ANNALES ■ Ser. hist. sociol. ■ 25 ■ 2015 ■ 3
original scientific article	UDC 323.2.011.5 (470+571)
received: 2015-05-16
GENDER AND CIVIC ENGAGEMENT IN MODERN RUSSIA
Elena ISAEVA
Yaroslavl Demidov State University, Department of Social and Family Law 10 Soviet Street, 150000, Jaroslavl, Russian Federation e-mail: elenia2000@mail.ru
Alexander SOKOLOV
Yaroslavl Demidov State University, Department of Socio-Political Theories 10 Soviet Street, 150000, Jaroslavl, Russian Federation e-mail: alex8119@mail.ru
Nadejda TARUSINA
Yaroslavl Demidov State University, Department of Social and Family Law 10 Soviet Street, 150000, Jaroslavl, Russian Federation
ABSTRACT
This article deals with the characteristics of civic activism and its gender aspects in modern Russia. The authors have conducted research on trends and components of civil activity in Russian regions (Subjects of the Russian Federation) and Russia in general. The paper analyzes development of new forms of social control of the regional and federal authorities, dialogue mechanisms between the government and representatives of various social movements and groups, planned and existing legislation to ensure that these dialogues are acceptable for performance. The paper analyzes a variety of surveys on current trends of civic engagement in community, studies the gender issue and prospects for development in Russia, and examines the state of public control mechanisms and its regional characteristics.
Keywords: civic engagement, gender, public control, civil society institutes
genere e impegno civile nella russia odierna
SINTESI
L'articob tratta delle caratteristiche dell'attivismo civico nella Russia dei giorni nostri e di alcuni aspetti di esso legati al genere (gender). Gli autori hanno condotto uno studio sulle tendenze e le component delle attivita civili nelle singole regioni russe (Soggetti della Federazione Russa) e in Russia in generale. Nel presente contributo viene analizzato lo sviluppo delle nuove forme di controllo sociale delle autorita regionali e federali, i meccanismi di dialogo tra il Governo e i rappresentanti di vari movimenti e gruppi sociali, nonché la legislazione prevista ed esistente per garantire che questi dialoghi siano efficaci per la risoluzione dei problemi. Inoltre, la ricerca prende in esame una serie di indagini sulle tendenze attuali dell'impegno civile nella comunita, studia la questione di genere e le prospettive di sviluppo in Russia, ed esplora le condizioni dei meccanismi di controllo pubblico e le sue caratteristiche regionali.
Parole chiave: impegno civile, genere, controllo pubblico, istituzioni di societa civile
451
ANNALES ■ Ser. hist. sociol. ■ 25 ■ 2015 ■ 3
Elena ISAEVA et ah GENDER AND CIVIC ENGAGEMENT IN MODERN RUSSIA, 451-468
INTRODUCTION
According to international assessments conducted over the span of the second decade of the 21st century, indices of various aspects of Russian democracy, including factors of the political activity of citizens and its provision by official institutions; mechanisms of the dialogue between the authorities and society, and forms of public control are wholly inadequate. To a certain extent, the estimates can be disputed, since they are likely to be entirely politically biased, without taking into account the peculiarities of Russian mentality, in promoting European (and west, in general) ideas about the issue of proper content, civil and political rights and freedoms (i.e., one-dimensional position as opposed to a multidimensional).
However, the picture of the drift of Russian political and social institutions in their direction of the classical canons of sustainable democracy, unfortunately, does not change. Although sociological and legal "discredit under canvas" do not change, and uniformity of texture and impression do not modify clarity of style, being under constant strengthening authoritarian style of state institutions, legal and factual restrictions on freedom for social groups' manifestation (critics of religious context of government activity, LGBT community, etc.) have gradually enhanced modern civil society activity of Russian citizens. It affects their immediate vital interests and fundamental ideas of human rights and freedoms. Let us consider characteristics of this process.
