A family is a small group based on marriage and (or) consanguinity, the members of which are united by cohabitation and housekeeping, emotional connection, and mutual obligations towards each other.
All social problems characteristic of modern society are reflected in the family, therefore all types of social work technologies are applicable to it to one degree or another - aimed at the social rehabilitation of disabled people or disabled children, providing assistance to the needy, women, military personnel, etc. There are also specific technologies designed to help the family as such.
There is a typology of social risk, i.e. identification of families who, due to objective or subjective reasons, are in a state of difficulty in life and need help from the state system of social protection and social services.
1. Dysfunctional families (criminal, conflict, pedagogically untenable);
2. Families of social risk (having difficulties in their development: single-parent families, low-income families, with children or disabled parents);
3. Families in difficult life situations (illness, death of family members, loss of job, families of refugees and internally displaced persons);
Different social work technologies are used for families of different categories of clients. The types and forms of social assistance, the purpose of which is to preserve the family as a social institution in general and each specific family in need of support, can be divided into emergency, i.e. aimed at the survival of the family (emergency assistance, urgent social assistance, immediate removal from the family of children in danger or left without parental care), aimed at maintaining the stability of the family, at the social development of the family and its members.
Protecting weaker family members, especially children, from abuse in the family is one of the most important tasks of a social worker. Therefore, you should know the direct and indirect signs of abuse in the family with children.
The combination of such signs should become a reason for a serious study of the situation in the family. When the facts of domestic violence are revealed, the child, as a rule, is removed from such a family and placed in a social rehabilitation institution. Abuse of children can serve as a pretext to initiate a parental deprivation case or to prosecute the perpetrator of abuse.
The technologies used in cases of family violence also include the organization of social shelters (hotels, shelters), which enable women and children to wait out the crisis of the family situation in a safe place.
Working with "difficult" children and adolescents provides for the diagnosis of family and school situations, the identification of the child's primary social network, the obligatory analysis of his medical-social and intellectual-psychological status. Based on the data obtained, a program is drawn up for working with the child's family, resolving his school problems, and involving him in a more favorable social network. In the course of the implementation of such a program, social and psychological counseling of the family is carried out in parallel in order to eliminate mutual misunderstandings, unproductive types of family interaction, conflict in relationships; social and legal counseling, which allows the family to realize and learn to defend their rights in relations with the social environment, primarily with the educational system; pedagogical counseling, as well as pedagogical assistance, which helps to overcome the school difficulties of the child (children). Psychocorrectional measures, changes in self-assessments of adults and children, elimination of negative stereotypes and the development of a benevolent and respectful attitude towards each other are also of great importance.
When working with the family of an alcoholic, diagnosis involves identifying the underlying cause of alcohol abuse and related circumstances. This requires the study of the personalities of all family members, as well as the study of social biography. The reasons for alcohol abuse can be a family predisposition, some features of personal status (personality instability, infantilism, dependence), traditions of the family or social environment, an illusory attempt to get away from problems. A combination of these reasons is often revealed. Further, a program of work with a drug addicted person, his family, social environment is drawn up - these are therapeutic measures, consultations, psychotherapy and psychocorrection, possibly, social and labor rehabilitation of the alcoholic himself and his family. Medical rehabilitation of alcohol abusers has so far been ineffective, because after rehabilitation the patient returns to the same environment in which he developed the alcohol habit. Therefore, working with such a family implies the formation of the client's and his family's motivation for a non-alcoholic lifestyle and building a different system of relationships; psychocorrectional measures aimed at educating a person capable of being the master of his own destiny; the introduction of the client into associations or clubs of persons - adherents of a non-alcoholic lifestyle or the creation of such an association.
Social work with a conflict family or family, the emotional climate in which is unsatisfactory, begins with a thorough study of the real family problem, about which spouses most often have misconceptions, familiarization with the characteristics of the spouses' personalities, their family and marital attitudes. External difficulties - material and economic constraints, uncertainty about the future, unemployment, etc. - as a rule, only exacerbate family conflicts, reveal their true causes. Family therapy includes finding a compromise in the cultural and semantic sphere, correcting the accumulated socio-psychological stereotypes, teaching the skills of non-conflict communication.
This work is done through individual conversations and interviews, group psychotherapy or play therapy.
It must be said that the awareness of a real family problem has not only diagnostic, but also therapeutic value, since the detected and conscious difficulty forces family members to reconsider their behavior.
The technologies for correcting family relationships are numerous; their choice is determined both by the circumstances of a specific social situation, including the characterological traits of clients, and by the personal qualities of the family therapy specialist himself, his tastes and preferences. Over time, each experienced specialist transforms methods in his own way, creates his own contamination from several suitable forms of work. The essence of all the means used is the implementation and consolidation of those changes that will contribute to the desired stabilization of the family.
Social Work Technologies in Penitentiary Institutions
The modern Russian penitentiary system is a place of pre-trial detention: temporary detention facilities, pre-trial detention centers, institutions correcting punishment, correctional labor colonies, educational labor colonies (VTC), intended for the maintenance of minors who have committed crimes between the ages of 14 and 18, correctional labor colonies (settlements),
The specifics of social work in correctional institutions
Consists of the following:
- it is conducted within social organisms with a high degree of closeness and isolation;
- its object is persons with a high index of social ill-being and increased stressfulness;
- social work is carried out in an atmosphere of confrontation between two irreconcilable ethical and legal concepts (let's call them the mentality of the "prison staff" and the mentality of the "prison world", while their representatives do not consider social work as an integral and necessary element of prison life, often do not understand its meaning and roles);
- social work is inextricably linked with the execution of criminal punishment, having, in fact, the same ultimate goals as this social and legal institution ",
social work in the conditions of the penitentiary system should not stop with the end of the execution of the sentence, since the former prisoner needs re-socialization and adaptation to the outside world, its rules and norms;
The main tasks of social work in institutions of the correctional system of Russia are:
Development and strengthening of socially beneficial ties between prisoners and the outside world;
- increasing and developing the social status of a prisoner at the place of pre-trial detention or serving a sentence, assistance in establishing socially positive horizontal ties with other persons, assistance in changing social status;
- assistance in building this type of horizontal and vertical relations, which, on the one hand, would correspond to the goals of preliminary detention or execution of a criminal punishment, and on the other hand, would entail the least physiological, psychological, ethical and social costs for the person being punished;
- assistance in ensuring acceptable social and living conditions of pre-trial detention and serving a sentence;
- assistance in the social development of the prisoner, including the improvement of his social culture, the development of social needs, a change in the normative value orientation, an increase in the level of social self-control;
- assistance to prisoners in obtaining assistance from specialists, in particular in the field of psychology, psychiatry, etc .;
- organization and provision of social protection for those categories of prisoners who need it (pensioners, disabled people, etc.);
- helping prisoners in finding a socially acceptable environment for them, a point of social interest (work, family, religion, art, etc.);
- assistance in resolving and depicting conflict situations;
- social development and forecast for the development of the institution;
- assistance to social and legal protection of personnel.
