Modern woman tries not so much to keep up with the times, but to keep up with the man, and even tries to get ahead. And into politics behind him, and into the army, and into space. And it didn’t start yesterday, or even the day before yesterday. The women's Internet portal Country of Beauty decided to figure out how poor and unhappy men react to this phenomenon - feminism, and what awaits them next...

Feminism through the eyes of a man

It all started in the distant XVIII century, when women first raised their heads high and actively and declared their rights. Much water has flown under the bridge since then - having achieved equality in many spheres of public life, we began to wear men's suits and men's short haircuts, occupy men's positions and play men's games.

But men's attitude to the feminine feminism, and this is what we are talking about now, even in the so progressive 21st century it still remains very ambiguous.

Feminism - examples from life

Remember the footage from the film “Moscow Doesn’t Believe in Tears” - well, I couldn’t main character allow the woman he loves to occupy a higher position and receive a salary greater than he receives. And even because of the notorious male pride I almost lost myself Great love In my life, True, I came to my senses in time.

Although... After all, the author of the film does not show us how the relationship of the main characters develops after a quarrel - was Gosha still able to come to terms with the superiority of the woman he loved?! Perhaps it doesn't show because For such a family, the situation can be the most unpredictable, unless a strong woman learns to leave her directorial ambitions at the doorstep.

Feminism in modern life

IN modern life there are a great many such examples - how many successful women who make stunning careers, spend fabulous sums on their own appearance, remain lonely, and come to their empty luxurious apartments every evening.

Most men are afraid of strong independent women - because of their over-success feminist women trample on such a fragile and vulnerable male ego.

After all, even in everyday life, such women will demand the division of household duties in half. How else? Both work - both must take care of everyday life. Such a prospect is not at all included in men’s ambitious plans; moreover, it frightens them, if not repels them!

Feminism - advantages for men

However, women's feminism from a man's point of view can also have obvious advantages. You can and even need to go on a date with a feminist girl without, without banal, you can do without compliments, without opening doors for her, without shaking hands when getting out of transport, without taking off a girl’s outerwear, without pulling up a chair in a restaurant...

Look how convenient it is! The main bonus awaits the man at the end of the date with a feminist - she will pay for herself, drive herself home herself, or even give him a lift home in her own car!

Such a girl for sure will not demand stupid romantic confessions under the moon, evidence is strong male love to her, and then during a lifetime of endless vows in this very love.

Feminist girl much easier will agree to sex after the first date, and the point here is not a lack of self-respect, but the fact that men do this. This means that a woman should not lag behind them!

Men, don't be afraid! Feminists are women too moreover, they are very beautiful and successful, and just like other women, these militant people want your love and tenderness! So feminism feminism, and everyone without exception wants love, affection, tenderness, care and attention! Love your friend and be happy!

General characteristics of the problems of feminism

Feminism, as a set of ideological, theoretical and philosophical concepts, has become very widespread in modern conditions - feminism is often mentioned in media mass media, specialized literature, comprehensive gender studies are conducted, etc.

All this allowed the followers of the doctrine in question to achieve significant success in combating sexual discrimination and ensuring equality legal status men and women.

For example, all European countries currently recognize women’s rights to obtain higher education. vocational education, receiving equal pay for equal work, the right to vote and be elected, etc.

However, despite the indicated positive achievements for modern feminism Characteristically, there are some problems and shortcomings that prevent the preservation of the positive image of feminist doctrine today.

Thus, the key problem of modern feminism in the specialized literature is recognized as its radicalization, generated by the third wave of feminism. Chronologically, the designated process can be counted from the 1990s. XX century, when the characteristics of feminism to some extent acquired an extremist coloring.

Among the specific manifestations of the identified problem are:

• The retreat into the background of the classical ideas of equality for feminism;
• Forming a thesis not about the equality of men and women, but about the direct superiority of the latter;
• Among the acceptable methods of achieving program goals and objectives, modern feminists, unlike their predecessors, do not recognize progressive reform government system, and change public consciousness in terms of transforming the appearance of men and women in social interaction, and radical social changes expressed in the destruction of classical ideas about the concept of sex, gender, traditional family, etc.

The identified factors led to a split in the feminist doctrine that had evolved over decades, diverging views of its representatives on a number of conceptual issues that once formed the main content of a holistic theory - issues of identity, gender, the fight against patriarchy, the distinction between private and public, etc.

Moreover, due to the failure to reach final agreement on the identified issues, another problem of modern feminism is its final collapse into many relatively independent movements.

Note 1

In other words, one of the main problems of both the theoretical and practical directions of feminism is the vagueness of concepts and the lack of specific goals and objectives.

Problems of the radical libertarian direction of feminism

Since, as noted above, modern feminism is largely characterized by its own radicalism, in the framework of characterizing the problems of feminism, it seems reasonable to dwell in more detail on the problems of current trends in feminist doctrine.

At the same time, an analysis of special sources allows us to note that just as classical feminism itself was not characterized by absolute uniformity and homogeneity, modern radical feminism is characterized by the presence of many relatively independent theoretical and practical directions, the main of which are considered to be radical libertarian and radical cultural feminism.

The problem of the first of these, the radical-libertarian direction of feminism, is the excessive radicalism of the program goals and the proposed ways to achieve them.

Thus, according to representatives of the approach under consideration, gender, as a fundamental category of feminist doctrine, is exclusively social concept, separated from the floor. However, the model of patriarchal organization of society that has existed for centuries leads to the establishment of control over women and the formation of appropriate gender frameworks.

In other words, the main oppressor is not individual representatives of the male gender, but the existing system of male domination. In this regard, representatives of radical libertarian feminism advocate fundamental changes in the institution of the family, blurring the line between fatherhood and motherhood through the implementation of the only possible, in their opinion, way to defeat the system of oppression - replacing natural reproduction with artificial one.

According to supporters of this direction, in this way, the biological nuclear family system will be destroyed, and all children will be raised collectively by the entire society.

Problems of the radical cultural direction of feminism

If the problem of the radical-libertarian direction of feminism is the desire for the complete destruction of the existing foundations of social organization, starting with the interruption of natural biological reproductive processes, then the problem of the radical-cultural direction of feminism is the call for a “sharp numerical reduction in the number of men,” which indicates a direct the rapprochement of feminism (the classical values ​​of which were the desire to ensure equality and intergender justice) and fascism, in its desire for the physical destruction of “undesirable” social groups.

The reasons for the formation of such views are related to the fact that supporters of the considered direction of feminism argue that the reason for the dominance of men over women is actually their heterosexuality, which ultimately gives rise to psychological and physical violence of men against women.

Note 2

Based on this, if a woman wants to be completely free, she must stop all communication with men, be it physical or spiritual.

Topic 11. Feminism

1.Basic concepts of feminism

Feminism(from Latin “femina” " - woman) in modern social political life usually called Firstly, a system of views (or theory, philosophy, ideology), the central idea of ​​which is the civil equality of women and men; Secondly, this concept used to refer to the women's movement, which is a “product” of feminism.

Feminism is sometimes understood as philosophical concept of sociocultural development , emphasizing the need to take into account women's social experience in ideas about the world, as well as research methodology oriented towards identifying and articulating the female value system.

Under "women's movement" understands the variety of forms of organized activity, aimed at realizing the idea of ​​equality of women and men, at protecting the social interests of women . However, as history has shown, this activity may not entirely coincide with feminist ideas and may not be aimed at the radical transformation of relations between the sexes that feminism seeks, but at a partial improvement in the position of women within the framework of the traditional system of these relationships. And yet, feminism and the women's movement are so interconnected phenomena that it is impossible, and even incorrect, to consider them separately. The emergence of feminist ideas is the result of certain social needs and expectations . Once they arise, these ideas are realized in people’s activities—in this case, in one or another type of women’s movement. Which, in turn, gives impetus to the meaningful development of the theory and ideology of feminism.

Contemporary feminism has a variety of forms and traditions. To his the most important areas include: liberal feminism, radical(and within its framework - cultural) feminism, Marxist and socialist feminism, " black» feminism, psychoanalytic feminism, postmodern feminism ( postfeminism). Less known versions of it are: anarcho-feminism, humanistic feminism, conservative feminism. Among the newest feminist streams are eco- and cyberfeminisms.

Two key concepts - "gender" And "patriarchy"- connect together all this many approaches to the ideas of equal rights for women and men. Close to them is the concept sexism(English sexism, from Latin sexus - sex) - a worldview that affirms the unequal status and different rights of the sexes .

When using the concept gender(from English gender - gender) and its derivatives (gender relations, gender order, etc.) we are talking about social, cultural, psychological characteristics positions of women and men , while "floor" denotes, first of all, physical, physiological, biological differences between men and women . English sociologist Anthony Giddens explains, for example, that “gender” is these are “not physical differences between men and women, but socially formed features of masculinity and femininity». Gender, he says, means primarily “social expectations about behavior considered appropriate for men and women.”

Unlike other scientific approaches the concept of “gender” considers man and woman not in a “natural”, “natural” quality, not as a biological being whose fate is predetermined by its physiological characteristics, but as a social being, with its own special status, special social interests, requests, needs, strategy of social behavior. E. Giddens rightly notes that “the distinction between sex and gender is fundamental, since many differences between women and men are caused by reasons that are not biological in nature ».

