1. Introduction

The Nordic countries are widely recognised as leaders in gender equality. For nearly two decades, Iceland, Finland, Norway, and Sweden have consistently ranked among the most gender-equal countries in the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) Global Gender Gap Reports. In 2025, Iceland ranked first for the 16th consecutive year. Similarly, for the past decade, the European Institute for Gender Equality’s (EIGE) Gender Equality Index has consistently placed Sweden, Finland, and Denmark among the top ten EU countries.

However, research on Nordic equality and anti-discrimination policies has highlighted barriers to achieving gender equality in practice. These include gender-based violence, sexual harassment, pay gaps, austerity measures, unequal distribution of care work, and the underrepresentation of women as CEOs in the information and communication technology sector. In addition, a growing amount of research pinpoints that prolonged structural gender inequality is often compounded by other factors such as age, education, race and minority status. Intersectional understandings of gender equality highlight how racism and bias against women with disabilities for instance place women from minority groups in a particularly precarious position in Nordic societies. There is also a recognised lack of long-term, population-level statistics on barriers encountered by gender minorities in the Nordic countries.

Although the Nordic countries rank highly in international gender equality assessments, public perceptions of the realisation of gender equality in practice provide a contrasting perspective.

In Finland, Statistics Finland conducts a Gender Equality Barometer (Tasa-arvobarometri) every 3–5 years on assignment from the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health. The most recent survey from 2024 showed that Finnish people generally support the promotion of gender equality, but also believe that full gender equality has not yet been achieved in the country. Similar results have been reported in Norway, where the general public broadly supports gender equality advancement.

In Iceland, a Gallup poll conducted in October 2025 indicated that the population is divided over whether full gender equality has been achieved: 47% believed that full gender equality has been achieved, while 44% believed it has not.

These results from Finland, Norway and Iceland thus point to a discrepancy between international rankings and popular perceptions of gender equality in everyday life.

In 2021, the Nordic Council of Ministers published a survey report on hate crimes targeting LGBTQI+ people in the Nordic countries. The report highlighted a need for greater knowledge and policy responses concerning broader opposition to gender equality, sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHS), and LGBTIQ+ rights. In 2022, The Nordic Council of Ministers for Gender Equality (MR-JÄM) launched a Nordic Roadmap (2022–2024) to outline their commitment and response to the pushback. The commitment to promoting gender equality and LGBTQI+ rights was reiterated by the ministers in the ‘Pushing for progress’ programme (2025–2027).

In the wider global and European context, a common strategy of discursive opposition involves rebranding gender equality, gender mainstreaming, SRHR, LGBTQI+ rights, intersectional anti-racist work, and academic gender studies as gender ideology. This framing is often presented as a threat to national unity and to the traditional heterosexual family. Such ideas are promoted in particular by certain conservative doctrines within Catholicism, Evangelical and revivalist movements, the Russian Orthodox Church, and various right-wing and far-right populist organisations. Researchers and policy experts increasingly refer to this phenomenon as anti-gender mobilisation or anti-gender politics. Academic scholars and policy experts have categorised various forms of pushback movements under the umbrella term anti-gender politics.

Definition of anti-gender politics

In this report, anti-gender politics refers to coordinated and often transnational efforts that seek to contest and undermine gender equality. These efforts typically frame gender equality advocacy and related policies as forms of ideological propaganda or indoctrination. The term politics is used here in the broadest sense. It refers to the collective practices through which individuals, grassroots movements, civil society organisations, and political parties mobilise supporters, articulate interests, contest power, and seek to shape public norms and institutions. In this context, politics does not refer only to formal government action, legislation, or public policy, but to the wider field of social and political activity in which ideas, values, and power relations are publicly negotiated and contested.

This report joins the critical intervention to pushback against gender equality work. The report was commissioned by the Council for Gender Equality in Finland (Tane) as part of the Finnish Presidency of the Nordic Council of Ministers in 2025. The project was carried out in partnership with the Coalition of Women’s Associations in Finland (NYTKIS).

The survey results presented and discussed in this report provide a preliminary snapshot of encounters with opposition to gender equality work and its impact. The report serves as a starting point for discussion and highlights the urgent need for follow-up research on the manifestation of anti-gender politics in the Nordic countries. Further research is also urgently needed on the strategic, foreign influence and funding networks behind coordinated opposition to gender equality in the Nordic countries. The results and discussion presented in this report are not intended to provide a comprehensive view of the phenomenon and cannot be generalised.

