Single and double sexual standards in Finland, Estonia, and St. Petersburg.

SEXUAL STANDARDS

Centuries of written history of Western societies document that women and men have been treated differently in sexual matters (Tannahill, 1981). Usually, women but not men have been pressured to remain virgins until marriage and to abstain from sexual activities after divorce or the deaths of their spouses. This inequality in sexual standards for men and women is referred to as a sexual double standard. A sexual double standard is a dual set of moral standards for males and females, usually with stricter standards applied to females, especially for premarital virginity and for what is considered acceptable sexual behavior (Francoeur, Perper, Scherzer, Sellmer, & Cornog, 1991).

Williams (1987) suggested that, historically, these different sexual standards originated from women's value to men as property and objects of exchange. To preserve their value, it was viewed as essential that girls and women preserve their virginity before marriage. Monitoring of virginity and chastity served to protect young women from unwanted pregnancies, to ensure that they married men from their own social class or clan, and to preserve family honor (Siann, 1994).

In the 19th century the sexual differences between women and men became a legitimate subject of scientific inquiry. This perspective is typified by researchers like Havelock Ellis, who considered female sexuality to be weaker, less fulfilling, and more passive than male sexuality. In contrast, modern sexology since the Kinsey era has stressed the ideology of gender similarity. Scientists, most notably Masters and Johnson, have emphasized how similar men and women are in sexual response and functioning (Irvine, 1990).

The advent of more individualistic values and more equal standards for men and women is related to socioeconomic developments. Individualism and relaxation of the requirement of virginity in brides correlate with high Gross National Product (GNP; Hofstede, 1998). Growing affluence provides women with more educational opportunities. Girls start circulating more freely, and they have more opportunities to meet boys. Increasing affluence also gives people more living space and privacy. Medical care and information improve, including information on contraception. Young people get more opportunities for sexual exploration, and sexual norms adapt to this situation.

THE SEXUAL REVOLUTION IN THE WEST

Increasing affluence, along with secularization and urbanization in industrialized Western countries in the 1960s, gave rise to a sexual revolution. This revolution drew attention to the sexual activity and satisfaction of women, lead to increased sexual knowledge, and introduced modern sexual values. These included the right of women to obtain pleasure from sex (Barbach, 1975).

In welfare states such as Finland, where the government provides an array of services for its population and inequality of income is low by international comparison, a country's growing GNP can provide benefits for the whole population. Finland's basic institutions have supported sex education in the schools, gender equality in laws and norms, discussions of sexual issues in the media, highly trained family planning services, and easy access to sexual health services. In such a society, many barriers to sexual satisfaction are eliminated. Kontula and Kosonen (1994, 1996) suggested that the lively discussion of sexuality and gender issues in the Finnish media since the 1960s contributed to the increase in women's sexual satisfaction in the 1970s and to the increasingly similar sexual expectations of men and women in Finland as reported in sex surveys (Kontula & Haavio-Mannila, 1995).

One achievement of the sexual revolution was the institutionalization of public sex education and information. In many countries in northern Europe, particularly Sweden, gender-equality-oriented sex education had already started in the 1950s, earlier than in the United States and Canada (Bergstrom-Walan, 1965; Linner & Litell, 1967). In the mid-1970s, when the U.S. was experiencing the sexual revolution, a flood of "how-to" books accompanied the rather sudden lifting of the veil of human sexuality (Phelps & Austin, 1988, p. 142). Barbach (1975) advanced the concept of personal liberation for women as sexual human beings. Menand (1997, p. 27) wrote, "The pop ideology of the sexual liberation was that ... women enjoyed sex as much as men, and in the same way as men were imagined to enjoy it--that is, actively, and without guilt."

Sexual relations between the sexes were expected to reflect equal respect and concern for the differing sexual needs of men and women (Hearn & Morgan, 1990). Some survey research in the U.S. has indicated a decrease in, if not disappearance of, the traditional sexual double standard (Sprecher & McKinney, 1993). However, Muehlenhard and Quackenbush (1988), using their Sexual Double Standard Scale, found that female college students still held this standard to a certain degree, and they thought that their male sexual partners held it to an even greater degree. A conditional double standard was found to operate at least under certain circumstances, such as in casual relationships (Sprecher & McKinney, 1993).

THE DEMOGRAPHIC CRISIS IN THE SOVIET UNION

The Soviet Union was geographically close to this Western sexual reform, but because of much slower economic development and public restrictions on the distribution of new sexual knowledge, Russian women missed their chance to join the progress toward gender equalization in sexual matters. Compared with the West, in Soviet countries there was not much evidence of a sexual revolution at the end of the 1960s or even in the 1970s. Indeed, sexual patterns in Soviet countries have only gradually shifted in the Western direction (Kon, 1995; Liljestrom, 1995; Rotkirch, 2000).

The "demographic crisis" detected in the early 1970s in the European regions of the USSR (low fertility and high divorce rates) was interpreted by the scientists and their bureaucratic colleagues to reflect a breakdown in family values, attributed largely to women's participation in the labor force. Early socialist ideals concerning the need for gender equality were now viewed as misguided, and the policies that resulted from the concept of women's emancipation were blamed for having brought the nation to the brink of a population catastrophe (Rivkin-Fish, 1999, p. 804).

By the mid-1980s, discourses in the USSR had begun to promote family life and traditional gender roles. Pedagogical campaigns were launched to cultivate femininity and masculinity and to improve interactions between men and women. Demographers and pedagogues devised pronatalist "sex role socialization" classes. Women and men were instructed that being a cultured, moral person required them to realize the dictates of their gendered nature. Sexual moral education texts launched vivid attacks on emancipated (used pejoratively to mean autonomous, ambitious, and assertive) women. At the same time that the women's movement in Western Europe and North America seized upon images of sexual equality, and egalitarian relations between men and women became popular among university-educated groups, Soviet experts were attempting to encourage traditional interactions between the sexes by modifying girls' and women's behavior (Rivkin-Fish, 1999, p. 804).

Before the 1990s, the Soviet Union had no formal family or sex education. Abortion was almost the only available method to prevent pregnancy (Kon & Riordan, 1993). The risk of pregnancy was so great that Russian women could not enjoy the same degree of sexual freedom as women in many Western countries did. At the end of the 1980s, Gorbachev's policy of glasnost led to the liberalization of the printed word, and such topics as abortion, birth clinics, contraceptives, and young people's sexuality entered into public debate (Kon 1995, p. 267).

SEX RESEARCH IN THE BALTIC REGION

The 1990s saw a growing interest in both gender studies and sexual science in cross-cultural comparisons. National sex surveys were conducted in many Western countries (Gronow, Haavio-Mannila, Kivinen, Lonkila, & Rotkirch, 1997; Haavio-Mannila & Kontula, 2001; Haavio-Mannila & Purhonen, 2001; Hubert, Bajos, & Sandfort, 1998; Kontula & Haavio-Mannila, 1995; Laumann, Gagnon, Michael, & Michaels, 1994; Lewin, Fugl-Meyer, Helmius, Lalos, & Mansson, 1998; Spira, Bajos, & the ACSF Group, 1994; Wellings, Field, Wadsforth, & Johnson, 1994). The specific aim of these surveys was not to study gender equality or sexual double standards as such; however, survey results indicated the presence of different sexual standards for men and women in these societies.

This new wave of national sex surveys gave us a chance to study whether sexual double standards still exist and whether there are differences in sexual standards between northern Europe and some adjacent areas of the former Soviet Union. In this paper, we analyze the following: (a) the existence of sexual single and double standards in marital fidelity and in initiating sexual activity in Finland, Estonia, and St. Petersburg; and (b) their relation to sexual satisfaction in these societies. We hypothesized that there would be less evidence of a double standard in Finland than in the two former Soviet areas, where the Western type of sexual revolution did not emerge until the late 1980s. We also hypothesized that adherence to a single sexual standard in marital fidelity and women's initiation of sexual contacts would generate a higher level of sexual satisfaction, especially among women. Our results are based on an analysis of sexual attitudes and behavior in each national group according to gender, age group, and, for Finland, decade in which the data were collected.