This seemingly simple conclusion is difficult to master. After all, it has long been accepted that differences in social positions and in the everyday behavior of women and men are determined by their “genes” and “chromosomes”, which, by the way, are indeed not the same. All the genetic material of any person is contained in a cell . It lives in twenty three pairs of chromosomes , the last one is twenty-third - contains sex chromosomes . For women, both elements of this pair are identical. They are designated asXX chromosomes. For men, this pair is made up of different elements. One of them is defined as X-, other like Y chromosome. Modern science believes that these differences appear upon reaching puberty in women and men and make themselves felt primarily in the reproductive sphere .

However many researchers traditionally dispute this point of view. In their opinion, innate biological differences determine generally all social behavior of men and women . Men stronger, more energetic, more aggressive than women. Women- passive, patient, meek. That's why men wage wars, conquer nature, create history and culture. Women are engaged in routine housework and raising children. The obvious asymmetry of “masculinity” and “femininity”, from this point of view, is inevitable, it is predetermined by “nature” , but you can’t argue with the latter. This means that it is not for nothing that the founder of psychoanalysis Z. Freud at first XX V. came to the sacramental conclusion: “ Anatomy is destiny».

This biologically determined approach to proper “masculine” and proper “feminine” for many thousands of years seemed the only possible one. As feminist supporters argue, this approach served as an ideological justification for patriarchy — systems of male dominance, or dominance, over women. Not without good reason, they prove that the traditional division of roles into “male” and “female”, which is generally considered “natural”, due to natural inclinations, is the result of a certain type of socialization of upbringing and training. It begins in very early childhood, when parents communicate completely differently with boys and girls, dress them, offer them certain toys and books. At each stage of education, specific attributes of “masculinity” and “femininity” are developed, which, as a rule, convey the idea of ​​male social superiority, that is, they affirm and consolidate patriarchy.

So in fact general view the concepts of “patriarchy” and “gender” intersect, substantiating the legitimacy of the original feminist idea of ​​equal rights for women and men. One of the most difficult questions that arises in this case is the question of why women found themselves in an unequal, dependent position on men, why patriarchy was established? Have there ever been other times and other forms of interaction between women and men?

2.Historical background of feminism

Experts do not have a single opinion or any accurate data about the nature of gender relations in the very distant past. Alone of them consider that at the dawn of history relationships between men and women were gender neutral . Others say that at that time reigned matriarchy. Moreover, someone defines this way of life as domination of women. And someone, including the famous American feminist anthropologist Ryan Eisler, argues that matriarchy actually implied partnerships between men and women. This partnership was allegedly destroyed with the emergence and development "war technologies" establishing the superiority of brute force, and with it patriarchy .

Researchers consider the materials obtained by archaeologists during excavations of the earliest human burials to be a significant confirmation of this point of view. Excavations speak of the equal status of those buried, regardless of their gender. But the most important evidence of the high female role in an archaic society is, in their opinion, widespread at that time in the area of ​​ancient Europe, the cult of the Great Mother Goddess. According to R. Eisler, in almost all prehistoric myths and writings “there lives the idea of ​​the Universe as a generous Mother, ... from whose womb every life comes and where ... everything returns after death to be born again.” This cult is indicated in its own way by rock paintings in caves and numerous finds of female figurines in ancient sanctuaries. They are usually crudely stylized, wide-hipped, and often faceless. Archaeologists dubbed them the ancient Venuses.

Evidence of the equal status of men and women in prehistoric times can be found in legends , retold by some ancient authors. The “golden age” of gender harmony is described, for example, in the famous Hesiod's tale "Works and Days". The same motive prevails in the retelling of the great thinker Plato the legend about the destruction of Atlantis. But these are prehistoric myths.

Strict researchers, accustomed to relying on specific facts when constructing theoretical structures, are not inclined to trust them. Therefore, they prove that in the history of mankind there was neither matriarchy nor archaic gender partnership. Primary division of labor between man and woman, which occurred at the earliest stages of social development, determined completely different living conditions for men and women . It consolidated men have the right to be the subject of history. Women same become object of male power.

This point of view is shared, for example, by the same E. Giddens. At the same time, he claims that the universal prevalence of patriarchy is not due to the dominance of male physical strength, but primarily to the maternal functions of women . According to him, “men dominate women not because of superior physical strength or more powerful intelligence, but only because before the spread of reliable means of preventing pregnancy women were entirely at the mercy of the biological characteristics of their sex . Frequent childbirth and almost non-stop efforts to care for children made them dependent on men, including financially.”

None of the above points of view on the nature of gender relations in prehistory has yet received final recognition. Obviously something else. With the beginning of the so-called historical time, approximately 7-5 thousand years ago , in the moment, when that type of social organization arises, which sociologists define as a “traditional” society », Patriarchy is a legalized system of gender relations. The division of labor between the sexes is built in this system on the principle of complementarity, but the complementarity of not at all equivalent social roles. To a man left to the outside world, culture, creativity, claims to dominance . To a woman - house, but even in the house she is a subordinate creature . Hierarchy of male and female roles is fixed quite clearly: he is the subject of power relations. She is the object of his power. Such relationships are defined by sociologists as subject-object, status unequal .

As rightly noted R. Eisler, lined up this way gender relations are the most fundamental of all human relations , even their matrix. They “have a profound impact on all our institutions, ... on the direction of cultural evolution.” The authority of male power, the right of force, established in gender relations, turns into the basis of all authoritarian regimes known to mankind. - the power of clan leaders, “fathers” of peoples, monarchs, dictators. And while gender inequality persists, there is also the potential for the existence of an authoritarian type of government. This is one of the main tenets of modern feminist criticism.

As part of this criticism, it is argued that authoritarian power is based not only on the apparatus of physical coercion and brutal violence. Authoritarian power also uses more subtle methods of influencing the consciousness of individuals , deliberately preventing their dissatisfaction and forcing them to unconsciously follow certain instructions, accept certain roles in the existing order of things. This -

Ø methods of cultural influence, formation of stereotypes of proper social behavior;

Ø methods of socialization and education;

Ø ideological processing of consciousness with the help of language and cultural patterns.

The most common example lying on the surface is language norms. Let's say practically In all European languages, the concept of “man” is equivalent to the concepts of “husband” and “man”. The concept of “woman” only cares about the meaning"wife" and is not synonymous with the concept “person”. It means that he is a husband, a full-fledged representative of the human race. She is his wife, and nothing more, no additional characteristics. That is, a woman - a person of no social significance, not included in human society . She is a simple addition, an addition to her husband, a man. Thus, language norms fix the patriarchal attitude towards male power- up to physical possession, possession of a woman.

Feminist historians rightly note that at the initial stages of traditional society, especially under conditions of slavery, the wife was “the slave of a man - the head of the family, who owned the woman as private property and could do with it the same way as he did with any thing belonging to him.” During some periods of history ancient Rome the husband had the right to life and death of his wife. A wife who disdained marital fidelity could be beaten to death with sticks and stones, or thrown into the circus to be torn to pieces by animals.

Famous philosophers of that time made a significant contribution to consolidating this order of things. Pythagoras, for example, confidently declared : “There is a positive principle that created order, light, man, and a negative principle that created chaos, twilight and woman.” Aristotle, in its turn, explained : “A woman is a female due to a certain lack of qualities... the female character suffers from natural inferiority... a woman is only material, the principle of movement is provided by another, the masculine, the best, the divine.”

3.The emergence of feminism

The first doubts about the fairness of patriarchal orders can already be detected in the New Testament, who announced that life and death of a person do not depend on the whim of nature, but only on the will of God . The teaching of Christ, in principle, complicated the view of man, highlighting in him spiritual and physical substances, soul and body. This The doctrine proclaimed what's there, in the heights of the mountains, all souls will be equalized, “both Greek and Jewish,” both men and women .

But the path to this promised personal equality in Christ is long and steep. In the meantime, an earthly woman is not at all equal to a man. First of all, she is sinful, how sinful is her foremother Eve, an accomplice of the devil, an instrument of dark forces that doomed man to expulsion from paradise. However Christianity also develops a different approach to women - develops, exalting the image of the Mother of God, contrasting the image of Eve — natural-generic femininity , image of the Virgin Mary — femininity spiritual, enlightened, personal and eternal .

Cult of the Virgin Mary with time developed in Romanesque countries of Europe into a cult beautiful lady . This cult foreshadowed the possibility of transforming the relationship between a man and a woman; He lifted the curse of sin from their love , op-overturned the hierarchy in relations of dominance-subordination : the knight worshiped and obeyed the lady, she was his mistress. Thanks to this cult love is individualized- another person and the feeling associated with him are recognized as no less significant a basis for individual existence than the existence of a race or the Divine principle. According to a French social psychologist J. Mendel, this is a sure sign that To XVI V. V Western Europe a completely new type of person is emerging - person, separated from the race, from his community, an individual arises, with his own self-awareness , with longing, love and loneliness.

Individualization, autonomy - manifestations of the onset emancipation of the individual(women and men) from the burden of patriarchal customs and traditions, and therefore a sign of a crisis in the traditional structure of gender relations. After all, what is emancipation? This autonomous action of the subject, aimed at his own liberation from the pressure of natural-generic forces.

Emancipation is accompanied , according to the definition of an outstanding sociologist Max Weber, "disenchantment" rationalization of the world picture . An obligatory part of such rationalization is “humanization” - a meaningful rethinking and changing the relationship between a man and a woman, which is gradually turning from a relationship of dominance/subordination into a relationship of mutual responsibility or " responsible love».

