Biography, Gender and History: Nordic perspectives

Abstract

honor, which she expected would result in public disapproval: 'some of us who refuse to join will be called narrow-minded and spiteful.' 25 Gripenberg's analysis of the lectures was accurate; they continued Key's criticism of the organised women's movement that she had first summarised in Missbrukad kvinnokraft. For example, her view that 'the civilised women of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries had such a great influence on their contemporaries that they did not attempt to imitate men, but further developed their own feminine natures' 26 repeated the theme that she presented in her polemical work. By saying this, Key wanted to encourage nineteenth-century feminists not to undervalue the importance of women's unique contribution to human progress, namely intuition, emotions, and motherliness. This was a strong historico-political argument. in contrast, Gripenberg was of the opinion that, above all, history evidenced the inequality experienced by women; they had never had any genuine influence and it was contrary to the aims of the women's movement to claim otherwise. 27 Key's ideas were controversial among feminists, but she did not represent reaction in the sense that she would have objected to demands for women's political, legal, economic and social emancipation. However, Key was concerned about the impact of emancipation in terms of what she saw as true femininity, and in her Helsinki lecture, she repeated her warning that the politics of the middle-class women's movement put gender difference in jeopardy. Gripenberg did not accept this argument, and to her, Key was only providing ammunition that opponents could use in preventing women's emancipation. instead of serving the goal of true equality, she interpreted the message of Key's lecture as a celebration of uneducated women.in one of her lectures in Helsinki, Key brought up older women's right to love. 28 This reflects her positive and open attitude towards women's sexuality, which was rather atypical in the era. Her sexual radicalism also included criticism of marriage as an institution, and