The radical transformations taking place in modern Russian society in the socio-economic and political spheres could not but affect the family, as the most important social institution. The modern Russian family is characterized by such crisis manifestations as: a low birth rate, an increase in the number of families at risk, single-parent families, dysfunctional families, a constant increase in divorces (according to statistics, every third marriage in Russia ends in divorce, and two thirds of broken families are families , in which there are children), the spread of so-called “civil” marriages. https://privet-rostov.ru various types of stationery folders.
The family, as a result of market transformations, is currently in a deep crisis. The mechanisms of social adaptation that were characteristic of Soviet society in the changed conditions turned out to be unsuitable. New ones are developed spontaneously and often come down simply to survival mechanisms. As a result, modern man In the conditions of increased competition, I stopped seeing the main wealth and happiness in the family.
It should be noted that in Russia the slogan of modern youth is “career first, then children.” Data from sociological studies of reproductive attitudes among young people clearly illustrate that today there is an obvious downward trend in the planned number of children. Thus, as the analysis showed, the average desired number of children for women of childbearing age is 1.7, which is even lower than the level necessary for the reproduction of society (the norm is 2.1 children per woman).
I would like to dwell on one more trend. As research has shown, a strong transformation in the content of family roles is currently noticeable. The reason for this is the feminization of Russian society, which in turn leads to various role conflicts associated with the discrepancy between the role expectations of parents, children and spouses. Economic status today increasingly determines the leader in the family. Quite often there are families where women play leading roles, since a woman in modern society is no longer as dependent on a man economically as a few decades ago.
It should be noted that in modern Russian society there is a so-called “cult of youth”. According to the outstanding sociologist of the early 20th century, Ortega y Gasset, the “mass” person is characterized by such traits as the desire to avoid responsibility and affection, selfishness, and the desire to always remain young. This is precisely what the majority of Russians strive for between the ages of 16 and 30-35 (i.e. precisely at reproductive age, when one should start a family). Today, people want to prolong their youth by any effort, sparing no effort or expense (neither material nor spiritual) for this. Today, more than ever, fitness clubs, various diets, and plastic surgery have become popular. The media constantly promotes the image of an “forever young” person. Today, many young people want to first “live for themselves,” and only then start a family. They are much more concerned about finding a variety of entertainment and new sensations than about starting a family.
And finally, the reason for the current crisis of the family as a social institution is, of course, the decline of morality (early sexual relationships among young people, neglect of marriage, the spread of sexually transmitted infections). According to research data, among adolescents and young people under thirty, the percentage of sexually transmitted diseases is higher than among the general population. There is an increase in HIV-infected young people. The proportion of ages between fifteen and thirty years is 79% of all HIV-infected men and 80% of women. The growth of drug addiction, tobacco smoking (Russia accounts for about 70% of the total international market) and alcoholism continues to grow.
In addition, the reproductive attitudes of modern youth are quite strongly influenced by the factor of reduction physical health. Today, only 10% of school graduates are absolutely healthy.
Alikhanova Veronika Levanovna
3rd year student of the Faculty of Philosophy and Psychology, Department of Cultural Studies, VSU,
RF, Voronezh
E- mail: Alihanova . veronika @ mail . ru
Korobov-Latyntsev Andrey Yurievich
scientific supervisor, Ph.D. Philosopher Sciences, Lecturer at the Department of Cultural Studies, Faculty of Philosophy and Psychology, Voronezh State University,
RF, Voronezh
The family is one of the main social institutions of society, performing an extremely important function for preserving the integrity of society - the function of procreation. However, the processes currently taking place in the political and economic arena, changes in the social structure of society, and globalization processes have had a significant impact on the role of the family in modern society both in Russia and throughout the world. The goal of our work will be to identify the main manifestations of the crisis of the modern Russian family, to search for the causes of this kind of phenomenon, as well as the impact of this situation on the development of Russian culture. To do this, we analyzed the data Federal service State Statistics (GKS) and the All-Russian Center for Public Opinion Research (VTsIOM). The relevance of this work lies in the fact that identifying the causes of crisis phenomena in social sphere will serve as the first step towards solving this problem.
So, at the beginning of our work, we stated that the modern Russian family is currently experiencing a crisis. What allowed us to talk about this? Let us consider the main manifestations of the family crisis in Russia.
- Rising number of divorces
According to the Federal State Statistics Service, 1,225,985 marriages were registered in 2014, of which 693,730 broke up. We see that approximately half of the marriages concluded in Russia end in divorce.
- Decrease in the number of marriages.
The number of marriages concluded in civil registry offices as a percentage decreased from 65 to 57. So, half of all couples in Russia prefer extramarital relationships.
- An increase in the number of abortions and a decrease in the birth rate.
According to statistics, every year Russian women commit approximately 6 million abortions, which means that 57% of women terminate their pregnancy. The consequence of this situation is the birth rate crisis in Russia.
- Increase in prostitution
- Non-traditional forms of relationships
Here we will be referring to so-called “open” relationships and homosexuality.
- Women's emancipation and women taking on functions that were traditionally performed by men, which entails a change in the nature of their relationships.
So, based on statistical data, we have proven that the modern Russian family is indeed experiencing a state of crisis. The factors listed above entail a large number of other negative phenomena arising from them. If marriages break up, then children born in such families are left without one parent, or without any at all. Growing up in a single-parent family violates the integrity of the mental and social life child. Firstly, the natural process of transmitting cultural experience in the family is interrupted. Traditional family values must be passed down from both parents and their families. If a child is raised by only one of the parents, then he does not gain experience and assimilate values to the fullest extent. Thus, the role of the family as an agent of transmission of cultural values and the transfer of experience of generations is violated. This is the first manifestation of the influence of the family crisis on culture.