The process of emancipation is accompanied by the emergence two fundamentally important for modern history humanity of ideas - ideas of human rights and ideas of social contract, which were formulated during the Enlightenment and contrasted with traditionalist attitudes towards the authority of force, the right of force. The spread of these ideas provoked the formulation of the question about the rights of women, about their liberation from male domination.

In Western countries recognition of women's rights issues as an integral part of human rights occurs in several stages.

1. For the first time, women are announcing their claims to the role of full-fledged citizens during bourgeois revolutions, which can also be called revolutions of “law”, “legal consciousness”. This - the era of the birth of feminism.

2. Then, during industrial revolutions women in droves find themselves drawn into social production , which forces them to achieve equality in the sphere of socio-economic relations. This time "first wave" feminist movements that developed under the influence of liberalism and Marxism .

3. In the second half XX c., comes time of cultural revolutions, changing the approach to women’s reproductive functions, views on love, childbirth, family life. This stage is called "second wave" feminism, or neofeminism, established influenced by existentialism, psychoanalysis, structuralism and post-structuralism.

At all these stages, spanning more than three centuries, women won for themselves , relatively speaking, three groups of rights, which could allow them to count on a social status comparable in basic parameters to that of men :

Ø political (civil);

Ø socio-economic;

Ø reproductive rights.

The great bourgeois revolutions played a decisive role in this process . They proclaimed the advent of the era of human rights, thereby denying the inviolability of the complete and supposedly heaven-sanctified omnipotence of the monarch over his subjects, of men over women. And in contrast, they declared the freedom and equality of all people before the law. Among the first rebels who challenged patriarchal customs and demanded the same civil rights and freedoms that were granted to men during these revolutions are names French women Olympia de Gouges, Englishwomen Mary Wollstonecraft, American women Abigail Adams. These champions of women's equality were later dubbed " feminists". Their worldview was formed largely under the influence of the liberal ideology of the Enlightenment (Voltaire, Diderot, Montesquieu, Rousseau, T. von Hippel, etc.).

4.Theoretical foundations of feminism

First public manifesto of feminism is " Declaration of the rights of women and citizens", written in 1791 little known writer Olympia de Gouges. In this document for the first time in history, the demand for civil equality of women and men was formulated.

Article one of the Declaration stated : “A woman is born and remains free and equal with a man in the face of the law.” Article six developed this idea further. It declared: “All citizens and citizens must have equal access to all public honors and positions, to all services, for which there should be no barriers other than personal abilities and talents.” Finally Olympia de Gouges prophetically said: “If a woman has the right to ascend the scaffold, then she should have the right to ascend to the podium.”

Such a careless statement cost the writer her life. She was sent to the guillotine as a person who disdained social order. But this same statement brought her immortality. Olympia de Gouges went down in history as the author of the “Declaration of the Rights of Woman and Citizen,” written in opposition to the most famous document in modern history, “Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen.”

What did not suit Olympia de Gouges in the document, which, seemingly sweeping away all the prejudices of its time, unconditionally stated: “All people are born and remain free and equal in rights”? She found the address “suspicious” les homines "(men, people), addressed only to one half of society. Many French women hoped at that moment that legislators would recognize women as capable citizens. The most determined of them even created special women's organization "Society of Revolutionary Republican Women" , which demanded that women be provided the right to vote in elections. This organization can be considered a prototype of the future movement suffragettes(from English suffrage - voting).

But neither the literary gift of Olympia de Gouges nor the pressure of the revolutionary Republican women brought civil rights to French women at that time. Lawmakers refused to see them as full-fledged citizens. Women - along with children, the mentally ill, and financially insolvent persons - fell into the category of those unable to answer for themselves in the face of the law . Women's organizations were disbanded, Furthermore, women, we were forbidden to gather in groups in public places. Thus, the French revolution cooled the ardor of its citizens and nipped in the bud the first shoots of women's social activity, including the desire for collective action with the help of women's associations.

Released in 1804 Napoleon's Civil Code, which began to be considered the standard of bourgeois jurisdiction, confirmed that women do not have civil rights and are either under the guardianship of their father or under the guardianship of their husband . Following the Napoleonic Code, everything new bourgeois legislation rigidly fixes the traditional division of male and female roles. For men still belongs to the entire outside world and dominance in the house. Women - domestic peace, raising children and the obligation to obey your husband. This order is the pinnacle of patriarchy . He is recognized not only custom, but also formal law.

The triumph of male power is also strengthened by the fact that at this moment there is a separation of the sphere of private life from public life - public sphere. The law begins to protect privacy from outside interference, something that past centuries did not know, when a leader or monarch had the right to encroach on everything that was on the territory under their control. A man, the owner of the house, becomes a sovereign master on his territory . Here he gets the opportunity to straighten up full height and turn from a subject into a ruler - an independent citizen. He acquires citizenship skills through the suppression of the "other" . Such an “other” was his wife, who was legally obliged to cultivate his authority in the family, bow to him, and humbly endure his despotism.

English social philosopher Mary Wollstonecraft (1759-1797), being under the strong influence of the radical democratic ideas of Rousseau, the first made a systematic critique of social orders from the standpoint of feminism - 50 years before the emergence of the Sufra-Jist movement. Her most significant work " Defense of Women's Rights" (1792) bears the imprint of Locke's liberal philosophy; in it on the basis of the idea of ​​“inimitability and uniqueness of the individual,” the need to provide women with equal rights with men, especially the right to education, was argued . In addition, the work carried a much more complex analysis of women's problems themselves - an analysis that in many ways anticipated modern feminism.

Beginning since the 30s XIX centuryThe women's movement is reasserting itself. This time the impetus for its development comes from industrial Revolution, which literally explodes the traditional way of life in Western Europe. The modernization of this way of life is accompanied by the development of large-scale industry, the growth of cities, the ruin of small rural farms. And at the same time - destruction of the previous type of family life, crisis in the relationship between man and woman . Two circumstances provided crushing impact on traditional family relationships:

Ø mass involvement of women in social production;

Ø gradual establishment of birth control.

New large-scale industrial production increasingly uses cheap female labor. Under the influence of the industrial revolution mass female labor in social production turns into a fact of social life . And the fact is far from clear. On the one side, it created an economic opportunity to challenge the traditional hierarchy of male and female roles. A with another- turned into super-overloads, super-exploitation of women. After all, no one relieved them of the usual household duties, motherly worries and troubles. Moreover, according to the laws in force at that time the woman could not even manage her earnings - it belonged to her husband . Women were not accepted into trade unions and other public organizations that defended the rights of hired workers, etc. So did new grounds arise? For joint collective performances of women, For creation of women's organizations, designed to defend the interests and rights of women.

With their help, women could present their account to society, which forced them to leave the family hearth and start working. With time within the framework of the women's movement, the first demands were made on the state — relieve women of some of their traditional responsibilities and take care of children, the sick and elderly . From here the idea was formed about the need to expand the functions of the state, about its transformation into social state, called to take care of the common welfare, the weak and poor, the disabled and pensioners.

The objectives of the women's movement of the first wave of feminism were:

Ø requirements equal pay for equal work with men;

Ø access to those professions to which they were trying to be kept out, etc.;

Ø defense by working women of their special social, civil, political interests;

Ø mastering the spheres of civil and party-political life;

Ø protection of women’s rights to work, decent remuneration, education, social guarantees for the protection of motherhood and childhood, the sick, the disabled, and the elderly .

To the beginning of XX V. women's movement turns into a massive, multi-component one. The following are active in its vein:

Ø suffragettes , seeking to extend universal suffrage to women;

Ø socialists , concerned about the recognition of women’s right to work, to fair pay, to participate on an equal basis with men in trade union organizations;

Ø radical feminists , promoting the ideas of conscious motherhood and birth control;

Ø women's charities of all kinds and types, including Christian women's organizations.

In order to get on its feet and gain strength, the women's movement was in dire need of ideological support, some theoretical justification that would help it resist the oppression of traditional morality and achieve changes in bourgeois legislation. The task was difficult, since the majority of ideologists - philosophers, historians, sociologists - were completely convinced of the civil inferiority and insolvency of women. Both conservatives and liberals spoke in unison about the natural or “natural” purpose of each of the sexes.

Only a few dared to challenge these dogmas. One of them, social philosopher C. Fourier in his work " Four Movement Theory", which appeared as a result of the author's reflection on the events of the Great French Revolution, wrote: " Expansion of women's rights is the main principle of social progress ».

Another the great utopist A. de Saint-Simon, dying, left a mysterious thought as a legacy to his students: “ A man and a woman are a full-fledged social individual " Both of them developed ideal projects for a harmonious, fairly organized social life, the basis of which, according to their plan, was to be equality of women and men.

Later, the authoritative English thinker John Stuart Mill. His book " Subordination of a woman"received wide popularity; it was translated into many languages, including Russian. And feminists themselves were looking for justification for their activities. Representatives of suffragism were distinguished by the greatest theoretical activity : English womenX . Taylor, M. Fuller , American women L. Mott, E. S. Santon and etc.

But at that time they played a special role in the conceptual understanding of the social significance of the movement for women’s equality. Marxists. They defined the entire complex of demands formulated by this movement as the “women’s question” and offered their answer to it . The main approaches to the women's issue are set out in the famous work F. Engels « Origin of the family, private property and the state" K. Marx shared the concept of the book; it was jointly thought out and, as it were, continued the traditions of C. Fourier and A. de Saint-Simon . However, unlike its predecessors, Marx and Engels they wrote not so much about the individual, whether a woman or a man, who should be endowed with all civil rights and freedoms, how much about the masses - the masses of workers . They turned to them, explaining that the idea of ​​the “natural purpose” of gender essentially masks a special kind of “relations of production” - relations of reproduction of the human race . The whole mystery of these relationships is not connected with the “sacrament” of gender, but with the fact that they are simultaneously natural, biological, and social. And also - these are relations of social inequality arising from the unequal and unfair division of labor, in which the wife and children are actually slaves of the husband and father . Therefore, any the traditional family form automatically reproduces relations of dominance/subordination.

