Of particular importance is the typology of families, which contains information about The structure of power in the family, about the predominant family functions of men and women, about the specifics of intra-family leadership. In accordance with these criteria, the following types of families are distinguished: Traditional patriarchal, traditional matriarchal, neo-patriarchal, neo-matriarchal And Egalitarian. The first four types of families can be called asymmetric, the last type - symmetrical.
AT Traditional patriarchal In a family, the husband is its indisputable head, the dependence of the wife on the husband, and the children on the parents, is pronounced.
The role of “owner”, “provider”, “breadwinner” is assigned to a man. Male authority is recognized without question or accepted under pressure. The dominance of paternal authority is unlimited. The authority of other family members depends on their gender and age: the elderly are most revered, men have more rights than women. Clan interests prevail over individual ones. Therefore, such a family is called Authoritarian-patriarchal.
A man makes a fundamental contribution to the material support of the family, manages its financial and economic resources, determines its status and social circle, and makes responsible decisions on the most important problems. He sorts out intra-family disputes and represents the family outside. Male sexuality is given an active role, this attitude is concentrated in the concept of "potency". The spouse is released from household duties. The wife is either a housewife or earns very little. The organization of normal life and consumption falls on her shoulders, and she is required to exemplary housekeeping, to create a cozy and comfortable atmosphere in the house. Her responsibilities also include looking after children and raising them.
In its classic version, the patriarchal family is briefly characterized as follows: the husband is the sole head and patron of the family, women's obedience is the wife's natural duty. Marriage was perceived as a state established by God, in which a man and a woman live together, in mutual understanding, giving birth to offspring and thereby avoiding fornication. Thanks to the consecration by the church, marriage in the eyes of society acquired the features of constancy and longevity. The vitality of marriage was determined by pragmatic goals: it allowed to strengthen the material position of the husband's family.
Famous patriarchal image- a virtuous wife. The social activity of a woman was limited to household chores and daily care for the spiritual and physical needs of children. Children should be brought up in obedience and piety. best qualities women were the recognition of a dependent position and the service of marriage to their husband. It is appropriate here to recall the native Russian words "get married", "married". The meaning of female sexuality was seen in childbearing. The spouse is a representative of the fair sex, possessing natural physical and intellectual strength.
This cultural stereotype was supported by religious and legitimate formulas of male domination, which localized the social space of a woman.
The hallmarks of a patriarchal family are Patrilocality And Patrilineality. Patrilocality It consists in the fact that a woman follows her husband, that is, she settles in his father's house. Sons, married and unmarried, live in the parental home; daughters leave him only when they get married. This shows respect for the paternal family. In modern Russian families, the question of the place of residence of the newlyweds is decided much more freely. Patrilineality Means calculus of kinship through the male line. Consequently, wealth is passed on to the heirs of the male line, and the father has the right to decide whether to reward his sons or not. The fathers of families are still interested in the birth of boys, "the successors of the family", at least as the first child. This position of young Russian men is subject to the unconscious "pressure" of centuries-old traditions.
In science, there are conflicting views on the problem of the relationship between the patriarchal family, society and the state. Outstanding Psychoanalyst Wilhelm Reich In the work “Psychology of the masses and fascism”, he unequivocally expressed his point of view: “... an authoritarian society reproduces itself in the individual structures of the masses with the help of an authoritarian family ... In the person of the father, the authoritarian state has its representative in every family, and therefore the family turns into essential tool his authority." For sons, a deep identification with the father is the basis of emotional identification with any form of authority. In an authoritarian family, there is not only competition between adults and children, but also competition among children in their relationship with their parents, which can have more serious consequences.
According to another point of view, the patriarchal family protected the rights of the individual from encroachment on them by the state. Primary in it were the relations of spontaneous cooperation in the process of family production, thanks to which individual egoism was overcome. views Elton Mayo, One of the creators of the famous theory of human relations, can be attributed to the so-called neopaternalism.
The idea of paternalism suggests that relationships in an enterprise, in a firm should be built on the basis of patriarchal, family ties, when the leader performs the function of a "father".
Up to the middle of the 20th century. traditional values retained their influence both in Europe and in Asia. But the process of transforming the family into a “moderately patriarchal” was steadily gaining momentum. In the 1950s, in post-war Europe, there was a weakening of the dominant positions of fathers in almost all social strata.
Acceptance/rejection of the patriarchal model by contemporaries It is largely determined by the decrease in the social and economic dependence of the wife on her husband. At the same time, working women perform the vast majority of chores in the household and provide psychological relief to the husband and children. German historian R. Zider He writes that the wife's attitude towards her husband is still of a service nature: “As before, the satisfaction of the objective and subjective needs of the“ main earner ”has absolute priority over the needs of the wife and children. Patriarchy has not yet been overcome. In any case, however, the patriarchal basic relations of family members, which are essentially socio-economic and determined by cultural tradition, are overlapped by increasingly partner forms of address.
AT Traditional matriarchal The personal headship of the family belongs to the woman. Matriarchy, like patriarchy, did not exist among all peoples. But many nations have maternal lineage, For the reliability of the mother is objective. At all times, the mother has played an exceptional role in maintaining family ties. Woman's capacity for reconciliation interpersonal relationships and the use of indirect methods of influencing others helps to win the struggle for power. In separate families, with the formal leadership of a man AT In fact, the dominant position is occupied by a woman.
If we are talking about Russian family Then the feminine, maternal principle is more pronounced in it. I. S. Kon Reminds that Russian wives and mothers in the pre-revolutionary era were often strong, dominant, self-confident individuals. This is reflected in Russian classical literature: "He will stop a galloping horse, he will enter a burning hut."
Under Soviet rule, the “strong woman syndrome” was preserved and even intensified. Women bear the main responsibility for the family budget and the primary issues of domestic life. Typical for Soviet times is the image of a peasant with a ruble or a three-ruble note in his pocket, daily given out by a compassionate, but powerful wife. This is not the fault, but the misfortune of a woman whose husband brought home a salary, the size of which could have little effect. The wife had to contrive and “stretch” this amount until the next salary. She had to take the reins of government into her own hands. Such was the price of the stability of the existence of the socialist family.
The claims of a Russian woman to headship in the family can be understood on the basis of a general trend in the history of Soviet society - the trend of demasculinization of men. The most authoritative specialist in the field of gender psychology and sociology, I. S. Kon He says that neither in professional activity, nor in social and political life, the average Soviet man could show traditionally masculine traits. The stereotypical image of a man includes such qualities as vigor, initiative, courage, independence, self-government. Social and sexual lack of freedom was aggravated by the feminization of all institutions and was personified in dominant female images: mothers, teachers, etc. Under such conditions, the strategy of transferring family responsibility to the wife was psychologically justified. From the deformation of the male character, the woman is unlikely to have gained anything. Where the husband rebelled against the power of the wife, she either endured rudeness and humiliation, or sacrificed her abilities and professional achievements. In a family where the husband accepted his subordinate position, the wife was deprived of the necessary support.