Secondly, the absence of one of the parents entails a deformation of social roles in the family. For example, a boy receives masculine qualities from his father in the process of upbringing; in the absence of this, it is difficult to develop such qualities in a child. The famous psychoanalyst Z. Freud believed that the first character traits in a child are formed precisely from imitation of the father, and then of the mother. “Simultaneously with this identification with the father, and perhaps even before that, the boy begins to treat his mother as a support type object. So, he has two psychologically different connections: with his mother and with his father - identification according to the type of assimilation." It follows from this that the crisis family relations entails a crisis of human identity in the early stages of its development. We see that for the formation of a child’s personality, the connection with both parents is equally important, but if this connection is lost on either side, then the child’s socialization and acculturation may be disrupted. This is the second impact of the family crisis on culture - in the disruption of the processes of identification, socialization and acculturation.
In modern society, gender roles are beginning to shift noticeably. Women, due to various circumstances, such as the divorces mentioned above, for example, are forced to take on part of the obligations that a man must fulfill. This leads, on the one hand, to significant problems in the female psyche, such as female alcoholism, etc., and on the other hand, a woman often emancipates to such an extent that she loses the need for a marriage partner, since she copes with it herself. functions. This leads to a decrease in the number of marriages, to significant disagreements in the family, as well as to a change in the very nature of intergender relations. Often the union of a man and a woman acquires a “free”, non-binding character, and marriage becomes something optional and burdensome.
The change in the nature of relationships results in a crisis of family functions. Even if the marriage is concluded, relationships in the family proceed without significant conflicts, we are faced with another total crisis phenomenon: the birth of children in the family has become optional. Young people prefer not to take responsibility for the life of a child and prefer to “live for themselves,” which leads not only to serious demographic problems, but also to a crisis of spiritual values. According to the GSK, for every woman in Russia there are approximately 1.6 children, which is a high figure compared to previous years (in 2001 - 1.1 children, in 2013 - 1.4), but does not cover the level mortality. The low birth rate and high mortality rate in Russia can lead to an aging population, older generation may become more numerous than the youth. This will lead to the conservation of cultural values, to a lack of continuity between generations; new values and attitudes simply will not have time to be developed; a sharp gap between the values of the “old” and “new” generations will lead to social tension. This is the third possible manifestation of the influence of the family crisis on Russian culture.
Thus, traditional family values in Russia are in decline.
What are the causes of the family crisis? In modern society, it has already become a tradition to blame globalization processes for the crisis. Many believe that phenomena occurring in the social and political life of Europe, such as the legalization of same-sex marriage, for example, have a detrimental effect on the situation in Russia. Without a doubt, the situation in Europe to a certain extent influenced the crisis in Russia. For example, after the adoption of a law allowing members of the same sex to marry, discussions on this issue began in Russia. If such a question is raised, it means that it is possible to accept this model; this becomes theoretically permissible. In 2014, a marriage was concluded in Russia between a girl and a transgender person, that is, a young man who is in the process of changing his sex. At the wedding ceremony, both the bride and groom wore white dresses.
But isn't the impact of globalization processes on the family crisis in Russia overestimated? We think that it is somewhat exaggerated. Firstly, Russia does not fully identify itself with the West; it is not a bearer of Western values. Throughout our history, there have been debates about what cultural type Russia belongs to, and at the moment, most researchers are inclined to the original path of Russia. A Russian person is probably aware of this and therefore cannot blindly adopt those patterns of behavior that exist in the West. Secondly, if we turn to the history of our country in the 20th century, we will see crisis phenomena that manifested themselves even before the start of globalization. For example, the situation in the literature of Russian symbolism, the key feature of which was a close connection with philosophy. The symbolists were inspired by Solovyov's concept of Sophia - the highest wisdom, which included the highest love. They were convinced that a writer should bring to life the attitudes and values that he embodies in his work. This phenomenon is called “life creativity”. In addition to the Highest love, there is base love, which a poet should never stain himself with, and Sophia’s love is devoid of carnal relationships. Hence, the symbolists have a feeling of crisis in marriage relations. Since shocking and scandal were a common form of their behavior, they shocked the public with their family relationships. For example, Dmitry Merezhkovsky and Zinaida Gippius were legally married, but decided that their marriage would be complete and without children. However, what is more surprising is not even this, but the fact that Dmitry Filosofov, a literary critic, also lived in the same house with them. Globalization begins in the West only towards the end of the 20th century; in the 19th–20th centuries, European globalization could not influence Russia, because there was no such phenomenon as globalization.
As for gender issues, its rethinking occurs at the same time. The above-mentioned symbolists believed that the poet, with his exclusivity, is able to overcome gender limitations. Rozanov in his work “People of Moonlight” makes gender a religious and philosophical problem. He acknowledges the possible existence of a “third” gender, considers the possibility of sex without sin, etc. This was a big step towards moving away from the traditional understanding of gender roles.
So, in our work we came to the following conclusions: Modern Russia is experiencing a deep family crisis, and this significantly affects the culture of our country. We showed this influence in three aspects: firstly, in the disruption of the processes of transmission of cultural experience and mechanisms of cultural identification due to the collapse of traditional family values; secondly, in the loss of the role of the family as an agent of socialization and acculturation; thirdly, in violation of the continuity of generations and the conservation of cultural values. As for the reasons for this kind of phenomenon, we believe that the role of globalization processes as the cause of the crisis is significantly exaggerated, since a similar situation was present in Russia even when it did not feel the influence of Europe. The family crisis in Russia has evolved historically since the 20th century.
References:
- All-Russian Center for the Study of Public Opinion – [Electronic resource] – Access mode. – URL: http://wciom.ru/ (accessed December 5, 2015).
- Rozanov V.V. People of Moonlight / V.V. Rozanov. – M: Friendship of Peoples, 1990. – 280 p.
- Federal State Statistics Service – [Electronic resource] – Access mode. – URL: http://www.gks.ru/ (accessed December 5, 2015).
- Freud Z. Psychology of masses and analysis of the human “I” / Z. Freud. – St. Petersburg: Azbuka, Azbuka-Atticus, 2013. – P. 53.