Nowadays, research on civic engagement and civic participation in Russia is one of the most pressing issues. The growth of civil activity, its causes, and factors are equally in the loop of political scientists, sociologists and lawyers, which are effectively turning the phenomenon into the question of interdisciplinary research. National legislators, understanding multiple aspects of civic engagement and its ability to be a catalyst for both constructive and destructive phenomena in Russian society, systematically "take moves" to frame civic engagement in certain regulatory frameworks. On the one hand, we can notice civic engagement stimulation through increased funding of socially-oriented nonprofit organizations originated from the federal budget (Presidential grants, subsidies granted by the Ministry of Economic Development of Russia), but, on the other hand, we cannot see new regulations that scarcely affect governing political activity (e.g., the law on rallies, sanctions against political activity of NGOs with overseas funding, etc.). Moreover, Russian legislators have also introduced public control measures, with their focus on a variety of subjects and on the wide scope; thus, volunteering is a prominent example of activity that is strictly regulated.
There seem to be various ways of assessing state regulation, having been originally evolved as a purely public phenomenon. It is a controversial question that
nationalization of such institutions as volunteering will have a positive impact on their development, as a number of NGOs leaders have noted it. It is difficult to assume that these legislative initiatives can lead to the formation of "volunteer-in-law", and "volunteers outside the law" in Russia, i.e., those who are not supposed to do good works (Isaeva, Sokolov, 2015).
Civic engagement and involvement of the population in addressing their enquiries to municipal authorities significantly correlates with an amount of established and actively operating public associations and nonprofit organizations in a particular area. Growing number of nonprofit organizations may indicate an increase in the level of civic engagement and residents' readiness for responsibility in solving problematic issues. By creating NGOs, residents plan improvement in social, cultural, economic, among others, aspects of their life on their own. The number of registered NGOs in the regions of Russia, their qualitative characteristics (thematic priorities of activities) and development dynamics can evidence in favor of a large number of problems that exist in the region in a particular sector, or lack of support for civil initiatives from the authorities and local government. Non-profit organizations are concentrating on the vital problems of the society, which is crucial for the formation of civil society. The number of registered NGOs is steadily growing. Government stimulates registration of public associations in case they are socially oriented, that is to say, operate in social sector (Isaeva, Maklashyn, Sokolov & Frolov, 2015).
In this regard, the purpose of the article is to identify trends in development of civic activism in contemporary Russia (in example of Russian Federation regions), and, to determine its gender-specified manifestations.
The study is closely linked with such related categories, as political behavior, political activity, and political participation. Researches by Western, in particular, American political scientists and sociologists are the most extensive theoretical basis for studying the problem of political participation. In foreign literature there can found a variety of predictions of nature of political participation under different social and political conditions.
The national researchers who studied theoretical aspects of protest are as follows, Irkhin, Y. (1996), Strizoe, A. (1999), Kirichek, A. (2011), Shestopal, E. (2000), Kinsbursky A. and Topalov, M. (2006), Nagaitsev, V., Noyanzina, O. and Goncharova, N. (2011), Trubitsin, D. (2010), Skobelina, N. (2010), among others. Structure, history and evolution of the Internet are described and developed by Bondarenko, T. (2009), Gerasimenko, A. (2006) and Sviridenko, S. (1997) among others.
Organization features of civic activity are studied by Mersiyanova, I. and Jacobson, L. (2007), Nikovskaya, L., Yakimets, V. and Molokova, M. (2011), Patrushev, S., and Aivazova, S. (2008).
The theory of social movements, their structure, mechanisms of formation, and peculiarities are consid-
452
ANNALES ■ Ser. hist. sociol. ■ 25 ■ 2015 ■ 3
Elena ISAEVA et ah GENDER AND CIVIC ENGAGEMENT IN MODERN RUSSIA, 451-468
ered by Kostyushev, V. (2009) and Kleman, K. (2007). The problem of modern civic movements is examined by such scholars as Yanitskii, O. (1995), Dyatlov, A. (2008), among others.