More harsh in their judgments V. N. Druzhinin:"... the dominant role of the Russian woman was imposed by the Soviet government and communist ideology, depriving the father of the main father's functions." Relations in the family in a totalitarian society become psychobiological, not socio-psychological. A man is deprived of social and economic opportunities to provide for his family and raise children, his role as the main agent of socialization is reduced to nothing. The totalitarian state assumes the entire burden of responsibility and replaces the father.
At the same time, the importance of the natural psychobiological connection between the child and the mother is increasing. Breaking this connection leads the family to disaster. Then the state and society are again forced to turn to the problems of motherhood. A “vicious circle of imaginary causes and real consequences” arises: “... in a modern Russian family, a woman wants (and is forced by the force of circumstances) to rule undividedly and completely. A man is not able to provide for his family, be responsible for it and, accordingly, be a role model.” Way out of the current situation V. N. Druzhinin He sees in the creation of social conditions for the manifestation of male activity outside the family.
The division of family power is also realized in modern married couples. In order to prevent destructive conflicts, it is necessary that such a separation suits both spouses and contributes to the fulfillment of the family's functions. The traditional model of the family may be quite acceptable if the spouses' positions regarding the power structure are consistent. With regard to the family, the famous question of power is Question about family leadership Or, more precisely, Supremacy. The head of the family combines both the leader and the manager.
AT Neopatriarchal family The strategic and business (instrumental) leader is the husband, BUT Tactical and emotional (expressive) leader- Wife. The spouse determines the long-term direction of the development of the family, sets the priority goals for its existence, chooses ways and means to achieve these goals, formulates appropriate instructions and instructions for family members. He knows the present state of affairs well and foresees possible consequences decisions made. It is the spouse who performs the role of the authorized representative of the family in society; the position of the family in the world around him depends on his actions. Extra-family activity of the husband (father) - professional, social, political, etc. - is encouraged by the household. The man himself has high claims in this area, is distinguished by a business orientation, pragmatism, takes care of the material well-being and social status of his loved ones. The worldview and life strategy of a man serve as a guide for all family members. He sets the style of family life and ensures its implementation. The younger generation sees in the father an example of strong-willed qualities and organizational abilities.
The father is impressed by the desire of children to express their opinions, a realistic assessment of people and events, and the successful mastering of independent activity skills. The wife finds life support in her husband, and his labor achievements become a source of pride for the whole family.
If a The spouse is responsible for long-term family planning, the spouse develops short-term plans, Which are easily and quickly correlated with the specific actions of adults and children. The prerogative of a woman is to build everyday contacts between family members. It develops relationships of mutual assistance and cooperation. Being interested in increasing the cohesion of family members, she organizes joint events, the range of which can be extremely wide, from general cleaning and Sunday dinners to anniversary celebrations. Admire her competence in the intricacies of domestic life. She is also in charge of family entertainment. She is endowed with sensitivity to the needs and emotions of all family members. The wife corrects the psychological climate in the family, creates an atmosphere of emotional and moral support, develops her own leadership style and “support style”. The wife (mother) ensures the functioning of the family as an environment for emotional release. In a neopatriarchal family, the father acts as an expert for children in business and production issues, and the mother - in intimate personal relationships.
AT Neo-matriarchal The family is the opposite. A common feature of the considered variants of families - Joint leadership of husband and wife while dividing their spheres of influence. Conflict in a marital dyad may arise as a result of an indistinct distribution of spheres of influence or claims of one of the spouses to a different role.
egalitarian family assumes Full and genuine equality of husband and wife in all matters of family life without exception. In the current constitution Russian Federation and the Family Code of the Russian Federation, the principle of equality between men and women is declared, which is the legal basis for the development of an egalitarian family.
Husband and wife contribute (proportionately) to the material well-being of the family union, jointly manage the household, jointly make all major decisions, and equally take care of the children and their upbringing.
The role and importance of each of the spouses in the formation psychological climate families are equal, the status of the family is established by the spouse having a higher position. The circle of communication is formed by both spouses. This marriage is called Biarchal, Or Cooperative-symmetrical marriage. Being spouses means "running in the same harness." Apparently, it's more convenient to do it this way?!
In an egalitarian family, the principle of consistency in the positions of spouses takes on special significance. It is necessary to come to an agreement on a very flexible division of spheres of influence, on high degree interchangeability. Everyone should be ready to become a leader, business executive or educator. Disagreements should be resolved through mutual agreements, compromises or mutually beneficial exchanges.
Children are full members of the family, as far as possible participate in the discussion and implementation of decisions. In their upbringing, humane methods are used, based on trust in the personality of the child, recognition of his rights. The initiative and independence of the child is encouraged, his needs for autonomy, development of individuality, and creativity are respected. Children who come from such families may tend to use a similar relationship model in their marriage.
The ideal model of an egalitarian family is presented in the concept of open marriage, according to which it is believed that in marriage each of the spouses can remain himself, reveal his abilities, and preserve his individuality. Spouses should not be "one body and one soul." Marriage is built on mutual attraction and trust, spouses do not seek to manipulate each other's behavior, subjugate their partner.
Principles of open marriage:
· One must live in the present, proceeding from realistic desires.
· Respect your partner's privacy.
· Communication should be open and based on the consideration: "say what you see and feel, but do not criticize."
· Family roles should be mobile.
· Partnership should be open: everyone's right to their own interests and hobbies should be respected.
· Equality is affirmed as a fair division of responsibility and benefits.
· You should give the other the opportunity to live according to his ideas; know your worth and maintain your dignity.
· Trust each other and respect extra-family interests.
The creation of an egalitarian union is a complex undertaking, since it requires, firstly, a careful and scrupulous description of the rights and obligations of the spouses; secondly, a very high culture of communication, respect for another person, mutual information and trust in relationships.
Some scientists speak of an egalitarian family as a conflict one: power functions are distributed, but their distribution is a constant ground for conflict. The egalitarian model in Russia is given the role of a transitional one. Its appearance is due to the growth of the economic independence of the family from the totalitarian state, the growth of the economic, social and political role of men. It is considered preferable for our country to have such a family in which, along with equality of rights, the father will take responsibility for the upbringing and maintenance of children, while maintaining other family responsibilities for the mother and children.
In Russia, younger and better educated men are more egalitarian and take on more domestic and parental responsibilities than was previously the case.
- the primary cell of society, the first circle of people's communication: here a person first enters into social relations - family relations between parents and children.
Family - a circle of stable relationships based on marriage between husband and wife and on blood relationship between parents and children, brothers and sisters. Family members are bound by common property and life (joint living and housekeeping), moral responsibility and mutual assistance. Family relations are thus both natural (biological) and social (social). Human biology is unchanged, but social relations change, and with them the forms of the family change.