The psychology of gender relations is a new direction in science devoted to the study of the patterns of differentiation and hierarchization of personal and group relations in the field of inter-sex interaction (Kletsina, 2004).
Gender relations are various forms of interconnection of people as representatives of a certain sex, arising in the process of their joint life activity. Gender relations are embedded in a wide social context and are manifested at different levels of society, that is, these are multi-level relationships that exist at the macro, meso and micro levels of social reality, as well as at the intrapersonal level. In other words, gender relations are:
- socially organized relations at the level of society, between the state and gender groups;
- relationships between different gender groups;
- relationships between subjects of different sex;
- the attitude of an individual to himself as a representative of a certain gender group.
The basis for the formation of gender relations characteristic of all levels is: polarization, differentiation of the positions of men and women as two gender groups, the phenomena of inequality, dominance, power, subordination. Insofar as
The social-constructivist paradigm pays special attention to these phenomena, one can consider the differentiation of the roles and statuses of men and women, as well as the hierarchy, subordination of their positions as the main parameters of the analysis of gender relations. Thus, in general, we can distinguish two vectors for measuring gender relations: horizontal, where the main parameter is the differentiation of the roles and statuses of men and women, and vertical, which is determined by the parameter of the hierarchical positions of men and women or gender groups.
All the variety of meaningful characteristics of inter-sex relations can be reduced to two alternative models: partner and dominant-dependent.
The first model - partnership - is a relationship between two equal subjects, each of which has its own value. Despite the presence of individualized goals, each takes into account the goals and interests of the other. In such a relationship, the most important thing is the coordination of positions and aspirations between partners. Communication and interaction here are distinguished by respect and correctness, the ability to put oneself in the place of a partner, to delve into his problems and situation; such attitudes are characteristic of not one of the partners, but both.
At the opposite pole is the dominant-dependent model of relations, which does not imply equality of positions: here one side takes a dominant position, the other - a dependent one. In this case, one subject of the relationship encourages the other to submit to himself and take into account the goals and interests that are not consistent with the aspirations of the dependent partner. The dominant position includes such behavioral manifestations as self-confidence, independence, authority, demonstration of one's own importance, the ability to insist on one's own. The representative of the dominant position strives for rivalry, he despises weakness and strives for strength as a self-sufficient value.
The following criteria are commonly used to measure stratified gender space:
- position in the income hierarchy, and as a consequence - the methods and forms of consumption of available material and social benefits (way and lifestyle);
- power (the hierarchy of relations between the political and economic influence of individuals and groups on each other).
The specificity of manifestations of gender relations from the position of the state is set by social policy aimed at a specific gender group, and the policy is determined by the dominant gender ideology in society. The specificity of manifestations of gender relations from the standpoint of gender groups is expressed in the social roles of men and women as members of society, these roles are defined as gender.
In accordance with the gender ideology of society, which is approved by the dominant social structures and is aimed at gender groups, men and women as an object of social policy and ideological influence in the process of fulfilling gender roles create (implement) gender relations.
Gender role ideology - judgments about what gender roles should be in a given culture and society (that is, how men and women should look and behave). In other words, gender ideology can be defined as a coherent system of views and ideas about social status and the content of the roles of men and women, which they must fulfill as members of society. Gender ideology is a mechanism of social organization and maintenance of established models of relations between the sexes. Gender ideology is reflected in the social policy pursued by the state in relation to women and men as social groups; this policy forms the legal and social status of these groups, regulates their relationship with society. Analysis of the content of social policy aimed at gender groups makes it possible to clarify the essence of gender ideology, to determine its type - patriarchal or egalitarian.
Gender ideology of the traditional type in its semantic content correlates with the concept of “patriarchal ideology”. The division of labor between men and women is based on the principle of mutual complementarity, but not on the principle of equal roles. The man is assigned the role of the subject of state, professional and social activities, the head and breadwinner of the family, the link between the family and society as a whole. His prerogative is the outside world, culture, creativity, domination. The "natural" destiny of a woman in this society is the sphere of motherhood, raising children and housekeeping. The hierarchy of male and female roles is recorded quite clearly: he is the subject of power relations, she is the object of his power.
Egalitarian state policy is a policy based on the principle of creating equal conditions for the development of an individual, regardless of gender, in all social spheres. The implementation of this type of policy requires an appropriate legal framework for solving problems, the presence of arbitration, committees, councils to overcome gender discrimination, work under ministries of departments or departments dealing with gender equality issues, research work on gender issues, the creation of reliable, an objective statistical base reflecting the situation of representatives of gender groups.
In modern sociological literature, the concept of "gender contract" is used to characterize gender relations. This is an unspoken, normative treaty imposed by the state on all men and women as members of society, according to which they are obliged to perform social functions that correspond to the needs of the state in a specific historical period. At the same time, as a rule, the principle of differentiation of roles is observed: men are assigned social roles in the public sphere, women - in the private sphere.
The main contract for women in Soviet society was that of a working mother. This contract implied that the woman would combine participation in social production with the birth and upbringing of children and unpaid work to serve her family. The state, for its part, provided her with a number of necessary conditions: paid maternity leave, free medical
service, a wide network of childcare facilities (kindergartens, after-school groups, out-of-school institutions for child development and pioneer recreation camps). The overwhelming majority of Soviet women accepted and implemented the contract of a working mother in their daily activities. This contract predetermined the three main social roles of women: "worker", "mother", "mistress".
For men, the main contract in Soviet society was the “worker - warrior-defender” contract. Although the state basically encouraged men to persistently and successfully work in the sphere of production, a man in the system of gender constructions in Soviet society is always also a real or potential soldier, a protector. The main, social, roles, set by the framework of the basic contract, were the roles of "worker" and "soldier". The overwhelming majority of Soviet men have successfully fulfilled these normative roles.
In the system of relations "gender groups - the state", the latter demonstrated an autocratic-paternalistic role and position, and groups of men and women - a subordinate one, while the state showed more paternal concern in relation to the female group than in relation to men. Therefore, we can conclude that the typical model of gender relations that existed in Soviet Russia corresponds to the theoretical model of "dominant-dependent" relations.