METHOD

Participants

We studied six populations as represented in three Finnish samples in 1971, 1992, and 1999; one native Estonian and one native Russian sample in Estonia in 2000; and a sample of residents of St. Petersburg in 1996. The samples were drawn at random from national population registers in Finland and Estonia and from the voting register of St. Petersburg, and they were representative of the total populations within the age range chosen for each study.

In 1971 in Finland, the interviewers were local public health nurses who were paid for this extra work. In 1992 the surveys were conducted by trained interviewers of Statistics Finland (the government's central office of statistics). In St. Petersburg and Estonia, interviewers were employed by market research organizations Gallup St. Petersburg and Emor (Estonian Gallup). The researchers participated in the training of the interviewers in Finland and St. Petersburg. Most of the interviewers were middle-aged women. There was no matching of the interviewers to the respondents based on gender or other variables.

Initial contacts with potential respondents differed in the different surveys. In Finland, press conferences were organized in 1992 and 1999. The researchers distributed announcements of surveys, and some radio stations and newspapers published news of the forthcoming research. In 1971 and 1992, the respondents were sent a letter before an interviewer made personal contact with them. In 1999 the whole survey was conducted by mail. In St. Petersburg and Estonia, personal contact by an interviewer was not preceded by press conferences or letters sent to the potential respondents. To reduce the potential influence of taboos against open discussions of sexual matters, the titles of the studies indicated that they also covered other aspects of life in addition to sexuality. For example, the 1992 Finnish study was entitled "A National Survey of Human Relations, Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles" (Kontula & Haavio-Mannila, 1995).

The questionnaires were translated from Finnish into Russian by a Finnish translator working on our project (Satu Tihvera) and checked by sociologists at the European University in St. Petersburg (Anna Temkina and Elena Zvadromyslova). The translation into Estonian was made by Emor and checked by an Estonian medical doctor living in Finland who had previously done sex research (Krista Papp).

In 1971, 2,152 Finns (ages 18-54 years) completed face-to-face interviews during which each interviewee also completed a self-administered questionnaire. The response rate was 91%. In the 1992 survey, the data collection method was identical; the number of respondents was 2,250 (ages 18-74), corresponding to a response rate of 76%.

In 1999, a mail survey with mostly the same questions was conducted in Finland. We received 1,496 responses (from persons ages 18-81 years), corresponding to a response rate of only 46%. To compare these results with those in the other surveys, people older than 74 years were excluded. Thus we analyzed here only data given by 1,432 respondents to the 1999 survey. Because the data were weighted by age and gender, the demographic structure of the data represents that of the original sample. The Finnish 1999 data do not appear to be very biased due to low response rate. By analyzing the distributions of several identical retrospective questions measuring sexual issues in different generations, Kontula (2001) was able to show that the low response rate in 1999 did not have a major impact on the results from the sexual histories of those who were less than 55 years old. In the 55-74 age group, the male respondents were more monogamous than the corresponding birth cohort interviewed in 1992.

In St. Petersburg, the data were obtained in a similar manner as in Finland in 1971 and 1992. Each respondent answered general questions orally in a face-to-face interview and then completed the intimate part of a paper-and-pencil questionnaire by himself or herself. The number of the respondents was 2,081 and the response rate was 60%. The respondents were found to be representative of the general population in regard to gender and age. In Estonia, the market research organization Emor carried out so-called Omnibus surveys, sampling the permanent residents of the Republic of Estonia (ages 15-74) twice a month. Each time the sample size was 500 persons. The sex survey was repeated five times in May to August, 2000. The interviewers took the questionnaires to the respondents, who completed and returned them to Emor. Of the total sample of 2,500 individuals, 1,031 (41%) returned the questionnaire.

Emor used a two-staged stratified sampling method to obtain a sample representative of people throughout Estonia in both rural and urban areas, and weighted the sample to be nationally representative by gender, age, type of settlement, and nationality. The socio-demographic structure of the sample was compared with that of the population; the data were then weighted to ensure the representativeness of the sample. (More detailed information on the sampling, interviewing, and questionnaires is available in Haavio-Mannila & Kontula, 2001; Haavio-Mannila, Kontula, & Kuusi, 2001; Haavio-Mannila & Rotkirch, 1998; Kontula & Haavio-Mannila, 1995; & Sievers, Koskelainen, & Leppo, 1974.)

The total number of respondents under the age of 74 years was 8,946. The number of men was 3,711 and that of women was 5,233 (there was no information on the gender of two persons in St. Petersburg).

Measures

In this article, we analyzed gender equality in sexual attitudes and sexual behavior on three dimensions: marital fidelity, initiation of sexual contact, and sexual satisfaction. Attitude questions were presented to all participants in the study. We asked only married and cohabiting persons to respond to questions about fidelity (summarized in Table 6). Questions on sexual initiative and satisfaction were posed to people having experienced sexual intercourse as defined below (summarized in Tables 8 and 9). The questions referred to both heterosexual and homosexual activities.

Attitudes toward marital fidelity of husbands and wives and the sexual double standard or single standard. These attitudes were assessed using responses to two statements: "One should find the temporary unfaithfulness of a husband acceptable" and "One should find temporary unfaithfulness of a wife acceptable." The five response alternatives ranged from absolutely disagree (1) to absolutely agree (5).

To study whether respondents held similar standards or double standards for husbands and wives, these scores were compared. If the scores given for husbands and wives differed, we concluded that a sexual double standard existed, giving more sexual freedom to a husband (male double standard, MDS) or a wife (female double standard, FDS). If the infidelity of husbands and wives was rated as equally acceptable, we concluded that a single sexual standard (SSS) existed. In some analyses (e.g., the percentage distributions in Tables 4 and 5), we conceptualized sexual standards using three categories: the MDS, SSS, and FDS. For other analyses (e.g., the analyses of variance in Tables 3 and 5), we conceptualized sexual standards a dichotomous: Accepting a single sexual standard (SSS) was compared with accepting a sexual double standard (MDS and FDS). Being more accepting of infidelity by husbands than by wives (MDS) was compared with the SSS and FDS; being more accepting of infidelity by wives than by husbands (FDS) was compared with the MDS and SSS.

Actual infidelity. We studied actual infidelity, as distinguished from attitudes toward infidelity, with a question posed to presently married or cohabiting people in Finland in 1992 and 1999 as well as in Estonia and St. Petersburg. The question was "Have you had parallel sexual relationships during your present marriage or cohabitation?" The respondents were asked if they had had sexual intercourse, defined as "sexual interaction in vaginal intercourse, having oral sex or stimulation by hand" with people other than their spouses or partners.

In the 1971 Finnish questionnaire, there was no explicit definition of sexual intercourse. Probably most respondents reported only vaginal intercourse. In this early survey, the question did not specify for people having had several marriages which marriage they should be reporting on. Consequently, some respondents may have reported unfaithfulness in a previous marriage. We have combined these people with those having had affairs during their present marriage because in 1971, very few ever-married Finns (5.3%) had been married more than once. Thus the number of people who may have been reporting affairs during an earlier marriage is probably very small.

Attitudes toward initiation of sexual contact by women (AIW). We studied these attitudes using the following statement: "Women have the right to take the initiative when they want to have sexual contact with men." The five response alternatives ranged from absolutely disagree (1) to absolutely agree (5). Although there was no parallel question about whether men have the right to initiate sexual contact with women, we assume that most people afford this right to men.

