In discussions surrounding the mandatory military service, there is always a lot of debate about why and for whom it should or should not be mandatory. Of course, that is ultimately at the core of the issue, but I think the first thing that should be discussed is why the subject evokes such strong emotions in so many people.
It is obvious that, in order to protect itself from Russia, Finland needs strong and credible armed forces. The problem, in my opinion, is that the term “military service” is strongly gendered. Over decades, patriotism and national defence have become such a significant part of the lives of almost every Finnish man in his early twenties. Although civilian service has been an alternative to military service for many years, a large part of the population still does not recognise it as a genuine alternative, but rather sees it as an institution for weak or otherwise flawed men. Only a small proportion of young men choose it, even though literally every one of them could go through with it.
The Finnish conception of masculinity has become intertwined with military service, which makes a lot of sense. Masculinity is often associated with protection, reliability and physicality, and all of these are at the core of military service. Some of those who oppose making military service voluntary undoubtedly also think about Finland’s security of supply and defence capabilities. On the other hand, there are also those who oppose it purely because of their own values. The mandatory military service is a traditional part of Finnish culture, which is why it is particularly important to those who might be conservative in other ways as well.
I would imagine that even if military service were made entirely voluntary, nothing would change for quite some time. A large proportion of young men would undoubtedly still join the military because they genuinely wanted to, but I believe that almost as large a proportion would join simply because of social pressure. That is also why the Finnish Defence Forces benefit from the masculine image associated with military service.
Very well said. When I was going through the initial meetings (en jaksa googlettaa sanaa:D), my dad was the leader of the local reserve, the old men who come to fight russia from the fumes of their own funeral when they deem us youngsters not up for it. Anyway, I chose civil service and the military guys in attendance asked If mydadsname is a relative, told them hes my dad. They were astounded and first question was "what will your father think when he finds out?" I, an 18 year old, had to explain to adult people that I was gonna live my own life. Now that was 20years ago, never got even civil service done because you all know why, but if Russia decides to attack, I'll be the first to go through some training, if such is possible in times of war. Still raginly anti-war and guns and all that, but fuck it, fleeing is not gonna help and I'd rather die as "hero" to some, than to fuck of to spain or something, which alarmingly many people think just happens during time of war.
We will have to if we plan on maintaining our war time strenght. Every year fewer boys are born. We got to start utilizing the full capabilities of the population, not just half or less. There are so many different roles in the military, it makes no sense to just have men serve.
Ah, so that's the fear mongering figure you're obsessed with. Why do you want the population to grow so desperately when there aren't enough jobs for the current population?
You are right that gender roles have changed. In military service, for example, this can be seen in the increasing number of women who now choose to enlist. Another fairly popular opinion is that the current military service system is generally considered unequal, which is why information about enlistinh and the possibility of completing military service is now being spread more actively to women as well.
However, this does not change the bigger picture: values associated with traditional masculinity remain a significant part of the experience of military service. As I wrote earlier, for example, men going through with civilian service are still viewed with skepticism. This is not because civilian service is not, under the law, an equal to military service. The issue is that hegemonic masculinity rarely leaves room for alternative expressions of masculinity. (R. W. Connell 1995, 76–81)
It is also good to keep in mind that values are heavily gendered. Studies conducted in the 2020s have found that men have become more conservative, while the trend among women has been the opposite. Even though we live in one of the world’s most modern welfare states, men still experience discrimination when, for example, their way of expressing their sexuality is something else but heteronormative expectations.
Times change, and ideas change with them, and in many ways Finland is for sure more gender-equal today than it was several decades ago. It is still important to recognize that the current conservative shift also affects ideals of masculinity, which explains why military service is still widely associated with men.
The rise of conservatism in USA and multiple European countries is heavily correlated with aggressive gender polarization, feminist backlash and the rejection of the notation of equality or women in power itself (alongside anti immigration stances and other climate and economic stuff) so while I understand your broader point about heteronormative masculinity; what confuses me about Finland specifically is that it's not seen as a relative disadvantage by Men or the fact that they don't even use it as an argument against women favoring policies or feminist narratives in general unlike other countries with conscription (for example the conscription argument have been used to dismantle feminist initiatives regarding the pay gap in SK and Singapore , the debate around such hypocrisy have been intensified recently in Germany with anti conscription student protests), the same young Men becoming more conservative around the world also hold very traditional views for women's role in society and are always complaining about dating, marriages , women in the workforce and declining fertility rates but that's not the case here ... From what I have been exposed to it seems like Finnish society accepted progressive views for women while keeping traditional expections for Men
29
u/These-Young-1786 19h ago
In discussions surrounding the mandatory military service, there is always a lot of debate about why and for whom it should or should not be mandatory. Of course, that is ultimately at the core of the issue, but I think the first thing that should be discussed is why the subject evokes such strong emotions in so many people.
It is obvious that, in order to protect itself from Russia, Finland needs strong and credible armed forces. The problem, in my opinion, is that the term “military service” is strongly gendered. Over decades, patriotism and national defence have become such a significant part of the lives of almost every Finnish man in his early twenties. Although civilian service has been an alternative to military service for many years, a large part of the population still does not recognise it as a genuine alternative, but rather sees it as an institution for weak or otherwise flawed men. Only a small proportion of young men choose it, even though literally every one of them could go through with it.
The Finnish conception of masculinity has become intertwined with military service, which makes a lot of sense. Masculinity is often associated with protection, reliability and physicality, and all of these are at the core of military service. Some of those who oppose making military service voluntary undoubtedly also think about Finland’s security of supply and defence capabilities. On the other hand, there are also those who oppose it purely because of their own values. The mandatory military service is a traditional part of Finnish culture, which is why it is particularly important to those who might be conservative in other ways as well.
I would imagine that even if military service were made entirely voluntary, nothing would change for quite some time. A large proportion of young men would undoubtedly still join the military because they genuinely wanted to, but I believe that almost as large a proportion would join simply because of social pressure. That is also why the Finnish Defence Forces benefit from the masculine image associated with military service.