Family crises are natural stages; they are “built into” the algorithm of the existence of any family. Crisis situations are a kind of test of a family's strength, and if they are successfully passed, it means that the family is functioning correctly and developing normally. If this is not the case, it is likely that the difficult situation will only increase the disharmony of the relationship. And responsibility for this is distributed fifty-fifty between spouses. Often this phrase means that two people intend to separate in the near future. But a break in a relationship is more likely a consequence of a crisis that was not handled correctly, as well as troubles such as the appearance of connections on the side, illness, or alcoholism.
The cause of a crisis is usually important life events. They cause certain changes in established relationships that affect the rhythm of normal life and the redistribution of resources: attention, emotions, effort, time, additional knowledge and money. In modern family psychology, several transition periods related to internal dynamics and the development of family relationships. The transitions themselves from one phase of family relationships to another can occur more painfully and problematically, or quite calmly and without any special complications.
The following characteristics of a family crisis are distinguished:
1. Exacerbation of situational contradictions in the family.
2. Disorder of the entire system and all processes occurring in it.
3. Increasing instability in the family system.
4. Generalization of the crisis, that is, its influence extends to the entire range of family relationships and interactions. At whatever level of family functioning a crisis arises (individual, micro, macro or megasystem), it will inevitably affect other levels, causing disturbances in their functioning. As a result, the following manifestations of a family crisis can be detected:
1. Manifestation of a family crisis at the individual level:
Feeling of discomfort, increased anxiety;
Ineffectiveness of old ways of communication;
Decreased level of marital satisfaction;
A feeling of incomprehensibility, unspokenness, hopelessness and futility of efforts made to change the situation, that is, a feeling of limitation of one’s capabilities, inability to discover new directions of development in the situation;
Shifting the locus of control: a family member ceases to occupy a subject position, it begins to seem to him that something is happening “to him” - that is, outside of him, which means that changes should happen not to him, but to others. In this case, he sincerely begins to believe that it is a change in the attitude or behavior of another family member that will lead to an improvement in the situation (Shiyan O. A.);
Closedness to new experiences and at the same time hope for a “miraculous return of the world” not associated with one’s own changes;
The emergence of highly valuable ideas among some family members;
Formation of symptomatic behavior.
2. Manifestation of a family crisis at the microsystem level:
Violations in the cohesion parameter: a decrease or increase in the psychological distance between family members (extreme options - symbiotic fusion and disunity);
Deformation of the internal and external boundaries of the nuclear family, the extreme variants of which are their diffuseness (blurring) and rigidity (impenetrability);
Violations of the flexibility of the family system, up to chaoticity or rigidity (the mechanism of preserving and strengthening inflexible ways of responding - “incongruent adaptation” - is almost universal in crisis situations, however, with its long-term use, the natural exchange of energy in the family is disrupted);
Changes in the role structure of the family system (emergence of dysfunctional roles, rigid, uneven distribution of roles, “failure” of roles, pathologization of roles);
Violation of hierarchy (struggle for power, inverted hierarchy);
The emergence of family conflicts;
Increase in negative emotions and criticism;
Metacommunication disorders;
An increasing feeling of general dissatisfaction with family relationships, the discovery of differences in views, the emergence of silent protest, quarrels and reproaches, a feeling of deception among family members;
Regression or return to earlier patterns of nuclear family functioning;
“getting stuck” at any stage of family development and inability to solve the problems of the next stages;
Contradiction and inconsistency of claims and expectations of family members;
Destruction of some established family values and lack of formation of new ones;
Ineffectiveness of old family norms and rules in the absence of new ones;
Lack of rules.
3. Manifestations of a family crisis at the macrosystem level:
Updating the family myth;
Implementation of an archaic behavioral pattern that is inadequate to the current context of family existence, but was effective in previous generations;
Violations of internal and external boundaries of the extended family, the extreme variants of which are diffuseness and rigidity (impenetrability) of boundaries;
Violations of hierarchy (eg, inverted hierarchy, intergenerational coalitions);
Violations of the role structure of the extended family (role inversions, role failure);
Violation of traditions and rituals;
The ineffectiveness of old family norms and rules and the lack of formation of new ones.
4. Manifestation of a family crisis at the megasystem level:
Family social isolation;
Social maladjustment of the family;
Conflicts with the social environment.
Despite the variety of types and forms of family characteristic of modern times, most people live in two-parent families, nuclear or with other relatives. The vast majority of people marry and have at least one child. That is, the universality and universality of the family way of life is preserved.
At the same time, voices diagnosing a family crisis are becoming increasingly alarming. In Russia, this process becomes extremely acute due to the coincidence of the global (more precisely, characteristic of highly developed industrial countries) trend of transformation of the family model with the conditions of the socio-economic crisis, which negatively affects all aspects of the life of the population.
The negative impact of the crisis on the demographic characteristics of the population was manifested primarily in a decrease in the birth rate. Until recently, the decline in the birth rate in Russia was masked by the fact that numerous generations born in the post-war decade were entering childbearing age, and the absolute numbers of births were quite impressive. However, the time came when absolute numbers began to decline. So, in 1985 2,375.1 thousand children were born, and five years later, in 1990. - only 1,968.9 thousand. The drop in the birth rate was more than 16%. However, these extremely alarming figures soon began to seem quite favorable against the background of what followed in 1991. - a drop of almost 10% compared to the previous one. For 1992 – a drop of another 11.5%. Finally, the difficulties of a socio-economic and moral-psychological nature that manifested themselves in full led to the fact that in 1993. Almost a million fewer babies were born than in the previous year. Over the past ten years, the birth rate has fallen at an even faster rate.
In addition to general numbers, demographers use more precise indicators to determine the true state of fertility. Among them is the “total fertility rate,” that is, the average number of births per woman over the entire reproductive period. This indicator is independent of the age and sex structure of the population, and it well reflects the true dynamics of the process. It is known that for simple reproduction of the population, that is, in order for the number of residents not to decrease, so that the replacement generation is no less numerous in size than the one being replaced, the total fertility rate must be no lower than 2.15. The Russian average has now decreased by half (50%). The averages combine quite different regional fertility values. The situation is most alarming in the largest cities, central and northern regions of European Russia, in Siberia and the Far East, in a number of autonomies and republics. It can be assumed that narrowed reproduction is characteristic primarily of territories with a high level of industrial and scientific development, important for social progress countries.
