Сексология и сексопатология sexual culture and politics in contemporary russia

As a consequence of recent changes in adolescent sexual behavior,similar to the Western sexual revolution of the 1960s but compoundedby the breakdown of state medical services and the general criminalizationof the country, some dangerous trends now exist in Russian sexuallife - including the spread of STDs and HIV. The only reasonableanswer to this challenge is sex education. But since 1997 allefforts in this direction have been blocked by a powerful anti-sexualcrusade, organized by Russian Communist Party and the RussianOrthodox Church, and supported by "Pro Life." Its main targetsare sex education, women`s reproductive rights and freedom ofsexuality-related information. The campaign is openly nationalistic,xenophobic, homophobic and anti-semitic . And it has disastrouspublic health consequences.

1. Post-Soviet sexuality

In the former Soviet Union sexuality was a taboo topic, as thoughit were virtually non-existent. After 1987 the taboo was broken,and sex became a fashionable subject for both private and publicdiscourse ( Kon, 1995, 1997a, 1999a, 1999b).

Despite the official silence, general trends in Russian sexualbehavior have been similar to what occurred in the Western countries.The liberalization of sexual morality began long before perestroika,back in the 1960s and 1970s (Bocharova, 1994, Kon, 1997, Haavio-Mannilaand Rotkirch, 1997). According to Sergey Golod`s surveys in Leningrad-St.Petersburg,in 1965 only 5.3% of sexually experienced university studentsreported having first had intercourse before the age of 16- in1972 this figure was 8% and in 1995 it had risen to 12% (Golod,1996, p. 59). According to our 1993, 1995 and 1997 surveys (Chervyakovand Kon, 1998, 2000), the sexual behaviors and attitudes of urbanadolescents are changing rapidly. In 1993 25% of 16 years-oldgirls and 38% of boys had coital experience- in 1995 the respectivefigures were already 33% and 50%. Among 17 year-olds, the respectivegrowth is from 46% to 52% (females) and from 49% to 57% (males).

(See Table 1)

Table 1. Proportion of sexually active respondents by age andgender

Similar overall changes took place both in secondary and in vocationalschools. This suggests that changes in the age of sexual firstexperiences cannot be treated as an event caused by changes inthe sample design. We found further evidence of a dramatic changein sexual behavior between 1993 and 1995 when we analyzed answersto the question about age at first intercourse independently fordifferent age groups within one and the same sample (survey of1995). Among 16-year-old women, there were twice as many sexuallyexperienced girls than was the case for the 19-year-old respondentswhen they were 16 (23% vs. 11%). The same difference was foundbetween 17-year-old women and 19 year-olds who had been sexuallyexperienced at 17 (45% versus 24% respectively) The same tendencieswere observed among male students, although the changes were notas great.

The absolute figures are not surprising and are quite comparableto US and West European data. But in Russia change is occurringvery rapidly, and adolescent sexuality, which is strongly relatedto social class, is often violent and aggressive. There is alsotension between the processes of liberalization and gender equalityin sexual values and practices. "In Russia, liberalisation beganduring the Soviet Union and was speeded up by the free press andthe commercialisation of the 1980s and 1990s. In the Nordic countries,liberalisation reached its height in the 1970s. Today, liberalismand permissiveness are sometimes questioned from the perspectiveof gender equality and/or a new morality. In Russia, on the contrary,liberalism has undermined the arguments for gender equality fromthe Soviet era" (Haavio-Mannila and Rotkirch, 2001, p.13)

Uncivilized and uncontrollable early sexual activity has seriousmoral and epidemiological consequences.

Thanks to efforts, by medical personnel, the abortion rate hasdeclined in recent years. According to official figures, in 1990women aged 15 to 49 reported having 114 abortions for 1000 women,in 1992 -98, and in 1995 - 74. Yet the figure is still very high.Child prostitution and sexual violence are flourishing. For about10% of teenage girls their first sexual initiation is associatedwith some degree of coercion.

There is an enormous growth of STDs and AIDS. Between 1990 and1996 the incidence of syphilis increased fifty-fold in Russia,and 78-fold among young people. In 1996, 265 new cases of syphiliswere diagnosed per 100.000 of the population. The incidence ofHIV has also begun to grow nearly exponentially. In some districts,such as Irkutsk, HIV has already attained epidemic proportions:hence the importance of sex education strategy.