Gender representations, given in the form of the image of a "real man" or "real woman", relate to the gender differentiation of social behavior and participation in public life. Such gender representations exist both at the highest levels of culture, within the framework of religious or philosophical systems, and in ordinary everyday consciousness. Gender representations, unlike other types of social representations, help the individual to understand the content of gender roles, to determine their position in relation to the system of normative prescriptions about the proper behavior of men and women in society, to develop their own style of behavior in inter-sex interaction, to concretize the landmarks of the life path based on the accepted way of playing a gender role.
Gender representations reflect the existing gender differentiation in society and the dominant ideology of the state in the field of inter-sex relations. The whole set of such ideas can be assessed from the point of view of two polarities corresponding to two types of gender ideology: this is patriarchal (traditional) ideology, reflected in patriarchal gender ideas, and egalitarian ideology, reflected in egalitarian gender ideas.
Gender relations in intergroup interaction also have their own characteristics. When studying this level of gender relations, foreign and domestic authors (Tajfel, 1981, 1982; Turner, 1985; Ageev, 1983, 1985, 1986, 1990) found that intergroup perception, the object and subject of which are social groups, is characterized by the following features: 1) the unification of private ideas into something whole, qualitatively different from its constituent elements (that is, integrity and the desire to unify intergroup perception); 2) schematization and simplification of the range of aspects of the perception of another group; 3) the formation of insufficiently flexible intergroup representations that are stable. The last feature concerns the dynamic characteristics of intergroup perception. Empirical studies of gender groups reveal these general patterns in the situation of gender interaction. The images of typical men and women, typical for representatives of different cultures and peoples, are unified, they are distinguished by integrity, schematicity, simplification, and emotional coloring. Thus, the structural and dynamic characteristics of the process of perception of men and women as representatives of social groups fit into the general patterns characteristic of intergroup perception in general.
At the level of intergroup interaction of communities homogeneous by gender, the analysis of gender relations is carried out in the “group - group” system. Here, the determining socio-psychological factors of inter-sex relations are gender stereotypes (see section 1.7.3.2) as a kind of social stereotypes.
Numerous studies of intergroup perception and interaction reveal such features of these processes as intragroup favoritism and intergroup discrimination. “Intra-group favoritism is the desire to favor members of one's own group in some way as opposed to members of another group. Intra-group favoritism can manifest itself both in externally observed behavior in various situations of social interaction, and in the process of social perception, for example, in the formation of assessments, opinions, etc., relating to members of one's own and another group "(Psychology. Dictionary, 1990) ...
“Intergroup discrimination is the establishment of differences between one’s own and another group. Under certain conditions, intergroup differences can be artificially emphasized and exaggerated. The most common result of intergroup discrimination is the tendency to establish positively assessed differences in favor of one's own group ”(Psychology. Dictionary, 1990).
The problem of intergroup discrimination and intragroup favoritism is relevant for the interaction of any social group. At the same time, we are talking, if not about enmity, then at least about supporting one's own group as opposed to another (Ageev, 1990).
It follows from intragroup favoritism and intergroup discrimination that other groups are ranked lower relative to their own group. In other words, in a situation of intergroup perception, women should evaluate their group more positively than the group of men, and vice versa. However, empirical research does not support this view. It turned out that both men and women attribute more positive characteristics to the representatives of the male group. Consequently, intragroup favoritism as a phenomenon of intergroup perception and interaction acts in relation to the male group and does not act in relation to the female (Kletsina,
- ... In this case, the leading role is played by laws of a higher order, that is, not at the level of intergroup interaction, but at the level of functioning of the macrostructure. We are talking about the influence of a special cultural tradition - androcentrism, which was mentioned above. This is an example of not within-group, but out-of-group favoritism.
The specificity of gender relations at the level of intergroup interaction is determined by the fact that at this level, individual differences are leveled, and behavior is unified. Most often, such impersonal interaction occurs in typical social situations. All these situations are united by the fact that the participants in the interaction are not personally involved in it, they contact based on the role prescriptions and norms of behavior typical of the situation. The most common classification of such situations includes two types of interaction: short-term social-situational communication (social-role) and business communication (Kunitsyna et al., 2002).
In social-role interaction, contacts are limited by situational necessity: on the street, in transport, in a store, at a reception in an official institution. The basic principle of relationships at this level is the knowledge and implementation of the norms and requirements of the social environment by the participants in the interaction. In business interaction, people are united by business interests and joint activities aimed at achieving common goals.
In the system of intergroup interaction, the problem of gender relations is most relevant in the professional sphere. In business communication and interaction, men and women manifest themselves both as representatives of gender social groups and as subjects of professional activity.
A distinctive feature of gender relations in the professional sphere is the inequality of the statuses and positions of men and women: men all over the world more often enjoy a higher status than women, and this provides them with access to resources and making responsible decisions. This leads to the fact that women are much more often than men find themselves in the role of subordinates, dependent, led. The needs of women for professional development, self-realization and advancement in the service ladder are met to a lesser extent than those of men. The existing system of gender relations contributes to the consolidation of such personality traits in women, manifested in business interaction, as passive subordination, conformity, weak-willedness, a tendency to yield to everyone at all times, self-doubt, fear and obedience.
The inequality of women and men in the sphere of industrial (business) relations reflects gender relations at the intergroup level. Gender inequality in business interactions manifests itself in two ways. It:
- widespread practice of occupational segregation, due to which prestigious professions and positions are less accessible to women than men;
- a pronounced tendency to discrimination, when women receive lower remuneration for work than men, although they do the same work.
Thus, the model of gender relations in a situation of intergroup interaction can be considered as a dominant-dependent model of relations (with a male dominant position), which is confirmed by significant statistics from sociological and socio-psychological studies.
When considering gender relations at the level of interpersonal interaction, the object of analysis is the “personality-personality” systems; in this case, we are talking about the interaction of two people of different sex. Gender relations at this level are determined by gender attitudes (see section 1.7.3.4) as a kind of social attitudes.
There are such general parameters of the analysis of gender relations, regardless of the level of their functioning, such as polarization, differentiation of the positions of men and women, the phenomenon of dominance, power, subordination. Differentiation of the roles and statuses of men and women as subjects of interpersonal relations and the hierarchy, subordination of their positions are one of the main parameters of the analysis of gender relations in the microenvironment. These parameters relate to both the objective side - the real practices of interaction, and the subjective side - the gender attitudes of men and women as subjects of interpersonal relations. Thus, interpersonal relations are distinguished from other types of gender relations by a pronounced emotional component that accompanies the entire process of formation and development of relations. In addition, in gender interpersonal relationships, the role of the personal characteristics of the participants is very significant, as well as the communication process, against the background of which relationships develop and function.
