RASRISKEN Nimby-reaktioner och bilder av ensamkommande flyktingbarn i Göteborgs stads information om temporära flyktingbostäder, februari- mars 2016

Sammanfattning: This thesis aims at revealing the dominant discourses present when Gothenburg informed its citizens about their plans to build temporary homes for un-accompanied refugee children in February- March 2016. With a pragmatic and intersectional critical discourse analysis, based on prior research on structural discrimination, participatory governance, nimby-ism and immigration policy discourses, recordings of six meetings and one public online chat have been analysed. The results shows that government officials constructs its reader/citizen as empowered, active, house owners with Swedish citizenship whom is having (legitimate) fears and concerns about this issue. The ”situation” is presented by government officials as extreme, mainly from an egocentric perspective and has a strong focus on safety and security aspects. The citizens present questions with nimby-characteristics and concerns regarding their own neighbourhood and nation. The safety of their own children and welfare resources for other ”weak” groups (with a strong connection to a right wing populist rhetoric). The safety-questions are related to geological conditions of the building sites (with risk of collapse), of loosing symbolic recreational areas and also to an expected over crowdedness of existing public spaces and services. But the most frequently discussed issue is the homogeneously described group ”un-accompanied children” and their ”poor understanding of the Swedish gender equality culture”. This image is substantiated with presumptive traits of these children related to their gender, age, religion and country of origin. But also presupposed traits of specific cultural and moral values, a problematic mental health status and a heterosexual orientation. The unaccompanied refugee children are presented as anonymous numbers and discussed as being potentially violent and their status as of being children (under 18) is frequently questioned often with references to media reports mentioning un-accompanied children as (sexual) offenders . Questioning of these dominant discourses is visible trough statements and questions regarding how the children are being taken care of, how one can personally help in the welcoming of refugees, that refugees can be an economic asset, stories of positive encounters with refugee children and by claiming that the statistic risks of this type of housing does not match the perceived threat and that ”we” have a moral responsibility to take care of this group.