Principles of organization development are an important feature of civic activism and social movements. Smorgunov, L. (2001), Morozova, E. and Miroshnichen-ko, I. (2011), Bykov, I. (2013), Kurochkin, A. (2005), and Ivanov, D. (2002), among others, have studied this problem.
There are a number of foreign researches who have studied different aspects of civic engagement, specifically:
•	mechanisms of civic engagement is conducted by David Mansley (2014), Stefania Milan (2013), Rober Rice (2013), Daniel Gillion (2013), Seraphim Seferiades and Hank Johnston (2012);
•	new wave of protest activity and protest movement in modern world (Fawaz Gerges (2014), Stefan Kiesbye (2013), Mitchell William John Thomas (2013), Mohammed el-Nawawy and Sahar Khamis (2013), Priya Singh and Kingshuk Chatterjee (2013), among others);
•	civic activity features in modern Russia (Feifer, G. (2014), Robertson, G. (2011), Bicheyn, D. and Polis, A. (2010) and S. Vegren (2013), among others).
In order to reveal peculiarities of civic activity, dynamics of its development, and forms of its implementation, in 2014, there was conducted the experts' survey.
The experts were duly represented by the authorities, members of NGOs, political parties, academic institutions, business, and media, with authorities to amount 36.5% of the sample respondents, representatives of social and political elite (members of NGOs and political parties) - 29%, expert community (business representatives, journalists and representatives of academic environment) - 34.5%, correspondently. The report includes the survey results of experts from 21 regions of Russia, with a limited 10-14 number of experts for each region.
In order to study regional characteristics of public control in the Yaroslavl' region, three studies took place over the span of November - December, 2013, and January-February 2014:
•	telephone survey of the Yaroslavl' region population: 639 adults in the sample of Yaroslavl' region residents (statistically representative sample by gender and age, with the standard error of the sample to be 3.9);
•	survey of 54 non-profit organizations of the Yaroslavl' region;
•	survey of 52 representatives, and local authorities.
For each of these groups a unique questionnaire was developed that allows taking into account the role of each entity in the implementation of every kind of civic activity.
These studies provide empirical data characterizing civic engagement in the Russian Federation, and the introduction of civil control in the Yaroslavl' region.
CIVIC ENGAGEMENT: TRENDS, FORMS, FEATURES OF MANIFESTATION
According to some sociologists, modern Russian society is primarily characterized by request for legal and factual (to some extent) equality, legal security, and social justice. Other ideas of democratic "package" (e.g., the right to be elected, independent media, political opposition, and the right for strike, etc.) are less demanded. Deactualization of these aspects of democracy is partly explained by the fact that most Russians do not see any obstacles to free expression of their political or other views (over 80% of respondents evaluate their capabilities in this regard as "good" and "satisfactory"). The slight decline in interest of elective procedures can be explained by not quite pleasant "aftertaste" feelings of the last election campaign, since there is skeptical attitude towards systemic opposition as a part of the ruling elite, and because of alertness to the non-system opposition by its frightening diversity and disunity.
The phenomenon of civic activism is associated with the development of civil society institutions, which have gone through a long process of formation and now appear in various forms. Public movements, non-profit organizations, initiative groups, protest movements, expert public commissions, community committees, and unions can be considered to be present forms of civic engagement. Civic engagement has proved to be manifested in various forms of independent activity of citizens, communities, associations, and networks as realization of their civil rights, solving social problems, which are caused by internal motives and aspirations, being not aimed at profit generating.
Latest factors significantly adjusting the quantity and quality of civic engagement are specific characteristics of the political and economic situation in Russia, and change in "color" of its foreign contacts.
However, none of the aforesaid deactualization processes or difficulties experienced in 2014, and 2015, do not uproot civic activism, and, hopefully, will not be able to eliminate mechanisms of transferring private and community interests into social problems, forcing the authorities to fulfill their direct duties, although these processes are running not speedy.