As a model of gender relations at the interpersonal level, family (marital) relations are usually considered, since, firstly, all the characteristic features of interpersonal relations are most clearly represented here (mutual orientation of the subjects of relations to each other, real direct contact, pronounced emotional basis, intensive communication) ; secondly, the specificity of gender relations is clearly reflected in marital relations, that is, here various socio-cultural prescriptions affect the content of family roles and their performance by men and women.
In modern families, there are two types of distribution of family responsibilities. Less widespread is the egalitarian (equality) variant, when all types of family concerns are not rigidly divided into male and female, but husbands are included in household chores to about the same extent as wives. In practice, either the husband and wife share equally all responsibilities for the house and raising children, or it depends on the situation, that is, the spouse who is less busy at work devotes more time to home and raising children. In another more common variation, wives do most of the housework. At the same time, the differentiation of male and female roles in the family, the division of family affairs into women and men remains a stable phenomenon.
Scientific publications devoted to the analysis of the problem of uneven distribution of economic responsibilities in the family are based on various theoretical approaches. Economic concepts are often used here (Barsukova, Radaev, 2000; Zhurzhenko, 1996; Kalabikhina, 1995; Mezentseva, 2001, 2002).
So, from the point of view of the theory of resources, homework is understood as work that does not require special physical and mental characteristics or high qualifications of the performer - in most cases, domestic work requires only free time. And those who are less employed or in demand in the labor market have this main resource. As a rule, women fall into this category, which is why they do most of the housework.
The “new home economy” (a development of the previous approach) is based on the idea of the family as a production unit that creates “family capital”. The main resources in its production are the goods and services purchased on the market, and the time of family members. The value of time is determined by the opportunity cost (that is, the market price of domestic work performed by employees). A family, while optimizing its economy, is forced to calculate the ratio of price and time spent on labor in the household and on the labor market. In a traditional society (due to the fact that women in it, as a rule, are inferior to men in terms of “market human capital”), it is more profitable for a family when the husband works outside the home, and the wife is busy with the household. In modern conditions, due to the increase in the education and qualifications of women, their domestic work has "risen in price", and the decision on the nature of the distribution of domestic responsibilities becomes more problematic and requires constant monitoring and clarification.
Relative productivity theory relies on labor market performance to justify the unequal distribution of household responsibilities between spouses. Household work is performed by the family member whose market productivity is lower (productivity is measured by the level of material reward and positions in the public status hierarchy). Although usually the husband's earnings and career advancement rate are higher and it would be logical to entrust the wife with household work, the growing variability of the spouses' material and status positions in the labor market should (according to the theory of relative productivity) be reflected in the distribution of household responsibilities in the family.
The main criticisms of economic approaches to the analysis of domestic work boil down to the fact that the main thing here is the "single utility function" of the household, and the importance of individual decisions is ignored; non-economic variables such as habits, traditions, tastes, inclinations, religious preferences, etc. remain outside rational calculations.
Among the sociological and socio-psychological explanations for the division of domestic labor, the following can be distinguished:
- T. Parsons' theory of sex roles (the wife plays an expressive role in the family, the husband plays an instrumental role. The wife is responsible for maintaining a favorable emotional climate in the house, the husband is responsible for the material support of the family and the establishment of external social contacts. Such role differentiation is determined by the functional characteristics of a developed industrial society , requiring from any small social group - including the family, household - a distinct role structure);
- socialization theory (the traditional distribution of household responsibilities leads to the fact that boys and girls tend to master skills and skills that are appropriate for gender, and do not acquire other skills; this experience of primary socialization does not allow men to master the skills necessary for doing household chores) (Berne, 2001 );
- role-playing theories (use the logic of biological or psychological reduction, give priority to psychologically arranged evolutionarily and biologically determined differences between sexes and behavioral models that are little subject to transformation when the position of women in the social and economic context changes) (Barsukova, Radaev, 2000);
- theories of legitimizing behavioral patterns (the socially enshrined legitimacy of the leadership or domination of men and the subordination of women in the social sphere is projected onto the family level, which gives men the right to choose the degree of their participation in the household; their participation in such work) (Barsukova, Radaev, 2000).
Unequal positions in the system of marital relations give rise to situations in which one commands, orders, the other obeys, expects advice or instructions. In this case, submission can be both voluntary and forced. If one of the spouses has an orientation toward dominance, and the other toward submission, the relationship will be complimentary, but if both the husband and the wife are characterized by the same orientation - it does not matter whether it is dominance or dependence - then the relationship will be non-complementary, which is fraught with conflict and unproductive action. The position of dominance involves accepting social responsibility for whoever obeys. The task of the dominant personality in the dyad is to ensure safety, coordinate actions, determine prospects and help develop a partner.
Indicators of position in the system of gender relations can be information about the leadership of the husband or wife in the family. For a long time, the term “head of the family” has been used in special literature. This institutional characteristic denoted a person to whom other family members were unquestioningly subordinate (in a patriarchal family, as a rule, such a status was with a husband or someone from the older generation) (Gurko, Boss, 1995). The status of the head of the family presupposes, first of all, primacy in the distribution of resources and decision-making regarding the life of the family. The dominant position is occupied by the family member who controls its resources and more often makes decisions that are significant for the functioning of the family and all its members.
Studies (Gurko, Boss, 1995) have shown that in almost all spheres of family life, the wife more often than the husband makes decisions, although there are many families where both spouses do this. In those families where there is no practice of joint problem solving, it is mainly the wives, not the husbands, who manage the money, organize the family's leisure time, solve household issues, determine how to raise the child, and have the final say when discussing most of the other issues important for organizing a family life.
There are several options for explaining the leading role of women in the family:
- the concept of compensatory behavior. The dominant position of women in the sphere of family interaction is a compensation for their low status in the sphere of social life in comparison with men. The dominance of women in family relations can be carried out both explicitly and implicitly (hidden, veiled), using manipulation;
- social expectations concept. The widespread in society notions of normative, socially acceptable gender behavior encourage women to take responsibility in the sphere of family relations, and men - in the sphere of extrafamilial interaction. The presence of responsibility stimulates the development and manifestation of leadership qualities in women, which, in turn, is expressed in the position of dominance (Barsukova, Radaev, 2000);
- identification concept. Women are reluctant to relinquish control in the sphere of household affairs due to the fact that they predominantly identify with this area of life (Berne, 2001). This concept is based on the relationship-centered approach to the psychology of women developed by Jean Miller (Miller, 1976). This approach emphasizes the role of relationships and communication with significant people in a woman's life. The relationship-centered approach includes the following: 1) a woman's personal development occurs in relationships; 2) communication with people determines the psychological state of women; 3) women are focused on caring for other people, taking responsibility for them; 4) for women, emotional closeness with people is especially important, which determines the role of women at work and in the family (Frager, Feydimen, 2001).