The founders of Marxism argued that industrial Revolution dealt an irreparable blow to such a family. Women's wage labor, no matter how hard it was, created the economic prerequisites for the independence and independence of working women. He started destroy the foundations of the old family and traditional family relationships , dooming women to a servile existence. This is the positive meaning of hired female labor.

In addition, the classics of Marxism emphasized, The position of women hired workers is a class position. They belong to the proletarian class . That's why the task of liberating them from social inequality coincides with the task of liberating the proletariat. The destruction of all forms of exploitation and oppression is the common goal of proletarians and women. Only in a society free from exploitation and oppression are equal relations between men and women possible .

This is, in the most general terms, the Marxist approach to the problems of women's equality. He corresponded to his time and its evidence. There was only one problem. Marxists considered this approach to be the only correct one, and therefore they resolutely distinguished themselves from all other advocates of women's equality. The suffragists, who sought recognition of women's political rights, especially suffered from them. Marxists believed that the demands of the suffragettes in their own way legitimized the bourgeois political system . And therefore they attached the label “bourgeois” to these demands, and to “classical” liberal feminism itself. And they waged a fierce struggle against the suffragettes, as representatives of the bourgeois system. . Up until the 60s. XX V. this struggle split the women's movement, weakening it and causing it irreparable damage.

Nevertheless, the women's movement managed, step by step, to win a space of freedom for women, to change morals, laws, and traditions. As a result of the slow, “creeping” gains of feminism at the end XIX - first half XX V. women managed to achieve :

Ø rights to education;

Ø to equal work and wages with men;

Ø later - to receive the right to vote and the right to be elected, first to local, then to the highest echelons of power;

Ø the right to join trade union organizations and political parties;

Ø right to divorce;

Ø in some places - on the use of contraceptives and abortion;

Ø the right to state assistance for pregnancy and childbirth, maternity leave, etc.

All directions of the women's movement, each in its own way, helped women in one way or another get used to the new role of a subject of history for them. The activities of supporters of Marxism and the activities of suffragettes brought tangible results. Under the pressure of the latter, in particular, women were finally provided voting right. First time this happened in New Zealand in 1893, then - in Australia in 1896, in Finland in 1906.

5.The second wave of the women's movement - neofeminism

But it turned out that obtaining civil rights is only part of the task. Other no less complex part of it - learn to use these rights. This also took time and special efforts on the part of women's organizations. For some time, the painstaking, grassroots activities of these organizations remained virtually unnoticed. However at the turn of the 60-70s. XX century the rapid rise of the women's movement began , which was called second wave. The women's movement gained momentum during the turbulent student performances and led to such dramatic changes in the behavior of women that sociologists were forced to talk about the “peaceful women’s revolution” as the only revolution that took place XX century

The ideological basis for this movement was studying neofeminism, whose slogans were aimed not only at protecting the socio-economic and political rights of women, but also at overcoming traditional ideas that the main purpose of women is procreation, that the main meaning of their lives comes down to performing reproductive functions, and therefore giving birth to children is their main responsibility .

Following radical feminists XIX V. neofeminists insisted that motherhood from the category “responsibilities”» should be reclassified "women's rights. In this context they they sought recognition of the right to prevent pregnancy, the possibility of its termination, and raised the issue of “conscious motherhood” and “family planning.” And they talked about it loudly, putting forward the slogan: “ Our womb belongs to us!” In this approach, a woman’s appropriation of her “womb,” her body, was thought of as equivalent to the appropriation of her destiny.

Neo-feminism formed under the influence of ideas formulated Simone de Beauvoir (1908-1986) - French writer and existentialist philosopher. She was one of those Western feminists who for quite a long time were convinced of the fruitfulness of the Marxist model of women's liberation - liberation through labor and proletarian revolution. However, despite her initially sacred faith in the cause of socialism, she still had certain doubts about the self-sufficiency of the Marxist approach to transforming relations between the sexes. It was these doubts that prompted her to write a special work on the status of women - two-volume work “The Second Sex”. The book was published in 1949 first in France, and a little later in almost all Western countries. IN 1997 The book was also published in Russia. Three generations of Western women grew up reading this book, revering it as new Bible. IN THE USA had a comparable influence in the 60s. last century book Betty Friedan (1921-2006) “The Feminine Mystique” published in 1963 g. In Russia it was released in 1994 called " The mystery of femininity» .

Without entering into direct polemics with Marxists, S. De Beauvoir shifted the emphasis from the problem of the collective struggle of the proletariat, as a guarantee of such liberation, to the problem of the personal formation of a woman as a subject. That is, it restored the theme of emancipation in its true meaning. This approach was natural for the existentialist philosopher of the atheistic movement, to which S. de Beauvoir belonged. In her system of views, the concepts of free will, freedom of choice, self-realization of the individual and its true existence occupy the main place. For S. de Beauvoir, the only obvious reality of existence is man himself, in whose nature there is nothing predetermined, predetermined, there is no “essence”. This essence is made up of his actions, it is the result of all the choices he has made in life. A person is free to develop the abilities inherent in him or to sacrifice himself to circumstances , conventions, prejudices. Only a person himself is able to fill his life with meaning. .

That is why in the center of her attention — not the “female masses” and their “collective struggle », and the female personality and its “situation” in history, given by physiology and anatomy, psychology and social norms and rules. S. de Beauvoir concentrates his analysis mainly on the topic of interpersonal relations between men and women - relationships "One" And "Other" seen through the prism of “true being” - the existence of a person capable of consciously building his life, filling it with meaning and purpose .

From these positions, S. de Beauvoir re-reads the myths and legends about the “mystery of sex,” “the purpose of a woman,” and “the mystery of the female soul.” It is obvious to her that such a riddle does not exist in principle. In the heat of controversy she formulates his famous thesis: « One is not born a woman, one becomes a woman" The thesis is extremely controversial, provocative, which will cause a flurry of criticism from both convinced anti-feminists and feminists.

Of course she does not deny the biological difference between a man and a woman in general - “male” and “female” as natural principles . She denies the direct dependence between different levels of human life , denies Sigmund Freud with his thesis “anatomy is destiny.” And it proves that the biological difference between a man and a woman does not at all imply their social difference, when one is a master and the other is his slave. This distribution of roles not given in advance, not predetermined once and for all, but imposed by very specific socio-historical circumstances . It happened at the dawn of history , when a man was assigned the sphere of “constructing the meaning of life” - the sphere of culture, and a woman was assigned the sphere of reproduction of life itself - the sphere of “nature”. On this basis, over time, there arise stereotypes of social consciousness, identifying culture with men and nature with women.

S. de Beauvoir emphasizes that since it was male activity that formed the concept of human existence as a value that raises this activity above the dark forces of nature, conquers nature itself, and at the same time woman, then a man in everyday life consciousness has always appeared and appears as a creator, creator, subject, master. A woman is only as a part of natural forces and as an object of his power. The thesis “one is not born a woman, one becomes a woman” is directed against this prejudice. S. de Beauvoir thus seeks to dispel any doubts that Initially, a woman has the same potentialities, the same abilities for the manifestation of free will, for transcendence, for self-development, as in a man. Their suppression breaks a woman’s personality and does not allow a woman to develop as a person. The conflict between the initial ability to be a subject and the imposed role of an object of someone else’s power determines the peculiarity of “women’s destiny.” But S. de Beauvoir is convinced that this conflict is gradually being resolved. The desire for freedom prevails over the stereotypes of traditional behavior of women and men. Confirmation of this is the appearance of major female personalities in history, the development of ideas of women's equality, and the women's movement itself.

Still “The Second Sex” remains the most complete historical and philosophical study on the status of women practically from the creation of the world to the present day. Here the failures and achievements of the women's movement of past years are summed up and the basis is prepared for its further development as a collective action that helps the formation of a free, “autonomous” female personality, capable of “appropriating” her own life, starting with the appropriation of her “body” .

Contemporaries of S. de Beauvoir did not dare to turn this idea into a guide to action. Their daughters dared - non-feminists. They, spiritual heirs of S. de Beauvoir owe her, first of all, the fact that they began to evaluate themselves and their lives by new standards - the standards of a free person . Awakening social female consciousness or, in other words, awakening in women the desire to live the life of a full-fledged person is the main achievement of neofeminism.

Not all neofeminists were ready to fully follow S. de Beauvoir and see in a woman a being that differs from a man only in her ability to bear children. Some of them, for example, French women L. Irie-garey, E. Cixous and others, based on the theory of essentialism (from lat. essentia - essence), defend the idea about the special female subjectivity, specificity of the feminine principle. On this basis they they talk about a woman’s right not to copy the male standard of social behavior, but to live in history in her own way, in accordance with female nature , in other words, defend the right to be different from a man.

For supporters of S. de Beauvoir , convinced of fundamental similarity, even equality of personality in man , whether a man or a woman, in principle there is no such female “essence” and there cannot be. In their opinion, being a woman is not a calling, not a purpose. A woman should be able to realize herself as a person - in work, in creativity, in self-development.