The nature and rate of marriage is changing. The number of registered marriages is decreasing, and the number of divorces is increasing. In 1993 The country's average indicators were registered that were previously characteristic only of capitals with hypertrophied dynamics of divorce activity: for every three marriages concluded, two divorces were registered. And if the number of divorces generally increased quite smoothly, the decline in marriage rates was literally steep: since 1989. to 1993 the number of newly concluded marriages decreased by 280 thousand, or almost a quarter.
Three groups of indicators of deterioration in family functioning can be distinguished. The first is associated with objective processes of change in marriage and family relations in all economically developed countries and, especially, in Europe in the direction of nuclearization of the family, which inevitably entailed a decrease in the birth rate, an increase in divorces and an increase in the number of single people.
As in the West, the type of “consensual” marriage is widespread in Russia: a man and a woman have intimate relationships, run a joint household, sometimes have children, but do not register their marriage. The most obvious reason is the desire to take advantage of the benefits provided by the state for single-parent families and single mothers. Foreign experts are creating methods to distinguish a truly single-parent family, in dire need of help, from a quasi-single-parent family, in which both parents are present, but they do not formalize their relationship. Probably, such abuses are inevitable, but such a rapid and widespread spread of “consensual marriage” indicates a certain optionality of relationships in such a family model. Her choice is the result not only of material calculations, but also of a weak attitude toward starting a family. Therefore, this phenomenon is often found in marginalized sections of the population; such cohabitation often ends not only scandalously, but also criminally.
Judging by a number of observations, alternative models of marriage and family that have already been tested abroad are spreading: family-commune, etc. Homosexual relationships become an achievement of publicity; already has abroad famous story a movement for the recognition of same-sex cohabitations as marriages, which should legally give the right to such “spouses” to adopt children. On the one hand, the spread of such forms can be interpreted as a reaction to the crisis of the traditional family model and experimentation with the aim of developing a new model. On the other hand, these are, of course, the results of a crisis in the moral and semantic structures of society and the public psyche. This deepens the family crisis.
According to some estimates, the Russian family has entered the inevitable stage of the so-called “sexual revolution.” This is an “age-related” disease that developed countries suffered back in the 60s and after which some positive changes occurred in the institution of the family.
The second group is made up of the national factor, which exists along with the global, one might say universal, tendency to destabilize marriage and family relations. In Russia, it is due to the specifics of the functioning of the “Soviet family”, associated with the original Russian culture and spirituality and at the same time absorbing the experience of life in a totalitarian, “socialist” society. The most visible manifestations of this specificity are the extremely unsatisfactory housing and material living conditions of the majority of Russian families, the dependence of young spouses on their parents, the excessive employment of women with housework, the unsettled family life, and the high level of drunkenness and alcoholism.
More hidden, but also more significant contradictions are associated with the system of moral education in a totalitarian society. This is a low level of personal responsibility, the absence of a culture of rational planning of one’s own life, a very weak influence of morality, in particular religious, on daily life in the family, a focus on nurturing in children such qualities as obedience and discipline, rather than responsibility, initiative, independence, and personal dignity.
Another extremely important element of national specificity is that in the former USSR there was no, and could not be carried out, social work in the modern understanding, the activities of religious and charitable organizations aimed at helping marginal families, which, from the point of view of official propaganda, actually did not exist, did not develop. As a result, many millions of families were deprived of the necessary qualified, specialized assistance, eking out a miserable existence unworthy of human beings.
The third group of reasons for the weakening of family and marital ties is associated with the current state of Russian society, which is experiencing an acute crisis. First of all, it should be noted that there has been a sharp stratification of families in terms of income. Wealthy and even rich families appeared, as well as low-income families. There are various gradations between them, but still, according to most experts, the standard of living of most families is very, very low.
The sharp decline in living standards led to uncertainty about the future, spiritual and psychological instability.
Along with material impoverishment, another serious, perhaps more dangerous, trend has emerged - the decomposition of spiritual values and moral guidelines. It manifests itself in the desire of citizens to dramatically change their socio-economic status, by hook or by crook to get from one cell of society to another, more prosperous one, justifying the means by the importance and significance of the goal. Having created ugly forms of relations between the personal and the public, constantly trampling on the former in favor of the latter, the state nevertheless contributed to the formation of many values in the sphere of interpersonal communication that allowed people to survive and remain human in inhumane conditions. Such as honesty, camaraderie, kindness, respect for people, etc.
These qualities were also preserved because, propagated by the so-called communist morality, they seemed to be outside it, deeper than it. They were rooted in national, historical, cultural and moral traditions Russian people. No longer supported by the state ideological machine, these qualities begin to erode and depreciate.
There is still no reason to believe that the lowest point of negative changes in the sphere of family and marriage relations has been reached. Moreover, one can foresee the moment when the forces of internal family self-defense will be broken, and quantitative changes will turn into qualitative ones. Meanwhile, the family is the most important factor and school of sociality in society: with the breakdown of these primary ties, the forces capable of structuring the population and turning it into a society are weakened. The absence of children deforms a person’s semantic attitudes and distorts the concept of the purpose of life. The selfish calculation of today's generations, who achieve well-being by abandoning children, conflicts with one of the most important foundations of modern humanistic mentality - with the global concept of sustainable development, according to which the well-being of today's generations should not be achieved at the expense of the well-being of future ones.
