Mødestedet: A space of encounters

Mødestedet: A space of encounters

By Renata Byfoged and Dildora Nutfieva

Mødestedet is a center run by the Christian church in Vesterbro, which offers workshops, religious dialogues, excursions, and socialization programs for refugee and immigrants of any faith. During a visit, the authors, though, encountered much more than that.

Considering that the authors are also immigrants in Denmark our experience at Mødestedet somehow connect us with our cultural background. “Gatherings” in the center reminded one of us, who is a Muslim, of social activities from the home country, where only women meet to share or cook food together. Like in the center, the main purpose of the gatherings is to socialize. On the other hand, the informality and spontaneous way in which the conversation took place reminded the other author, who is Brazilian, of specific characteristics of Brazilian cultural practices. At some point during our visit, the experience of the moment and the fact that we are also in an immigrant position sensorial transported us into the situation of participant in that encounter. For a moment we separated ourselves from the student position with the purpose of observing what was going on, and instead we were enjoying and participating in the encounter.

The center is run by Danmission and also receives funds by Copenhagen and Frederiksberg municipalities and the Ministry of Affairs. Considering that 80 percent of the visitors are Muslims, the center offers special hours only for women. The main purpose is to provide a “safe space” for immigrants who can come together and socialize.

Dove and olive branch are originally a symbol of peace in the biblical context, and three holy books under the dove demonstrate peaceful relationship among different religions in the center. Photo by the bloggers.

Thyra Smidt, the head of the center, described Denmark as a secular country, where all citizens are equal regardless of religion. As Casanova says in The Secular and Secularisms: “To be secular is not experienced as an existential choice modern individuals or modern societies make, but rather as a natural outcome of becoming modern” (p.1054). When talking about a secular country, Thyra may think that individuality is an essential human factor regardless of human faith (to have own view, opinion and decision). Therefore one of the purposes of the center is to support the idea that all citizens are equal. According to Thyra most of the visitors have a very traumatic life story which may hinder their socialization. Therefore, Mødestedet is providing a space where they can talk their own language, share particular meals and talk to others in the same situation is a way to stimulate them to create their own network and avoid social exclusion. In this way, religion and cultural background are used as potential facilitators for socialization and inclusion.

As a second part of our visit, we participated in a lecture prepared by an intern about ‘identity’. With the title “What is Identity” the lecture was an open dialog about how identity makes us unique persons. The themes were about identity and its relation to gender, nationality, language, religion, family and work. There were discussions of dichotomies that create the distinction between ‘us’ and ‘others’, such as conflicts generated by prejudices, discrimination and bullying. As a final task the group were asked to talk about the positive aspects related to their identity with the question “what are we good at?”

The announcement of the presentation with the title “What is Identity”. Photo by the bloggers.

Through the interactions motivated by the conversation on identity, it was easy to see how the participants’ diversity, different opinions and beliefs engaged them in the specific encounter (Wilson, p. 455). In some situations, these different opinions clashed in a sense that invited them to new reflections, which reminded us of the unpredictability and transformative aspect of encounters. There were visible expressions of surprise and disagreements as well as exchange of laughter and similar understandings. It was visibly an encounter where negotiations were primarily producing meaning and transformation whereas the invisible part of this encounter and negotiations was related to the possible effects of such negotiations on the individual level.


Comments are closed.