Supporters "right to difference" argued that all previous history and culture was built in accordance with the male vision of the world, with male tastes, preferences - the world is "masculinized"". Therefore, entering history as its subject, a woman must contrast her own, feminine standards and stereotypes with men . Without affirming their special view of the world, history and culture, women risk losing their identity and simply dissolving, disappearing into a “male” society. Supporters of Simone de Beauvoir, "egalitarian"(from French egalite - equality) feminists reproached their girlfriends for the fact that they base all their conclusions on the level of sexuality and its manifestations, that for them “the sign of gender is the main and ubiquitous one.”

The dispute between these versions of feminism quickly spread beyond the boundaries of their “family.” Representatives of all human sciences - biologists, physiologists, psychologists, anthropologists, ethnographers, philosophers, historians, philologists - were drawn into it. This also happened because since mid-1970s. under the pressure of feminists in Western universities everywhere centers for “women’s” “feminist” studies with special programs emerged . Main the task of such centers — identify and define features - or lack thereof - feminine “beginning”, feminine view of the world, feminine values.

With the development of these studies, the feminist debate was not only not resolved, but finally drove in different directions the proponents of the “egalitarian” and “differentiated” approach to the definition of female identity . Their a way out of the impasse of this dispute was proposed by researchers who based their analysis on the basis of the comparative characteristics of the “male” and “female” principles . At the center of their analysis was concept of "gender". So gender studies emerged, which very quickly won their place both in academic sciences and in educational centers. The concept of “gender” in the 80-90s. of the last century were adopted as a research tool by sociologists, political scientists, philosophers, psychologists, economists, etc.

In recent decades XX century,Despite internal disputes, feminist theory is also experiencing a period of rapid development. Within radical feminism seriously the concept of patriarchy is clarified and supplemented . This is what American women do S. Firestone, K. Millett, French K. Delphi etc. Radical feminism is convinced that gender differences are the most profound and politically significant divide in society. All societies, past and present, according to this view, are characterized patriarchy - a system that allows , according to the expression Kate Millett, « one half of humanity - men - to keep the other half - women in check " Radical feminism proclaims the need for a kind of sexual revolution - a revolution that, among other things, will restructure not only political, but also personal, domestic and family life . Characteristic the slogan of radical feminism is “the personal is political”" However, it does not go so far as to see a man as an “enemy” - only in its most extreme forms does radical feminism call on women to completely “remove themselves from male society.”

In the works D. Mitchell, N. Chodorow, K. Killigan, G. Rabin etc. is being further developed psychoanalytic feminism, which focuses not on the special role of the father and the Oedipus complex (which is characteristic of the founder of psychoanalysis, Z. Freud), but on the pre-Oedipal period, when the child is in a special way connected with the mother. From the point of view of feminist psychoanalysts, first of all imaginary fear of the mother, inherent in childhood, determines the motivation for the behavior of adult individuals . Psychoanalytic feminism played a certain role in drawing attention to the social nature of not only fatherhood, but also motherhood, and raising the problems of education (especially by women).

Under the influence of the great French philosopher Michel Foucault, who developed a new “capillary” theory of power, as well as such prominent theorists of poststructuralism as J. Lacan, J. Derrida, R. Barthes, J. Deleuze, F. Guattari, postmodern feminism or postfeminism. Its largest representatives include such diverse researchers as D. Butler, R. Braidotti, M. Wittig, Y. Kristevu and etc.

6.Feminism at the beginning XXI century

Today, postfeminism is considered perhaps the most authoritative branch of feminist criticism, although opponents rightly reproach its representatives for incompleteness, internal contradictions in mental developments, and vagueness of the concepts used. However, it is within the framework of postfeminism there has been a semantic increment to feminist knowledge . Postfeminist managed to offer a new interpretation of the “differences” in subjectivity- not as marginality, exceptions from culture, not as deviations from the norm, but as some kind of value. In such a paradigm, any “other” (other subjectivity) receives its full status in history, and any “other” is recognized as having the right to a full existence. This approach affirms the versatility, diversity, diversity of social space, which is kept in tension not by one central conflict, not by one contradiction - class, racial or national, but by many different conflicts, different contradictions, in different ways. and permitted.

For today's feminism, the concept of “diversity” is basic. One of its largest representatives, American historian J. Scott emphasizes : “Modern feminist theories do not assume fixed relationships between entities, but interpret them as the changing effects of temporal, cultural or historical specificity, power dynamics... Neither individual nor collective identity exists without the Other; inclusion does not exist without exclusion, the universal does not exist without the rejected particular, there is no neutrality that would not give preference to any of the points of view behind which someone's interests stand, power plays an essential role in all human responsibilities. wearing... For us, differences are a fact of human existence, an instrument of power, an analytical tool and a feature of feminism as such.”

Active during this period Sociologists classify women's organizations in different ways: based on their goals and objectives, methods of action, ideological postulates. The most recognized is their basic division into two streams: liberal and radical.

Liberal women's organizations - This reformist, moderate, mass associations seeking equal rights for women with men through political methods , legally recognized by society. The main types of activity of liberal organizations are lobbying and petitions to judicial and legislative bodies in order to change laws and institutions in the interests of women.

Radical women's organizations As a rule, they adhere to left-wing views - from Marxist and neo-Marxist to the far left and focus on activities “at the roots of the grass”, achieving the “growth of consciousness” of women on a personal level .

The political context of a given country significantly influences the strategy of women's organizations. US women's organizations operate within an “open” political system with entrenched lobbying rules . Hence their scope and focus on using their own Women's Lobby in Congress(The Women's Lobby was founded back in 1972, during the promotion of the Equal Rights Amendment.)

In Francewith its powerful party system in those same years women's organizations use “party-oriented” forms of activity : they seek the adoption by parties of special quotas that guarantee the integration of women not only into the electoral process, but in general into the political process; changes in party programs, which include demands for gender equality.

In Germanycoexist and strong independent women's organizations , And powerful women's factions in political parties, trade unions . Women's interest groups engaged in lobbying have also emerged. In some countries, for example in Iceland, Sweden to protect women's rights arise and are successful Women's and Feminist parties are active .

The women's movement in all its forms has managed to have a significant impact on changing social norms and rules. Under his influence has begun , For example, a real breakthrough for women in politics . Women take charge of the work of local authorities, become mayors of cities, municipal councilors, deputies of regional councils, deputies of parliaments, heads of government and even presidents. According to the UN at first XXI century. women have led and are leading - as presidents or prime ministers - the following countries : Bangladesh, Ireland, Latvia, New Zealand, Australia, Panama, San Marino, Switzerland, Finland, Sri Lanka, Germany, Argentina, Chile, Brazil. Under their leadership was about 10% of the world's parliaments. Women are trying not only to master the entire political space, but declare their intention to radically change its rules and content - to make the policy more humane, people-oriented .

7.Feminist traditions in Russia

Russia also has its own feminist tradition. The development of the women's movement began in our country around from the middle XIX centuryand was associated with a number of historical features. The point, first of all, is that initially the women's movement was formed here not in the crucible of the bourgeois revolution, but only on the approaches to it, which lasted for a good half century. If the first slogans of Western women's organizations were slogans of civil and political equality for women, then in the demands of Russian women's organizations the emphasis was placed on issues of women's labor and female education. Russian feminists, who at that time were they called equal rights, have achieved remarkable results in their own way. In particular, it is with their support, higher education for women has become a recognized value of our fellow citizens . But the issues of civil and political rights of women were relegated to the background. Perhaps that is why it still remains poorly mastered by the public consciousness.

The first period in the development of the women's movement in Russia — from the reform of 1861 to the revolution of 1905 When the results are summed up, among the undoubted achievements of equal rights they name opening of “women’s medical courses” at the Medical-Surgical Academy in St. Petersburg in 1871 g. and Higher Women's Courses at St. Petersburg University in 1878 G. Back to top XX century. in almost all large cities of Russia there were women's courses, both higher and specialized : medical, as well as polytechnic, agricultural, architectural etc. Almost all of these courses owed their emergence to private and public initiative and the influence of women. Thanks to them, back to the beginning XX V. Russia was in second place in the world (immediately after England) in the number of women who received higher education .

The question of women’s civil and political rights did not arise during this period - no one had these rights under the conditions of an absolute monarchy. Revolution 1905 changed the situation in the country. The male half of Russian society in accordance with Nicholas’s Manifesto II received at that moment certain civil and political rights and freedoms, women did not receive civil recognition. And they began to achieve it, including in their demands the slogans of civil and political equality . From now on the second stage in the development of the domestic women's movement begins which will last until the revolutions of 1917

The women's movement has become much more diverse and multi-component in these years, and its ideological forms have become more complex. However target all its streams one — equalization of women in civil and political rights with men. On the eve of the 1917 revolution, the women's movement was a significant socio-political force in Russia. His achievements provided such a margin of safety for the ideas of gender equality that they forced the new government that arose during the revolution to take these ideas into account and even include them in the program for building a new society.

By decrees adopted in December 1917, the Bolsheviks provided women with full civil rights and freedoms, making them equal to men before the law. . True, simultaneously with the publication of these decrees all independent women's associations were banned . The Soviet government took upon itself the task of defending women's interests. Thus a completely new phenomenon arose - "state feminism" or special state policy towards women , within the framework of which the “emancipation” of Soviet women was now carried out.