According to the report on the state of civil society in Russian (2013), the quality of political and social participation of citizens is changing, and becomes more meaningful and socially motivated. Thus, according to WCIOM monitoring studies, the number of those who said that they are participating in political life, not pursuing personal interests, but guided by the ideas and values of the common good - to make a difference in their city, town, country, almost doubled over the span of the
453
ANNALES ■ Ser. hist. sociol. ■ 25 ■ 2015 ■ 3
Elena ISAEVA et al: GENDER AND CIVIC ENGAGEMENT IN MODERN RUSSIA, 451-468
Diagram 1. Dynamics of civic engagement over the span of the past two years in the areas inhabited by the experts (with "-5" - a significant reduction in civil activity, "0" - no change, "5" - growth in civic engagement)
The Subject of the Russian Federation	Expertise
Ulyanovsk region	2,8
Republic of Tatarstan	1,2
Krasnodar region	1,1
Kostroma region	-0,9
Irkutsk region	0,77
The Republic of Dagestan	1,5
Kirov region	1,82
Altay region	0
Republic of Adygea	0,73
Yaroslavl' region	1,77
Vladimir region	1,42
Republic of Bashkortostan	-1
Nizhnii Novgorod region	-0,22
Voronezh region	1,45
Samara Region	-0,8
Saratov region	0,5
The Republic of Karelia	0
Novosibirsk region	1
Vologda region	1,36
Kaliningrad region	0
Khabarovskii Krai	1
Table 1. Dynamics of civic engagement over the span of the past two years in the areas inhabited by the experts (with "-5" - a significant reduction in civil activity, "0" - no change, "5" - growth in civic engagement)
454
ANNALES ■ Ser. hist. sociol. ■ 25 ■ 2015 ■ 3
Elena ISAEVA et ah GENDER AND CIVIC ENGAGEMENT IN MODERN RUSSIA, 451-468
Manifestation of the growth in civil activity	%
Protest actions (events, sentiments)	32,4%
Organization of a greater number of significant social events, and programs (projects), with a large number of people participating	31,5%
Increasing number of non-governmental organizations and their members (with the youth involved greatly) to monitor the authorities activity	15,3%
Growth in the number and scope of initiative groups (e.g., environmental, anti-corruption, green piece)	14,4%
Growth in civil activity on the Internet	10,8%
Political (electoral) activity	10,8%
Table 2. The Main Manifestations of Civil Activity Growth
past seven years (from 25% to 45) (Report on State of Civil Society in Russian Federation, 2013).
Strengthening the role of Internet technologies becomes an important condition for the development of civic engagement in modern world. Information and communication on the Internet are indicators of effectiveness and development of the society. Despite a number of differences at levels of communication (i.e., subjects, audience), Internet and its Russian segment (i.e., "ru.net"), shows relatively high quantitative development. According to the data of the "Public Opinion" Foundation, 55 million people were online every month in Russia (winter 2012), 57 million - during summer in 2013, and, correspondingly, 59 million users were online on April 1, 2014 (Internet in Russia, 2014).
Thus, the study of civic engagement in Russian regions over the past two years shows that there is a dynamic steady growth in development, in particular, 50% of respondents mentioned the growth in the last one (Diagram 1). Less than a third, on the other hand, noted its decline (in different estimates). At the same time, there is a significant regional differentiation: the trend of civic activity ranges from "2.8" points (Ulyanovsk region) to "-1" (Republic of Bashkortostan), with the"0.77" Russian range (Table 1).
Civic engagement is mainly manifested in form of protests (32.4%), participation in socially substantial public events and programs (31.5%), and increasing number of public organizations and their members, with youth organizations controlled by government and other non-profit organizations (15.3%) included. A significant increase in number and, therefore, influence of environmental, anti-corruption (14.4%), and initiative groups, political (electoral) activity (10.8%), and growth in intensity of civil activity on the Internet (10.8%) are depicted in Table 2.