2 Attitudes to sex education

Systematic sex education is long overdue in Russia. It has beendiscussed in the mass media since 1962. An attempt to introducea special course in the early 1980s was welcomed by parents, butfailed because teachers were not ready to teach it.

The idea that sex education can be done by parents themselvesruns counter to all of international experience (Rademakers, 1997) In Russian families intergenerational taboos on sexuality discourseare very strong. According to the National Center for Public OpinionResearch (VtsIOM) representative national survey in 1990, only13% of parents have ever talked to their children about sexualmatters.

According to our 1997 survey, today`s students have much moreinformation about sexuality at their disposal than did their parents.For their parents` cohort, the main source of information aboutsexuality was conversations with peers. Today printed materialsand electronic media are most important, and the main sourcesof knowledge on sexuality are newspapers, books and magazines.However, this often means merely the replacement of one sourceof misinformation by another, `virtual` one.

Видео: 10 Common Things Banned In Russia

Until 1997, Russian public opinion was generally in favor ofsex education. In all national public opinion polls conductedby VTsIOM since 1989, the vast majority of adults - between 60and 90%, depending upon age and social background, strongly supportedthe idea of systematic sex education in schools. Only 3 to 20%were opposed to it (Kon, 1999). But who will in fact undertaketo do this work? And what exactly should be taught?

Teachers thought that parents should provide sex education fortheir children. In our 1997 survey, 78% of the teachers agreedwith this. However, this same survey showed that the family cannottake on this responsibility. Only about one out of five teenagersconsidered it acceptable to discuss problems of sexuality withhis or her parents. Parents themselves only reluctantly initiatesuch topics of conversation with their children. More than halfof them never initiated such talks, another quarter had takenthe initiative only once or twice, and only one in five mothershad such conversations with their children several times (thefathers did not do so at all). The primary inhibiting factorswere a lack of psychological and educational readiness. More thanthree-quarters of the parents said they needed special books explainingwhat should be told to children, and how this should be done.About two-thirds of the parents think it would be useful to haveseminars for parents about sex education in the schools theirchildren attend.

But the school is also incapable of doing this. Three-quartersof the teachers were convinced that form teachers (persons whoare primarily responsible for social and moral education) shoulddiscuss issues of gender and sexual relations with their students.However, 65% of teachers reported never having done this, andanother 15% had done so only once or twice. It is clear why thisis the case: only 11.5% of teachers feel that they are well preparedfor this task. Eighty five per cent were in favor of special courseson the fundamentals of sexology in pedagogical universities.

In general, respondents in the 1997 survey were unanimous thatsex education courses in schools must be launched. It might beexpected that such courses would become one of the favorite curriculumsubjects for students. 61% of seventh-grade students and 73% ofthe ninth-graders said that they were eager to attend such classes.Only 5% of students would prefer to avoid them. There were muchmore serious disagreements among the interested groups, however,with respect to the content of sex education. Teachers would liketo offer a detailed treatment of anatomy, physiology and ethics,whereas students are more interested in practical issues and insexual pleasure.

Видео: Russian Culture vs American Culture

(Table 2).

Table 2. Students` preferences regarding topics for a coursein sex education (those who indicated a topic as `very necessary`,%),1997 survey

At the request of the Russian Ministry of Education, the UnitedNations Population Fund (UNFPA) in collaboration with UNESCO in1996 awarded a 3-year grant for experimental work in 16 selectedschools, to develop a workable curriculum and textbooks "for classes7, 8 and 9, considering the importance of the fact that youngpeople should be able to make informed and responsible decisionsbefore reaching the age for potentially starting sexual activities".There was no cultural imperialism or any attempt to invent somethinguniform and compulsory for the entire country. The introductionto the project emphasized that "to ensure cultural acceptability,the curricula and text-books will be developed by Russian experts,making use of knowledge and experience from other countries, andwith the input of technical assistance from foreign experts".