The state and the ruling party took care of the ones they first formed “ women's departments", then " women's councils». « The drive belt of the party was also considered Soviet Women's Committee , created in 1946 . He was mainly involved in contacts with anti-fascist organizations abroad, and later became an association of “women’s councils” . Soviet women's organizations did not raise the issue of gender equality. They propagated party decisions that spoke of the need to “improve the situation of women " This means that they were not subjects of collective action in the truest sense of the concept. Using the concept of the famous Russian historian Yu.S. Pivovarova, we can say that “subjective energy” of women's organizations, like other civil associations, was appropriated by the party-state . Democracy, human rights, women's rights were illusory concepts in these conditions . AND This is the second feature of the Russian women's movement. The weak civic potential of women, insufficient awareness of human rights issues, emancipation in the conditions of authoritarian modernization, within the boundaries established by the state - this is the historical legacy that modern women's organizations in Russia have received and which cannot but affect their current activities.

“Perestroika” of the era of M.S. Gorbachev and the liberal reforms that began after it potentially opened up new opportunities for the development of civil initiatives, for updating the issue of human rights, including women’s rights. This means for the formation of an independent women's movement. The first women's groups that declared themselves independent organizations began to appear in 1988-1989. Since then, independent women's organizations have, in one way or another, tried to become a definite factor in public life. In conditions when the main burden of the social consequences of reforms fell on the shoulders of women, they sought to help their compatriots survive — acquire new professions, maintain health, solve problems with difficult children, drug-addicted children, find psychological support and shelter in case of violence, etc. Engaged in legal and gender education of fellow citizens , lobbying for the interests of women at the level of legislative and executive power, gender expertise of legislative acts and other government decisions . They raised the question of the need to promote women in power structures.

It is important to emphasize that as the activities of women’s organizations develop, the process of “denationalization” of the very task of equalizing the social status of women begins. Dissatisfied with the position of women in society, their activists intend to take responsibility for their lives and their own, for its specific problems. In their associations they try to do what the state cannot or does not provide for them to do for them.

At the end of the 20th century.was registered only by the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation about 650 women's associations. To these should also be added those organizations that were registered at the regional or local levels, as well as those that were not registered at all. Generally in the regions of the country, according to official statistics, at that time there was about 15 thousand women's associations.

Certain women's organizations (for example, movement "Women of Russia") in these decades gained experience in participating in various types of election campaigns and even experience in parliamentary activities ( faction "Women of Russia" in State Duma in 1993-1995). Other women's organizations were busy either searching for forms of interaction with the authorities, developing “social partnership,” or grassroots activities “at the roots of the grass.”

The further development of the women's movement in Russia will largely depend on the persistence of its activists, their ability to influence public life - provided that the authorities see them as allies, not opponents, and begin to provide them with at least moral support. support rather than opposition.

Thus, world feminist worldview , represented by many directions , is independent and in an original way perception and explanation of the world . In the future, its transformation into ideology is not excluded.

Literature

Aivazova S.G. Russian women in the labyrinth of equality. M., 1998.

Ai-vazova S.G. Gender equality in the context of human rights. M., 2001.

Aivazova S.G. Feminism // Political Science: Lexicon / Ed. A.I. Solovyov. M., 2007. P.708-724.

Anthology of gender theory / Compiled by E. Gapova, A. Usmanova. Minsk, 2000.

Beauvoir de S. The Second Sex. M.; St. Petersburg, 1997. T. 1-2.

Introduction to Gender Studies: Tutorial/ Ed. I.A. Zherebkina. St. Petersburg.. 2001.

Voronina O.A. Feminism and gender equality. M., 2004.

Malysheva M.M. Modern patriarchy. M., 2001.

Friedan B. The Mystery of Femininity. Per. from English M., 1994.

Khasbulatova O.A., Gafizova N.B. Women's movement in Russia. Ivanovo, 2003.

The definition of “feminism” arose much later than the phenomenon itself. One by oneNoah version, it was introduced into circulation by Alexander Dumas the son, author of the famous novel “Lady with camellias." He supposedly invented it at the end XIX c., when feminism strengthened, it became a sociala vitally significant fact.

Suffragettes (from the English Suffrage - suffrage) - participants in the movement to give women voting rights in the second half of the 19th - early 20th centuries. in the UK, USA and other countries.

Mary Wollstonecraft was married to the anarchist William Godwin; her daughter Mary Shelley is the author of the famous Frankenstein.

Betty Friedan is one of the leaders of American feminism. She advocated for full rights for women, on equal terms with men. wages before participating in the political life of the country, and the abolition of the ban on abortion. In 1966, Friedan created the National Organization for Women and became its president.

From B. Friedan’s book “The Femininity Mystique”: “A man is not our enemy, but a friend in misfortune. The real enemy is women's self-deprecation", "Most women do not have a wife to take care of the "little things in life", "Women have nothing to lose but their vacuum cleaners."

Masculinity (from Latin masculinus, male) is a complex of bodily, mental and behavioral characteristics (secondary sexual characteristics) considered masculine.

His recognized theorist was the famouschanged Alexandra Kollontai, who still worshiped by many Westerners feminists.

“FEMINISM IN MODERN SOCIETY

scientific adviser

Siberian Federal University

She shouted: "Equality!

Give me all my rights!

He quietly: “Yes, take it. To your health.

I give everything, because you're right.

Drive? Yes please.

Whitewash, wash, saw, plan.

I give everything, then don’t complain

Don't you dare whine and shout.

With passion, woman, redoubled

I took care of everything myself.

I washed, built a house - built.

She taxied, dug and rowed...

And he, having felt the “disenfranchisement”,

Having fallen in love with the sofa,

Thank you for equality

All women of the world and all countries...

Feminism has already become an integral part of our lives. Just imagine a world where women do not have the right to higher education, cannot vote and hold leadership positions, should not wear trousers, short skirts or makeup, and, naturally, there can be no talk of any continued dates - this is the lot "fallen" women. Is it difficult to imagine? But our world was like this just recently. By the way, in civilized Switzerland, women were allowed to vote in elections only in the 80s of the twentieth century. So we cannot say that feminism has lost its relevance. Moreover, he has not yet reached many places, and women there are still treated as a kind of livestock. And regarding the fact that it’s hard to do everything yourself - that’s true before women They didn’t carry me in my arms at all, and they didn’t even let me open my mouth. It has always been, at all times, not easy to be a woman. But whether feminism has benefited us is not yet known. Women have achieved a lot, but what do we see? That now women everywhere are busy with their careers and self-affirmation. They pushed the institution of mother and wife into the background. So it is not surprising that feminism on the male side is now picking up speed. Somehow it turned out that women shouted, but they had not yet acquired true freedom from male chauvinism.

At the same time, in modern society A huge number of myths have developed about the activities of feminists, their views and ideas. Did you know that feminists have never held public bra burnings? In reality it was like this. In 1968, American students protested against the Miss America beauty pageant: they staged a mock coronation of a sheep and defiantly threw ladies' magazines, high-heeled shoes, curlers and corsets into trash cans. For greater effect, they intended to burn their underwear at the same time, but in the end they did not do this for reasons of fire safety. But the editor of the New York Post really liked the headline “Bra Burners” - it really does sound romantic and terrifying. Thus, thanks to the media, the belief about the pyromaniac tendencies of feminists was born. But what about bras? Bras are a trifle, a special case, “flowers”. There are also “berries”.

“Feminism is when women want to rule the world,” my friend once said. And thereby formulated the main stereotype about feminism. In fact, feminism was and still largely remains a struggle not for the superiority of women over men, but only against their defeat in legal and actual rights.

Early feminism emerged shortly after the French Revolution. Olympia de Gouges, one of the most striking characters of the era, wrote in her “Declaration of the Rights of Woman and Citizen”: “If woman has the right to mount the scaffold, then she must have the right to mount the tribune.” She was indeed executed in November 1793, and she was far from the only one. But the French Revolution never allowed women onto the podium. In the same November, clubs and associations of women were closed, they were soon banned from appearing at public meetings, and a little later, Napoleon, who came to power, enshrined in the constitution that only men could have civil rights.

The beautiful slogans proclaimed in the American Declaration of Independence of 1776 that “all men are created equal, and are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,” applied only to men. Abigail Smith Adams, the wife of President John Adams and considered America's first feminist, said, "We will not submit to laws we had no part in making or to an authority that does not represent our interests."

So the first steps towards equality and brotherhood, which are written with affection in history and law textbooks, applied specifically to “brothers,” because “sisters” were somehow not really considered people. It was against this background that suffragism developed, that is, simply put, the movement for equal voting rights. And if you don’t think women should be banned from voting, then congratulations: you are de facto a suffragist (or suffragist). Entire generations of men and women fought for this equality, which today seems self-evident, and fought hard: they disrupted government meetings, held hunger strikes in prisons, and even staged terrorist attacks against government agencies.

There is another misconception... “Okay, 19th century, suffragettes, the right to vote and study. Okay, third world countries. But now what do women lack in enlightened Europe? What other rights do they want? They're crazy about fat!" Actually - no, not with fat. The problems that feminists raise and try to solve cannot be called far-fetched. In particular, violence. On average, up to 70% of murdered women in the world are killed by them. sexual partners. In some EU countries, every fourth woman has been a victim of domestic violence. And this is only what is reflected in the statistics, but beaten and raped women do not always report this “to the right place.” Moreover, they themselves do not always adequately assess what is happening to them. For example, many still do not understand that a husband raping his wife is also rape.