In prehistoric times, the family united only blood relatives: brothers, sisters, and their children. What about husbands? They were not part of a consanguineous family. Two friendly clans (families) entered into a "marriage union": men of the same clan entered into marital relations with other women. Such relationships were fragile, so males in the female gender were accepted as guests, the children remained in the maternal family. Over time, the marital relations of individual couples became more stable, the first, still very weak element of selectivity appears. However, men are still guests in the family of their marriage partners. They are. males belong to another allied clan. The consanguineous family was headed by a woman, and the corresponding historical period is called matriarchy.
patriarchal family
With the advent of private property and the accumulation of wealth, the question of inheritance arose. It was important for a man to eliminate all doubts about the origin of his heirs. A patriarchal family arises, where the power of the head of the family extends to the wife (or several wives), children, domestic slaves and slaves. The patriarchal family existed not only, say, in slave-owning Rome, but also in the Russian pre-revolutionary village. Here, of course, there were no slaves, but there were sons, their wives, their children, unmarried daughters, elderly infirm parents. The patriarchal family performed a productive function as the basic unit of agricultural production.
In the Middle Ages, a monogamous (single-married) family was formed, with a stable relationship between husband and wife. In such a family, the power of a man becomes less rigid, a woman receives a more honorable and free position. With the development of industry and cities, the family loses its production functions, it is now busy raising children, organizing everyday life and consumption.
Nuclear family
The family's loss of the productive function has accelerated the process of narrowing the family, its fragmentation, getting rid of "superfluous" relatives, who, however, are themselves happy to live as their own family. Today, most families consist of a husband, wife and their children, most often minors. Such a family is called nuclear (from the Latin nucleus - the core). deep changes inside family relations in industrial and post-industrial countries occurred during the 20th century due to the greatly changed position and role of women in society. The national economy needed women's labor, and the woman received her own source of livelihood, independent of her husband. Her economic dependence on her husband either weakens or is abolished altogether. The woman was given the freedom to control her own destiny. Now she is kept in marriage by common children, spiritual and sexual intimacy with her husband, his cordial respect for her, his willingness to take some of the household chores off her shoulders.
In the second half of the 20th century, a number of ethical family values were radically broken, and the ethics of family relations were changing. Firstly, the value and even the immutability of an officially registered marriage is falling; many families arise where the husband and wife do not register the marriage, believing that in this way they preserve their freedom. Such families can be both fleeting and very durable. Secondly, the moral principle has been archived, according to which the wife is given to her husband, and the husband to his wife for life. Even the church is forced to abandon this principle. Today Anna Karenina would calmly leave her husband for Vronsky, and no one would condemn her. Thirdly, attitudes towards extramarital sexual relations they are no longer forbidden. At the same time, society looks at women with illegitimate children, and at such children themselves, in a new way. Single mothers are not condemned, and their children are not infringed in any way in their social position. Do such dramatic changes undermine or strengthen the strength of the family? They undermine and strengthen. They undermine families based not on the free choice of spouses, but on some kind of dependence of one spouse on another. It is difficult for such families to survive in the new conditions. On the contrary, families that have arisen by the free choice of spouses do not experience any pressure to break from external circumstances.
Mass breakup of families now is a worldwide phenomenon. In some countries, the number of divorces is equal to the number of marriages. What are the reasons for this phenomenon? In addition to the reasons already mentioned, I will name the following.
Firstly, in modern conditions, a young person enters an independent life earlier than his parents once did. In Western European countries, children, barely reaching the age of 17-18, leave their parents' home and live an independent life. They enter into early marriages, which most often break up after a short time.
Secondly, all kinds of social vices are widespread, in particular drunkenness and drug addiction. Many who suffer from such vices make family life unbearable. Because of the drunkenness of a husband or wife, for example, many families break up.
Thirdly, the main interests of many spouses lie not in the family, but outside of it: in the service, in business, in social activities. The family, the house becomes only a “bedroom”, which alienates the spouses from each other.
The crisis in family relations is especially evident in demographic terms: Russia is dying out, that is, the number of dead people exceeds the number of births. We have an average of one and a half children per family, and to maintain the balance of the population, 2.3 are needed. The consequences can be catastrophic: a country with a small population will not be able to hold vast territories; soon there may be a deficit of the able-bodied population; there will be no one to feed the children and the elderly.
Society and the state are interested in strengthening the family, since the well-being and prosperity of society largely depends on it. The task of protecting and strengthening the family is solved by family law.
The most archaic type is patriarchal: leading relation- consanguinity, a clear dependence of a wife on her husband, and children on their parents. The primacy of the husband is carried out due to the concentration of economic resources in his hands and the adoption of major decisions, in connection with which there is a rigid consolidation of roles.
Recall that in two classic works - by L. Morgan and F. Engels (see works 1 and 2, ch. I) - the patriarchal family is singled out as a transitional institution from the pair to the monogamous model. Its heyday is attributed to the turn of barbarism and civilization. Both researchers considered the ancient Roman family as a model, in which the dominance of paternal power over a certain number of free and not free people, united by the goal of cultivating the land and protecting domestic herds, was consolidated. The form of marriage
polygamy or monogamy - did not have any significant significance.
A fundamentally similar meaning to the concept of "patriarchal family" was given by F. Le Play (see work 3, ch. I). The sociologist observed such relations among the Bashkirs, Russians living in the Urals, and the southern Slavs, however, already in the 19th century. Although among these peoples the family consisted exclusively of relatives and in-laws, however, the household remained, as in the past, indivisible, and the power of the father was unlimited.
As regards, in particular, the South Slavs, their traditional principles were preserved until the middle of the 20th century. Let's present them in general terms.
The most common type of family among these peoples was a complex multi-lineage zadruga. While maintaining the main features that characterize the zadruga (collective ownership of land and property, collective consumption), this family form also had local differences. So, for example, in Macedonia, the elderly enjoyed great authority, regardless of gender; while in Dalmatia the power of the father, the head of the zadruga, is noted.
The family of Yugoslav peoples is patrilocal. Sons, married and unmarried, in the vast majority of cases remained in the parental home, and daughters lived in it until they got married, after which they moved to the husband's community. In extraordinary cases, this order was violated. For example, a widowed daughter with her children could return to the parental home, or an outsider could become a member of a friend after working for a long time.
employed in it, and then married one of the daughters.
The number of family clans was not regulated. In the first half of the XIX century. often there were families numbering fifty or more people; along with them there were also small associations. Numerous communities were more common among the Christian than among the Muslim population.
Collective ownership of all movable and immovable property of a friend was an indispensable condition for its existence. This property, or at least the bulk of it, was not subject to sale. The actual owners were males, since the girls, getting married, in principle, were deprived of the right to inherit. The tradition of inheritance was not the same in all Yugoslav regions: in some, exclusively males acted as heirs, in others, formally both sexes, but in practice women renounced their share in favor of men - this was dictated by customary law.