3. The anti-sexual crusade

From the very beginning sexual freedom has been used by communistsand nationalists as a political scapegoat. The first massive campaign,in the form of an anti-pornography crusade, was initiated by theCommunist Party in 1991. In provoking moral panic, the CommunistParty was pursuing very clear political goals. The anti-pornographycampaign was aimed at diverting popular attention from pressingpolitical issues and the government`s economic failures. In defendingmorality and the family, the Party was deflecting blame from itselffor the weakening and destruction of morals and the family. Communistleaders were trying to cement the developing alliance between themselvesand conservative religious and nationalist organizations. Anti-pornographyslogans enabled them to control and channel popular frenzy by brandingthe democratic mass media as a Jewish-Masonic conspiracy bent oncorrupting the morals of young people, destroying traditional values,etc. But despite all efforts, the campaign failed, since peopledid not swallow the bait (see Kon, 1995, 1997a)

The second round, which is aimed at sex education, has been muchmore successful.

The "UNESCO project" was formally initiated in October, 1996.Its first step was sociological monitoring, an attempt to assesssexual values, attitudes and information levels of children, parentsand teachers of a few pilot schools, on a strictly voluntary basis.Similar monitoring was also planned for the next stages of theexperiment. Unfortunately, without consulting the experts, Ministryof Education officials announced the commencement of such a sensitiveundertaking without any political and psychological preparation.Even worse, the Ministry sent to 30.000 schools a package of 5self-made, sloppily edited and unrealistic (some of them requiredmore than 300 class hours "alternative sex education programs",which had never been tested in the classrooms. Though these programshad nothing to do with the "UNESCO project," they were perceivedas being a part of it.

Before it was even born, the project came under fire and waslabeled as a "Western ideological plot against Russian children".An aggressive group of Pro-Life activists filed a complaint withthe communist-dominated Parliament`s National security committee.In some Moscow district towns people were asked in the streets:"Do you want children to be taught in school how to engage insex? If not, please, sign the petition to ban this demonic project".Priests and activists told their audiences that all bad thingsin Western life were rooted in sex education, that Western governmentsare now trying to ban or eliminate it, and that only the corruptRussian government, at the instigation of the "World sexological-industrialcomplex", was acting against the best interests of the country.All this was supported by pseudoscientific data ( for example,that in England boys begin to masturbate at 9 years of age, andat 11 they are already completely impotent) and other lies.

The idea of any sex education was strongly and formally denouncedby the Russian Orthodox Church.

At an important round-table in the Russian Academy of Educationon March 6, 1997, influential priests declared that Russia doesnot need any sex education whatever in the schools, because thishad always been successfully done by the Church: up to 80% ofthe time during the sacrament of confession is dedicated to sexualmatters. Some prominent members of the Academy ( Antonina Khripkova,Valeria Mukhina, Nikolai Nikandrov, Irina Dubrovina and others)also attacked the so-called "Western" spirit. As Professor Khripkovaput it, "we don"t need the Netherlands" experience- we have ourown traditional wisdom". The President of the Academy Dr. ArthurPetrovsky strongly dissociated himself from this nationalist positionas well as from the suggestions for re-introducing moral censorship.But the general decision was to freeze the UNESCO project, andinstead of "sexuality education" to improve moral education "withsome elements of sex education" (this opportunistic formula wasused in 1962). Prof. Dmitry Kolessov proclaimed that instead ofchildren`s "right to know" educators should defend their "rightnot to know" (pravo na neznanie).

After lengthy debates a special academic commission for the preparationof a new program was formed (in which I refused to take part),but the new, openly conservative project was equally unacceptableto the clergy, and nothing came of it. In the Academy`s recentprogram statements on children`s health sexuality or sex educationare not even mentioned. The Ministry of Education formally cancelledits previously approved programs. Now it is very dangerous forRussian school principals on their own initiative to introduceany elements of sex education even at the local level (this hadbeen done in a few schools since the 1970s).

In 2000, there was even a trial in St. Petersburg: teachers whoused a Netherlands- made educational videofilm were sentencedfor "propaganda of masturbation", which, according to the accusers,is a very dangerous habit (I have not seen this film and thereforecannot evaluate it)

During the 1999 parliamentary elections the Communist Partyof Russian Federation (CPRF) presented this "anti-sex-education"campaign as its most important political victory. The officialposition of the Russian Orthodox Church, which is trying to putitself in the shoes of the former Agitprop, is the same. For someRussian newspapers anything which smacks of sex education is likewaving a red flag before a bull. Militant sexophobia is ragingnot only in the communist, fascist and clerical mass media butalso in much of the liberal and official ("Rossiiskay gazeta")media.

