There is a fervent belief that culture is, among other desirable ideals, “good for you.” This has been the baseline of the cultural policies in many countries. Through cultural policies, some forms of cultural participation over others are subvented through public funding, which makes it yet more important to ask which groups intentionally withdraw—or are left out—from which forms of it. We address the debate on cultural non-participation by scrutinizing nationally representative and longitudinal survey data from Finland, a Nordic welfare country with allegedly low social and cultural hierarchies, for years 2007 and 2018. We explore the changes in cultural non-participation by asking whether the main frequencies of cultural non-participation have changed between 2007 and 2018, what forms of different cultural non-participation patterns can be distinguished, and which socioeconomic factors best predict which form of cultural non-participation most in both years. Finally, we ask whether certain everyday forms of participation would compensate or complement non-existing cultural participation. We find three main cultural non-participation patterns: highbrow avoidance, mainstream avoidance, and nightlife avoidance. While the changes in non-participation look small from the macro level, their internal dynamics face a steep change between 2007 and 2018. Especially higher education becomes a continuously more significant factor for any kind of cultural activity. We also show that cultural participation is not compensated by everyday activities as often claimed in the literature, but that cultural and everyday non-participation overlap. Our results indicate that the alleged egalitarianism in Finland does not reach cultural participation: avoiding most forms of participation is more and more related to socio-economic differences reflecting social and cultural hierarchies.

有一种狂热的信念认为，除了其他理想的理想之外，文化“对你有好处”。这一直是许多国家文化政策的基线。通过文化政策，某些形式的文化参与得到了公共资金的资助，这使得询问哪些群体有意退出或被排除在哪些形式的文化参与中变得更加重要。我们通过审查来自芬兰的全国代表性和纵向调查数据来解决关于文化不参与的辩论，芬兰是一个据称社会和文化等级较低的福利国家，在 2007 年和 2018 年。我们通过询问是否2007年至2018年间，文化不参与的主要频率发生了变化，可以区分哪些形式的不同文化不参与模式，哪些社会经济因素最能预测这两年中哪种形式的文化不参与最多。最后，我们询问某些日常参与形式是否会补偿或补充不存在的文化参与。我们发现了三种主要的文化不参与模式：高雅回避、主流回避和夜生活回避。虽然从宏观层面看，不参与的变化很小，但其内部动态在 2007 年至 2018 年间面临急剧变化。尤其是高等教育成为任何一种文化活动的持续更重要的因素。我们还表明，文化参与并没有像文献中经常声称的那样被日常活动所补偿，但是文化和日常不参与重叠。我们的研究结果表明，芬兰所谓的平等主义并未达到文化参与：避免大多数形式的参与越来越多地与反映社会和文化等级的社会经济差异相关。