The head of the zadruga, as a rule, was the oldest male grandfather, father or first son, only occasionally, however, the tradition of seniority was not respected and the most energetic and authoritative person became the head. The range of his duties was very diverse. He represented his friend before the outside world, participated in solving community affairs, paid taxes and debts, and was responsible to society for the moral deeds of all family members. He decided, and sometimes participated in the direct execution of economic affairs, controlled
shaft and directed them, concentrated in his hands the family cash desk. He also led religious worship, holding family and calendar holidays, participated in weddings, christenings, funerals.
A strict hierarchy reigned in this community. The word of the head of the friend was the law for each of its members; any orders were carried out implicitly. The authority of other family members was directly dependent on their gender and age. In the patriarchal family, the most respected were the elderly, whose opinion everyone considered. The custom of getting up at the entrance to the house of an older one, not smoking in the presence of a father, and showing other signs of attention to elders, for example, kissing their hand (in areas of eastern influence), calling them "you" (in areas with western influence), has become entrenched everywhere. It is worth emphasizing that the honor was predominantly expressed to men, they had more rights than women, and were on a higher rung of the hierarchical ladder compared to the others. The woman, with rare exceptions, was deprived of her rights and “was in a subordinate position. One of the responses received in Bosnia, during a questionnaire conducted before the First World War, characterizes the attitude towards a woman with exceptional accuracy. This entry read: “A man is five years older than than a woman of fifty." Until the middle of the 20th century, women ate second after the men had finished eating.
pezu. The position of the younger daughters-in-law was especially disenfranchised. Dedo_vl "Mg-that" among women there was a hierarchy, at the head of which were grandmother, mother, and also older daughters-in-law. All of them, regardless of status and age, could not publicly, in the presence of other members of the friend, express their feelings, rejoice or be sad.
Labor activity was also regulated by age and gender. For example, the care of birds, and sometimes pigs, was entrusted to children. The elderly and the sick did the lightest work. The main one, however, was the sexual division of labor. Men usually performed the most difficult work of cultivating the land, caring for livestock, preparing firewood, repairing buildings and tools. It happened that during the period of decline in agricultural work, they were engaged in waste industries or traded in agricultural and livestock products.
Women's work concentrated mainly around serving the members of the friend - this is taking care of food and clothing, cleaning the house and yard. The works were signed between the women of the family and were carried out by the same persons constantly or for some long time. Of course, they also took part in agricultural work - weeding, reaping, harvesting, cultivating gardens. Together with men, women went to summer pastures, where they lived during the entire period of cattle breeding and prepared dairy products. They also held primacy in home crafts - spinning, weaving, knitting and embroidery (4, pp. 84-103).
There is a number of significant evidence that definitely indicates that the patriarchal family is not a purely European phenomenon. At least in Asia, for thousands of years it has been equally widespread throughout the territory of many countries.
Moreover, despite certain nuances, due mainly to the religious-caste system, the base lines traditional family West and East are consonant.
According to the summary of T.F. Sivertseva, in the so-called developing countries (Jordan, Iraq, Iran, Turkey, India, Ceylon, etc.), until recently, the dominant place was occupied by a complex (inseparable) family, which is characterized by the dominance of male power, the prevalence of clan interests over the individual, respect for elders, minimal use of birth control, low divorce rates, distribution, along with monogamy, and polygamy (5, pp. 29, 30). In a word, we have before us a portrait of a classical patriarchal family.
Another source testifies: relatively recently, the basis of the social structure of Japanese society was large clan houses - "ie". A distinctive feature of "ie" as a form of family organization was the following - the eldest sons, as successors of the family, remained after marriage in the parents' house. The head of the house enjoyed unquestioned authority and power. In accordance with tradition, he disposed of all property. The fate of all members depended on his will.
families, for example, the marriage of children and grandchildren. The supremacy of men over women was secured not only by customs, but also by law. In "ie" individual individuals sacrificed their personal needs in favor of common interests.
Since the second half of the current century, there has been a gradual decline in the proportion of such "houses". This trend is indirectly confirmed by the steady decrease in the average family size and the rapid growth in the total number of families. If in 1955 the average size of a Japanese family was about 5 people, then 20 years later - about 3.5 people; from 1970 to 1975 the total number of families increased by 15.9% (6, pp. 6-8). Despite the significant weakening of the force of customs over the past decades, nevertheless they make themselves felt at the end of the century. The spiritual and social traditions of the clan family often manifest themselves in such everyday situations as weddings and funerals, inheritance, and contacts with neighbors.
30 An excerpt from a letter from the Nobel Prize winner Kenzaburo Oe can serve as a brilliant illustration of the thought expressed. “Recently, I went for a walk along the central streets of Tokyo,” he narrates, “... and noticed on a telegraph pole a leaflet of some patriotic union faded from the rain. Its authors, referring to the immutable commandments of the hierarchical system with its vertical rod, “the ruler - subject," they accused me of refusing to accept the Order of Merit in the field of culture last year. Reading the sentence passed on me, I ... felt with all my guts how the sting of ethics, which filled me with trembling in childhood, was absorbed into the fabric of our entire present being" (7, p. 231).
A few sketches, I believe, will make it possible to identify the coinciding principles of a complex (patriarchal) family both within the Asian and in comparison with the European continent.
Young people in most developing countries could not (and partially still cannot) meet without parental permission. Marriage is most often concluded as a transaction, the basis for which is property and social equality.
Arranged marriages predominated in pre-war Japan. The main actors in the preparation for such marriages were not so much the bride and groom as their parents, as well as matchmakers and matchmakers. After the wedding, the wives for the most part moved to the husband's parental home and became dependent members of his family clan, headed either by the husband's grandfather or father. The marriage of children was considered by the parents of both the groom and the bride as an important common cause, connected primarily with economic and material calculations. I will say more, and in the post-war period for a number of years, after the introduction of new laws, the old practice of arranged marriages continued to prevail not only in villages and provincial areas, but also among the petty-bourgeois population of Tokyo and other major cities countries.
AT difficult families Arab East, Pakistan and India, the care and upbringing of children is traditionally carried out not only by parents, but also by relatives and close neighbors. Children are supported by the community and are required to participate in
lecture economic activity. This activity, by the way, is never perceived on their part as coercion.
We find the same order among the Japanese. Their desire to preserve their lineage primarily explains high level birth rate, which was observed in the country both in the pre-war and in the first post-war years. Typical for that period were families with a large number of children, who, along with their parents, were raised by grandparents, older brothers, sisters and other close relatives who lived together in a common "house" ("ie") 31 .