Actual taking of sexual initiative by women. Actual taking of sexual initiative by women, as opposed to attitudes toward it, was measured only in Finland. The question was "Which of you took the initiative in your latest sexual intercourse?" The response alternatives were as follows: I did more, partner did more, we both did equally, and cannot remember. Cannot remember answers were treated as missing data. This variable is not directly related to the sexual double standard, but it is interesting because it relates to the variable measuring attitudes toward women's initiative in sexual contact.

The perceived quality of sexual intercourse. We assessed whether perceived quality of sexual intercourse was related to egalitarian attitudes about marital fidelity and sexual initiative. It was measured by the question, "Has the intercourse you have experienced mostly been very pleasurable, fairly pleasurable, neither pleasurable nor unpleasant, rather unpleasant or very unpleasant, or is it difficult to evaluate?" If the quality of intercourse was "difficult to evaluate," the response was coded as missing data.

RESULTS

Analyses

In this article, we present means or percentages, their standard deviations, the effect size of gender (d), and the statistical significance of the gender difference for each indicator according to gender, age (three groups: 18-34, 35-54, and 55-74 years, except for Finland 1971, where data are not available for the oldest age group), and research time or site (six groups: Finland in 1971, 1992, and 1999; Estonians in Estonia; Russians in Estonia; and St. Petersburg). The effect size is the difference between the mean scores of the group with the greater score and the group with the lower score, divided by the pooled standard deviation. Effect sizes of .80 or greater are often considered large, those around .50 medium, and those around .20 small (Cohen, 1969). We used analysis of variance (ANOVA) to test the significance of the effect of the independent variables. In the tables, F and p values are presented.

For the six research groups we use the term national group or nationality even though Finns in all three surveys were of the same nationality. The term Estonian is used for native speakers of Estonia, and the term Russian in Estonia is used for native speakers of Russian. The name of the country, Estonia, is used in referring to both language groups. Russian is also used here as a synonym of inhabitant of St. Petersburg and is not representative of the whole population in Russia.

Attitudes Toward Infidelity

Attitudes toward marital infidelity of husbands and wives were mostly negative (see Tables 1 & 2). With the exception of men in St. Petersburg, only one fifth of the respondents rated the temporary infidelity of either a husband or a wife to be acceptable. In St. Petersburg, 51% of the men rated a husband's temporary infidelity as acceptable. More Estonian and St. Petersburg men than women found male infidelity acceptable. The attitudes toward the infidelity of a wife did not vary much by gender (see Table 2). Differences between the age groups were relatively small. Middle-aged and older people were more accepting of infidelity than were younger people.

The national differences in people's reactions toward infidelity of either spouse were larger than age differences. Male infidelity was found most acceptable in St. Petersburg, whereas female infidelity was found most acceptable among Finns in 1971 and among Russians in Estonia.

The national groups showed within-subject differences with regard to the impact of gender on attitudes. The interaction between nationality and gender was fairly large, especially for male infidelity (see Table 3). Finnish women in 1999 were less accepting of temporary infidelity by a husband than were any of the other groups (see Table 1). There was also a significant interaction between gender and nationality in the attitudes toward female infidelity. Attitudes toward infidelity by a wife varied by gender more in Estonia, St. Petersburg, and Finland in 1999 than in Finland in 1971 and 1992 (see Table 2). Also, the d values in Tables 1 and 2 show that gender differences in the attitudes toward infidelity were larger in St. Petersburg and Estonia than in Finland. In Finland, gender differences were a little larger in 1999 than earlier.

There were small significant interactions between nationality and age group in predicting attitudes toward male and female infidelity (see Table 3). In Finland in 1971, Estonia, and St. Petersburg, age differences were small. In Finland in the 1990s, middle-aged people rated infidelity by either gender as more acceptable than did young people (see Tables 1 & 2).

Single and Double Standards in Attitudes Toward Infidelity

In the whole data set, 73% of the respondents demonstrated a single sexual standard (SSS), giving identical ratings to infidelity by husbands and wives; 18% demonstrated a male double standard (MDS), rating infidelity by husbands as more acceptable than infidelity by wives; and 9% demonstrated a female double standard (FDS), rating infidelity by wives as more acceptable than infidelity by husbands (see Table 4).

Women favored a single sexual standard much more often than men did; this was the case particularly in St. Petersburg (see Table 5). In all research groups, especially in St. Petersburg, men were more inclined to accept male than female infidelity. Only in St. Petersburg did we find a gender difference that could be interpreted as being more accepting of female infidelity than of male infidelity: 22% of St. Petersburg women but only 4% of Russian men gave more sexual freedom to women than to men.

As one could expect on the basis of these findings, the interactions between nationality and gender in predicting sexual standards were statistically significant. The gender differences in all age groups were larger in St. Petersburg than elsewhere.

Age predicted sexual double standard to some extent (see Figure 1). In most groups, younger people were more likely to expect a single sexual standard than were older people. There was an interaction between the effects of age and nationality on SSS. In St. Petersburg and Estonia, having a single sexual standard was less related to age than in Finland, where younger men were more likely to accept a single sexual standard than were older men.

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

Actual Infidelity

Based on our data, twice as many men as women reported that they had had a temporary or a permanent "parallel relationship" during their present relationship (see Table 6). The proportions of the married or cohabiting men reporting infidelity were about one fourth in Finland in 1971, about one third in Finland in the 1990s and in Estonia, and about one half in St. Petersburg. For women, these percentages were 9% in Finland in 1971, about 15% in Finland in the 1990s, and 23% in Estonia and St. Petersburg.

Overall, more men than women reported that they had been unfaithful. The effect of age group was also significant; in most national groups middle-aged people were most likely to report infidelity. The proportions of unfaithful people differed in the six research groups. There was more unfaithfulness in St. Petersburg and Estonia than in Finland. The interaction between gender and nationality was significant. Gender differences in infidelity were larger in St. Petersburg and in Finland in 1992 than in the other groups.

People tend to adjust their behavior to their attitudes or vice versa, as we found in this study. Having a sexual double standard by accepting the infidelity of one's own gender was related to actual unfaithfulness. Of the 764 men endorsing a male double standard, 47% reported unfaithfulness during their present marriage or cohabitation, compared with 30% of the 1,801 men endorsing single sexual standard and 33% of the 213 men endorsing a female double standard. For women, unfaithfulness was reported by 26% of the 360 FDS women, compared with 16% of the 2,344 SSS women and only 11% of the 313 MDS women. Sexual standards had similar correlations with infidelity in all age and national groups.

Attitudes Toward Initiation by Women (AIW)

Attitudes toward women's right to take the initiative when they want to have sexual contact with men (AIW) varied according to gender, age group, and nationality. Men in all groups supported the right more than did women themselves (see Table 7 & Figure 2).

[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]

Young people supported the idea that women should be able to take the sexual initiative more than did older people. The interaction between age group and gender was fairly strong. Gender differences were smaller among younger than older people because, similar to men, younger women strongly supported the right of women to take the sexual initiative.

Attitudes toward women initiating sexual contact varied in the different national groups. Finns had a more positive attitude toward it than Estonians and Russians did. Gender interacted with national group. Estonian men were almost as likely to support the right of women to take the sexual initiative as were Finnish men.

There was also an interaction between nationality and age group. Age differences in AIW were smaller in Finland than in Estonia and St. Petersburg. We also found an interaction among all three independent variables--gender, age, and nationality--on AIW. Young Estonians, particularly men, supported sexual initiative by women as much as young Finns did, but young Russians both in Estonia and in St. Petersburg were less accepting.

