‘Who run the world? Girls*’ – Beyonce [*Well, at least in Finland they do.]

This is the fourth in our 2019-20 series of student blog posts from the class L2421 Feminism and Politics. Click here to read the previous blog post, on Elizabeth Warren’s withdrawal from the US Democratic nomination.

Written by Kirsten Synnöve Watson, BA(Hons) Politics & International Relations and History.

If you were to ask non-Nordic adults what first springs to mind when considering Finland, you would be hard-pressed to find many whose general knowledge extends beyond that it is cold and Santa lives there; God forbid you ask them to point it out on a map, you might be there for days. Situated in the far North of Europe with a population of 5.4 million, Finland is more of an outlier than a major global player in politics when compared to their Russian neighbours. Finnish domestic politics rarely garners more than a passing mention at best in the international press, making the General Election in December 2019 an anomaly. The small country’s newly elected government came to worldwide attention due to the result; on 10 December 2019 Sanna Marin assumed the role of Prime Minister within a coalition government.

Beyoncé’s popular song lyrics ‘Who run the world? Girls.’  On a protest sign during the Women’s March in Washington DC, USA, 2017. Source: https://betches.com/2018-womens-march-sign-ideas/

What about this result was so newsworthy? A huge political U-turn had not occurred nor had a reality TV show host risen to power – the world’s youngest head of state had been elected whilst simultaneously forming the only all-female cabinet. Just over a century since Finland became the first country in Europe to allow women the vote, once again they are achieving world-firsts whilst breaking down gender barriers (you can almost hear the glass-ceiling shattering).

The new Finnish cabinet: Prime Minister Sanna Marin (centre) leads a coalition government of five women. From left to right:  Li Anderson, Katri Kalmuni, Anna-Maja Henriksson and Maria Ohisalo (February 2020). Credit: Laura Kotila, VNK. Source: https://newsnowfinland.fi/politics/new-opinion-poll-signals-good-news-for-the-government

 Why do we care?

The need to increase women’s representation in politics has been a feminist focal point for decades and has recently started to be recognised by national governments. It has been argued that in order to utilise resources and pursue justice for the good of society as a whole, women must be involved in political discourse (Krook & Norris, 2014). Scholar Hanna Pitkin (1967) has been highly influential on feminist categorizations of political representation. On her view, representation can be descriptive; effectively the characteristics of those in power should reflect those of the population. Thus if a portion of the electorate is female, the same should be the case with the legislature. Pitkin herself advocated rather that representation should be substantive in nature, whereby the interests of a group are advanced and advocated for by those elected through their actions, irrespective of the characteristics of the representative (see also Lovenduski 1997). Many feminist scholars, however, argue that both descriptive and substantive representation are intrinsically linked, as who better to advocate on behalf of women than women? (see, e.g., Wängnerud 2009). However, there remains a clear disconnect here with political reality: despite constituting the majority of the world’s population, on average only 25.1% of Members of Parliament worldwide are female.

Whilst open to debate, the argument has also been made that men and women have fundamentally different interests and priorities due to their gendered circumstances and that these should be treated equally (Krook & Norris, 2014).  One of the circumstances most often referenced is the fact that women are statistically more likely to become the primary caregiver to children, elderly or infirmed relatives than men.

It is important to keep this stance in mind when examining the policy framework Marin’s government appears to be pursuing. Having only been in office for just over two months one of their first policy proposals was reforming the parental leave system to ensure that fathers are entitled to the same length of paid parental leave as mothers. The proposal also contains provisions for single parents wherein they would receive the same allowance as a couple. Overwhelmingly this means single mothers; according to the most up-to-date estimates, single fathers constitute 0.97-3.75% of all households in OECD countries, while single mothers constitute between 10.61 and 19.26%. Considering Marin’s policy proposal within a feminist theoretical framework, it can hardly be a coincidence that the first female government was the first to focus on the perceived ‘female issue’ of parental leave.  

Why Finland?

In line with their fellow Nordic countries, Finland has for many years found itself featured in the lauded ‘World’s happiest countries’ or ‘Best place to be a woman/parent/gay’ lists. The World Economic Forum’s gender pay gap report index ranked Finland at 4 out of 149 surveyed countries noting their high economic, educational and political gender parity. What is it about Finland that has shaped the country into one of the world’s most equal and socially progressive – what is the secret ingredient?