At the same time, the dynamics of these indicators does not mean constant apparent success, but only shows some positive trends. Two-thirds of the experts pay attention to the fact that initiative and activity of citizens, in general, and in absolute terms have not yet been developed as dominant resources of civil society (see Table 3). We recorded another problem - fragmentation of civil society, and civil society activists (among 44.1% of respondents). Complexity of communication in the civil movement (20.5%) has a lot to contribute to these factors, while contradictory position of authority in respect of institutions (38.9%) contributes to the explicit opposition from these bodies (31%). Poor funding of social movements' actors is also a very significant fac-
	%
Low initiative and activity of citizens	61,1%
Opposition to the government	31,0%
Contradictory actions of the authorities against civil society institutions	38,9%
Difficulty in communication among the civil movement	20,5%
Dissociation of civil society institutions from civil society activists	44,1%
Poor funding	35,8%
Other reasons	0,9%
No problem	1,7%
Table 3. Problems in Civic Activism Development in Contemporary Russia
455
ANNALES ■ Ser. hist. sociol. ■ 25 ■ 2015 ■ 3
Elena ISAEVA et ah GENDER AND CIVIC ENGAGEMENT IN MODERN RUSSIA, 451-468
Civic Associations	%
Official associations, or organizations	34,1
Not duly registered associations of citizens (e.g., local groups, social movements, Internet communities, among others)	28,8
Coalition between duly registered NGOs	4,0
Coalition between not official associations of citizens	5,8
Mixed coalition between duly registered and unofficial associations	16,8
Difficult to answer	10,6
Table 4. Forms of the Most Active Civic Associations
tor. However, there is actually visible direct correlation between all these factors. For example, a significant lack of resources is noticed in the Ulyanovsk region and in the Republic of Bashkortostan, which are at the opposite poles of civic engagement indicators. At the same time, disunity of civil society in both regions is not as deep as, for example, in the Voronezh region, with a high rate of civic engagement (1.45), although significantly less than in the Ulyanovsk region, but much larger than in the mentioned Republic. In some regions, there are systemic complexity. For instance, Yaroslavl' region (activity index is higher than in the Voronezh region) is characterized by disagreement between civil society institutions (76.9% of the experts), and insufficient funding and communication (38.5%).
Legal form of public associations is not the main criterion for choosing means of expressing their position. In contrast, duly registered associations (34.1% of the experts) are proved to be the most active, indicating a rather high degree in institutionalization of civil society, and informal groups with their less significant activity (28.8%). Coalition between groups (16.8%) is less dy-
namic and productive; moreover, often inevitable, because appropriate events or projects can be exceptionally run by official, i.e., duly registered, organizations, or associations (see Table 4).
Experts point out that vector of civic engagement is focused mainly on solving urgent social problems (64.8%), public relations (57.3%), and authorities' decision-making process (54.2%). Encouraging civic engagement (37%) and "nurturing" new leaders (23.8%) can be identified among other objectives. However, experts state that pure enthusiasm of civil society does not guarantee success, hence being without strong influence on authorities' decision-making (55.8%), but, with encouraging citizen participation - 25%. Other specified areas we evaluated in 3 points within a 10-point scale.