Actual Initiation by Women (IW)

Actual initiation of sexual intercourse by women (IW) was studied in Finland only (see Table 8). In the combined male and female population ages 18 to 54, the percentage of the sole male initiators declined from 49% in 1971 (N = 1,904) to 37% in 1992 (N = 1,601) and 38% in 1999 (N = 981), where N is the number of respondents in this age group. At the same time, the proportion of women who took the initiative in the latest sexual intercourse increased from 7% to 12% to 14%. The shares of equal initiative were 44%, 48%, and 45%, respectively. Two percent did not remember who had initiated the latest intercourse. The statistically significant relationship, F (1, 5,218) = 16.0, p < .001, between the year of study (1971 vs. 1990s) and the female partner's participation in the initiatiation of the latest intercourse indicates a noteworthy shift in the gender roles in sexual intercourse.

There was an interaction between gender and AIW on women taking or sharing the initiative, F (4, 5,148) = 4.3, p < .002. Women who had a positive attitude toward women taking the initiative in sexual contacts more often reported having participated in the initiation of their latest sexual intercourse; men's attitudes were unrelated to whether the woman took the initiative. The result makes sense: Women who thought that it was acceptable for women to initiate sex were more likely to do so. Men who thought that it was acceptable for women to initiate sex may or may not have had partners who did so.

Sexual Satisfaction and Sexual Standards

Men reported more pleasure from sexual intercourse than did women (see Table 9). Young people enjoyed intercourse more than older people. Satisfaction with intercourse did not vary much according to age among men, but young women enjoyed intercourse more than older women did. The effect of nationality on sexual satisfaction was considerable. Sexual satisfaction was higher in Finland than in Estonia and St. Petersburg. The interaction of gender and nationality was statistically significant. Gender differences were higher among Finns in 1971 and among Estonians than among other groups.

Having a single sexual standard predicted sexual satisfaction of both genders. The independent variables in the ANOVA included the three background variables (gender, age group, and nationality) and the participant's sexual standard (dichotomized so that those supporting a single sexual standard, SSS, were contrasted with those supporting a sexual double standard, either MDS or FDS). Results showed that SSS was significantly related to sexual satisfaction, F(1, 7,643) = 7.6, p < .006, even when the effects of gender, F(1, 7,643) = 292.5, p < .001, age group, F(2, 7,643) = 50.8, p < .001, and nationality, F(5, 7,643) = 25.5, p < .001, were included in the explanatory model ([R.sup.2] = .066). No significant interactions with SSS were observed in any group.

In Finland in the 1990s, we were able to study the relationship between attitudes (AIW) and practices (IW) related to women's sexual initiative on sexual satisfaction (not studied in Estonia and St. Petersburg). Women taking the initiative (either alone or shared with their partners) and having a positive attitude toward women's sexual initiative significantly increased the sexual satisfaction of both men and women. The results of ANOVA showed that AIW significantly predicted sexual satisfaction: Even when the influence of IW was controlled for, the F values were F(4, 2,065) = 5.2 for men and F(4, 2,085) = 13.4 for women (both ps < .001). IW increased the sexual satisfaction of women even more than AIW: The F values were F(1, 2,065) = 11.7 for men and F(1, 2,085) = 172.2 for women when the effect of IW was controlled for (both ps < .001).

Participation in the initiating the latest sexual intercourse increased particularly the sexual satisfaction of those women who were not ardent supporters of sexual rights of women (see Table 10). Sexual pleasure of women seems to be less dependent on their attitudes than on their actual practices.

DISCUSSION

Summary of Results

The sexual revolution--the fight for sexual freedom and gender equality in sexuality--began in the West in the 1960s. It reached Russia at the time of glasnost at the end of the 1980s but never gained the force that it had in the Western countries. We have compared gender equality in sexual patterns in Finland at three points in time (1971, 1992, and 1999) and in two former Soviet areas, Estonia (in 2000) and St. Petersburg (in 1996). The comparable survey results show that Finland in the 1990s represented a more egalitarian sexual culture than St. Petersburg, Estonia, and Finland in 1971. This applies to attitudes toward marital fidelity, actual faithfulness in marriage or cohabitation, and attitudes and practices related to women's taking the sexual initiative. We explored differences in these variables by gender, age group, and nationality. We also looked at how levels of sexual satisfaction were affected by sexual standards and support for women's taking the sexual initiative.

Around one fifth of the total sample responded that one should be able to accept either a husband's or a wife's temporary infidelity. There were two exceptions: Russian men in St. Petersburg and Estonia. Many of these men had a sexual double standard: More than 50% of them responded that one should be able to accept temporary infidelity of a husband, but only about 20% responded that one should be able to accept the temporary infidelity of a wife.

The gender gap in attitudes toward marital fidelity decreased in Finland from 1971 to the 1990s, when it was small in all age groups. In Estonia and in St. Petersburg, gender differences were large in all age groups. A sexual double standard prevailed even among the young respondents. Sexual standards predicted actual fidelity in present marriages or cohabitation relationships.

Women's taking the initiative sexually received the most support in Finland (and by Estonian men), but women were more reserved than men in this regard. Women had adopted traditional cultural expectations of sexual passivity by women. These attitudes also had practical implications. Women who indicated their acceptance of women initiating sexual activity had themselves initiated their latest intercourse more often than had those women who did not.

Differences between the sexual cultures were also associated with the quality of sexual experiences. In all survey years, Finns were more likely to report that their latest sexual intercourse had been pleasurable than were the respondents in Estonia and in St. Petersburg. In St. Petersburg and Estonia, women's evaluation of the quality of sexual intercourse was similar to that of Finnish women some 25 to 30 years earlier.

Younger Finnish women rated intercourse as more pleasurable than did older women. Consequently, there was almost no difference in the sexual satisfaction of young men and women. This is in line with the new international approach to sexual health, in which sexual satisfaction has been defined to be a crucial part of sexual health and sexual rights (Lottes & Kontula, 2000).

Sexual Transition and Culture Gaps

The transition toward gender equality in sexual matters started in Finland in the late 1960s. Because there was no similar sexual revolution in Estonia or St. Petersburg, sexual life in these areas in the late 1990s resembles that in Finland in the early 1970s. The attitudes and behavior of the young generation in Estonia and St. Petersburg are equivalent to those found among the middle-aged generation in Finland.

The prevalence of a double standard and wide gender gaps in sexual attitudes and behavior in St. Petersburg, and to some extent in Estonia, illustrates the consequences of a sexual culture that is dominated by males. It is related to lack of sex education and reliable contraception. However, these national differences are also due to the different economic standards. The border between Finland and Russia is also a border of affluence, with Estonia lying in between. As Hofstede (1998) has shown, growing affluence gives women more opportunities for individualism and free circulation. National wealth also secures better health services, including contraception. Russian and Estonian women have lacked the opportunities available to women in the Nordic countries.

The pronatalist policies of promoting "natural" male-female interactions to increase the birth rate, thus avoiding a demographic crisis in the European parts of the USSR, seem to have maintained and perhaps also strengthened the sexual double standard and traditional gender roles. This can be considered a social problem, for we have found that having a single sexual standard in marital fidelity and egalitarian attitudes toward gender roles in taking the sexual initiative tends to increase sexual satisfaction. Egalitarian partners are more satisfied with their sexual relations.

In Finland, some of the goals of the gender equality and sexual liberalization movements have been achieved. In addition to changing women's lives, these movements have also influenced Nordic men. Some of them have adopted equality-oriented characteristics that belong to a "new man" ideology. Most Finnish men do not follow the traditionally macho sexual scripts that include the kinds of sexual double standards that are still commonplace among men in Eastern Europe.