In 1736, the English judge Sir Matthew Hale made a decision that for two and a half centuries determined the legal fate of the concept of “marital rape”: “A husband cannot be guilty of violence committed by him against his lawful wife, for by their consent and the marriage contract the wife is given to her husband and cannot deny him anything.”

Only in 1991 Court of Appeal Britain ruled that the principle was no longer appropriate and upheld the conviction of a man convicted of raping his wife. This decision was supported by the House of Lords, and then confirmed by the European Commission of Human Rights.

Another problem that leaves unplowed ground for the work of feminists even after the adoption of all the necessary laws is that sometimes declared rights remain rights only on paper. Stereotypes of public consciousness that define different attitude to women and men, they sit in the blood like cholesterol, and this affects the level of implementation of the rights that are so wonderfully spelled out. Moreover, in order to realize rights, you need to at least know about them, and often have remarkable courage to go “across.”

But some feminists perceive this activity as a kind of game: you can shout “for your rights” to your heart’s content until you smell kerosene, and at the very least you can call for help from a big and strong defender and hide behind the backs of men. In the movie Ghost Dog, a man kills a policewoman with the words: “You wanted equality? You got it." And rightly so. Coming out of the shadows, the women realized that in the sun you can not only warm up, but also get burned.

Many people think that feminists are man-haters. In fact, if a woman has a lover and loving husband, why does she need this nasty thing starting with the letter “f”? However, statistics prove that the idea that feminism is for people with failed personal lives and that it is incompatible with happy romantic heterosexual relationships is a myth that has nothing to do with reality.

This is evidenced by the results obtained by specialists from Rutgers University in New Jersey, USA, who conducted a face-to-face survey of 242 students and an online survey of 289 older people. Men in relationships with feminist women reported more stable relationships and greater sexual satisfaction to researchers. At the same time, stereotypical ideas about feminists were tested - and refuted: in terms of success with the opposite sex, love and the quality of relationships with partners, feminists left non-feminist women behind.

And man-hating is attributed to feminism thanks to the “efforts” of only one of its many directions - radical feminism. Suffice it to remember how in the 70s in Holland, activists on the streets pinched men’s... soft spots in order to “revenge all oppressed women.”

“Metaphors and hyperbole aside, what is called ‘radical feminism’ is fascism. Chauvinism, censorship, quasi-scientific anthropology, the search for the enemy, mystical unity with nature, fake pseudo-pagan religiosity, mandatory standards of thought and even appearance", writes American anarchist Bob Black.

Another misconception is that feminism will soon sweep away other values. “Traditional values ​​are in danger, and feminists are to blame! They are systematically destroying our world!” - impressionable adherents of traditions fear. But don't worry: the idea that feminism is a single whole is wrong. In fact, there is probably not so much disagreement about any “-ism,” and there are more than 300 different definitions of feminism in the literature.

However, mass thinking prefers to simplify everything; no one wants to understand the difference between socialist feminism and liberal feminism, not to mention such strange beasts as psychoanalytic feminism or, God forgive me, postmodern feminism. It's difficult. It is much easier to come up with some collective image of a feminist monster (or angel) and vigorously criticize (or praise) it. For example, feminism is accused of “positive discrimination” - giving women an economic and legal “head start”, for example, electoral quotas, advantages in admission to educational establishments and to work tax benefits. Sometimes it even reaches the point of absurdity, as in Sweden, where the Left Party proposed imposing a “domestic violence tax” on all... men! That is, a man lives for himself, he won’t hurt a fly, and maybe he himself will when his wife falls under the heavy Scandinavian hand, but he is obliged to pay for the fight against domestic violence, because he is a man. Why this is not discrimination, the fight against which feminism puts on its banner, is a mystery. But there is another example: when in Spain socialists proposed lowering taxes for women and increasing taxes for men, it was feminists who spoke out against it.

But still, since people with different views call themselves the same word “feminists,” it means they have a certain point of intersection. This point is the idea of ​​the inadmissibility of discrimination against women and forcing women to live a lifestyle determined by their gender. The only difference is in the ways to achieve this goal and the ideas about what exactly the world of gender equality should look like.

It so happened that in my conscious life I had already managed to zealously support the views of feminists, but everything, as they say, comes with age, and, most likely, this kind of statement was just “youthful maximalism.” The reasons may be different, especially their combination, but this is not the task of my essay. Having matured a little, I understood the real calling of a woman, her true essence as the keeper of the hearth and the basis of happiness in the home. I am deeply convinced that the fundamental intransigence of the ardent supporters of these ideas arises from their inability to understand the importance of the role of a woman as a woman and to intelligently distinguish between the spheres of activity of women and men. But still, the main purpose of the beautiful half of humanity lies not only in raising children. In addition, you are destined by the Almighty to be a wonderful decoration of our planet, to bring beauty and love, harmony, tenderness, and high feelings to the human world. You need to start not by proving your equality with a man, but by realizing yourself as a full-fledged person, and not an appendage to your husband. Women must realize, first of all, for themselves that their souls did not incarnate on Earth in order to serve men and children. And in order to realize yourself as a unique and talented person. Well, when men notice this personality in you, it won’t even occur to them to sign you up as a servant.

Do not forget about female dignity even in the most difficult everyday situations and remember that it is then that men most of all need your moral support, and having received it from you, they will ultimately be able to cope with any misfortune to the joy of themselves, and to you, my loved ones.

Love a woman for the sin she carried out of paradise,

And not because she cooks and does laundry better than anyone else.

Love a woman for the sadness she hides from you.

Because next to her the burden of problems decreases faster.

Love a woman for her mind, which is both great and modest.

For children's fun, the noise in your home at dawn in the morning.

Love a woman for the night she gives you,

And for the desire to help when you are dead tired.

Love a dream and an intriguing secret in a woman

Do not humiliate beauty with a reproach thrown casually.

The awakening, or “feminine renaissance,” began in the 60s. Its epicenter was the United States, where precisely during these years there was an intensification of democratic processes aimed at eliminating various forms of discrimination, and above all racism. The women's movement took on new, often radical forms, which is reflected in its name - “women's liberation movement”.

The new wave of the struggle for emancipation was due to structural changes in society and, above all, a significant increase in the share of female labor in social production. Thus, by 1960 in the United States, women made up more than one-third of the country's labor force, while 54% of working women were married and 33% had children, which indicates economic factors that encouraged women to join social production practices.

The feminist movement of the 60s and early 70s acquired a somewhat extravagant coloring, manifesting itself in unusual slogans and forms of expression of protest that were provocative, even shocking to the traditionally minded public. In an effort to awaken women's self-awareness and liberate public opinion from the inertia of patriarchally oriented moral attitudes, feminists used, for example, the techniques of “square theater.” The leaflets of the American organization that emerged in 1968 under the scandalous name “Witch” said: “Everything that is repressive, exclusively male, envious, puritanical and authoritarian should become the target of your criticism. Your weapon is your limitless beautiful imagination. Your strength comes from yourself as women, and it is greatly enhanced by working together with your sisters. It is your duty to free your brothers (whether they want it or not) and yourself from gender role stereotypes. Shaternikova M. Where does feminism grow from? // Bulletin of Moscow State University. - 2014. - No. 16. - P.25.

Not only the forms of feminist protest were shocking, but also their content. Those foundations of society that, according to feminists, contributed to the consolidation of the unequal status of women: marriage, motherhood, etc. were criticized. The logic of the reasoning boiled down to approximately the following: “In marriage, according to the law, a man and a woman are one person, that is, the very existence or legal existence of a woman ceases with the beginning of her marriage. For “one” always implies male dominance.”

The extremism of the feminist movement had positive and Negative consequences. On the one hand, it contributed to the awakening of women's self-awareness, and on the other, it gave rise to discredit, allowing opponents to accuse feminists of having an inferiority complex, an unhealthy addiction to power, a tendency to sexual promiscuity, etc.

Feminism, like any other political movement, could not avoid radicalism, “leftism” as a kind of growing pains. It took time for maturity of assessments, moderation and balanced actions, and, finally, theoretical validity to arrive. This was greatly facilitated by the creation of a network of so-called women's studies, designed to simultaneously educate and provide a scientific foundation for the movement for women's liberation. Women's studies has become an integral part curricula many universities, and many specialized research centers have appeared.

In the 70s, centers for “women’s” or “feminist” studies with special programs, including specialists in biology, physiology, anthropology, ethnography, philosophy, history, and philology, appeared everywhere in Western universities. They moved into a debate that divided feminists into supporters of an “egalitarian” approach and preachers of “female subjectivity.” With the spread of women's studies, this dispute not only was not resolved, but separated opponents in different directions. Bryson V. Political theory of feminism. / Per. from English - M., 2011. P.145.

Researchers who based their analysis on a comparison of “male” and “female” roles in different situations and different periods proposed their way out of this impasse. They proposed introducing a new concept of “gender” (from the English gender - genus). In Russian, this concept can only be explained by a semantic phrase: “social relations of gender,” or the socially fixed division of roles into male and female. They strive to transfer the analysis of gender relations from the biological level to the social level in order to finally abandon the postulate about the “natural purpose of sex”; show that the concept of “gender” belongs to the same meaning-forming concepts as “class” or “race”.

In the 70-80s, the international community adopted documents that call for the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women. In them, a woman is recognized as the same full-fledged subject of history as a man, and her personality is valued higher than her “natural purpose”; they emphasize that the birth of children, procreation is a woman’s right, not a duty.

