Anne Maria Holli

Quota trouble: Talking about gender quotas in finnish local politics

Abstract This article analyses the discourse concerning gender quotas and their implementation in Finnish local politics. Among our local actor interviewees, we found four different groups: feminist-oriented, non-feminist, accepting and disapproving. Despite the successful implementation of the quotas, our analysis reveals hidden conflicts and resistance. Respondents often resorted to memory lapses, strategies of distancing or assumptions about the interim character of quotas in an ‘almost gender equal Finland’ when discussing the implementation process. The predominance of these strategies is explained by contextual factors, including the strong cultural support for gender equality and legalism in Finland. We suggest that they can be interpreted as psychologized forms of resistance to a hegemonic discourse which does not really allow for anyone to be ‘against gender equality’ or wilfully negligent of the law.

State Feminism Finnish Style: Strong Policies clash with Implementation Problems

In international comparisons, Finland is regarded as one of the Nordic ‘women-friendly’ welfare states. In gender equality policy, Finland has been a runner-up which has followed the pioneers Norway and Sweden. Although Finland established its first gender equality machinery, the Council for Gender Equality, simultaneously with them in 1972, it was the last Nordic country to introduce a gender equality law in 1986. In a Nordic comparative analysis of the effectiveness of gender equality policy in the mid-1990s, Finland was placed in the third tier after Sweden and Norway, but before Denmark and Iceland. However, it was also observed that Finland deployed the least money per capita on its gender equality machinery and personnel (Borchorst, 1999, pp. 182, 184–5).