Analysis of demand on new forms of civic engagement shows that the most popular short-term, not costly actions are via Internet (21.6%) in form of publications, voting within social networks, and flash mobs (12.4%) (see Table 5). Communication, in these terms, does not have the same intensity varying among regions; in particular, from 2.55 points in the Republic of Adygea to
Forms of Civil Engagement	%
Internet activity	21,6%
Flash mobs	12,4%
Pickets, rallies, protests, unrests	10,3%
Forums, seminars, workshops, lectures, educational programs, «School», etc. (with the youth involved actively)	8,2%
Public discussion of problems through discussion platforms, round tables (including problems with public utilities)	8,2%
Collecting signatures, filing petitions	5,2%
Self-organization of citizens (e.g., to deal with drunk drivers, to clean rivers and forests (with the youth involved actively), etc.)	4,1%
Organizations appealing to the law enforcement agencies and authorities	4,1%
Involvement of creative people with projects on architecture, the design and construction of new buildings, monuments, etc.	4,1%
Volunteer movement	4,1%
Table 5. New Forms of Civic Engagement Appeared in Different Regions (TOP 10)
456
ANNALES ■ Ser. hist. sociol. ■ 25 ■ 2015 ■ 3
Elena ISAEVA et al: GENDER AND CIVIC ENGAGEMENT IN MODERN RUSSIA, 451-468
7.67 points in Ulyanovsk region. Interestingly, the Yaroslavl' region index equals the average Russian level - 5.75 points. Internet is becoming a popular tool for civic engagement not only because of its accessibility, but also because it really affects the decision-making process (49.3% of respondents) by attracting attention of bloggers and media; moreover, it updates social problems (42.4 %), and activates society by a wide range of social groups (31.8%).
Accordingly, traditional forms of activity, such as pickets, are becoming less popular (10.3% of respondents). Among others, less popular are becoming those of new forms of civic engagement which require high costing and special skills for participants to organize, e.g., public discussion platforms, round tables, forums, seminars, workshops, etc. (8.2%). However, with the authorities support, e.g., free legal consulting (but on scheduled special days) conducted by regional offices of the Association of Russian Lawyers, their effectiveness has significantly increased.
CIVIC ACTIVITY AND GENDER
Actual and specific context of civic engagement is a gender perspective, seen as a social construct, which contains the accents femininity, masculinity, and non-conventional sexual orientation. Gender relations are analyzed, respectively, in such social phenomena, as: 1) organized social communication between the governors and gender groups; 2) social communication between gender groups; 3) interaction between the sexes; 4) the ratio between the sexes. Concerning the subject of our research, first two compositions are in our main interest, with the focus on the LGBT community, and civilian, and political activity of women. We will have our deep concern on sociology and jurisprudence features of civic activity and on such specific Russian phenomenon as "agents of influence".
The doctrine of women's representation quoting in political and public positions is always under discussion, having a mixed success. For example, the gender part of the staff of the Supreme Council of the USSR superficially looks optimistic, due to up to 30% of female deputies were involved in convocations running. However, since the real power belonged to the Communist Party (Article 5 of the USSR Constitution, 1936), the gender political horizon essentially changed, thus, gender proportion of the party members was 79.1% male members to 20.9% female, correspondingly, the Central Committee - 97.2 % male to 2.8% female, and the Po-litbyuro - 100% male, accordingly. The world of politics was male; women were included in the governing bodies only to simulate presence of both sexes. Later, during the adjustment period lasting to the end of the 20th century, the idea of women's quota was "buried" under a bushel of political and economic issues, apparently, more urgent and less harmful for the "downscale half of
humanity". Only in 2003, the State Duma there eventually passed a bill on «State Guarantees of Equal Rights and Freedoms for Men and Women and Equal Opportunities for Their Realization. However, it "hovered for a decade" - the work on it resumed only in 2011. We can assume that it had not happened without influence of actualized gender policy run by the United Nations, and reflected in "UN Women", an international organization established in 2011 (Tarusina & Isaeva, 2014) .
Despite the fact that accents and vectors of gender ideas, and social practices are constantly evolving, with Russian "field to play gender" to be concerned, the basic concepts are quite axiomatic: 1) both equality and inequality have a dual structure, and their interaction neither implies a constant positive sense of the first one, nor negative of the latter; inequality is unjust, as men and women, heterosexuals, and non-traditionalists should have equal rights; 2) in order to reach relative harmony, the government and society are trying to provide additional guarantees, benefits, positive discrimination, and gender neutralization.
