BASEES Sampler 2
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
R O U T L E D G E . TAYLOR & FRANCIS Regimes and Societies in Conflict Eastern Europe and Russia since 1956 www.routledge.com/carees Contents 1. The gendered subject of postsocialism From: Gendering Postsocialism, edited by Yulia Gradskova and Ildikó Asztalos Morell 2. The March 1956 events in Georgia From: Georgia after Stalin, edited by Timothy K. Blauvelt and Jeremy Smith, foreword by Ronald Grigor Suny 3. Women’s experiences of repression in Czechoslovakia,1948–1968 From: Women's Experiences of Repression in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, by Kelly Hignett, Melanie Ilic, Dalia Leinarte and Corina Snitar 4. The Romanian Orthodox Church From: Eastern Christianity and Politics in the Twenty-First Century, edited by Lucian N. Leustean 5. A history of dissensus, consensus and illusions of a new era From: Art and Protest in Putin's Russia, by Lena Jonson 6. Introduction: What are truth- revelation procedures and why do they matter? From: Politicising the Communist Past, by Aleks Szczerbiak 7. Against the liberal consensus From: Ideology and Social Protests in Eastern Europe, by Veronika Stoyanova 20% Discount Available Enjoy a 20% discount across our entire range of Central Asian, Russian & East European Studies books. Simply add the discount code FGT07 at the checkout. Please note: This discount code cannot be combined with any other discount or offer and is only valid on print titles purchased directly from www.routledge.com. www.routledge.com/carees Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution. 1 The gendered subject of postsocialism State-socialist legacies, global challenges and (re)building of tradition Ildikó Asztalos Morell and Yulia Gradskova When the Berlin Wall fell in November 1989 and when, two years later, the Soviet Union crumbled and was divided into 15 independent states, the huge space formerly called the Communist Bloc or the countries of state socialism seemed to disappear forever, and an unprecedented process of change began. This process was just as unique from a historical perspective as the earlier attempts to build communism and/or state socialism. The changes had different speeds and directions, and while some states embraced the process of demo- cratisation in order to “return to Europe”, others were experimenting with the ideals of a strong authoritarian state, religion, and a “return to tradition” to build a new society. Now, however, nearly 30 years later, the different countries of this huge geo- graphical space often continue to be addressed according to their common past, or as countries still in a state of transition or transformation from their previous condition – as postsocialist. In some cases the communist past seems to have been totally overcome, and these countries are recognised as European and democratic states with well-functioning market economies (as in the case of many countries that have joined the European Union). However, their position in the formerly socialist space can suddenly be remembered in exceptional circumstances, like during the refugee crisis of 2015 (Dalakoglou, 2016). In other cases, the changes do not seem to be thorough due to the emergence of authoritarian regimes and corruption. Thus, the states that have experienced slower changes are more frequently referred to through their past as “formerly” or “post” socialist. In deference to these temporal interpretations, following Madina Tlostanova, we approach postsocialism not only in temporal terms, but also in spatial terms – as a space populated by millions of people whose experience is “underconceptualized” in the analysis of globalisation (Tlostanova, 2017, pp. 1–3). In choosing to analyse postsocialism as a “critical standpoint” in order to avoid the essentialisation of the region (Stella, 2015, p. 133), we consider it important to explore gendered changes focusing on institutions, discourses, memories, identities, and fantasies that in one way or another connect to this postsocialist condition. Although taking place in varied shapes and degrees, the dismantlement of state socialism and the emergence of “capitalism” in the former state-socialist 1 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution. 2 Ildikó Asztalos Morell and Yulia Gradskova countries led to radical shifts in their economies as well as in the welfare state’s involvement in social citizenship. Gender relations were a key arena for the moulding of state-socialist citizenship where institutions, guarding women’s reproductive rights as well as their work opportunities, were raised to create the ideal socialist citizen. Gender norms and gender relations have also been a prime field for forming the postsocialist citizen. While we assume that the bondage between economic regimes and gender norms is not deterministic (Asztalos Morell, 1999), the contributions to this book further explore the connectivity between gender and economy without assuming reductionist causality or restricting the sphere of gender norms to the sphere of economic importance. Thus, the main aim of this book is to explore changing gendered norms and expectations in relation to the postsocialist transformation in Eastern Europe and Eurasia. We explore how the gendered legacies of state socialism are entangled with the geopolitical reorientation of the region and the simultaneity of socio-economic, political, and cultural changes in this geographical space. How are gender expectations shaped in the conflict between impulses towards more gender equality versus the renaturalisation/retraditionalisation of gender norms, and how are the new gender norms entangled with the neoliberal economic demands, precarities, “multifaceted injustice” (Suchland, 2015, p. 188), new forms of socio-economic differentiation, and insecurities?1 How can the analysis of gender norms and expectations in the space of former state socialism contribute to a study of global developments in gender relationships? Theoretical approach Following Raewyn Connell and Rebecca Pearse, we assume that womanhood and manhood are not exclusively imposed from the outside (Connell and Pearse, 2015a, pp. 72–74). Indeed, Candace West and Don Zimmerman (1987) showed in their seminal article “Doing gender” that gender norms are produced, reproduced, and challenged in the process of communication. Furthermore, according to Judith Butler, the heterosexual gender matrix – a specific regulatory framework for gender – is culture specific (Butler, 1999, p. 42). Norms always presuppose the active involvement of individuals in “doing gender” and cannot be seen as a stable construct based on biology. Gender simultaneously constitutes and is constituted by institutions. As Connell and Pearse (2015b) wrote: The assumptions, rules and guidelines that we call “norms” are part of the weave of everyday life. They are embedded in institutions as much as they are in individual heads. […] A key question about gender norms, therefore, is how they are materialized in social life. It is this materialisation of gender norms that is particularly important for most of the contributions in this book. While the gender norms of state 2 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution. The gendered subject of postsocialism 3 socialism were embedded in the overall guarantees of work, education, and housing, they also in most countries supposed accessibility to abortion and childcare. The beginning of the postsocialist reforms, on the other hand, was connected not only with freedom for political activity and new gender ideals, but also with changing material constraints in the sphere of work, family life, leisure, and education. Furthermore, as Connell and Pearse (2015b) stated, institutions play a particularly important role in the reproduction of norms of gender inequality, but still gender norms can be changed and the “pressures for change are coming from many sources”. However, the changes are often ambiguous. Thus, in this book we explore how much the gender norms have changed since 1989, what the important sources of the “postsocialist” gender norms are, and how they materialise. Norms are also seen as gaining expression through technologies and practices of governing. From the perspective of governmentality theory (Dean, 2010), action in accordance to desired patterns does not require violent oppression when norms are internalised. While totalitarian regimes were installed via the use of force, later state socialism reproduced itself through the agency of the subjects of state-socialist regimes. To some extent, state-socialist gender norms were also shaped by the interests of citizens and became integrated into everyday praxis (Chernova, 2008; Gradskova, 2012). Neither can we perceive state socialism as a unified system of norms. Diverse national and local conditions formed and shaped the institutions through time and national variations on gender regimes inside of the state- socialist camp emerged, among other ways, through local resistance. From its beginning state socialism aimed to unset the established gender norms, which assumed women’s availability as care providers (Goven, 2002). While the state was meant to rationalise, and provide for childcare, women were to be liber- ated via engagement in spheres of life that previously belonged to men. As part of this modernistic, emancipatory vision, women were to be enabled to engage in work, education and were to enjoy sexual rights similar to men. As a counterforce, from the 1960s onwards, a restoration of “natural” gender norms unfolded. For example, in Hungary the 1956 revolution