Culture. The word encompasses many meanings but is often examined as a possible explanation for many political anomalies; such as the election of an all-female cabinet (Berman, 2001). Regarding the election of women, the political and societal culture of a country has been used to explained women’s likelihood to even run for office as well as the eventual result. Finland is often referred to having a culture of gender diversity; with social, economic and political gender parity even being enshrined in the constitution. One of the methods used by Finland is a party quota system. Whilst there is no official required quota system in place for parties the Finnish Equality Act includes a quota provision that requires state committees, boards and executives to be composed of at least 40% women.  Whilst there is no obligation for parties to conform to this during the election process, parties must follow the guidelines once elected. This has led to almost all parties establishing voluntary quota systems during elections. Scholars Aili Tripp and Alice Kang (2008) argue that such quotas are the most efficient and effective method to promote gender equality and parity in political representation. They even go so far to state that this ‘offers the most explanatory power for women's representation today’ (Tripp & Kang, 2008: 339). In Finland, the ‘Zipper method’ is used as a part of the quota system – in the party list, nominations alternate between genders effectively female, male, female, male and so on, to ensure that women have a fair chance of being elected (Delgado-Márquez et al, 2014). Richard E. Matland argues that this is necessary to ensure that quotas have a practical application and are not just symbolic (Matland, 2006). The fact that Finland’s parliament is 47% female, one of the highest figures in the world, is testament to the effectiveness of these quotas.  

Another argument put forward is that the large welfare states of the Nordic countries allow for greater female participation in the labour market and politics. Scholars have argued that the system’s existence has led to a fundamental change in society; having one of the most equal parental leave systems in the world has led to childcare not being viewed as an exclusively female role (Haavind & Magnusson, 2005). Finland also has heavily subsidised childcare meaning that the parent’s income does not determine the childcare options available to them and their available childcare does not limit their job prospects, allowing parents a way out of this catch-22. Arguably, this system has helped enable Marin, a mother of one, to reach the highest position in the country. 

Finland – a feminist utopia?

Scrolling through Twitter, you could be under the impression that the election of Marin has been universally celebrated. Celebrities, academics, world leaders to name a few have been vocal in their support for the PM. However, unsurprisingly in no time the sexist commentary and critique started to creep in. Estonia’s interior minister referred to Marin as a ‘sales girl’, referring to her previous work experience as a way to question her credentials and suitability for the Prime Ministerial role. There was no mention of the fact that she was a sales assistant whilst studying for her Master’s degree or that she has been an elected official for almost a decade. Marin has the misfortune of being young and female. This apparently means that all her experience and education is thrown out the window when some members of the political establishment or media try to come to terms with her election. In an interview with a journalist from The Guardian (a left-of-centre publication) Marin was repeatedly asked ‘what was the trick?’ to her election. Again, Marin was forced to justify her suitability for the role and justify that her age and gender had nothing to do with it nor would they limit her. Whilst a culture of greater of gender equality exists within Finland, we see that this is not the case globally. Marin’s gender will always be a focal point. 

'"There’s no trick”: Finland’s Sanna Marin youngest PM in world', The Guardian, Source: Youtube, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1JVMIWVJfs

It is also important to not view Marin’s election as enough. All five coalition leaders are young, white and Christian. To say their election is wholly representative is to define all women by their gender, ignoring intersectional arguments pertaining to race, class and age, to name a few. Simply put - women are not one-dimensional.

An all-female future?

Whilst we can all admit the election of Finland’s all-female cabinet is ground-breaking, this should be normal. Women face numerous societal and institutional barriers which have put us in a box and expected us to be grateful for it. Marin and her cabinet are the result of what can be achieved when these barriers are overcome and gives us cause for hope and celebration. We trust, if not expect, women to run the households of the world; how about we help them to run the House of Commons or House of Representatives next?

References

Berman, S., 2001. Ideas, Norms, and Culture in Political Analysis. Comparative Politics, 33(2): 231-250.

Delgado-Márquez, B.L., Ramírez-González, V., and López-Carmona, A. 2014. Ensuring Parliamentary Gender Equality Through a New Zipper Method: An Application to Finland. Social Indicators Research 116(2): 475-92

Haavind, H. and Magusson, E., 2005. The Nordic Countries-Welfare Paradises for Women and Children? Feminism & Psychology 15(2): 227-235.

Krook, M.L. and Norris, P. 2014. Beyond Quotas: Strategies to Promote Gender Equality in Elected Office, Political Studies, 62 (1): 2-20

Lovenduski, J. 1997. Gender Politics: A Breakthrough for Women? Parliamentary Affairs 50(4): 708-719.

Matland, R.E. 2006. Electoral quotas: Frequency and effectiveness. In D. Dahlerup (Ed.), Women, Quotas and Politics. New York and London: Routledge.

Pitkin, H.F., 1967. The Concept of Representation (Vol. 75). USA: University of California Press.

Tripp, A.M. and Kang, A. 2008. The Global Impact of Quotas: On the Fast Track to Increased Female Legislative Representation. Comparative Political Studies 41(3): 338-361.

Wängnerud, L. 2009. Women in Parliaments: Descriptive and Substantive Representation.  Annual Review of Political Science 12(1): 51-69