The first model, partnership, is the relationship of two equal subjects, the personal value and significance of which is not questioned. Spouses have their own individual goals, but each takes into account the goals and interests of the other. Relationships between spouses are built on equal terms, there is no desire to suppress and subjugate a partner, a willingness to make mutual concessions is expressed. Communication is distinguished by respect and correctness, the ability to put oneself in the shoes of a partner, to understand him, to delve into his problems and situation, and this is characteristic of both spouses.
The partnership model of family relations is characterized by the following features:
- cooperation in the use of power;
- leadership based on authority;
- interchangeability of roles in the family;
- flexible distribution of family responsibilities and activities;
- a constructive way to resolve conflicts;
- failures and mistakes are not hidden, discussed without reproach, forgiven, forgotten;
- respect for personal affairs, intimate aspects of life, without encroaching on the individual sphere of the partner's life without his permission;
- the perception of the family as a safe haven, where self-confidence is acquired, doubts, anxiety disappear, and mood improves;
- openness of family life for society;
- expanding the child's autonomy, recognizing his right to participate in collective decision-making and to express his opinion.
The dominant-dependent model of family relations is characterized by the following features:
- uneven distribution of power, abuse of power;
- strength-based leadership;
- rigidity and rigidity of family roles;
- polytyped family responsibilities, segregation of interests of family members;
- destructive way of resolving conflicts;
- failures and mistakes are hidden, condemned, obstructed, often remembered;
- lack of respect for personal affairs, intimate aspects of life, total control over behavior;
- feeling of insecurity, loneliness, guilt, anxiety, depression;
- closeness of family life, isolation from society;
- raising children in conditions of hyper control, subordination.
At the intrapersonal level, the object of analysis is the relationship of the individual as a subject of a certain gender to himself, and gender identity (see section 1.7.3.1), which is a component of social identity, here acts as a determinant. The intrapersonal level of analysis of gender relations includes such phenomena as internal gender conflict and gender identity crisis (see section 1.7.3.1) (Aleshina, Lektorskaya, 1989; Gavrilitsa, 1998; Kon, 2002; Zdravomyslova, Temkina 2002; Lukovitskaya, 2002; Turetskaya , 1998).
The dynamics of individualization, which is expressed in the desire to achieve and consume, as well as in the desire for self-realization, contributes to the change of gender boundaries established by the traditional family. Gender relations in the modern Russian family are regulated by rather flexible norms. However, in these relations there is a tendency of struggle for dominance between men and women in several areas. Firstly, it is the sphere of money management. Here men more often than women support the idea of the dependence of family headship on economic contribution.
Secondly, the sphere of sexual relations, in particular the problem of sexual freedom in marriage. Men insist on her absence, who are sure that the fact of their wife's betrayal should definitely lead to divorce. Women are willing to put up with infidelity and prefer to keep the marriage. Third, the area of raising children. Today, men are more likely than women to be supporters of the independence of children, while women are prone to overprotection and excessive control.
The norms of gender relations in the Russian family, generally inherited from the Soviet era, also differ among people of the older and younger generations. Older women (55 years and more) believe that "a wife should work on an equal basis with her husband, so that there is something to support the family." This conviction is connected not with the idea of gender equality, but with the experience of “equality in poverty” and forced female employment. The type of behavior that corresponds to this norm, which was widespread during the Soviet era, is now found most often among the poor and among older women. The overwhelming majority of young women are inclined to believe that the best way to organize family life is to have a family with a male breadwinner. Young women and some middle-aged women (up to 24 years old and 25-34 years old) more often than all others strive for stability in marriage and attach special importance to the sexual relations of spouses, seeing in them a guarantee of the strength of relations. Middle-aged and older women (35-44, 45-54, 55 and older) are characterized by an orientation toward parental care and a desire to strictly control children.
Older men believe that a family is certainly more important for a woman than a profession, without denying the possibility of a woman's “double“ employment. ”Young men make up the majority of those who consider a family dominated by a man to be the norm: in it, the husband makes decisions about major purchases , the wife should choose clothes in accordance with his tastes, and “only a father can raise a full-fledged man out of a boy.” They are sure that the house and children are a woman’s business, and “a real woman willingly does household chores.”
childishness ". The youngest men (under 24 years old) are convinced that "the money in the family should be managed by the one who earns it."
Many domestic studies show that women today are in favor of preserving the foundations of an equal Soviet-type family, adding to this the requirement that a man is obliged to earn money. A woman in such a family can work and even make a career, although the main responsibility for the family and children also lies with her. In fact, women strive to maintain control over the man and children within the family, but at the same time they are not ready to accept the role of housewife and would like to relinquish responsibility for the economic side of family life. Men, especially young men, think of themselves as the head of the family and strive to build marital relations according to the traditional model, and parent-child relations according to a modernized one, weakening parental control and guardianship. However, most men recognize that a wife's career is important enough that spouses should share household chores.
Studies of a modern, modernized family have found that gender asymmetry is fixed primarily in family norms, which is a necessary condition for an intra-family agreement. In Russian society, there is an actual increase in gender asymmetry in the daily life of men and women, which is demonstrated by the mass ideas about family norms and the peculiarities of the intra-family agreement. The Soviet model of the working mother's family is transforming into a family with more clearly defined gender boundaries, although at first glance this seems to be a return to the experience of the traditional family. There is a movement from the “equal” family of the Soviet type with the double employment of a working woman-mother to a family with a husband-breadwinner. She is recognized as the best by both men and women, but she does not turn into a family with male headship.