It is easier to stabilize and correct the situation in the economy than in the sphere of family relations, where motives are hidden in the deep layers of the psyche, and reactions to the influence of social authorities are delayed and unpredictable. Today we can state this state without any doubt. family life in our country, when simply no measures can be taken at the expense of the family, and the draft of any decision must be examined from the point of view of the interests of the family. Otherwise, the changes may become irreversible. The state and society must form and support an attitude, both mass and individual, to preserve and strengthen the family way of life, creating legal, organizational and economic conditions for this. And every person who has to solve this problem for himself personally must keep in mind that by solving it, he may be deciding the fate of civilization in the 21st century.
To summarize distinctive features modern models of family economic activity as such over the values of kinship, the separation of kinship from socio-economic activity, we note a number of significant changes.
1. There was a preponderance of the personal benefits of the individual over the public ones. The Russian family is characterized by some specificity associated with the fact that there is not a preponderance of the individual’s economic needs over the values of kinship, but their fusion, interpenetration, which is observed in all spheres of socio-economic activity: politics, economics, science, even crime - with the creation of firms, divisions in the interests of the family (often to the detriment and expense of the state), the opening of accounts, funds in favor of relatives, the organization of bonuses, etc. In this regard, it is appropriate to move the discussion from the preponderance of values to their mixture, when the related and the national merge together and act as economic independence and maximization of benefits.
2. The modern family model is characterized by the separation of home and work. There has been a proliferation of the consumer type of family, where family activities are supplemented by the consumption of goods and services from non-family institutions at the expense of wages earned by family members outside the home. However, due to the sociocultural division of family responsibilities, women participating in productive non-family labor continue to run the household - the so-called “double load” of a modern woman. The transition from social to family-domestic self-service caused a transformation of male and female roles in the family.
It is very unique for Russian woman solving the problem of equalizing family functions in the sphere of family and household self-service. In the previous family, the man and woman had plenty of family responsibilities. By now objectively In an urban family, and partly in a rural one, a man has less workload. Subjectively, it can generally become minimal. The use of women's labor in the family remains voluminous. “Russian-style leveling” occurs due to the widespread spread of such a phenomenon as country house. There are objectively more opportunities for the application of male power there. However, this, as a rule, ends with not a “double” but a “triple” load on a woman: home - work - dacha. At the same time, psychologically she experiences greater peace and satisfaction.
3. There was a demarcation between home and the extra-family world, the primacy of the family and the impersonality of relationships in the external environment.
4. The modern family is characterized by social and geographic mobility associated with independent and independent professional and personal self-determination of children without inheritance social status and professional specialization of parents. Many northern Russian cities (Nizhnevartovsk, Nefteyugansk, etc.) were built, developed and inhabited by young people.
5. The system of “family-centrism” with a focus on material wealth, the values of duty, family responsibility, the birth and upbringing of children, concern for the old age of parents, the dominance of the authority of parents and relatives gives way to a system of “egocentrism” with the values of individualism, independence, personal achievements, and increased feeling own "I".
6. There is a transition from a centralized extended family-kinship system to decentralized nuclear families, in which marital ties become higher than kinship ties.
7. Divorce on the initiative of the husband (primarily due to the childlessness of the marriage) is replaced by divorce caused by the interpersonal incompatibility of the spouses (“did not get along in character,” “lack of mutual understanding,” “experienced disappointment in each other”).
8. There is a transition from a “closed” to an “open” system of choosing a spouse based on interpersonal selectivity by young people of each other (albeit while maintaining property interests and the inheritance system secured by the marriage contract).
9. The culture of childlessness with a strict taboo on the use of contraception is being replaced by a culture of individual intervention in the reproductive cycle, i.e. prevention and termination of pregnancy.
10. Norms associated with the phenomenon of large families have historically become obsolete. In the 20th century, there was a spontaneous reduction in the number of children in the family, divorces became more frequent, and marriages became less common.
At the same time, in post-Soviet Russia the family model has a chance to change. The family, where the mother bears all responsibility (she dominates the family, and she also has closer emotional contacts with the children), and the father is “thrown overboard” of family relationships, may be replaced by a different family structure, in which the dominant role remains with the mother, the next in importance belongs to the father, and the children are subordinate. The father is responsible for the well-being and social protection of the family, and the mother raises the children. Children are emotionally closer to their mother than to their father. Of course, such a structure is also not without contradictions, both in terms of marital and child-parent relationships.
Chapter 2. Social and pedagogical foundations of working with families
Despite the presence of different points of view on the family crisis, all researchers are unanimous in their opinion about its presence in modern Russian society. The components of this crisis can be considered the following signs: falling birth rates; mass childlessness; depopulation of the nation; an increase in the number of divorces; increase in the number of single-parent families; children born out of wedlock; widespread informal marriages (cohabitation); alternative forms of marriage and family relations (“concubinate”, family-commune, “swing”, “group marriages”), legalization of same-sex relationships; increase in individuals living alone (loneliness).
The decline in the birth rate in Russia began in the late 60s. Modern fertility parameters are two times less than what is required to replace generations: on average, there are 1.2 births per woman, compared with 2.15 required for simple population reproduction. In a number of regions located in the central part of Russia, the total fertility rate is about one birth per woman.
The nature of the birth rate in the Russian Federation is determined by the widespread prevalence of small families (1-2 children), the convergence of the birth rate parameters of the urban and rural population, the postponement of the birth of the first child, and the growth of out-of-wedlock births.
