[Spotykach] womens issue workshop plan

[olhas]

>Dear Spotykachers,
>
>I wanted proposed for you consideration an idea to have a workshop 
>on the topic of gender/feminism or womens issue from different 
>aspects of east-west. This topic normally presented in way as the 
>for example comimg conference http://www.hbs-hessen.de/ver/frauen07-05.htm
>
>
>To look a bit alternatively and deeply were the differences are 
>hidden, I propose go to the sources which not subbordinate all women 
>under the one label (not matter feminists or not) but try show real 
>diferences. As I once already mentioned, from my personal 
>experience, I noticed that perception of  me as Ukrainian woman or 
>just like a woman totally different here on the West compare as I 
>percieve myself, how my co-citizens were dealing/treating me. From 
>the begining I have thought that it is just my migrants aura but 
>later on I realize that difference is somewhere else. On the point 
>of womens issue I can be more that 100 percent sure, ther there is a 
>biggest misinterprattion of the role, history, position which our 
>two different society produced over woman here and there plus it 
>nessesary take in account how women reflect themselve here and 
>there. Without going into details right now, I would just propose to 
>read ne interesting bibliografy of The "Ladomir" Publishing House in 
>Moscow  of Natalia Pushkareva's book The Russian Woman: History and 
>Modern Times. A History of Studying the 'Woman Question' in Russian 
>and foreign science. 1800-2000.
>Opinion of Pushkarjeva is just one o take in account. For is 
>important to go through personal experience which says more than 
>scientists. About this we can speak on workshop. For you attantion 
>below I add interview with Pushkajeva.
>
>regards, Olga
>
>In the interview, Natalia Pushkareva admits that she tried to return 
>"history to women and women to history."
>
>In the past, the image of the Russian woman was formed by various 
>attributes - recklessness, aggressiveness, women's rebellions, 
>striptease, etc. Has the image of the Russian woman changed since 
>then? How does the woman of today differ from that of the "Soviet" 
>woman or women of previous historical epochs?
>
>
>The peculiar feature of Russian feminism is seen precisely in the 
>fact that our feminists never placed themselves in opposition to 
>men's organizations.
>
>If there is anything that the Russian women of today have in common 
>with those of the past, it is traditional social activity. However, 
>this activity is in no way superficial nor was it "borrowed" from 
>the West. This social activity has deep historical roots: it is 
>something that they have endured throughout their entire history. 
>Arbitrarily speaking, "the Russian woman has always been considered 
>chaste." But I think that this is disputable. It would be erroneous 
>to say that this was a national characteristic and that those women 
>who behaved otherwise were not worthy of being considered the 
>national ideal. There was a whole multitude of different models of behavior.
>
>I believe that the Russian woman was influenced by both Orthodox 
>morals and the peculiarities of our legal system. After all, 
>beginning in the 10th century, women in Russia had the right to 
>divorce, something that women did not have in the West. She also had 
>the right to own her own property when she was married. This was 
>also typical of Russia and unusual in the West (where everything was 
>family property).
>
>Then why did feminism not take root in Russia? They struggled and 
>struggled, and then gave up?
>
>Unlike in other countries, the question of women in Russia was 
>usually brought up by men - Granovsky, Pirogov, Sechenov, and the 
>journalist Mikhailov, whose article "The Ideal Woman" was read to 
>tatters. However, the first women's organizations appeared in Russia 
>only at the beginning of the 19th century, whereas the roots of 
>feminism in the West first became visible back in the 16th century.
>
>The Bolsheviks took a very prejudiced attitude towards women's 
>organizations: there could be no women's interests that differed 
>from men's interests! The peculiar feature of Russian feminism is 
>seen precisely in the fact that our feminists never placed 
>themselves in opposition to men's organizations.
>
>Women don't only shape politics when they are speaking from the rostrum...
>
>Personally, I have always been interested in the forms of how women 
>indirectly participate in politics, i.e., how women can influence 
>politics without actually standing at the helm. This is where we run 
>into considerably more intrigues and interesting twists.
>
>On the whole, our society is very conservative. For example, nothing 
>in Russia has been "modernized" in respect to women. On the 
>contrary, what we can speak about here is a renaissance of the 
>patriarchy. That is precisely why our society took such a 
>categorical attitude against Raisa Gorbachev.
>
>
>They invite Zhirinovsky to programs devoted to feminism, and instead 
>of a serious discussion, the program turns into a comedy hour.
>
>In fact, our women themselves did not want to see such successful 
>women emerging in their ranks. For example, Raisa Gorbachev did not 
>even make an attempt to continue her professional activity, as for 
>example, was done by Hillary Clinton. The wife of the former 
>American president managed to achieve a great deal even after her 
>husband left the White House precisely because she remained 
>independent. The contemporary women's movement in the West gives the 
>green light to people like this. Perhaps, we will also have such 
>brilliant personalities soon - and they will be able to speak out in 
>defense of our democratic interests without betraying their gender.
>
>But the more we orient our girls to become cute Barbies for their 
>husbands, the fewer political "stars" and active women politicians 
>we shall have. But so far, our efforts in bringing up our young 
>women follow traditional interests. Unfortunately, the Church is 
>also working in that direction: we do not need active women; a woman 
>should marry and give birth to children. But what should women who 
>don't marry and decide raise children alone do? These women 
>immediately find themselves outside society's framework.
>
>Similarly, women who strive for professional success are condemned. 
>They are seen as the same kind of outsiders as men who are 
>conscientious objectors.
>
>Did you draw upon popular TV soap operas for material for your book?
>
>Of course, but those programs also have their limits. For instance, 
>those soap operas don't really bring up the question concerning the 
>insignificant role of women in contemporary politics. They do not 
>raise the question of why women fail to break through the 5% barrier 
>of votes received in elections.
>
>Television prefers to construct a traditional female image: "whether 
>her husband has left her or not," that is what is discussed. When 
>women get together to say they disagree with the policy that men are 
>pursuing, nothing is shown on a single channel. They invite 
>Zhirinovsky to programs devoted to feminism, and instead of a 
>serious discussion, the program turns into a comedy hour.
>
>
>
>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>Subject: confirm 250d92898847dab287d080de60732050e0b37635
>Sender: spotykach-request at lists.nadir.org
>From: spotykach-request at lists.nadir.org
>
>If you reply to this message, keeping the Subject: header intact,
>Mailman will discard the held message.  Do this if the message is
>spam.  If you reply to this message and include an Approved: header
>with the list password in it, the message will be approved for posting
>to the list.  The Approved: header can also appear in the first line
>of the body of the reply.