The Japanese, guided by the Confucian precepts, showed maximum care and respect to their elderly parents and grandparents, showed them all sorts of honors. The care and maintenance of the oldest members, even to the detriment of their own needs, was considered by them as an imperative moral duty, as a matter of honor for the whole family. In the performance of this duty they saw a natural expression of their gratitude to their parents. The traditional reverence by the Japanese for the oldest members of the family is still reminded today of various anniversary celebrations organized by children in honor of their elderly parents. In the past, the first anniversary of the old man was celebrated at the age of 40. The next holiday, often arranged by sons,
31 Even in the early 1990s, there were 35.2% of three-generation families in Japan, compared to 19.3% in South Korea and 6.1% in the USA (8, p. 19).
mi and daughters parents is "honke gaeri" - the day when it turns 61 years old. From this moment, according to an old belief, the return of the elderly begins in the period of the second childhood. Sometimes such dates in the life of elderly parents as seventy years (koki no iwai) and seventy seven years (ki no iwashi) are celebrated. Holidays are one thing, routine life is another. Right, and here we can talk about the great cohesion of generations. Thus, public opinion polls show that the majority (70%) of young Japanese and the same number of older people are in favor of cohabitation.
And in other parts of Asia, for example, in India, the elderly are provided with more substantial assistance in inseparable families relative to nuclear families. Surveys conducted in rural areas of this country showed that the proportion of sons who help their fathers as much as possible is 67% in "complex" families and only 9% in "simple" families.
And another cardinal characteristic of the patriarchal family is the relationship between husband and wife.
In pre-war Japan, the omnipotence of the husband and the subordinate position of the wife in the family were established by customs, morality, and laws. Husbands were assigned undivided ownership of property, the will of the spouse determined the position of wives in families, and labor activity and their leisure. We can safely say that in the second half of the XX century. the relationship of the spouses is imbued with the spirit of the primacy of the husband and the subordination of the wife, despite the adopted laws that equalize the rights of the spouses. In the special work "Japanese family", published by
Noah in 1980, the Office of Economic Planning, made a note characteristic of a traditional society: “As for the role of spouses in the family, the general opinion is that the husband’s business is to earn money for a living, and the wife’s role is to teach children, educate them, take care of their parents, run family budget affairs, etc." (6, p. 46) 32 .
An important indicator of the Japanese family lifestyle is the separate pastime of the spouses during leisure hours. Thus, a survey conducted by the Ministry of Labor in 1965 revealed that only 12.3% of married couples "often" rest and have fun together, "sometimes" - 41.1% and "almost never" - 3.7% (6. p. 57). According to a number of local sociologists, the reason for the disunity in the rest of the majority of spouses lies in national traditions, according to which, for a long time in the country, husbands and wives spent their time apart, based on the premise that the interests and entertainments of men are the same, and women are different.
Despite the significant contribution of women in a number of developing countries of the East to the national economy, their status. determined mainly by the economic position of the father, husband or son. In other words, not professional activity, but a system
32 According to the mentioned comparative study, for example, the responsibility for spending everyday funds falls on the wife: in Japan - 82.7%, in South Korea - 79.3%, while in the USA - 40.9%, the opposite distribution of responsibility for men (respectively) - 3.6, 6.7 and 31.3% (8, p. 87).
kinship is the leading indicator of "sociality" of women. The activity of a woman was (and in many cases still is) primarily focused on family circle duties: the birth and upbringing of children, housekeeping, care for the elderly.
The number of children (especially in Islamic countries) also affects the prestige of a wife: the more children, the higher her price. Professional activity in mainland Asia not only does not increase, but in a number of countries even reduces the social status of women, since it means that the father or husband is not able to provide it. The fact that out of two girls - working and being brought up at home - preference in the "marriage market" is still given to the second, in principle, testifies to the same thing. Moreover, in Muslim regions, say, in Pakistan, limiting women's work to the domestic framework is a matter of family prestige.
I am sure that even a cursory analysis in the paragraph is enough to state the following: despite the pronounced ethno-psychological specificity of peoples, and sometimes their conscious isolation from the outside world, the classical patriarchal family was widespread for many centuries. A convincing demonstration of the above consideration can be the parallel existence of the Yugoslav "zadruga" and the Japanese "ie" house, which did not directly influence each other, but nevertheless are consonant in their main characteristics.
§ 2. Variety of models
traditional family in the territory
former Soviet Union
The Soviet Union - and this is known to many - was a historically formed multinational conglomerate. It goes without saying that each nationality and ethnic group has specific customs, traditions, beliefs and a mechanism of social regulation. It is not at all necessary to be a specialist in order to understand the fundamental difference, for example, between a Russian family and a Turkmen one, a Ukrainian one from a Tajik one, an Estonian one from a Georgian one. You can extend this series further. At the same time, it is difficult to imagine such social and cultural conditions under which the family of a Lithuanian would become a literal copy of a Russian one, an Azerbaijani - a Belarusian one, etc. The noted differences, it is easy to understand, are far from formal. On the other hand, the family of the indigenous population of the Central Asian and Transcaucasian regions, according to some basic indicators (birth rate, divorce rate, dependent status of women, etc.), to a large extent resembles the state of the Russian family at the beginning of the 20th century. From here, I believe, there is an opportunity within the once unified country, albeit in hindsight, to highlight a vast set of traditional family models determined by ethnic diversity. Ras-
I cut this idea, resorting to the data of statistics and surveys.
To begin, let's turn to the indicators of cohabiting generations and the level of children. The share of married couples living with one or both spouses' parents ranges from 20% in Russia to 32% in Tajikistan. During the years between the 1970 and 1979 population censuses, the proportion of married couples living with their parents increased in the Central Asian and Transcaucasian regions, mainly due to its growth in rural areas, while in the other republics it decreased. As for childhood, here the picture is as follows. Of the total number of families (according to the 1979 census) have children (under 18), say, in Latvia, 34% - one, 18.7% - two and 4.4% - three or more, 42.9% no kids. A significantly different distribution characterizes, for example, the family of Tajikistan. The corresponding figures look like this: 18.1; 17.0; 49.6; 15.3%. Thus, the differences in the size and forms of (two- and multi-generational) families are undeniable: the indigenous population of Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan and Azerbaijan is characterized, firstly, by the preservation of the traditions of inseparable families, in which married sons more often live with their parents, in secondly, a greater number of children per married couple (9, pp. 51-59, 87-114).
Emphasizing the ethnic specificity of the family, of course, does not mean denying the general direction of its historical development. One thing is clear: the recognition of the progressive nature of the evolution of civilization as a whole entails the recognition of the same pattern for individual socio-
al institutions. A concrete analysis of the transformation - say, of the Uzbek and Russian families - indicates the identity of a number of empirical patterns.