Table 1. Gender Differences in Men's and Women's Acceptance of
Temporary Infidelity by a Husband, by Nationality and  Age Group

                                      Men
            Men   Women    Men      standard
Age group   N     N        mean     deviation

                       Finland 1971

18-34        644   638     2.91           1.33
35-54        437   406     2.69           1.35
Total       1,08  1,044    2.82           1.34

                       Finland 1992

18-34        407    396    2.15           1.07
35-54        468    441    2.42           1.27
55-74        225    305    2.32           1.23
Total       1,10  1,142    2.30           1.19

                       Finland 1999

18-34        222    214    2.16           1.22
35-54        302    297    2.64           1.29
55-74        169    210    2.45           1.24
Total        693    721    2.44           1.27

                     Estonian in Estonia

18-34        105    118    2.96           1.13
35-54        110    129    3.11           1.19
55-74         81     92    2.83           1.17
Total        297    338    3.00           1.16

                     Russian in Estonia

18-34         47     60    3.46           1.14
35-54         60     81    3.67           1.11
55-74         21     38    3.52           1.21
Total        147    196    3.57           1.12

                       St. Petersburg

18-34        307    374    3.44           1.19
35-54        325    465    3.31           1.42
55-74        163    299    3.17           1.46
Total        795  1,138    3.33           1.35

                     Women
            Women  standard
Age group   mean   deviation  d     F

                     Finland 1971

18-34       2.65     1.42    .19    11.3 ***
35-54       2.46     1.38    .17     6.4 *
Total       2.57     1.41    .18    17.2 ***

                     Finland 1992

18-34       2.10     1.17    .04      .50
35-54       2.40     1.28    .02      .08
55-74       2.38     1.43    .04      .29
Total       2.29     1.29    .01      .05

                     Finland 1999

18-34       1.70     0.97    .41    18.5 ***
35-54       2.07     1.22    .44    31.6 ***
55-74       2.27     1.26    .14     1.9
Total       2.02     1.18    .34    42.1 ***

                  Estonia in Estonia

18-34       2.35     1.24    .53    14.8 ***
35-54       2.46     1.16    .55    18.5 ***
55-74       2.50     1.30    .29     3.5
Total       2.43     1.22    .47    34.3 ***

                  Russian in Estonia

18-34       2.38     1.38    .76    18.7 ***
35-54       2.76     1.32    .68    18.7 ***
55-74       2.58     1.50    .64    13.4 ***
Total       2.58     1.39    .70    50.7 ***

                    St. Petersburg

18-34       2.34     1.33    .80   127.3 ***
35-54       2.40     1.48    .60    75.8 ***
55-74       2.40     1.46    .51    29.2 ***
Total       2.38     1.32    .65   218.9 ***

Note. These data summarize responses to the question,
"One should find the temporary unfaithfulness of a husband
acceptable." Response alternatives ranged from absolutely disagree
(1) to absolutely agree (5). Table entries present the Ns and means
for men and women, effect sizes for gender (d), and the statistical
significance of gender  differences (F and p values).

* p < .05.

** p < .01.

*** p < .001.

Table 2. Gender Differences in Men's and Women's Acceptance of
Temporary Infidelity by a Wife, by Nationality and Age Group

                                           Men
             Men      Women     Men      standard
Age group     N         N      mean      deviation

                        Finland 1971

18-34         644       638    2.91         1.33
35-54         437       406    2.69         1.35
Total        1,081    1,034    2.58         1.34

                        Finland 1992

18-34         407       396    2.16         1.07
35-54         468       441    2.42         1.27
55-74         225       306    2.24         1.23
Total        1,100    1,143    2.31         1.25

                        Finland 1999

18-34         220       215    2.04         1.14
35-54         302       297    2.54         1.29
55-74         169       209    2.35         1.23
Total         692       720    2.33         1.25

                     Estonian in Estonia

18-34         105       118    2.58         1.15
35-54         109       128    2.76         1.27
55-74          78        92    2.58         1.15
Total         292       337    2.65         1.19

                      Russian in Estonia

18-34          47        60    2.61         1.43
35-54          60        80    2.80         1.37
55-74          33        53    3.11         1.48
Total         140       193    2.81         1.42

                     St. Petersburg

18-34         309       372    2.24         1.33
35-54         331       457    2.09         1.31
55-74         163       298    1.95         1.37
Total         805     1,127    2.12         1.33

                    Women
             Women  Standard
Age group    mean   Aviation   d      F

                    Finland 1971

18-34        2.65     1.42    .00    0.3
35-54        2.46     1.38    .04    0.3
Total        2.54     1.42    .03    0.5

                    Finland 1992

18-34        2.10     1.17    .09    1.3
35-54        2.40     1.28    .00    0.0
55-74        2.23     1.42    .01    0.0
Total        2.27     1.32    .03    0.7

                    Finland 1999

18-34        1.76     1.02    .26    7.3 **
35-54        2.16     1.30    .29   12.8 ***
55-74        2.25     1.27    .08    0.5
Total        2.07     1.23    .21   16.2 ***

                  Estonia in Estonia

18-34        2.28     1.18    .29    3.5 *
35-54        2.46     1.15    .29    4.8 *
55-74        2.39     1.29    .15    1.0
Total        2.36     1.19    .25    8.8 **

                   Russian in Estonia

18-34        2.43     1.43    .12    0.4
35-54        2.55     1.32    .19    1.2
55-74        2.58     1.44    .37    3.7
Total        2.49     1.38    .20    4.1

                    St. Petersburg

18-34        2.47     1.34    .18    4.7 *
35-54        2.61     1.48    .36   26.2 ***
55-74        2.36     1.45    .28    8.8 **
Total        2.50     1.44    .27   34.4 ***

Note. These data summarize responses to the question, "One should
find the temporary unfaithfulness of a wife acceptable." Response
alternatives ranged from absolutely disagree (1) to absolutely agree
(5). Table entries present the Ns and means for men and women,
effect sizes for gender (d), and the statistical significance of
gender differences (F and p values).

* p < .05.

** p < .01.

*** p < .001.

Table 3. Effects of Gender, Age Group, and Nationality
on Sexual Standards and Behavior Supports

                            Accepts        Accepts       Sexual
                          infidelity     infidelity      single
                              by             by         standard
Predictors                 husbands        wives         (SSS)

Corrected model               23.2 ***       8.0 ***       35.0 ***
Intercept                 15,903.8 ***   12,36.0 ***   14,082.8 ***

                                         Main effects

Gender                       152.0 ***       4.6 *        126.9 ***
Age group                      6.4 **        4.6 **        12.3 ***
Nationality                   62.8 ***      15.6 ***      141.3 ***

                                         Interactions

Gender X Age group             1.9            .1            2.1
Gender X Nationality          29.0 ***      12.1 ***        8.2 ***
Age group X Nationality        6.9 ***       8.3 ***        3.8 ***
All three                      0.4            .7            1.8

[R.sup.2]                       .078          .026           .114
N                          8,692         8,672          8,729

                             Male         Female       Unfaithful
                            double        double         during
                           standard      standard        present
Predictors                  (MDS)         (FDS)           union

Corrected model               49.1 ***     11.4 ***      17.9 ***
Intercept                  1,469.5 ***    429.6 ***     940.7 ***

                                         Main effects

Gender                       274.3 ***     13.1 ***     119.4 ***
Age group                      5.9 **       5.1 **        8.2 ***
Nationality                  146.5 ***     11.6 ***      31.5 ***

                                         Interactions

Gender X Age group             7.7 ***      2.2 *         0.8
Gender X Nationality          63.8 ***     31.6 ***       4.6 ***
Age group X Nationality        3.2 ***      2.5 **        2.2 *
All three                      2.2 *        1.1           1.3

[R.sup.2]                       .154         .038          .093
N                          8,729        8,729         5,432

                          Supports
                           sexual
                         initiative       Finds sexual
                          by women        intercourse
Predictors                 (AIW)          pleasurable

Corrected model             45.5 ***        25.0 ***
Intercept                74,818.9 ***  150,300.5 ***

                                  Main effects

Gender                      257.8 ***      203.2 ***
Age group                   109.9 ***       30.0 ***
Nationality                  65.3 ***       29.5 ***

                                  Interactions

Gender X Age group           27.0 ***       16.9 ***
Gender X Nationality          9.2 ***        8.3 ***
Age group X Nationality       3.8 ***        1.0
All three                     2.7 **         1.7

[R.sup.2]                      .144           .091
N                         8,708          7,894

Note. The effects of gender, age group, and nationality were
analyzed using analysis of variance. Table entries represent
F values and their statistical significance (p values).