An “intra-family gender agreement” is an agreement that defines the areas of competence of a man and a woman, the degree of responsibility of each for the family and for maintaining relationships, as well as boundaries, the violation of which may lead to their rupture. In fact, these are unwritten rules of interaction that have developed in the family. Such an agreement is based on gender asymmetry that has developed in society, but in fact it is determined by the daily practice of relations between men and women in the family. It is believed that in Russia, traditional gender boundaries have been almost untouched, which establish the distinction between a “real man” and a “real woman” and define ideas about the norm and deviation in the behavior of men and women. Considering such boundaries are naturally set and unshakable, women and men often find themselves disoriented in the face of possible life changes. More adapted are those who are ready to revise the old boundaries and establish new, less stringent ones, thereby changing the terms of the “agreement”. Along with the “explicit” gender contract, which is based on the fact that the essence of a man’s identity remains the role of the breadwinner of the family, there is a “hidden” gender contract. The basis of the “hidden” gender contract is the refusal of a man (for the sake of family well-being) from the previously chosen professional path, that is, the renunciation of professional identity in the name of family and male identity. Such an intra-family gender contract is preferred by young educated people aged 29-35. It is often accompanied by a complete change in the life (primarily professional) strategy of both women and men. Husbands, who have entered the role of sole breadwinner and breadwinner, define their marriage as “traditional” and view their wife’s work as entertainment, “excusable whim” or a need for companionship. In such families, wives deliberately refuse to compete in areas where "money is made." In this regard, in the Russian family, the role of a man is
the breadwinner remains one of the main gender boundaries and the central point of the “real man” identity. At the same time, the importance of emotional and psychological support for the wife and her contribution to maintaining family unity is growing. This makes men and women who profess the value of a traditional family (in which, in fact, emotional closeness has never been among the main family values), to be more attentive to each other, to realize the value of intimacy and to preserve emotional closeness.
So, the "hidden" contract assumes that husbands, in order to provide for the family, refuse professional self-realization in accordance with the received education. Wives, on the contrary, can work for the sake of self-realization, but they do not pretend to earn money and refuse to exert superb efforts to combine family and profession, to take time from the family for the sake of a profession. At the same time, the more the husbands are concerned about the balance of power in the family, the more insistently they repeat that the wife's work is her “hobby”, a way to get away from a boring life, a “whim”. But even the most authoritarian husbands do not dare to deny the right of wives to strive for professional self-realization, even if they regard this striving as a “whim”. The seemingly obvious shift towards the traditional model (“husband is the breadwinner and support of the family”, “wife is the home guardian angel”) does not lead to the revival of the patriarchal model of family power, since it is only a widespread way of adaptation of men and women in society. where "every man for himself." In this case, the family, which gives the illusion of refuge in a cruel world, turns into a supervalue.
Gender relations - these are various forms of interconnection of people as representatives of a certain sex, arising in the process of their joint life. Gender relations are embedded in a wide social context and are manifested at different levels of society, that is, these are multi-level relationships that exist at the macro, meso and micro levels of social reality, as well as at the intrapersonal level. In other words, gender relations are:
- socially organized relations at the level of society, between the state and gender groups;
- relationships between different gender groups;
- relationships between subjects of different sex;
- the attitude of an individual to himself as a representative of a certain gender group.
The basis for the formation of gender relations, characteristic of all levels, is: polarization, differentiation of the positions of men and women as two gender groups, the phenomena of inequality, dominance, power, subordination.
All the variety of meaningful characteristics of inter-sex relations can be reduced to two alternative models: partner and dominant-dependent.
First model- partnership is a relationship between two equal subjects, each of which has its own value. In such a relationship, the most important thing is the coordination of positions and aspirations between partners.
At the opposite pole is the dominant-dependent model of relations, which does not imply equality of positions: here one side takes a dominant position, and the other - a dependent one.
To measure stratified gender space the following criteria are commonly used:
- position in the income hierarchy, and as a consequence - the methods and forms of consumption of available material and social benefits (way and lifestyle);
- power (the hierarchy of relations between the political and economic influence of individuals and groups on each other).
Gender relations at the macrosocial level
At the macrosocial level, gender relations are analyzed in the following systems: “society (state) - a group of men or women”; "Society (state) is the personality of a man or a woman."
Gender role ideology - judgments about what should be gender roles in a given culture or society. In other words, gender ideology can be defined as an agreed system of views and ideas about the social status and the content of the roles of men and women, which they must fulfill as members of society.
Gender ideology - the mechanism of social organization and maintenance of established models of relations between the sexes.
Analysis of the content of social policy aimed at gender groups makes it possible to clarify the essence of gender ideology, to determine its type - patriarchal or egalitarian.
Gender ideology of the traditional type in its semantic content correlates with the concept of “patriarchal ideology”. The division of labor between men and women is based on the principle of mutual complementarity, but not on the principle of equal roles.
Man the role of the subject of state, professional and social activities of the head and breadwinner of the family, a link between the family and society as a whole is assigned. The outside world is his prerogative. Culture, creativity, domination.
"Natural" purpose women in this society - the sphere of motherhood, upbringing of children and household. The hierarchy of male and female roles is recorded quite clearly: he is the subject of power relations, she is the object of his power.
Egalitarian government policy Is a policy based on the principle of creating equal conditions for the development of the individual, regardless of gender in all social spheres.
In modern sociological literature, the concept of "gender contract" is used to characterize gender relations. This is an unspoken, normative treaty imposed by the state on all men and women as members of society, according to which they are obliged to perform social functions that correspond to the needs of the state in a specific historical period. The main contract for women in Soviet society was the contract of a working mother, and for men, “worker - warrior - defender”.
Gender representations
, given in the form of the image of a "real man" or "real woman", relate to the gender differentiation of social behavior and participation in public life. Such gender representations exist both at the highest levels of culture, within the framework of religious or philosophical systems, and in ordinary everyday consciousness.
Gender representations, unlike other types of social representations, help the individual to understand the content of gender roles, to determine their position in relation to the system of normative prescriptions about the proper behavior of men and women in society, to develop their own style of behavior in inter-sex interaction, to concretize the landmarks of the life path based on the accepted way of playing a gender role.
Gender relations in intergroup interaction
Gender relations in intergroup interaction have their own characteristics. When studying this level of gender relations, foreign and domestic authors ( Tajfel, 1981, 1982; Turner, 1985, Ageev, 1983, 1985, 1986, 1990) found that for intergroup perception, the object and subject of which are social groups, the following features are characteristic:
- unification of private ideas into something whole, qualitatively different from its constituent elements(that is, integrity and striving for unification of intergroup perception);
- schematization and simplification of the range of aspects of the perception of another group;
- the formation of insufficiently flexible intergroup representations that have stability.
At the level intergroup interaction of communities
, homogeneous by gender, the analysis of gender relations is carried out in the "group - group" system. Here, the determining socio-psychological factors of inter-sex relations are gender stereotypes as a kind of social stereotypes.