Small families, as an established, developing and diversified social phenomenon, have crossed all boundaries: national, regional, class, professional. It has taken root in society and has become not a random or temporary process, but a pattern. The increase in the number of small and childless families is a reflection of family instability and a decline in its status. Modern society provides a person with many different opportunities for personal self-realization, which constitute a serious alternative to the need to have children. Although, undoubtedly, a low standard of living serves as a brake on the birth rate, the reason lies not only in this. The family crisis is not a problem of wealth and poverty, it is a common problem of the entire modern civilization, a problem that was expressed in devaluation family values. In the system of these values, regardless of material well-being, the human “I” determined itself in any way, but not through parenthood. We are dealing with something that has never happened in the history of mankind: having few children was forced. Nowadays, the anti-child, anti-family trend is mainly associated with the life philosophy of the younger generation, which does not want (or is afraid!) to have children due to the lack of real prospects for their professional and social self-determination. There was no place for man in this value system; his destiny was the hypertrophied social function of the worker. There is no man, there is no woman with her special responsible role of reproduction and education of the younger generation, but there are workers, creators, politicians. Unfortunately, people have transferred these impersonal relationships into the family, thus devaluing one of its most important functions. And therefore, now not only familists, but also representatives of other “human sciences” state with alarm: “... We are on the threshold, no matter how scary this word sounds, of depopulation, when the mortality rate is higher than the birth rate. Until we say that the crisis of the family is not just a crisis of its material capabilities, not only for this reason spouses refuse to have children, but that it is a crisis of the value system generated by the costs of industrial production, until this problem is realized in such a way production, until then its resolution will not be invented. It will still have to be allowed, since the anti-child, anti-family direction of development is inhumane, and therefore non-progressive, unpromising... There is no humane alternative to the family.”
Low birth rate is one of the reasons for depopulation. Depopulation – a persistent excess of the number of deaths over the number of births – has affected, to varying degrees, almost the entire territory of the Russian Federation and almost all ethnic groups.
Destabilization of marriage is one of the most important demographic problems, quantitatively expressed in the unfavorable ratio of registered and dissolved marriages. The divorce rate in Russia increased continuously in the 50s, 60s and 70s of the twentieth century.
Currently, more than 50% of marriages end in breakup.
Divorce is the most obvious, but not the only evidence of the destruction of family relationships, since it only formalizes their actual situation. Not all families with dysfunctional relationships make the decision to divorce, either due to fear of the procedure and consequences of divorce, or because of psychological inertia, or because of the belief that “children should have two parents, regardless of the relationship between them.” In this case, the family is formally preserved, but its basic functions are disrupted.
The downward trend in marriage rates, which intensified towards the end of the 1990s, was determined by several factors.
Firstly, partner cohabitation is becoming more and more widespread among young people.
Secondly, registration of marriages takes place today at an increasingly older age.
And, thirdly, the general deterioration of the economic situation, the growth of unemployment, especially among young people, the decline in living standards - all this slows down marriage.
The number of single-parent families (as a result of divorce, widowhood, the birth of a child to an unmarried woman, etc.) is 20%, with a predominance of single-parent families in which the child is raised by one mother (approximately 14 such families per single-parent family, in whose child is raised by one father).
Against the background of a general decline in the birth rate and an increase in the number of single-parent families, there is an intensive increase in children born out of wedlock among all births. Until 1985, their share fluctuated around
10%, and then began to grow rapidly, and in 2000 reached 28%. Today, the parents of almost every fifth child in our country are not in a registered marriage. This is partly due to weakening moral standards and more liberal attitudes towards children born out of wedlock, and can sometimes be seen as an indicator of the spread of de facto marriages. There is a significant increase in out-of-wedlock births among teenage mothers. Increased out-of-wedlock birth rates at very young ages are mainly a consequence of low contraceptive culture at the beginning of sexual life.
Both ours and foreign experience indicates that among the illegitimate children of minor mothers, the number of unplanned and unwanted children is especially high. Therefore, the rates of maternal and infant mortality, pathology of newborns, and mothers abandoning their children are increasing. Among the problems of single-parent families, the problem of its functioning as an institution for the upbringing and socialization of children is especially acute. Being born out of wedlock reduces a child’s chances of having a full family in the future: “purely” female, as well as “purely” male, child rearing leads to the formation of a distorted pattern of behavior. Another important difficulty for this type of family is their economic insolvency. The vast majority of single-parent families have the characteristics of being poor and dependent on benefits.
The next social characteristic that requires society's attention to single-parent families with minor children is related to the quality of the latter's health. Pediatric scientists studying the level of health of children come to a disappointing conclusion: children from single-parent families are much more likely than children from intact families to be susceptible to acute and chronic diseases that occur in a more severe form. Thus, the specific lifestyle of a single-parent family has a significant impact on the well-being of a single-parent family. Nevertheless, from year to year the number of children born out of wedlock is growing, which over time aggravates the problem of single-parent families.
Researchers, starting from the second half of the 80s, began to note the liberalization of public opinion regarding cohabitation. In the public consciousness, the name “civil marriage” is increasingly assigned to such unions, although this term arose in a completely different context - as a marriage union registered with government agencies, an alternative to church marriage.
Society's attitude towards " civil marriages"becomes more and more loyal. Between 1980 and 2000, their number increased sixfold. Young couples are increasingly refusing official registration marriage, the prevalence of legally unregistered marriages led to the fact that in 2000, every fourth child was born out of wedlock.
Social practice is expanding in society when, for many young people, marriage is preceded by cohabitation, which can be considered as a temporary, but in most cases an indispensable step towards the legal consolidation of emotionally and psychologically justified relationships. Traditional marriage is being replaced by the so-called “trial marriage” (cohabitation, extramarital union), most often at the age of 18–25 years. Analyzing the reasons for the growth of extramarital unions, some experts associate this fact primarily with the crisis modern family, a decline in her social prestige. Many young people are frightened by the prospect of taking responsibility for another person, as well as for children who sooner or later appear in the family. They should not be blamed for this, because today's youth achieve economic independence later. On the other hand, early physical development determines the need for sexual relations. Of course, sexual potency and the need to satisfy the sexual instinct have always existed, but previously this was largely prevented by strict social norms. Now freedom of premarital sexual relations dominates. Therefore, a couple living together without legal registration of the relationship can, with greater ease than in a legal marriage, terminate their relationship if something in the partner does not suit them. Psychological factors also play an important role in the growth of extramarital unions. An increasing number of young people (and even their parents) consider it necessary to undergo a probationary period in cohabitation before a “real” marriage - to better get to know each other’s character and habits, to test their feelings and sexual compatibility. But it should be noted that most often the initiator of a “trial marriage” is a man. The modern woman, as before, is more interested in creating a family and suffers more from its absence, although marital responsibilities primarily bind her and provide advantages to the man.