Let me clarify this idea. Some specialists, who do not take into account the peculiarity and historical sequence of the stages of monogamy, pair its strength once and for all with the effect of having many children. Demographer O. Ata-Mirzaev, in a survey of 1363 families in five regions of Uzbekistan, found that 92.5% of women with many children were married, and in the first and, with rare exceptions, in the second. Widows made up 6.6% and divorcees only 0.9%. From here he comes to the conclusion: for the Central Asian peoples, a small number of divorces is directly related to having many children (10, p. 33). It is difficult to say what is more in this judgment: naivety or uncritical national "pride". How can one explain the large number of children and the relatively small number of divorces in an Uzbek family? It is no secret to anyone that the tenets of the Muslim religion have a profound effect on indigenous people, especially those living in rural areas. Islamic customary law, as you know, sanctioned the despotism of the husband: God created, written in the Koran, wives for you from yourselves, and her very appearance is caused by the need of men (11, p. 191). The main business of women, according to the same source, is to give birth to children, educate them and run a household. According to another Uzbek
33 How not to remember the stereotypical phrase: "East is East", and add: "what is the Middle, what is the Middle."
th researcher - N. M. Aliakberova, and today in everyday life there are very strong ideas about the inadmissibility, sinfulness of celibacy, childlessness and birth control (12, p. 24).
The picture changes significantly if we turn to the urban and, especially, to the metropolitan family. In passing, I will note one important circumstance - there are more married women involved in professional activities, the latter in itself is an economic support in opposing patriarchal principles. So, in cities there are fewer inseparable families: if in rural areas every third, then in urbanized settlements - the fourth. Further, the birth rate is lower. According to N. M. Aliakberova, the birth rate in the countryside was 111.6% in 1950 compared to the urban one, in 1970 it was 140.4%, and in 1977 it was 151.3%. The same ratio is evidenced by the answers of women (in Uzbekistan as a whole) to the question about the expected number of children (in%): 0.4 - not to have, 5.6 - to have one, 32.7 - two, 15.0 - three, 46.3 - four or more, and in Tashkent: 0.5 - 11.2 - 46.9 - 19.0 - 22.4% (12). Finally, higher rates of divorce were found. I will dwell first on the dynamics of the average number of divorces per 1000 married couples. In the country as a whole, it is as follows: 1958-1959. -
34 According to feminist theory, patriarchy is "...a social system in which men dominate, repress and oppress women." The concept emphasizes "connection different options exercise of power by men over women," including "reproduction, violence, sexuality, work, culture, and the state" (13, p. 449).
5.3, 1968-1970 - 11.5 and 1978-1979 - 15.2 (9, p. 38), in Uzbekistan for the same years - 1.4 - 5.9 - 8.1. The share of divorces in Uzbekistan, therefore, is clearly lower than in the country as a whole, but at the same time it is impossible not to notice the fact that the growth in the intensity of family breakdown in the republic exceeded its pace in the Union. More - divorces in Tashkent are noticeably higher than the all-Union: 3.7 versus 2.6 per 1,000 population.
The convergence of these family indicators with the all-Union ones, at the same time, does not exclude the existence among the peoples who profess Islam, echoes of the most ancient rituals and customs of the classical period of patriarchy. Here are just two such "survivals". Until now, in use (again, mainly in rural areas), the rite of notification by demonstrating a sheet of the result of the first wedding night. Woe to the bride if the matter is pure. It was such a drama that, for example, the Uzbek Moira Okilova experienced. Her husband, without hesitation, refused her, sending her in disgrace to her parents' house. (I quote from: 14, pp. 139-140).
Another example is the spread of polygamy. Only in the Andijan region in 1975, 58 teachers, 45 students and more than 20 doctors got married in parallel on the basis of Sharia and Soviet legislation. Numerous facts of marriage according to Sharia by representatives of the intelligentsia were established by a scientific student expedition in the villages of Dagestan and Checheno-Ingushetia (11, p. 129). By the way, this phenomenon is confirmed by the judicial statistics of the Supreme Court of the USSR. For Azerbaijan, the figures
in particular, such: in 1961 40 people were convicted, in 1962. -50, 1963 -42, in 1964 -38 and 1965 - 39, respectively in Uzbekistan: 32 - 66 - 39 - 41 -30 and 59 people (11, p. 136).
The depth of inertia of traditional thinking comes out in relief when comparing two Christian peoples living in the same country, but in different geographical regions. Sociologists from Estonia compared the responses of students from Tartu and Tbilisi universities regarding their marital attitudes, in particular, young people were asked: do they think that premarital sexual relations are possible for men and women? The students from Tbilisi answered - only for men, the majority of Estonian students did not see any difference between men and women in this respect. The second question was formulated as follows: if a conflict arose between the spouses, how should it be resolved? From the point of view of Georgian students, the man always has the last word. According to their colleagues from the University of Tartu, the spouses should first discuss the causes of the conflict, and then make an agreed decision. And finally, the attitude of young people about divorce was clarified. Every third of the Tartu students regarded divorce as a completely natural phenomenon. In Tbilisi, only 2% of students expressed this opinion. A third of Georgians answered that they had never thought about divorce, while there were no such cases among Estonians at all (15, pp. 27-30). The orientations of Georgian and Estonian students fully reflect the various se-
main principles: the former emphasize patriarchal privileges, while the latter emphasize the values of modern models. There is no doubt that the traditional family type in the territory of the former Soviet Union (with some exceptions) is a modernized version 3 , however, it is also heterogeneous, the features of individual models look quite convincing. In the best way it (this specificity) comes through in the analysis of the most important parameters of patriarchy - patrilocality, patrilineality and the primacy of the husband.
The first question that, in fact, should have arisen before the newlyweds is where to start life together? In the type of family under consideration, the choice of place of residence is practically a foregone conclusion. The woman got married, and therefore had to follow her husband, that is, to settle in his father's family. The departure of men to live with his wife - which took place in exceptional cases - was regarded by the community (patronymy) unequivocally as an insult to the paternal family. And the word "primak" he branded for life. Can we talk today about the widespread elimination of this custom? Let us turn again to the materials of Central Asian researchers. We read: for Uzbekistan, "the residence of male sons-in-law in the family of their wife's parents is not typical, and the survey revealed only a few such factors" (17, p. 63).
35 "The Tajiks and Pamir peoples retain (partially modernized in accordance with the transformations of society) many traditional features that are rooted in antiquity" (16, p. 221).
A Kyrgyz ethnographer speaks in the same vein: "If in the past a husband never settled in the house of his wife's parents, now this sometimes happens" (18, p. 82). Is it necessary to specifically prove that for a Russian family (especially an urban one) the described custom has been lost in principle.
Another core of the traditional family is patrilineality, that is, the calculation of kinship along the male line. This system involves the transfer of material and family values to the heirs of the male line. The father was the owner of almost all family property, it entirely depended on his will whether to reward his sons or expel him from the house, marry or divorce.
In one relatively recent study, the factor "importance of continuing the surname" was found to be directly related to the number of children born and to preference for boys. Namely: 73.7% of the respondents wanted to have boys and only 21% - girls (19, p. 32).