Numerous studies of intergroup perception and interaction reveal such features of these processes as intragroup favoritism and intergroup discrimination. "Intragroup favoritism is the desire to somehow favor the members of one's own group" (Psychology. Dictionary, 1990).
"Intergroup discrimination "
- the establishment of distinctions between own and other groups. The most common result of intergroup discrimination is the tendency to establish positively assessed differences in favor of one's group ”(Psychology. Dictionary, 1990).
From intragroup favoritism
and
intergroup discrimination
it follows that other groups are rated lower relative to their group. In other words, in a situation of intergroup perception, women should evaluate their group more positively than the group of men, and vice versa. However, empirical research does not support this view.
It turned out that both men and women attribute more positive characteristics to the representatives of the male group. Hence, intragroup favoritism
as a phenomenon of intergroup perception and interaction, it acts in relation to the male group and does not act in relation to the female group (Kletsina, 2004).
In this case, the leading role is played by laws of a higher order, that is, not at the level of intergroup interaction, but at the level of functioning of the macrostructure. It is about the influence of a special cultural tradition - androcentrism. This is not an example of intra-group but of out-of-group favoritism.
The reason for out-of-group favoritism is the different social status of groups: low-status groups in certain sociocultural situations tend to develop negative auto-stereotypes and positive heterostereotypes (Dontsov, Stefanenko, 2002).
Group of men how any other community with a high status is evaluated and characterized in terms of competence and economic success; a group of women, a group with a low status, is assessed in terms of kindness, humanity, friendliness, etc. All positive female traits (compliance, emotional support, cordiality, etc.) are perceived as typical compensation for the lack of significant achievements in the public arena.
Have women how members of a low-status group, compared to men, have a less developed sense of identification with their group; adopting the point of view of men as a group of high status, they tend to overestimate men's achievements and dignity and underestimate their own. In the system of intergroup interaction, the problem of gender relations is most relevant in the professional sphere. In business communication and interaction, men and women manifest themselves both as representatives of gender social groups and as subjects of professional activity.
Distinctive feature
gender relations in the professional sphere is the inequality of the statuses and positions of men and women: men all over the world more often enjoy a higher status than women, and this provides them with access to resources and making responsible decisions. This leads to the fact that women are much more often than men find themselves in the role of subordinates, dependent leaders.
The needs of women for professional development, self-realization and career advancement are less met than those of men. The existing system of gender relations contributes to the consolidation of such personality traits in women, manifested in business interaction, as passive subordination, conformity, weak-willedness, a tendency to yield to everyone at all times, self-doubt, fear and obedience.
Inequality between women and men in the field of industrial (business) relations reflects gender relations of the intergroup level. Gender inequality in business interactions manifests itself in two ways. It:
- the widespread practice of occupational segregation, which makes prestigious professions and positions less accessible to women than men;
- a pronounced tendency to discrimination, when women receive less remuneration for work than men, although they do the same job.
In literature gender focus
the factors contributing to the persistence of inequality in the system of gender relations are described (Bern, 2001; Mezentseva, 2002; Glossary of Gender Terms 2002). Among the proposed options for explaining gender inequality in the field of economics and politics, two groups can be distinguished, associated with the personal characteristics or circumstances of women’s life, to the second group — the reasons generated by the conditions of activity in various organizational structures.
Thus, the model of gender relations in a situation of intergroup interaction can be considered as a dominant-dependent model of relations (with a male dominant position), which is confirmed by significant statistics from sociological and socio-psychological studies.
Gender relations in interpersonal interaction
When considering gender relations at the level of interpersonal interaction, the object of analysis is the “personality-personality” systems; in this case, we are talking about the interaction of two people of different sex. Gender relations at this level are determined by gender attitudes as a kind of social attitudes.
There are such general parameters of the analysis of gender relations, regardless of the level of their functioning, such as polarization, differentiation of the positions of men and women, the phenomenon of dominance, power, subordination. Differentiation of roles and statuses
men and women as subjects of interpersonal relations and the hierarchy, subordination of their positions are one of the main parameters of the analysis of gender relations in the microenvironment.
These parameters relate to both the objective side-real practices of interaction, and the object-gender attitudes of men and women as subjects of interpersonal relations.
Thus, interpersonal relations are distinguished from other types of gender relations by a pronounced emotional component that accompanies the entire process of formation and development of relations. In addition, in gender interpersonal relationships, the role of the personal characteristics of the participants is very significant, as well as the communication process, against the background of which relationships develop and function.
As models of gender relations
the interpersonal level is usually considered (marital) relations, because, firstly, all the characteristic signs of interpersonal relations are most clearly represented here (the mutual orientation of the subjects of relations to each other, real direct contact, a pronounced emotional basis, intensive communication); secondly, the specificity of gender relations is clearly reflected in marital relations, that is, here various socio-cultural prescriptions affect the content of family roles and their performance by men and women.
Scientific publications devoted to the analysis of the problem of uneven distribution of household responsibilities in the family. They are based on various theoretical approaches. Economic concepts are often used here (Barsukova, Radaev, 2000; Zhurzhenko, 1996; Kalabikhina. 1995; Mezentseva, 2001, 2002).
Relative productivity theory
to justify the unequal distribution of household responsibilities between spouses relies on indicators of their productivity in the labor market. Household work is performed by the family member whose market productivity is lower (productivity is measured by the level of material reward and positions in the public status hierarchy).
Among the sociological and socio-psychological explanations for the division of domestic work, the following can be distinguished:
- T. Parsons' theory of sex roles (the wife plays an expressive role in the family, the husband plays an instrumental role. The wife is responsible for maintaining a favorable emotional climate in the house, the husband is responsible for the material support of the family and the establishment of external social contacts. Such role differentiation is determined by the functional characteristics of a developed industrial society, which requires any small social groups - including from the family, household - a distinct role structure);
- socialization theory (the traditional distribution of household responsibilities leads to the fact that boys and girls strive to master skills and skills appropriate for the sex, and do not acquire other skills; this experience of primary socialization does not allow men to master the skills necessary for doing household chores) (Berne, 2001);
- role theories(they use the logic of biological or psychological reduction, give priority to psychologically arranged evolutionarily and biologically determined differences between sexes and behavioral models, which are little subject to transformation when the position of women changes in the social and economic context) (Barsukova, Radaev, 2000);
- theories of legitimizing behavioral patterns (the socially fixed legitimacy of the leadership or domination of men and the subordination of women in the social sphere is projected onto the family level, which gives men the right to choose the degree of their participation in his work) (Barsukova, Radaev, 2000).