One of their main targets is the Russian Planned Parenthood Association.Since 1991 this was the only organization which in fact had takenaction to reduce the rate of abortion and to promote sexual andcontraceptive knowledge. Now it is being denounced by Christianfundamentalists as a "satanic institution", propagating abortionand depopulation. The official slogan of RPPA "The birth of healthyand wanted children, responsible parenthood" was presented incommunist "Pravda" and in religious newspapers as "One child perfamily". The booklet "Your friend the condom", which was publishedfor young adults and teens, was described as if it were addressedto first-grade children.

Since there is no sex education in Russian schools or even inuniversities, the anti-sexual crusaders created another target-so-called valeology (from Latin "valeo" - a good health). I donot know if such a discipline has ever been institutionalizedanywhere in the West. Russian valeology looks like a hybrid ofsocial hygiene and preventive medicine, along with some strangeand even exotic ideas. Serious criticism and discussion of itwould certainly be useful.

But for the fundamentalists, any "science of health" which isnot approved by the Church is anathema. Like their U.S. allies,they are absolutely indifferent to real issues of public health,social hygiene, STD or HIV prevention. They claim that "valeology"is simply another name for "sex education" and violently attackit for being a) Western, b)non-Orthodox and c) prosexual.

Even the medical profession is split. In 1997 the Ministry ofHealth and leading experts in gynecology, pediatrics and othermedical disciplines strongly supported the need for family planning,contraception and sex education. But scholars and state officialsare worried about their moral and political reputations. In January,1999 "Meditsinskaya gazeta" (a professional newspaper for medicaldoctors) published an open letter to the Minister of Education,signed by 130 medical experts, clergymen, teachers and writers,against valeology and sex education. The dominant values of theEditor-in-chief, Andrei Poltorak, are clearly expressed in thetitle of his recent interview: "Honor the doctor… since it wasGod who created him" (Poltorak, 2000) (why not: "Don"t kill theviruses, since it was God who created them"?)

The anti-sexual crusade is openly nationalistic, xenophobic,sexist, misogynist and homophobic. Everything Russian is presentedas pure, spiritual and moral, and everything Western - as dirtyand vile. Sex education is treated as the most serious attemptpossible to undermine Russia"s national security, more dangerousthen HIV ( Soviet propaganda in the 1980s attributed HIV to thePentagon).

Видео: Russia: political culture, parties, elections, and linkage institutions

"Rossiiskaya gazeta"`s deputy editor-in-chief Victoria Molodtsovaquotes a phrase from an unnamed educational program stating that" to become a real man, the male must not only be brave and courageousbut also acquire some traditionally "feminine" qualities…" (suchas sensitivity, compassion and understanding). The journalist`scommentary is: A Vologda peasant male doesn`t need feminization-the educators arguing for the "feminization" of Russian malesare really trying to promote homosexuality, and are being paidfor their subversive activities by Western secret services.

The crusade against sex education is extremely militant and aggressive.At the clerical site

This is exploited by the mass-media. It is often claimed thatall sex education programmes are drawn up by pedophiles and gaymen.

Very often libelous attacks are personalized. Irina Medvedevatold the readers of "Nezavisimaia gazeta" in 1997 that unnamedWestern pharmaceutical companies had paid Professor Kon $ 50.000to support sex education in Russia Victoria Molodtsova in "Rossiiskayagazeta" in 1999 discovered that "one rich foundation" had paidme another $ 50.000 for "the defense of homosexuals` rights" (both statements are, unfortunately, wrong).

Mass-media provocations may have practical consequences. 30January I became a victim of a fascist attack in the main lecturehall of the Moscow State University. I was invited for an openlecture, "Men in a changing world" (not about sexuality) The lecturewas presided over and introduced by the Rector, Professor V.A.Sadovnichii Suddenly a group of about 20-30 bandit-like youngmen, who had nothing to do with the University, stood up and displayedlarge home-made insulting signs with slogans accusing me of engagingin propaganda for sexual depravity, homosexuality, pedophiliaand so on, and made terrible noises. The audience, which includedseveral prominent professors, was stunned and shocked. A pieceof cream tart hit me from behind and several smoke bombs wereset off, the smoke being a symbol of Hell. When Rector calledthe police, the hooligans left the room (one of them was caught)and I quietly finished my lecture and answered over 40 questions.This carefully prepared fascist performance (in which there wasnothing spontaneous) was unprecedented in the history of MoscowUniversity.