* p < .05.

** p < .01.

*** p < .001.

Table 4. Percentage of Men and Women Holding Sexual Double and
Single Standards in Marital Fidelity, by Nationality and Gender

Direction of                    Finland 1971     Finland   Finland
sexual standard              (18-54 year olds)    1992      1999

                                                Men

Female double standard (a)             8             11         9
Single sexual standard (b)            70             77        76
Male double standard (c)              22             12        15

Total                                100            100       100
N                                  1,077          1,101       723

                                               Women

Female double standard                 9              7         8
Single sexual standard                80             85        86
Male double standard                  11              8         6

Total                                100            100       100
N                                  1,032          1,144       757

Direction of                  Estonian    Russian in      St.
sexual standard              in Estonia    Estonia     Petersburg

                                              Men

Female double standard (a)        3            5             4
Single sexual standard (b)       73           58            38
Male double standard (c)         24           37            58

Total                           100          100           100
N                               297           88           796

                                             Women

Female double standard            4            9            22
Single sexual standard           87           80            61
Male double standard              9           11            17

Total                           100          100           100
N                               458          162         1,120

Note. Within each gender, the distribution of sexual standards
differed by nationality: For men, [chi square] (10, N = 1,077) =
630.0, p < .001; for women, [chi square] (10, N = 1,032) = 308.2,
p < .001.

(a) Female Double Standard (FDS): Accepts infidelity by wives
more than by husbands, (b) Sexual Single Standard (SSS): Equally
accepting of infidelity by husbands and wives, (c) Male Double
Standard (MDS): Accepts infidelity by husbands more than by wives.

Table 5. Percentage of Men and Women Endorsing Different
Sexual Standards, by Nationality and Age Group

                                   18-34 year olds
Sexual standard              Men   Women    d       F

                                    Finland 1971

Male double standard (a)      20      8    .34    38.7 ***
Single sexual standard (b)    74     85    .29    27.4 ***
Female double standard (c)     6      7    .01     0.0
Total                        100    100
N                            639    634

                                    Finland 1992

Male double standard           7      4    .14     4.1 *
Single sexual standard        84     90    .17     5.7 *
Female double standard         9      6    .09     1.6
Total                        100    100
N                            407    396

                                    Finland 1999

Male double standard           9      1    .34    12.7 ***
Single sexual standard        86     94    .26     7.6 **
Female double standard         5      5    .02     0.0
Total                        100    100
N                            220    214

                                 Estonian in Estonia

Male double standard          25      7    .50    14.5 ***
Single sexual standard        71     91    .51    15.3 ***
Female double standard         4      2    .11     0.6
Total                        100    100
N                            104    118

                                 Russian in Estonia

Male double standard          41      8    .79    19.7 ***
Single sexual standard        55     77    .49     6.5 *
Female double standard         4     15    .36     3.5
Total                        100    100
N                             47     61

                                  St. Petersburg

Male double standard          60     14    .96   202.2 ***
Single sexual standard        37     66    .88    62.8 ***
Female double standard         3     20    .74    45.9 ***
Total                        100    100
N                            307    371

                                  35-54 year olds
Sexual standard              Men   Women    d       F

                                    Finland 1971
Male double standard (a)      27     15    .29    17.9 ***
Single sexual standard (b)    64     72    .17     6.4 *
Female double standard (c)     9     13    .12     2.8
Total                        100    100
N                            436    400

                                     Finland 1992

Male double standard          12      7    .15     5.2 *
Single sexual standard        75     84    .21    10.1 **
Female double standard        13      9    .13     3.8
Total                        100    100
N                            468    441

                                     Finland 1999

Male double standard          13      3    .39    23.5 ***
Single sexual standard        78     89    .31    15.1 ***
Female double standard         9      8    .04     0.2
Total                        100    100
N                            302    296

                                  Estonian in Estonia

Male double standard          22      7    .41    10.4 ***
Single sexual standard        78     89    .27     4.5 *
Female double standard       --       4    .28     4.7 *
Total                        100    100
N                            109    127

                                  Russian in Estonia

Male double standard          47     11    .78    25.5 ***
Single sexual standard        53     84    .67    17.3 ***
Female double standard       --       5    .29     2.8
Total                        100    100
N                             60     80

                                     St. Petersburg

Male double standard          57     16    .88   180.6 ***
Single sexual standard        39     58    .39    29.2 ***
Female double standard         4     26    .60    73.7 ***
Total                        100    100
N                            325    451

                                   55-74 year olds
Sexual standard              Men   Women    d       F

                                    Finland 1971

Male double standard (a)
Single sexual standard (b)
Female double standard (c)
Total
N

                                    Finland 1992

Male double standard          20     13   .19      4.6 *
Single sexual standard        68     81   .31     12.7 ***
Female double standard        12      6   .23      7.1 **
Total                        100    100
N                            225    305

                                    Finland 1999

Male double standard          21     11   .26      6.5 *
Single sexual standard        67     76   .19      3.5
Female double standard        12     13   .02      0.1
Total                        100    100
N                            169    209

                                 Estonian in Estonia

Male double standard          17     14   .07       .20
Single sexual standard        77     79   .07       .00
Female double standard         6      7   .01       .20
Total                        100    100
N                             78     91

                                  Russian in Estonia

Male double standard          21     17   .10       .20
Single sexual standard        61     72   .20       .80
Female double standard        18     11   .17       .60
Total                        100    100
N                             33     53

                                      St. Petersburg

Male double standard          56     21   .74     66.7 ***
Single sexual standard        38     59   .41     18.4 ***
Female double standard         6     20   .41     18.4 ***
Total                        100    100
N                            163    297

Note. Table entries show the percentage of each group endorsing
each sexual standard, the effect size for gender (d), and the
statistical significance of the gender differences (F and p).

(a) Male Double standard (MDS): Accepts infidelity by husbands
more than by wives, (b) Single Sexual Standard (SSS): Equally
accepting of infidelity by husbands and wives, (c) Female
Double standard (FDS): Accepts infidelity by wives more than
by husbands.

* p < .05.

** p < .01.

*** p <.001.

Table 6. Gender Differences in Infidelity During Present Marriage
or Cohabitation, by Nationality and Age Group

            Men   Women   Men   Women
Age group    N       N     %       %     d           F

                             Finland 1971

18-34       320     389    25       9   .43    33.6 ***
35-54       383     340    22       9   .32    21.2 ***
Total       703     729    22       9   .37    53.6 ***

                             Finland 1992

18-34       219     246    29      17   .32     9.9 **
35-54       392     342    45      15   .62    84.2 ***
55-74       146     177    27       7   .54    25.7 ***
Total       757     765    37      14   .52   115.2 ***

                             Finland 1999

18-34       111     119    19      12   .21     2.0
35-54       240     236    39      21   .40    18.6 ***
55-74       118     140    25      13   .32     6.6 *
Total       469     495    31      17   .34    27.4 ***

                             Estonian in Estonia

18-34        70      86    34      25   .21     1.6
35-54        91      95    32      28   .09     0.4
55-74        63      54    40      14   .57    10.1 **
Total       224     235    35      24   .25     7.1 **

                             Russian in Estonia

18-34        34      46    44      21   .49     5.1 *
35-54        50      62    28      25   .00      .8
55-74        36      18    40       8   .67     6.3 *
Total       120     126    36      21   .31     6.7 *

                             St. Petersburg

18-34       148     214    50      27   .48    21.8 ***
35-54       262     337    58      25   .67    74.3 ***
55-74       131     161    44      15   .55    32.6 ***
Total       541     712    52      23   .58   123.3 ***

Note. These data include only married and cohabiting people.
Table entries present the Ns and percentages of men and
women who reported infidelity, effect sizes for gender
(d), and the statistical significance of gender differences
(F and p values).