However, the analysis of social practices in the context of gender does not allow us to come to clear conclusions with respect to this harmonization. Therefore, on the one hand, civic engagement of women gives definite visible color to life of public institutions. According to statistical data, on the one hand side, proportion between females and males in public and political activity, as well as qualitative aspect of female participation (more conventional than innovative), within the scope of formal and informal associations, projects, and short-term actions, force us to admit that there are contradictory attitudes among the authorities to the problem, and, on the other hand side, there is a significant differentiation of female civic engagement in terms of its vitality, diversity, and success. Its quantity and quality are typical examples of "gender order" in Russian society. Even now, being a male unconditionally prevails in Russian political games. Of course, it can be easily explained by patriarchal context of the history of gender relations, by the fact that, despite having opportunities to compete with men, women tend to be exposed under the rules that men have created, "mimicing" on their (male) territory.
There is an obvious fact that Russian political management remains largely masculine, although, in recent years, women have occupied a number of key positions (e.g., in management of the Federation Council, Central Bank, Chamber of Accounts, three committees of the State Duma, in governing three regions; moreover, the Ombudsman is also female). There are now legislative quotas for women in Russian (for example, in the State Duma the number of female deputies is less than 14%). Despite positive practices in a great number of European countries and United Nations, this idea remains under sluggish debates, and meets resistance. Thus, on the one hand, there should be an increase in Russian women's civic and political participation, in order to optimize ex-
457
ANNALES ■ Ser. hist. sociol. ■ 25 ■ 2015 ■ 3
Elena ISAEVA et ah GENDER AND CIVIC ENGAGEMENT IN MODERN RUSSIA, 451-468
pression and protection of their interests, i.e., family values, parenthood, childhood, elderly social support, etc. On the other hand, as long as gender reliance on power and control is inadequate, forms, funding, and communication of civic engagement of women do not improve.
As we know, increasing role in public and political activity belongs to the public chambers of cities and regions (subjects of the Russian Federation). Membership of women ranges from 20 to 52%. For example, this figure in Public Chamber of Vladimir region is stated to be 52%, in Chechen Republic and Moscow region - 20%, in Yaroslavl' region - 28%, correspondingly. The Federal Public Chamber accounts 21% of female, with 19 women (about 22%) heading Public Chambers among all Russian regions.
Despite the declaration of the principle of equal opportunities for women and men in political activity, enshrined in Article 8 of the Federal Law "On Political Parties", these associations clearly continue to follow the tradition: there are no rules on gender quotas, as well as rules about priority lists of gender party candidates.
Analysis of civil and political positions of Russian men and women allows us to identify a variety of "gender gaps" between them. Therefore, comparing with men, the level of electoral participation of women is slightly higher, ranging from 4 to 10 percent. Women's preparedness to vote in future elections reaches 14%. Interestingly, women are more likely to vote for the ruling party. However, their interest in politics is 1.5fold less, correspondingly. Women are less active (10-12%) in protest against political actions. For example, the gender composition of a mass protest "For Fair Elections" is 40 and 60% respectively. However, in socially orientated non-profit organizations, female factor is significant. Women's representation also dominates in various kinds of commissions and councils on social policy at regional and municipal levels. However, there are also other examples. In the Yaroslavl' region in the association of citizens men occupy visually impaired leading positions.
Promoting ideas about going back to traditional femininity, female destiny theory, complementarity of male and female principles (with significant role belonging to religious organizations), positioning of social support for women as a weaker than men gender (without strategic goal to remove causes of "weakness"), discrediting an image of feminists women impact on the characteristics of women's civic engagement. Nevertheless, studies support the fact that female focus of civic engagement is enhanced and there is hope that patriarchal vector will be gradually overcome.