Objective statistics provide interesting data on this matter. A married man differs from a bachelor in better physical and mental health, he gets sick less often, he is less likely to get hit by a car, become an alcoholic, or commit suicide, he is luckier in his professional activities, and lives longer. A married woman has worse health than her unmarried peers, especially those under the age of 30, her career advancement is hampered by the birth and upbringing of children, household responsibilities, and opportunities for extra-family leisure are limited.
It turns out that marriage is more in the interests of a man, nevertheless, he sees “quarrels” in the family, and she sees “happiness”.
The position of a woman in a “trial marriage” is no different from the position in a registered one: it is she who bears the main burden of housekeeping. Men, on the other hand, more often feel like a guest in an unofficial marriage, who is given honor and respect every day and hour, and at the same time no one expects, much less demands, his participation in household work. Everything depends on his personal desire, that is, he enjoys all the advantages of a married man, but with the only difference that he has no responsibilities and is not responsible for the economic well-being of the family. Family problems are resolved based on mutual agreement. Therefore, “trial marriage” should be considered not as a new stage in the development of intersexual relations, but as a crisis state of the modern family.
The phenomenon of diversity of family models is associated by both foreign and domestic researchers with profound social changes that have global and national characteristics and are expressed in a change in value paradigms.
In the 20th century Along with the monogamous family type, a number of types of non-traditional models have become widespread. The appearance of such forms in science is explained by the complexity of the formation of modern and post-modern types of families. As an example, we give several forms presented in English literature.
“Regularly separated” marriage is a model, the essence of which is that the husband and wife, at a certain stage of development of an individual family, prefer to live separately for a fairly long period of time. Spouses choose a certain degree of spatial isolation from each other in order to prevent the routinization of life and everyday conflicts and thereby achieve maximum satisfaction of individual needs and create the ground for creative expression.
The next non-traditional form is “open” marriage. Some people don't recognize divorce as best solution problems that have arisen in the family, so they are looking for opportunities to “open” the marriage. “Opening” a marriage means taking steps towards full equality and independence of spouses in the intellectual and professional spheres. In such a marriage, the husband and wife are independent partners. One of the extreme forms of “sexual open marriage” is the so-called “swinging”. Here, extramarital sexual contacts are openly practiced by both spouses, often at the same time and in the same place.
Alternative marriages also include “concubinage” (in which there is some participation of the “father” in the future fate of his child and his mother - in unregistered relationships, i.e. a “de facto” marriage, although the man has an official family), and also all varieties of bigamy.
One of the most pressing problems of marriage and family at the turn of the millennium is the legalization of same-sex cohabitation, equating them with legally registered marriages.
Finally, another sign of an unstable family lifestyle is the belief that being single is an attractive and comfortable lifestyle. To one degree or another, loneliness was inherent in various societies and peoples in the past. But if in the past it was the result of objective factors that almost did not depend on the person himself (the death of men in war, the death of one of the spouses from epidemics and diseases), now it also depends on the individual himself. Many become single consciously, that is, people consciously do not want to get married. Since the Second World War, the number of people living in isolation has increased dramatically. In previous generations, loneliness was perceived as a fate in general and people who experienced it were treated with understanding. However, conscious loneliness was condemned by society. Nowadays there is a different view. There is no doubt that public consciousness no longer forms a negative attitude towards him: society is quite tolerant of single people, perhaps even indifferent. We believe that these changes are due to some extent to the process of changing emphasis in the “society – family – individual” system. But in reality, this means that society today is not so important whether a person is a family person or not. Other indicators become more significant: professional, educational, etc.
Opinions and attitudes in this area depend on nationality, the degree of urbanization of the settlement, age and some other factors. At the same time, it is clear that directly or indirectly, the prerequisites for loneliness are created: economic, social, moral and psychological. All benefits and benefits are distributed in accordance with a person’s achievements in professional activities. Loneliness becomes a phenomenon organically inherent in society, and not accidental or temporary. The traditions and customs with which our ancestors fought against it are almost forgotten.
Another undoubted factor that negatively affects the stability of marriage, primarily abroad, but is already penetrating into the consciousness of Russians, is the influence of the feminist worldview. In Russia, the spread of feminist ideas occurs not only for internal reasons, but also under the influence of foreign theories - through international conferences, grants from foreign foundations, through the media and various publications. For example, in the introductory remarks to the works of prominent feminists translated into Russian, their generally positive assessment is given; In a number of translated sociology textbooks, material on family and marriage is presented as part of gender sociology. For the Russian reader, it is of some interest to consider “anti-familyism” in American feminism from the position of familism, the pro-family perception of these views.
The disappearance of social need for large family and the high birth rate caused the contraceptive and with it the sexual revolution, the collapse of a thousand-year-old system of social norms of family lifestyle. The spread of small families, the growth of divorces and cohabitation, socialization pathology, illegitimate births, etc. strengthened the new system of thoughts, where family was associated with everything “old” and “outdated,” and the products of its disintegration with everything “new” and “advanced.” " In a situation of a value crisis in the family style of behavior and the indifference of public opinion towards the family, feminism appeared as an obvious ideological and theoretical justification for what was happening. In feminism, the inequality of the family among the institutions that exploit it is replaced by the inequality and exploitation of women, while the social problem of the decline of the family is removed, and the problem of gender relations is brought to the fore.
A crushing critique of the family is inherent not only in radical feminism, which fully declared itself in the United States in the 70s, but also in other areas of modern feminist theory, the differences between which have been smoothed out in the last decade due to a general rejection of family.