Judging by my observations, young men, even in Russia up to the present time, prefer - at least as a first child - a boy. It would seem, what for? To transfer material values - so the overwhelming number of fathers, by and large do not have them, spiritual and moral - so they are undoubtedly equally important for both male and female heirs. Apparently, here we are faced with the unconscious "pressure" of centuries-old traditions that occupy a solid niche in the body of culture.
The primacy of the husband in the family, figuratively speaking, closes the circle of the dependent position of the wife. Which, as already noted, is manifested in the concentration of economic resources in his hands. It should not be thought that the elimination of the economic and moral priorities of the head of the family takes place everywhere in the same rhythm. “By tradition, the husband,” notes the Uzbek ethnographer S. M. Mirkhasimov, “is now considered the head of the family, and his word is decisive in many cases. Thus, 43.7% of the respondents answered that the husband decides the most important issues in the family” (20, p. 38). Demographers seem to echo him: "Respect for elders, the dominant position in the husband's family can be considered a characteristic feature of a rural family" (21).
Much in common with Central Asian stereotypes is observed in the families of the indigenous population of Transcaucasia and the North Caucasus. According to Ya. S. Smirnova, in pre-revolutionary times, the authoritarian power of men was preserved in families, consecrated by adat, sharia and, to a certain extent, by the laws of the Russian Empire (22). Field ethnographic observations and special sociological surveys conducted in the same region in the 70s showed that, due to tradition, the husband is still considered the formal head of the family in the vast majority of cases. In the family as a whole, the age-sex division of labor is steadfastly preserved. The ideology of gender equality, which is shared by the majority of spouses of young and middle age, has not yet become a reality for many of them in their way of life (23, pp. 53-57).
In the Volga region, among the Tatars and other peoples, male dominance prevails, as in the past. A woman (not a widow and not a divorcee) is less likely to lead a family than among Russians, Ukrainians, Belarusians and the peoples of the Baltic states. According to the Moscow sociologist M. G. Pankratova, in the Mari family the concept of "head of the family" (as indicated by 4/5 of the respondents in the 70s) is unshakable and the man is still considered to be the head of the family. Traditional etiquette is preserved. The husband's wife and mother try to emphasize the prestige of the man - the head of the family. The wife respectfully speaks of her husband, at least in front of guests and outsiders, and pays special attention to her father-in-law. AT home life more than 90% of families retain the inherited division of work by gender (14, p. 137). In Siberia, among the Buryats, Altaians, Tuvans and Yakuts, with rare exceptions, the eldest man is considered the head of the family. The head of the Tuvan family - "og eezi" - is the owner of the yurt. At the same time, the name of a woman - "kherezhok", i.e. "unclean", emphasized her isolation and humiliation not only in the family, but also in society (24, p. 15).
It must be clearly understood that traditional relations in the last third of the 20th century are inherent in Russia not only to the Volga or Siberian regions. In the cities of Central Russia, these principles, although not in such a pronounced form, are also tenacious. Let's name some of them: matchmaking, the decision on the most important problems of the family's life is taken by a man, the calculus of kinship is patrilineal, the bridegroom changes her surname to
the surname of the husband; when naming the newborn, the register of generic names is used.
The second central axis of the family, by definition, is the parent-child relationship. In the patriarchal family, absolute parental power and an authoritarian education system dominated for many centuries. The slightest violation of these principles led to inevitable sanctions. For example, according to the Code of 1649, a son, equally and a daughter, regardless of age, were punished with a whip if they spoke rudely to their parents, especially when trying to sue them. "... Children in the Middle Ages were often equated with the insane, inferior, marginal elements of society" (25, p. 316), taking care of them was not in the customs of a peasant family. So, the raznochinets writer D. V. Grigorovich noted: "... the most tender father, the most caring mother with inexpressible carelessness submit their offspring to the will of fate, without even thinking about physical development child" (26, p. 87). Reflecting on the rural system of life, the famous Russian ethnographer of the early 20th century R. Ya. Vnukov came to the conclusion that there was no
36 The patriarchal family is not typical for the Western countries of the second half of this century, however, in some specific aspects of behavior, the man still plays a dominant role today. Thus, surveys conducted in England suggest that in families of the lower strata the husband manages to retain control over the money. In the Dutch sample, the respondents indicated that the father alone made decisions about money expenses, and especially about the purchase of expensive things (25, pp. 396-398).
in the worldview of the villager, the concept of responsibility of parents to children, but, on the contrary, the idea of children's responsibility to parents existed in an exaggerated form. Hence the peasants' special reverence for the fifth commandment: "Honor your father and your mother."
Such relations in miniature reflected the hierarchy prevailing in society. According to the French historian F. Aries, “the idea of childhood was associated with the idea of dependence: the words “son”, “jack”, “garcon” also belong to the dictionary of feudal relations, expressing dependence on the seigneur. Childhood did not end until this addiction ended. That is why in the usual spoken language the word "child" was used to refer to a person of low social status... These were lackeys, companions, soldiers, etc.” (28, p. 231).
The dependent position of the young peasant in the Russian countryside even at the beginning of the 20th century. continued until he got married. And in fact, before marriage, the guy, even if he was over 20 years old, was not taken seriously by anyone. He is "small". Already in the title of the position unmarried man the infringement of his rights and social inferiority are hidden. However, it was also impossible to become an adult, that is, married (or married), without the will of the parents 3 .
And today the peoples of the Caucasus and Central Asia are distinguished by a strong commitment to following traditional principles in relations between parents and children. It has been noticed among Azerbaijanis that if a child
37 See work 2, ch. II.
©2015-2019 site
All rights belong to their authors. This site does not claim authorship, but provides free use.
Page creation date: 2016-02-13
Times are changing, social relations are changing with them. In ancient times, a woman was an indisputable authority in the tribe, such a union is called matriarchal. Now especially popular is the egalitarian type of relationship, where both partners are equal.
However, the family way of life is the most widespread throughout the world. patriarchal type. The question arises: a patriarchal family - what is it, what are the signs and features of such interpersonal relationships?
The traditional patriarchal family is a cell of society where a man occupies a dominant position. Translated from Greek, "patriarchy" means "paternal power", this definition describes not only relationships within the family, but also in society.
In this form of social organization, a man is a moral authority and a person with political power.
A woman in a patriarchal type union is a slave, she completely obeys her husband, monitors life, equips the hearth.
A man provides for the household, does not allow his wife to work under any circumstances. Children are brought up very strictly, they are instilled with deep respect for elders from an early age.
Based on this, the definition of a patriarchal family follows - this is a union consisting of a husband, wife, children, within which strong family relations are created between generations. The right of the last word belongs exclusively to the representative of the stronger sex.
signs
The hallmarks of a patriarchal family will help you understand what it is. In fact, a similar way of life existed from antiquity until recently, in some cultures, traces of this influence are still found. What is a patriarchal family - clearly, this is the subordination of a woman to her man, but what are its characteristic features?