The “women's revolution” that began in the 60s went under the slogan: “If a woman has the right to half of heaven, then she has the right to half of the power on earth!” - in the 80-90s, it forced those in power to make room and finally let women into all structures of social governance. These structures began to turn from single-sex male structures into “mixed” structures. The suffragettes, the grandmothers of late 20th century American women, would have rejoiced at the increase in the number of women members of political parties. In 1969 Women occupied only 3.5% of state positions by 1986. this figure rose to 13%. Their representation in local government was 4% in 1975. and 10% in 1981 The share of women in the US Parliament is 11.2%, in the UK - 7.8%. . And these numbers continue to grow, albeit very slowly. Thus, the “women's revolution” changed the idea of ​​the role of women in modern society. By the mid-90s, men held 375 seats in the US House of Representatives; women held only 60. In the Senate, there were 87 men and 13 women. There are 4 women in senior ministerial positions in the Bush Administration. Women-owned companies employ one in four Americans. But at the same time, only 12.4% of women are members of the boards of directors of the largest American companies. Bryson V. Political theory of feminism. / Per. from English - M., 2011. P.147.

In 1961, US President John Kennedy created the world's first special structure - the President's Commission on the Status of Women. This organization was headed by Eleanor Roosevelt, widow of President Franklin Roosevelt and author of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights The Commission monitored the observance of women's rights in the workplace.In 1963, the US Congress required all employers to pay women the same as men for the same work.

In 1964, discrimination based on race and gender was prohibited by law in the United States. The influential Equal Employment Opportunity Commission was created, which aimed to investigate cases of such discrimination. Right there. P.148.

Feminism spread around the world so quickly only because it could use pre-existing traditions everywhere. social activities. Feminism has adopted the fundamental norms of the era of humanism and Enlightenment, according to which man is a being that affects environment and on oneself, changing and creating. However, in a patriarchal society, a man has assumed an active role and the right to embody these characteristics of the human race. The goal of feminism is, therefore, to free women from the restrictions imposed by men, giving them equal opportunities to participate in the creative process, in history.

Feminism grew out of other movements aimed at reforming society. In the United States, one of the ancestors of feminism was the movement for the liberation of the black population, and another was the student movement. In Britain and Western European countries, modern feminism has its roots in the radical student movement of the 60s.

Since the early 60s, a radical branch of American feminism—the “liberation movement”—began to take shape. This movement gradually grew out of the “new left” movement, at the same time being a reaction and protest to the student revolution. Women students enthusiastically took part in university protests, sit-ins, protest marches against segregation in the South, and anti-war rallies and debates against the Vietnam War. But gradually they begin to feel dissatisfied with their role in the youth movement. The disappointment was associated with the process of realizing one’s complete detachment from leadership and decision-making in the new leftist informal groups and organizations. The New Left movement was the first mass movement of middle-class young people in the history of the United States against the institutions and values ​​of Western democracy. The criticism and ideological nihilism of the new radicals concerned the entire system of values ​​and institutions of the “rotten industrial civilization.” Zherebkina I. “Read my wish...” Postmodernism. Psychoanalysis. Feminism. M., 2014. P.76.

At the same time, it turned out that, having questioned the political ideals of “one hundred percent Americanism”, challenging the bourgeois “American Dream”, the “new left”, like the “old”, questioned the values ​​and practices of patriarchy. The demands of egalitarian democracy and “participatory democracy” do not apply to the system of gender relations. Comrades in the movement who dared to step away from the prepared role of clerical and kitchen assistants and put the issue of equal rights for women on the agenda of youth meetings were met with rude ridicule, bullying and complete rejection. The leader of the influential radical organization the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee became famous throughout the country for his “jocular” reaction to the question of the status of women. “The only position for women in our political organization,” he publicly declared, “is prostrate.”

Women leaving student groups in protest are forming their own communities and organizations. Their new concept is the slogan “The personal is political.” The “liberation wing” declaration provided a basis for collective strategies and actions distinct from the practices of liberal feminism. The main form of their activity was the creation of informal small discussion groups “conscious-raising”. Awareness of women's personal deprivation and personal experience as a political problem and as a social model of inequality for women as a group inevitably led, according to the organizers, to the formation of a collective identity and new solidarity activity. “ Personal experience and personal experiences give reason to talk about the general problem of oppression of all women,” said the Manifesto of the Red Stockings, an influential radical group from New York. -- “Male dominance is the oldest form of domination and exploitation of women. The growth of self-awareness is not psychotherapy, it is the development of the solidary class consciousness of women. Our goal is liberation from all types of suppression of the female personality. Zherebkina I. “Read my wish...” Postmodernism. Psychoanalysis. Feminism. M., 2014. P.78.

Any woman or women's group could begin activities at the local community, city or state level.

In numerous “consciousness growth” and “increasing personal self-esteem” groups, their participants rethought the well-known “similarities versus differences” debate in a new way. In the radical movement, female difference, opposed to the understanding of equality as sameness, ceases to be a term of abuse. On the initiative of women's groups, alternative women's “countercultural” groups are being formed. social institutions and practice. Since the late 60s, feminist publications, bookstores, cafes, kindergartens, women's clinics and centers have appeared women's health and family planning, crisis centers for women subjected to sexual and domestic violence. In its scope, the “liberation” women's movement by the mid-70s began to surpass the scale of anti-war and youth protests. Evans S. Born for Freedom. / Translated from English. - M., 2013. P.107.

The feminist challenge is becoming a leading theme in the media. The women's rights movement did not cause such resonance. The reformism of women's liberal organizations of the 60s, in general, fit into the framework of the US democratic system, while the radicalism of liberation groups threatened to destroy centuries-old sociocultural values, institutions and policies.

Problematization of sexual relations, as political relations power and subordination exacerbated the split within feminism in the 1980s. The identification of the lesbian wing in the radical movement and the ideological justification of female homosexuality as the leading strategy for women's liberation caused sharp antagonism from liberal organizations. According to one of the famous theorists of this movement, Charlotte Bunch, “reformists define the problem as a private issue; Meanwhile, for us, this is a form of political rebellion against the social construction of female sexual inferiority and secondaryness, as well as the fight against male power and oppression.”

By creating their own organizations and distancing themselves from the male homosexual movement, the lesbian community of the 1970s insisted on the fundamental importance of combating compulsory heterosexuality. Since the prevailing sexual practices excluded the possibility of realizing and satisfying women's own sexual desires, it was this project, in their opinion, that provided the basis for the establishment of equality as a sociocultural norm. As feminist discussions cool, proclamation of homosexuality ceases to be an act of political protest. Since the mid-80s, in the context of respecting the civil rights of sexual minorities, this topic has become part of the programmatic requirements of liberal organizations. Evans S. Born for Freedom. / Translated from English. - M., 2013. P.108.

Since the mid-70s, following the lesbian movement, the movement of black feminism began to take shape within the framework of the US women's movement. Famous journalists, future popular writers Alice Walker, Nobel laureate Toni Morrison and Angela Davis were the first to raise the problem of double identity and double oppression of black American women in their works. Involved in the 1960s movement for civil rights African-Americans, they followed the same path in their ideological evolution as their white comrades from youth organizations. The discovery of the marginality of women's situation not only in the traditionally patriarchal American society, but also in the new liberal and radical concepts of African-American liberation inevitably brought them into the ranks of feminists, inevitably causing accusations of betrayal of the interests of racial solidarity from adherents of the new programmatic slogan of the struggle “black power.” .

For black feminists themselves, the path to achieving female solidarity of protest also could not be simple and smooth. A serious barrier to this path and the main object of criticism was that the experiences of black women were not included in the models of women's liberation created by white feminism. In this sense, the concepts and practices of both branches of the movement of previous decades completely ignored the social, racial and ethnic differences among women. The liberal and radical paradigms of feminism, built exclusively on the experiences of white, educated middle-class women, reproduced, according to feminists of color, a power hierarchy among women themselves. The mechanism they created to ensure formal individual equality, which did not take into account the double exploitation of women from racial, ethnic minorities and lower social classes, turned out to be unworkable and sometimes worsened the status of these women. One of the most famous theorists of black feminism, bell hooks, wrote in her book “Feminist Theory: From the Edge to the Center” about the need not to limit the scope of feminism to the desire to achieve the same social status as men. Beauvoir S. de. Second floor. / Per. from fr. - M.: Gardarika, 2014. P.54.

Adding missing elements of analysis inevitably creates a split in the feminist environment, but at the same time it expands the boundaries of feminism to understand the totality of multiple systems of domination, the interdependence of forms of oppression based on gender, race and class. Identifying oppression exclusively with male dominance indicated, in Hooks's view, the weakness of liberal and radical political analysis and made it difficult to formulate viable strategies, the ability of men and women to be subordinated - their common point of contact. This idea becomes key in the formation of multicultural feminism in the 1980s and 1990s.

“Different feminism,” or the plurality of feminisms, defined a new stage in the ideology and practices of the US women's movement in the 1980s and 1990s. The collective action of the 1960s and 1970s is being replaced by the institutionalization of the women's movement in decision-making on a wide range of gender policies. The academic status of new university programs in women's and gender studies affirmed the recognition of the epistemological possibilities of feminist concepts. IN last decade In the 20th century, the integration of many feminist values ​​into the structure of the national identity and life philosophy of Americans became obvious. Legal recognition and respect for differences of all kinds shaped the formulation of the principles of multicultural pluralism in the 1990s and the evolution of the American model of democracy. Beauvoir S. de. Second floor. / Per. from fr. - M.: Gardarika, 2014. P.60.