Gender relations in the family
are also considered with the help of the parameter of the hierarchy of the positions of the spouses as subjects of interpersonal relations. In this system, husband and wife can occupy equal or unequal positions. Equality is a symmetrical position, here both spouses have equal rights and obligations, no one is subordinate to the other; emerging problems are resolved by agreement or compromise; none of the spouses dominates, suppresses or subjugates the other (Schneider, 2000).
Unequal positions in the system of marital relations, situations are generated that one controls, orders, the other obeys, awaits advice or instruction. In this case, submission can be both voluntary and forced.
For a long time, the term “head of the family” has been used in special literature. This institutional characteristic denoted a person to whom other family members were unquestioningly subordinate (in a patriarchal family, as a rule, such a status was with a husband or someone from the older generation) (Gurko, Boss, 1995).
Studies (Gurko, Boss, 1995) have shown that in all spheres of family life, the wife is more likely to make decisions than the husband, although there are many families where both spouses do this. In those families where there is no practice of joint problem solving, it is mainly the wives, not the husbands, who manage the money, organize the family's leisure time, solve household issues, determine how to raise the child and have the final say when discussing most other issues important for organizing family life. ...
There are several options for explaining the leading role of women in the family:
- compensatory behavior concept ... The dominant position of women in the sphere of family interaction is a compensation for their low status in the sphere of social life in comparison with men. The dominance of women in family relations can be carried out both explicitly and implicitly (hidden, veiled), using manipulation;
- social expectations concept. The widespread in society notions of normative, socially acceptable gender behavior encourage women to take responsibility in the sphere of family relations, and men in the sphere of extrafamilial interaction. The presence of responsibility stimulates the development and manifestation of leadership qualities in women, which, in turn, is expressed in the position of dominance (Barsukova, Radaev, 2000);
- identification concept. Women are reluctant to relinquish control in the sphere of household affairs due to the fact that they predominantly identify with this area of life (Berne, 2001). This concept is based on the relationship-centered approach to the psychology of women developed by Jean Miller ( Miller, 1976).
This approach emphasizes the role of relationships and communication with significant people in a woman's life. Relationship-centered approach includes the following provisions:
- a woman's personal development occurs precisely in a relationship;
- communication with people determines the psychological state of women;
- women are focused on caring for other people, taking responsibility for them;
- for women, emotional closeness with people is especially important, which determines the role of women at work and in the family (Frager, Feydimer, 2001).
In the system of interpersonal interaction of spouses, gender relations are expressed in the following two main models: affiliate and dominant-dependent
.
Partnerships,
there is a relationship between two equal subjects, the personal value and significance of which is not questioned. Spouses have their own individual goals, but each takes into account the goals and interests of the other. Relationships between spouses are built on equal terms, there is no desire to suppress and subjugate a partner, a willingness to make mutual concessions is expressed. Communication is distinguished by respect and correctness, the ability to put oneself in the shoes of a partner, to understand him, to delve into his problems and situation, and this is characteristic of both spouses.
The opposite relationship model, dominant-dependent model
does not imply equality. In this case, one of the spouses encourages the other to submit to himself and accept goals that are not consistent with the aspirations and intentions of the partner. The dominant position includes such manifestations in behavior as self-confidence, independence, authority, demonstration of one's own importance, the ability to insist on one's own. In communication, the dominant spouse, as a rule, uses the instrumental style of verbal communication, often ignores the point of view of the interlocutor, insists on his own opinion and solution to the problem.
In the partnership model of gender relations, the positions of the husband and wife are equal. In the system of dominant-dependent gender relations, both husband and wife can occupy a dominant position.
Interpersonal relationships at the intrapersonal level
At this level, the object of analysis is the attitude of the individual as a subject of a certain gender to himself, and gender identity, which is a component of social identity, here acts as a determinant. The intrapersonal level of analysis of gender relations includes such phenomena as internal gender conflict and gender identity crisis (Aleshina, Lektorskaya, 1989; Gavrilitskaya, 1998; Kon, 2002; Zdravomyslova, Temkina 2002; Lukovitskaya, 2002; Turetskaya, 1998).
If we take as a basis the explanation of the concept of "gender" in dictionaries, which is interpreted as "social sex", then the very expression "gender relations" can be considered as members of society belonging to different biological genders. The main thing in social interactions is the mental characteristics of the personality, the behavioral properties of the individual.
That is, speaking in simple human language, we can say that gender relations are non-sexual relations between male and female representatives in the broadest sense of the word.
In new anecdotes, in various humoresques and ironic monologues that sound everywhere from the stages and television screens, the question of "female logic" and "male logic" is being discussed. These two concepts are contrasted, as if fighting among themselves. Although the concept of "logic" is completely out of place here. Thus, stereotypes of gender behavior are ridiculed.
Gender relations are determined not by biological sex, but by the social position of a person, his education, his financial situation, his place of residence. For example, no one is surprised by the fact that an elderly businessman has a young woman who does not work, does not study, does nothing around the house, but she constantly receives expensive jewelry and visits restaurants. This distribution of roles in this category of our society is almost the norm. However, it would be naive to assume that in an ordinary village family a woman will walk around in a chic expensive outfit on a weekday, sleep until lunchtime and hire a housekeeper to clean the house. Here are completely different concepts about the distribution of gender roles in life.
In the ancient world, the distribution of gender roles in society played an important role, because it helped people to survive. The man was supposed to play the role of the sovereign, and the woman was to subordinate her will to his desires in everything. He was a protector, breadwinner and patron, She was a defenseless, dependent and obedient slave. In contrast to the concept of "gender", the modern word "gender" fully equates a woman with a man in all spheres of life, allowing her to be taken into account and studied, but not allowing her to humiliate with suspicion of the "weakness" of the female sex.
Despite the fact that women have long overcome the main gender-related internal and external behavioral roles and began to behave more freely in society, not only doing household chores, but also realizing themselves as successful professionals, it is obvious that the stereotype of a stronger (smart and successful) masculine nature and weak (defective) feminine, reflected in the language. Please note that the words "professional" or, for example, "librarian" are masculine, and an attempt to call a woman "professional" ("librarian") sounds like a way to "masculinize" her, to give her masculine features. At the same time, if you transform the word grammatically and add to its root the suffix and the feminine ending "professional" or "librarian" - the word will sound an insult. This phenomenon has long been fought in the West, making the necessary changes in grammar. For example, in German, all words related to the names of professions have the form of both masculine and feminine without fail.