The ideology of feminism was formed under the influence of Enlightenment ideas about the natural rights of every person and thanks to the contributions of prominent figures in the women's movement: Mary Wollstonecraft, Frances Wright, Sarah Grimke, Elizabeth Stanton and Suzanne Anthony. At the first stage of the formation of American feminism, liberal feminists gradually leaned toward radicalism, viewing women as an oppressed class and all social institutions as attributes of patriarchy. In the 19th century the emphasis was placed on the difference between men and women, purely feminine qualities were highlighted, and the leading idea was the desire to concentrate all management in the hands of “ strong women" In fact, it was the idea of maternal right, which was very fashionable among anthropologists at that time. Among liberal or cultural feminists, there was an opinion that the call for “matriarchy” (dominance of women) was a response to the enslavement of Western women in the 19th century.
Within the framework of cultural feminism of the 19th century. Elizabeth Stanton took a radical position, rejecting religion and the Ten Commandments, supposedly invented by men to deprive women of their rights. Matilda Gage went further than E. Stanton, equating patriarchy with the horrors of war, prostitution and the enslavement of women. Victoria Woodhull became the first woman to address the US Congress on the issue of women's rights, linking them with shocking views on free love. V. Woodhull defended the abolition of marriage as a system of official prostitution and rape.
Cultural feminists also defended abortion rights: Emma Goddman was arrested in 1916 for distributing literature on abortion, and Margaret Sanger advocated for better living conditions through legalized abortion and advocated slowing population growth.
The anti-family theory of feminism is based on the idea of individual freedom, cultivating the desire for freedom, not limited by anything - not even by the requirement of individual responsibility for negative consequences any unauthorized actions. Every individual of the female gender is free to do as he pleases, because responsibility for this is shifted to society and the state. From the point of view of feminism, traditional sociology of the family is guilty of sociocultural recognition of the separation of the sexes, in justifying the socialization of children according to their physiological constitution, i.e. in forced heterogeneous education. In the context of postmodern revaluation of values, feminist denial of human nature and relevant human culture surpasses all known forms of nihilism.
So, the crisis of the modern Russian family, unfortunately, is an undoubted fact. Moreover, it is taking place against the backdrop of a large-scale social crisis in the country, which makes it particularly acute and dramatic. In addition, it is associated not only with socio-economic, but also with a number of psychological reasons that appeared among people against the backdrop of social devastation.
The family has ceased to be a condition for survival in society, since every adult has the opportunity to become economically independent and therefore shows more concern for his personal growth than for family well-being. Most members of society have a pronounced focus on satisfying the basic needs of life not in the family, but outside it. Nowadays it is much more important to make a career than to become a good family man.
In recent years, an increasing number of young men have become involved in deviant activity and criminal activity, or have been recruited to participate in military operations taking place on Russian territory. All this, of course, is connected with a lifestyle that denies family, so young people of marriageable age are in no hurry to create one or simply do not have time to do so.
The crisis of the modern family is in some way connected with the decline in the role of men as a stabilizing factor within it. The leading position continues to be occupied by a woman with her high level of emotionality, which often leads to a thoughtless break in marriage on her initiative. Mass culture, which cultivates sexuality without love, has also played a negative role in this: in particular, advertising, beauty contests and other similar entertainment events that direct a man to evaluate a woman in terms of sexual attractiveness, rather than love and motherhood. Various kinds of sexual services have appeared, ranging from special salons to computer sex for intellectuals, which is incompatible with family life. In addition, the media (print, radio, television) obsessively promote the ideas of hypersexuality, leading to frequent changes of sexual partners. Naturally, the implementation of such ideas does not contribute to the strengthening of marriage and leads to a devaluation of spiritual and moral values and feelings of love.
In Russian society there has been a sharp decline in the role of traditionally significant family ties within the family and, first of all, between parents and children. Parents raised under the Soviet regime found themselves unadapted to dramatically changed social relations and became confused in the face of a reality that was unusual and incomprehensible to them. Therefore, children stopped perceiving them as carriers of wisdom, certain life experiences that could be borrowed. In turn, children who have not received a good upbringing do not know how to raise their children. Intentionally or unwittingly, difficult life situations make the family another “annoying factor”, so husband and wife, as well as other members family group, being in a chronic state of stress for several years, strive to find peace at least for some time. AND possible option The solution in this case is either the destruction of the family or the refusal to create one.
Thus, modern Russian society and social work are faced with an urgent task - helping a family in crisis, which is in a rather difficult socio-economic situation, which is aggravated by the increasingly widespread decline in the values of the familial lifestyle.
Tasks for independent work
1. Offer your definition of the concepts of “family” and “marriage”.
2. Draw family tree your family.
3. Tell us about the family as a social institution, using five groups of general characteristics of social institutions:
– attitudes and patterns of behavior;
– cultural symbols;
– utilitarian cultural traits;
– oral and written codes of conduct;
– ideology.
4. Make a table “Typical norms of a traditional and modern family”
|
The sphere of family life and non-family activities of spouses |
Typical norms traditional family |
Typical norms modern family |
5. Using the diagram below, describe the family life cycle. What typical problems does a family encounter at each stage?
|
Stages of the family cycle |
|||
|
Stage of childlessness, pre-parenthood |
reproductive parenthood |
socialized parenthood |
ancestry |
|
Family Events |
|||
|
Marriage |
Birth of first child |
Birth of the last child |
Separation from parents birth of the first |
6. Take notes on the work: Sorokina P.A. The crisis of the modern family // Bulletin of Moscow University. Ser. 18. Sociology and political science. – 997. – No. 3. Do you agree with the opinion of the sociologist? Give reasons for your answer.
Write an essay on the topic: “Values of family and marriage in modern society.”
Using the table below, describe the characteristics of alternative lifestyles in modern society.
|
Traditional marriage and family relations |
Alternative forms of marriage and family relations |
|
Legal (legally formalized) |
Loneliness Unregistered cohabitation |
|
Mandatory presence of children |
Deliberately childless marriage |
|
Stable |
Divorces, remarriage |
|
Sexual fidelity of partners |
Swinging |
|
Heterosexuality |
Homosexuality |
|
Dyadicity |
Group marriage |
9. Describe the family as a small social group.
10. Tell us about role conflicts in the family.