- Patrilineality. This characteristic feature lies in the fact that the inheritance of social status, property occurs only from father to son. The father has the right to dispose of the children as he sees fit.
- The responsibility of a man. The head of the family is fully responsible for the well-being of the house, the honor of the family. He is responsible for the woman, children, provides them with everything necessary. While society does not condemn a man's right to "own" a woman, he treats her with great respect. She reciprocates him.
- Monogamy. A Russian family clan of the patriarchal type is necessarily monogamous, that is, the husband has one wife, and the wife, respectively, has one husband. In Muslim society, polygamy is allowed, but it cannot be that one woman has several husbands. Polyandry, or polyandry, is not allowed.
- coexistence of several generations. It is easy to understand what a patriarchal family is if you turn your attention to one of the main signs. The main characteristic is that several generations live under one roof. Sons, when they get married, bring their wives home. All members of such a large clan implicitly obey the older man.
- Large families. The presence of rich offspring is only welcome. A woman, as a rule, gives birth while she has physical strength, does not have the right to terminate a pregnancy. A mother devotes her life to raising children, from a young age they are taught to be responsible for their actions, hardworking.
- Obeying strict rules. What is a patriarchal family is following the canons, rules, which, of course, lead to general well-being and prosperity. Own interests of the household fade into the background, family values, customs, and traditions are paramount.
- Arranged marriages. When choosing a partner, they are guided by his financial condition, benefit for the welfare of the whole family. Marriages for love usually do not occur.
The patriarchal way of life is also characterized by such a characteristic as conservatism. Various moves, changes of residence, workplace are highly undesirable. All changes are made exclusively by the oldest male with the most authority.
Need to know! Patriarchy has both positive and negative features. The advantage of this form of family structure is that, according to statistics, in such marriages there is an extremely small number of divorces.
There are several types of such unions, depending on the degree of control exercised by a man.
Families where complete control is practiced are extremely rare in the modern world, except in Muslim or religious families, but it allows you to best understand what a patriarchal family is and how the parties interact.
Without the participation of a man, nothing happens in it. Total control extends to all spheres of life, only the husband makes decisions on any issue.
The Orthodox Church promotes the veneration of men. A woman is completely subordinate to a man, but she is respected and respected by him. A man protects his companion from adversity, trusts her and is interested in her opinion. This is a harmonious union where respect and love dominate. Children are brought up calmly, they are instilled with respect, trust, care for each other.
There is a partial patriarchy, where the power of a male representative extends only to one of the following areas:
- financial part.
- Parenting.
- Protecting the honor of the wife and all family members.
The patriarchal Russian family has some peculiarities. Unlike the families of Ancient Rome, where the right to own a woman was equated with slavery, that is, the head disposed of the woman as some kind of thing or slave, the Slavs had a different situation - the man did not interfere in women's affairs at all. In Russia, a patriarchal union consisted of several married couples.
They owned common property and were jointly engaged in housekeeping. Bolshak, that is, the most mature and experienced man, led everyone, he was helped by an adviser, but she did not have a high status.
Interesting! In Russia, widows did not enjoy the right of inheritance after the death of their husband.
By the nineteenth century, the Russian family united two or three generations of relatives. However, in the lower classes, such a family consisted of a father, mother and children. Changes in family life took place on the eve of the twentieth century, along with changes in the economy.
In many ways, this was facilitated by crises occurring within the family. In the masterpieces of classical literature of that century, one can trace this tendency of disobedience to the head of the family. Soon the situation changed radically, and by the 1980s, women everywhere took over the function of managing finances. However, the influence of patriarchy is still felt today.
Useful video
Conclusion
The patriarchal type of family structure has become obsolete in many European countries, but there are isolated cases of unquestioning obedience to a man. Psychologists say that only insecure individuals with low self-esteem can exist in it.
Nevertheless, one should not neglect the advantages that this form of relationship guarantees: the absence of abandoned children, destitute old people, respect and reverence for elders, responsibility for one's actions, mutual assistance.
The most common type of family is patriarchal. The name speaks for itself - the man is the head of the clan. In a global sense, he makes important decisions, decides the fate of his children, manages funds, etc.
According to the periodization of the ethnographer M. M. Kovalevsky, the patriarchal family replaced the matriarchy. The headship of a woman in the family took place during the hunting life, about 2 million years ago, but with the transition to agriculture and the formation of communities, the woman lost her rights as the head, the property began to become the property of the family, after which the man received the right to dispose. Kinship began to be celebrated along the male line, the entire community was subordinate to one person - father, husband. At the same time, the concept appeared as the right of inheritance, which has been preserved in some countries to this day.
Ancient Greece, Rome, Egypt existed on the sole right of inheritance: royal families, as you know, passed their throne and crown from father to eldest son. The same principle continued into the Middle Ages. Even if the heir was only a few years old, he was still crowned, and until he came of age, the country was ruled by an assigned guardian. Any woman, despite even the highest position in society, was just a woman - the keeper of the hearth.
Despite the fact that much has changed since then, the patriarchal family is still quite common today. The right to inherit ordinary families sunk into oblivion, society has become much more civilized, but still patriarchy means the primacy of men in the family.
If you do not go into scientific terms, a family with a man at the head is a common thing in the modern world. Despite the democratization of society, the equality of men and women, the spouse is often the only breadwinner in the family, and a woman, according to a globally established stereotype, must give her all free time household chores and childcare.
In a patriarchal family, the wife is secretly subordinate to her husband, and the children, in turn, are subordinate to their parents. The basis of the supremacy of a man is his economic independence - he works, receives a salary, and provides for his family. By virtue of the fact that he is the breadwinner, he makes the main decisions: which circle to enroll the child in, when you can buy a fur coat for your wife, where to go on vacation in the summer. Even if the spouse has a job and brings quite large sums to the family, the husband still manages the finances.
In the patriarchal family there are divisions into types. Suppose that the husband brings the main income, the spouses have common topics for conversation, interests and understanding. Such a family will be quite happy, and both parties will be quite satisfied with life. In the case when a man is interrupted by odd jobs and wants to seem like the main one, but the woman still brings the money, the wife will rebel sooner or later. She wants to be provided by her beloved, but he is not able to fulfill her dreams, demanding submission. Such a marriage is practically doomed to failure, or constant quarrels. Another possible variant the patriarchal type of family is the oligarch and the Cinderella, whose relationship does not go beyond economic gain. This option is suitable for a woman who needs a rich sponsor and, say, a lover.
One way or another, patriarchal families have a place in the modern world. Many women are quite satisfied with the supremacy of the spouse. After all, the fact that a man is the backbone of the family does not at all mean an infringement of the rights of a woman. But there is someone to rely on.
