Saga - 2011, Page 131

Abstract
v i lhelm v i lhelms son
“ P R O M I S C U I T y I N R e y k J Av Í k ” :
early 20th century discussions on morality, sexuality and free love
In Iceland just after 1900, the moral condition of the younger generation became a
heated topic. young women in Reykjavík and other population centres were
repeatedly accused of engaging in licentiousness and promiscuity with foreign-
ers regardless of status or background. These women were said to tarnish both
their own reputations and that of the whole nation, and even to endanger
Icelandic bloodlines. This debate reflected widespread anxiety about the country’s
current urbanisation and other societal trends. At that time in its infancy, the
women’s rights movement for female equality and suffrage likewise caused con-
cern among those who feared negative consequences from female participation in
public life. Among those criticising the “moral conditions” was Ingibjörg Ólafs-
son. Her pamphlet, Nokkur orð um siðferðisástandið á Íslandi (Comments on Ice -
landic moral conditions), was harshly criticised by the feminist leader Bríet
Bjarnhéðinsdóttir in the feminist journal Kvennablaðið.
Morality was also a controversial issue among feminists abroad, split in
europe and America by a profound ideological distinction between two wings.
On the one hand, there were the so-called sex radicals whose revolutionary ideas
about sexuality and free love were usually accompanied by further political rad-
icalism. On the other hand, there was the reform movement which scholars have
dubbed the social purity movement; it had the primary goal of advancing moral
conditions in society in accordance with Christian values. Among the points of
contention between these two poles were contraception, abortion, marriage, extra-
marital sex, female sexuality and morality in general.
The feminist debate over free love did not reach Iceland until rather late,
around 1920, but signs of these issues had arisen in ethical discussions right after
the turn of the century, especially in the dialogue between Ingibjörg Ólafsson and
Bríet Bjarnhéðinsdóttir. Ingibjörg based her arguments on the concerns about
Christian values voiced by the social purity movement, while Bríet employed a
moderate version of the free-love concept to argue for liberalised marriage laws
and more tolerant attitudes towards extramarital sex and cohabitation. This clash
paved the way for the discussions on free love and morality which dominated
feminist discussions about a decade later.
„lauslætið í reykjavík“ 131
1-SagaVOR2011—NOTAGreinar_Sagahaust2004-NOTA5/4/111:13PMPage131