The Cold War and Feminism: Finland Between Two Worlds

In 1960s Europe, Finland was a democratic state falling under the influence of both the Soviet Union and Americanization. Whilst not behind the Iron Curtain, Finland aligned itself closely to Soviet social and cultural norms. In the early Twentieth Century, Finland was a traditional patriarchal society, with women taking a more active role during the Second World War[1]. Following this, Finland embraced the Soviet attitude towards femininity and women[2]. As Marxism seeks social revolution through a class struggle, the importance of gender diminishes. Men and women are encouraged to see gender neutrally in biological and social terms[3]. This type of feminism is similar to Simone de Beauvoir’s early work[4].

Finnish feminism in the 60’s presents something not entirely anti-feminist, but certainly anti-feminine. Women had to sacrifice their femininity to join a predominantly masculine society: Finnish feminism made ‘the idea of masculinity… the norm’[5].

Finnish political organisations clashed with second-wave feminism from the West; the feminism which sought to enhance the female consciousness, discarding the male-dominated social apparatus, and demanding equality through an all-female revolution[6]. Finnish political organisations believed women were already liberated[7]. Whilst ordinary people were more susceptible to ideas from the West[8], they became hostile when Lenita Airisto (advocate of second-wave feminism) criticised Finnish “housewives” for unquestioningly relying on their husband’s income[9]. 

Changing from Marxist to liberal feminism took time. Even throughout the 1970’s, concerns regarding the ‘androcentrism of… gender equality… remained rather marginal’[10]. It was not until the 1980’s and 1990’s that Western feminism made a noticeable impact in Finnish culture. It has correctly been said then that Soviet influences on Finland delayed the emergence of second wave feminism for over a decade[11]. 

---

[1] Anne Epstein and Birgitte Soland, “Marginal Experiences?: Learning from Early-Twentieth Century Nordic History,” Journal of Women’s History 10, no. 2 (1998): 218.

[2] This was, in part, due to the reparations Finland had to pay to the Soviet Union after the end of the Second World War; David Bradley, “Equality and Patriarchy: Family Law and State Feminism in Finland,” International Journal of the Sociology of Law 26, no. 1 (1998): 203.

[3] Laura Saarenmaa, “Between Sovietism and Americanization,” Feminist Media Studies 15, no. 1 (2015): 136.

[4] In 1949, de Beauvoir contended that discrimination was the product of culture and socialisation. It was not until the late 1960s that de Beauvoir herself believed that a socialist revolution was not enough to achieve gender equality; Kristina Schulz, “The Women’s Movement,” in 1968 in Europe: A History of Protest and Activism, 1956-177, ed. Martin Klimke and Joachim Scharloth (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008), 283-284.

[5] Joanne Hollows, Feminism, Femininity and Popular Culture (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2000), 141, quoted in Laura Saarenmaa, “Between Sovietism and Americanization," 138.

[6] Kristina Schulz, “The Women’s Movement,” 286.

[7] Laura Saarenmaa, “Between Sovietism and Americanization," 139.

[8] It should be emphasised that American influence continued to reach Finnish society and media; Ibid, 147.

[9] Ibid, 142.

[10] Susanna Paasonen, “Healthy Sex and Pop Porn: Pornography, Feminism and the Finnish Context,” Sexualities 12, no. 5 (2009): 588.

[11] Laura Saarenmaa, “Between Sovietism and Americanization," 133.