* p < .05.

** p < .01.

*** p < .001.

Table 7. Gender Differences in Acceptance of Women's Right
to Take the Sexual Initiative, by Nationality and Age Group

                                      Men
             Men    Women   Men    standard
Age group     N       N     mean   deviation

                     Finland 1971

18-34         651     642   4.70     0.68
35-54         445     402   4.47     0.85
Total       1,097   1,044   4.60     0.76

                     Finland 1992

18-34         407     396   4.68      .74
35-54         467     441   4.61      .79
55-74         224     304   4.49      .84
Total       1,098   1,141   4.61      .78

                     Finland 1999

18-34         222     214   4.88      .48
35-54         303     296   4.69      .68
55-74         167     209   4.58      .74
Total         692     719   4.72      .65

                   Estonian in Estonia

18-34         108     118   4.75      .58
35-54         110     130   4.62      .72
55-74          82      90   4.48      .87
Total         301     337   4.63      .72

                   Russian in Estonia

18-34          47      60   4.31      .94
35-54          60      81   4.48      .66
55-74          39      52   3.82      .93
Total         147     193   4.24      .87

                   St. Petersburg

18-34         310     374   4.36      .91
35-54         330     467   4.26     1.01
55-74         165     298   4.04     1.20
Total         805   1,138   4.25     1.02

                      Women
             Women   standard
Age group    mean    deviation     d         F

                           Finland 1971

18-34        4.41      0.93       .35    40.2 ***
35-54        3.79      1.30       .59    81.8 ***
Total        4.17      1.13       .44   108.8 ***

                           Finland 1992

18-34        4.59       .69       .11     2.6
35-54        4.36       .86       .30    20.7 ***
55-74        3.62      1.35       .70    72.3 ***
Total        4.24      1.04       .39    87.4 ***

                           Finland 1999

18-34        4.79       .51       .19     3.7
35-54        4.53       .77       .22     7.7 **
55-74        3.94      1.13       .62    39.5 ***
Total        4.43      0.89       .38    48.2 ***

                        Estonian in Estonia

18-34        4.37       .98       .46    12.4 ***
35-54        3.91      1.13       .70    32.7 ***
55-74        3.05      1.33      1.07    67.7 ***
Total        3.84      1.24       .71    92.0 ***

                         Russian in Estonia

18-34        4.21       .93       .10     0.3
35-54        3.66      1.07       .82    27.3 ***
55-74        3.41      1.41       .32     2.4
Total        3.77      1.17       .44    17.2 ***

                          St. Petersburg

18-34        4.05      1.07       .30    15.6 ***
35-54        3.99      1.17       .24    11.3 ***
55-74        3.32      1.46       .51    29.4 ***
Total        3.84      1.26       .35    60.1 ***

Note. Responses to the statement "Women have the right to take
the initiative when they want to have sexual contact with men"
ranged from 1 (absolutely disagree) to 5 (absolutely agree).
Table entries present means, standard deviations, effect sizes
for gender (d), and the statistical significance of gender
differences (F and p values).

* p < .05.

** p < .01.

*** p < .001.

Table 8. Percentages of Finnish Men and Women
Reporting the Woman Participated in Initiating
Latest Sexual Intercourse, by Survey Year and
Age Group

            Men      Women       Men   Women
Age group    N         N          %      %

                  Finland 1971

18-34       569       559        57     57
35-54       407       371        44     43
Total       976       929        51     51

                  Finland 1992

18-34       365       359        67     69
35-54       436       406        56     57
55-74       173       227        42     43
Total       974       992        58     58

                  Finland 1999

18-34       188       192        62     71
35-54       290       290        56     59
55-74       153       185        46     42
Total       630       668        55     57

Note. For this table, women's initiation was dichotomized;
table entries indicate the percentage of participants who
reported that the woman was either the main or an equal
initiator, as opposed to reporting that the woman took no
initiative in the latest intercourse.

Table 9. Gender Differences in Ratings of Pleasure During Intercourse,
by Nationality and Age Group

                                        Men
            Men    Women   Men        standard
Age group    N       N     mean       deviation

                         Finland 1971

18-34       574     563    4.38            0.56
35-54       417     377    4.37            0.54
Total       991     940    4.37            0.55

                         Finland 1992

18-34       373     368    4.42             .54
35-54       438     416    4.39             .52
55-74       180     256    4.41             .59
Total       991   1,040    4.40             .54

                         Finland 1999

18-34       180     188    4.46             .57
35-54       260     265    4.49             .55
55-74       125     161    4.32             .54
Total       565     614    4.44             .59

                     Estonian in Estonia

18-34       100     106    4.33             .58
35-54       110     129    4.20             .58
55-74        78      86    4.21            .76
Total       284     321    4.24             .64

                      Russian in Estonia

18-34        44      52     4.30            .59
35-54        58      81     3.99            .70
55-74        39      52     4.41            .50
Total       147     185     4.20            .68

                        St. Petersburg

18-34       287     342    4.27             .71
35-54       317     445    4.27             .65
55-74       157     276    4.21             .72
Total       757   1,063    4.26             .69

                      Women
            Women   standard
Age group   mean    deviation    d         F

                       Finland 1971

18-34       4.10      0.68      .43     54.8 ***
35-54       3.83      0.72      .78    141.7 ***
Total       3.99      0.71      .57    171.8 ***

                       Finland 1992

18-34       4.37      0.58      .08      1.3
35-54       4.20      0.60      .32     24.7 ***
55-74       3.92      0.77      .61     52.4 ***
Total       4.19      0.66      .32     63.0 ***

                       Finland 1999

18-34       4.40      0.61      .07       .7
35-54       4.24      0.68      .38     22.6 **
55-74       3.96      0.72      .55     19.7 ***
Total       4.22      0.69      .34     37.3 ***

                    Estonia in Estonia

18-34       4.05      0.69      .46      9.9 **
35-54       3.99      0.68      .35      6.3 **
55-74       3.76      0.68      .57     16.0 ***
Total       3.95      0.69      .45     30.5 ***

                     Russian in Estonia

18-34       4.11      0.73      .18      2.0 ***
35-54       3.96      0.60      .02       .8
55-74       3.71      0.81      .89     19.7 ***
Total       3.93      0.71      .32     12.5 ***

                        St. Petersburg

18-34       4.21      0.73      .20      7.1 *
35-54       3.96      0.70      .41     39.3 ***
55-74       3.75      0.71      .60     41.4 ***
Total       3.96      0.72      .38     80.4 ***

Note. Participants were asked to rate the quality of the intercourse
they had experienced, ranging from very unpleasant (1) to very
pleasurable (5). Table entries present means, standard deviations,
effect sizes for gender (d), and the statistical significance of
gender differences (F and p values).

* p < .05.