The following week, while I was working at home, I was calledby the head of the local police who asked me not to open my door,since there was a suspicious object there and the police officehad had an anonymous call that it was a bomb. On the door andthe wall of my apartment a star of David and the "satanic" numerals"666" had been written. A specially trained police dog discoveredthat the bomb was a fake. Yet in the next few days I had two anonymoustelephone calls, threatening that I would be brutally murdered,The story was reported by the popular Moscow newspaper "Moskovskiikomsomolets" and by the St. Petersburg weekly "Chas pik," butthere was no criminal investigation (fascist and hate crimes generallyremain unpunished in Russia).

The current anti-sexual crusade is only the top of the iceberg.Under the guise of a moral renaissance, Russian Orthodoxy andits allies are trying to restore censorship and administrativecontrol over private life.

In the long run, this goal seems to be unattainable. Sexualattitudes and practices in Russia are already highly diversifiedby age, gender, education, cohort, regional, ethnic, and socialbackground. Any attempts by the state, Church, or local communityto forcibly limit young people`s sexual freedom is doomed to failure.The militant position of the Orthodox clergy may even have a boomerangeffect. They seem to have forgotten an old Soviet joke: "How canyou make art flourish and religion decay? - It`s very easy, yousimply disconnect art from the State and make religion compulsory".

Yet this crusade is a part of a growing wave of nationalism,xenophobia and militarism. And it has very dangerous politicaland practical consequences. Without sex education it is impossibleto solve such urgent public health issues as STD and HIV prevention.Effective family planning is equally impossible without sexualknowledge. And, last but not least, the anti-sexual crusade iswidening the already vast and yawning generation gap.

Notes

Bocharova О.А., (1994). Seksualnaya svoboda: slova I dela. Chelovek, 1994, № 5, pp. 98-107;
Chervyakov, V. and Kon, I.. 1998. "Sex education and HIV preventionin the context of Russian politics". In: R. Rosenbrock, ed.Politics behind AIDS Policies. Case Studies from India, Russiaand South Africa. Berlin.
Chervyakov, V. and Kon, I.., 2000. "Sexual Revolution in Russia.andthe tasks of sex education". In: AIDS in Europe: new challengesfor social sciences. Ed. by Theo
Sandford et al. London: Routledge, pp.119 -134.
Golod, S. I. 1996. XX vek i tendentsii seksualnykh otnosheniiv Rossii. St. Petersburg, Aleteya.
Haavio-Mannila E. and Rotkirch, A., `Generational and genderdifferences in sexual life in St. Petersburg and urban Finland`.Yearbook of Population Research in Finland, vol. 34 , 1997.pp.133-160
Haavio-Mannila E. and Rotkirch, A. Gender Liberalization andPolarisation: Comparing Sexuality in St. Petersburg, Finlandand Sweden. 2001. Maniscript
Kon, I. S. 1995 The Sexual Revolution in Russia. From theAge of the Czars to Today. New York: The Free Press.
Kon , I. S. 1997a Seksualnaya kultura v Rossii . Klubnichkana beryozke. (The Sexual Culture in Russia). Moskva: OG.I. .
Kon, I.S. 1997b"Russia", The International Encyclopedia ofSexology, ed. by Robert Francoeur. Vol. 2, pp. 1045-1079, NewYork: Continuum Press
Kon, I.S. 1999b "Sexuality and politics in Russia (1700-2000)".In: F.X.Eder, L.A.
Hall and G. Hekma, eds. Sexual cultures in Europe. NationalHistories. Manchester University Press, pp.197-218
Molodsova, V. 1999 "Seks: razvrashchenie vmesto prosveshchenia".Rossiiskaya gazeta, 10 June
Poltorak, A. 2000 "Pochitai vracha… ibo Gospod` sozdal ego".Mir za nedeliu, 15 April р.16
Rademakers, J. 1997 Adolescent sexual development: a cross-culturalperspective. Sexuality Beyond
Boundaries. International Conference. Amsterdam, 29 July -4 August 1997
Tkachenko, A..A. 1999 Seksualnye izvrashchenia - parafilii( Sexual perversions Paraphilias). Moscow : Triada X
Verkhovskii, A. (2001). Problema INN grozit raskolom. No neTserkvi, a pravoslavnym fundamentalistam. http://polit.ru/documents/401411.html.