1.1 Previous research on opposition to gender equality in Europe

Numerous academic studies, policy reports and briefings have documented the growth of coordinated and heavily funded opposition to gender equality in Europe over the past decade. The undermining and rollback of sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR), comprehensive sexuality education (CSE), LGBTQI+ rights, and attempts to defund academic institutions have become common features of political campaigning to the extent that this opposition is widely perceived as a threat to European democracy. Examples of such campaigning over the past decade include the 2013 mass protests and referenda against same-sex marriage in France and Croatia, as well as the 2025 mobilisation in Latvia to withdraw from the Council of Europe's Istanbul Convention.

According to a 2025 report by the European Parliamentary Forum for Sexual and Reproductive Rights (EPF), between 2019 and 2023, funding for hybrid forms of organised opposition to SRHR in Europe was estimated at USD 1.18 billion. This funding supported litigation, referenda, and lobbying of the European Parliament, among other activities. Multidisciplinary research projects funded by the European Research Council indicate that anti-gender actors also target independent media outlets, academic research funding institutions and civil society organisations. Numerous other coordinated efforts aim to permanently reshape equality, diversity and human rights legislation, policies and institutions within the EU. Research backed evidence suggests that the broader objective is to bypass institutional checks on government power, including human rights commissions altogether.

The politics of anti-gender mobilisation in Europe has been well researched and documented. Several studies have shown that the organised opposition to gender equality, SRHR, CSE and LGBTQI+ rights is closely connected to the rise of authoritarian populism and far-right extremism. Recent counter-terrorism studies and policy reports also highlight a concerning trend of the use of opposition to gender equality as a key tool for violent, far-right extremist organising. Research also indicates that this organising is simultaneously an opposition movement against representative, constitutional democracy and its institutionalised, intermediary systems for monitoring political power, such as the independence of the judiciary, media, academic institutions and the pluralism of civil society. The consequences are far-reaching. When opposition to gender equality operates through political parties, not only conservative third sector organisations, it gains momentum to push for institutional changes at both national and international levels.

Recent comparative research based on representative surveys of the general population’s attitude towards gender equality in Denmark and Norway point to a new trend: opposition to gender mainstreaming. In both countries, affiliation with right-wing political parties is associated with the perception that gender equality has already been achieved. This perception is linked to support for covert pushback policy measures, such as funding cuts, departmental reorganisations or closures as well as postponement of gender equality advancement and gender mainstreaming. Similar trends have been observed in Sweden and Iceland.

Existing research indicates that some conservative, populist and far-right parties in Europe and the Nordic region deliberately frame intersectional approaches to gender equality as overly expansive. According to this type of rhetoric, intersectional feminism prioritises the rights of gender minorities and migrants in ways that disadvantage men and boys. Within this type of discursive opposition, gender equality and human rights are increasingly framed in nationalist terms. Rather than a universal right, equality is presented as part of a Nordic project centred on protecting women and girls from perceived risks associated with migrant men, particularly Muslim men. In this framing, migrant men are constructed as a central challenge to Nordic commitments to equality and diversity, while structural gender inequalities within Nordic societies receive comparatively less emphasis.

According to existing research, discursive opposition in the Nordic countries takes place, for instance, through public political rhetoric, media debates, blog posts, and newspaper opinion pieces and columns. Although direct challenges to formal equality legislation may also occur, these forms of discursive pushback primarily aim to reshape public debate so that resistance to gender equality is gradually viewed as reasonable and legitimate. This happens even when formal equality policies remain in place and continue to align with international agreements that commit the Nordic countries to developing and implementing gender equality measures. For example, gender mainstreaming and academic gender studies programmes are delegitimised as unnecessary, elitist, overly bureaucratic, or too costly. The rhetoric of opposition to gender equality in the Nordic region is therefore sometimes less overt than the high-profile legislative actions and attempts observed in countries such as Hungary, Croatia and Latvia.

Nevertheless, the Nordic countries are not immune to ideologically motivated forms of violence or even violent extremism. Notable incidents include the 2022 nightclub shooting in Oslo during Pride celebrations. In October 2025, Anna-Karin Hatt, leader of the Centre Party in Sweden, resigned after receiving hate and death threats. According to representatives of the Swedish Gender Equality Agency, young women report self-censorship or leaving public office positions altogether for similar reasons.

Countering anti-gender pushback requires coordinated societal and institutional strategies. It is important to recognise that anti-gender groups often frame opposition as common-sense or grounded in family values, free speech, or religious freedom for instance, while portraying intersectional gender equality advocacy as radical, and develop alternative narratives to challenge these misrepresentations. Effective counter-strategies also include cross-movement coalitions, strategic litigation, policy advocacy, and grassroots initiatives, such as community networks, education, and public awareness campaigns. Furthermore, intersectional approaches must continue to engage men and boys across institutional practices in order to strengthen societal resilience. This, in turn, contributes to Nordic security by embedding inclusive principles within legal, cultural, and governance frameworks.