** p < .01.

*** p < .001.

Table 10. Men's and Women's Ratings of Pleasure During
Intercourse, According to Attitudes Toward Initiation by Women
(AIW) and Women's Sexual Initiative During the Latest Intercourse
(IW) in Finland, 1992 and 1999

                                             Men
Woman initiated      Men   Women   Men    standard
latest intercourse    N      N     mean   deviation

                             AIW = negative
                              or uncertain

No                    33    140    4.07     0.75
Yes                   43     82    4.42     0.67

                             AIW = fairly
                               positive

No                   121    201    4.29      .55
Yes                  162    234    4.36      .61

                              AIW = very
                               positive

No                   529    373    4.41      .54
Yes                  658    601    4.47      .56

                               Women
Woman initiated      Women   standard
latest intercourse   mean    deviation    d        F

                              AIW = negative
                               or uncertain

No                   3.78       .87      .34     5.1 *
Yes                  4.26       .71      .23     1.3

                               AIW = fairly
                                 positive

No                   3.91       .70      .61    26.8 ***
Yes                  4.27       .68      .14     1.1

                                  AIW = very
                                   positive

No                   4.12       .73      .47    47.8 ***
Yes                  4.37       .60      .17     8.5 **

Note. Participants rated their pleasure during intercourse,
from very unpleasant (1) to very pleasurable (5). These
ratings are presented as a function of (a) participants'
attitudes toward sexual initiative by women (AIW) and
(b) whether participants reported that the woman participated
in initiating their latest intercourse, either as the main
initiator or an equal initiator (Yes), or that the woman did
not participate in initiating the latest intercourse
(No). Table entries represent satisfaction means and standard
deviations, effect sizes for gender (d), and the statistical
significance of gender differences (F and p values).

* p < .05.

** p < .01.

*** p < .001.

The data collection for this study was financed by the Finnish Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, the Academy of Finland, and privately by Elina Haavio-Mannila (in Estonia). No commercial or interest groups provided financial support for the studies.

REFERENCES

Barbach, L. (1975). For yourself: The fulfillment of female sexuality. New York: New American Library.

Bergstrom-Walan, M.-B. (1965). Sexualkunskap for mellanstadiet [Information about sex for middle level]. Stockholm: Liber.

Cohen, J. (1969). Statistical power analysis for behavioral sciences. New York: Academic Press.

Francoeur, R. T., Perper, T., Scherzer, N. A., Sellmer, G. P., & Cornog, M. (1991). A descriptive dictionary and atlas of sexology. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press.

Gronow, J., Haavio-Mannila, E., Kivinen, M., Lonkila, M., & Rotkirch, A. (1997). Cultural inertia and social change in Russia. Helsinki: University of Helsinki, Department of Sociology.

Haavio-Mannila, E., & Kontula, O. (2001). Seksin trendit meilla ja naapureissa [Trends in sexual life at home and in the neighboring countries]. Helsinki: WSOY.

Haavio-Mannila, E., Kontula, O., & Kuusi, E. (2001). Trends in sexual life measured by national sex surveys in Finland in 1971, 1992 and 1999, and a comparison to a sex survey in St. Petersburg in 1996 (Working Papers E 10/2001). Helsinki: The Family Federation of Finland, The Population Research Institute.

Haavio-Mannila, E., & Purhonen, S. (2001). Slimness and self-rated sexual attractiveness: Comparisons of men and women in two cultures. The Journal of Sex Research, 38, 102-110.

Haavio-Mannila, E., & Rotkirch, A. (1998). Generational and gender differences in sexual life in St. Petersburg and urban Finland. Yearbook of Population Research in Finland XXXIV 1997 (pp. 133-160). Helsinki: The Family Federation of Finland, The Population Research Institute.

Hearn, J., & Morgan, D. (Eds.). (1990). Men, masculinities and social theory. London: Unwin-Hyman.

Hofstede, G. (1998). Comparative studies of sexual behavior: Sex as achievement or as relationship. In G. Hofstede et al. (Eds.), Masculinity and femininity (pp. 153-226). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Hubert, M., Bajos, N., & Sandfort, T. (Eds.). (1998). Sexual behaviour and HIV/AIDS in Europe: Comparisons of national surveys. London: UCL Press.

Irvine, J. M. (1990). From difference to sameness: Gender ideology in sexual science. The Journal of Sex Research, 27, 7-24.

Kon, I. S. (1995). The sexual revolution in Russia: From the age of the Czars to today. New York: Free Press.

Kon, I. S., & Riordan, J. (1993). Sex and Russian society. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Kontula, O. (2001, August). Response rate and selection bias in a sex survey: An empirical test. Paper presented at the IUSSP XXIV General Population Conference, Salvador, Brazil.

Kontula, O., & Haavio-Mannila, E. (1995). Sexual pleasures: Enhancement of sex life in Finland, 1971-1992. Aldershot, Hampshire: Dartmouth.

Kontula, O., & Kosonen, K. (1994), Seksia lehtien sivuilla [Sex on the pages of journals]. Helsinki: Painatuskeskus.

Kontula, O., & Kosonen, K. (1996). Sexuality changing from privacy to the open: A study of the Finnish press over the years from 1961 to 1991. Nordisk sexologi, 14, 34-47.

Laumann, E. O., Gagnon, J. H., Michael, R. T., & Michaels, S. (1994). The social organization of sexuality: Sexual practices in the United States. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Lewin, B., Fugl-Meyer, K., Helmius, G., Lalos, A., & Mansson, S.-A. (1998). Sex i Sverige: Om sexuallivet i Sverige 1996 [Sex in Sweden: About sexual life in Sweden 1996]. Stockholm: Folkhalsoinstitutet 11.

Liljestrom, M. (1995). Emanciperade till underordning: Det sovjetska konssystemets uppkomst och diskursiva reproduktion [Emancipated into resignation: The birth of the Soviet gender system and discursive reproduction]. Abo: Abo Akademis forlag.

Linner, B., & Litell, R. J. (1967). Sex and society in Sweden. New York: Pantheon Books.

Lottes, I., & Kontula, O. (Eds.). (2000). New views on sexual health: The case of Finland (Series D 37/2000). Helsinki: The Family Federation of Finland, The Population Research Institute.

Menand, L. (1997, February 6). It's a wonderful life. The New York Review of Books, 25-29.

Muehlenhard, C. L., & Quackenbush, D. M. (1988, November). Can the sexual double standard put women at risk for sexually transmitted diseases ? The role of the double standard in condom use among women. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society for the Scientific Study of Sex, San Francisco, CA.

Phelps, S., & Austin, N. (1988). The assertive woman: A new look. San Luis Obispo, CA: Impact. (Original work published 1975)

Rivkin-Fish, M. (1999). Sexuality education in Russia: Defining pleasure and danger for a fledgling democratic society. Social Science & Medicine, 49, 801-814.

Rotkirch, A. (2000). The man question: Loves and lives in late 20th century Russia (Research Rep. No. 1/2000). Helsinki: University of Helsinki, Department of Social Policy.

Siann, G. (1994). Gender, sex and sexuality: Contemporary psychological perspectives. London: Taylor & Francis.

Sievers, K., Koskelainen, O., & Leppo, K. (1974). Suomalaisten sukupuolielama [The sexual life of Finns]. Porvoo: WSOY.

Spira, A., Bajos, N., & The ACSF [Analyses des Compartements Sexuels en France] Group (1994). Sexual behaviour and AIDS. Aldershot, Hampshire: Avebury.

Sprecher, S., & McKinney, K. (1993). Sexuality. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Tannahill, R. (1981). Sex in history. London: Sphere Books.

Wellings, K., Field, J., Wadsforth, J., & Johnson A. M. (1994). Sexual behaviour in Britain: A national survey of sexual attitudes and lifestyles. Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin.

Williams, J. H. (1987). The psychology of women: Behavior in a biosocial context (3rd ed.). New York: Norton.

Manuscript accepted December 2, 2002

Address correspondence to Elina Haavio-Mannila, Department of Sociology, University of Helsinki, Unioninkatu 35, P.O. Box 18, Fin-00014 Helsinki, Finland; e-mail: [e-mail].

Elina Haavio-Mannila
The University of Helsinki, Finland

Osmo Kontula
The Family Federation of Finland