CIVIC ENGAGEMENT IN THE MAINSTREAM OF LGBT
The second focus of gender presence in the social movements and their gender characteristics are not yet so clear and massive for the Russian social practice,
that is to say, only their "sparks" are visible on the gender field, hinting at the possibility of "flame" ignition of them, however, being extinguished by passive state supervision or legal and factual constraints. Analysts and sociologists, generalizing the LGBT movement from within, point out some of its Russian characteristics. Thus, community substance is not completely structured, it has very blurred group of people whose sexual orientation (behavior, lifestyle) does not fit into the framework of traditional heteronormative model; corresponding movement is attempting to secure the rights of sexual minorities, eliminate heterosexism, heteronorma-tivity, homophobia, and transphobia.
Russian LGBT activism is about 25 years old. At the first stage, it is "happily left the criminal law field", but little has generated systemic research (except Kon works (Kon, 2003) or systemic practices. "Second Wave", at the end of the 90s, is characterized by the Internet activism, as the main activity of the community was focused on forming a network of LGBT discourse. "Third Wave" began over the span of the second half of 2005 - first half of 2006 and manifested more actively in the real, not virtual, world, starting with the design of a gay parade in Moscow, and continuing its implementation in form of non-mass street protests. Formalization and systematization of these forms of activity is relevant only for large Russian cities (e.g., Moscow, St. Petersburg, etc.). In Russian provinces, such activity usually does not exist, or is latent. For example, there are no registered associations of this type among existing 2,500 non-profit organizations in the Yaroslavl' region. The objectives of the formal and informal clubs and associations include activists' education and informing, ideological lobbying and softening positions of authorities, tolerant public opinion formation, opposition to regulatory restrictions, and in the family sphere - promoting the idea of equality in the institution of marriage, parenthood, and adoption. The latter problem is quite far from being solved. However, its positioning emerged from the underground, carrying out little debatable fervor; in the family law doctrine, there are a number of supporters (we have it already mentioned in detail in our 2014-2015 writings).
The legalization of same-sex cohabitation and samesex marriage at the political level has grown into the serious issue, which defines status of governmental officials, and the direction of the state policy in family regulations. The Heads of countries and applicants for this position can no longer sidestep their attitude to samesex marriage in the lead of their election campaigns.
Putin's press secretary Dmitry Peskov explained in his speech the point of view of the President of the Russian Federation about the legalization of same-sex marriages. Vladimir Putin believes that, quote, "Russia is not the case for the Netherlands to criticize the way they live, for the way they are, or are not, relevant to sexual minorities. However, this phenomenon is unacceptable
458
ANNALES ■ Ser. hist. sociol. ■ 25 ■ 2015 ■ 3
Elena ISAEVA et al: GENDER AND CIVIC ENGAGEMENT IN MODERN RUSSIA, 451-468
in Russia, because culture, history, multi-faith and multi-ethnicity, foundations of society are in contradictions to these phenomena", unquote. In his understanding, "this is not freedom", but the phenomenon is "unacceptable" in Russia (Tihonov, Peskov, 2013). At press conference in Amsterdam while representatives of sexual minorities were protesting against the Russian law on gay propaganda, the Russian leader reminded journalists about the issue of demography, and noted that he could hardly imagine gay marriage, for example, in Chechnya, I quote, "before the victims would be reached", unquote. President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko expressed a similar view earlier (Lukashenko, 2013).
Legalization of same-sex marriage is unlikely for our country to be proved, due to the fact that the level of tolerance in Russian society (especially in provinces) to sexual minorities is one of the lowest in Europe. However, current Russian legislation does not specify the prohibition on same-sex cohabitation. In fact, these relations remain outside of legal regulation (Isaeva, 2012).
The position of the certain foreign countries leaders regarding the issue of same-sex unions is diametrically opposed to Russia's position. For example, during the election campaign in 2008, it was the first time when the gay rights have become one of the central themes of the debate between the two main contenders from the Democratic Party of the United States. Both, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have repeatedly appealed to the LGBT community. The problem of the rights of the LGBT community has become one of key issues, in the rhetoric of Barack Obama, and includes the aspects, as follows: protecting gays and lesbians from the sexual crimes; fight against sexual orientation discrimination in employment; legalization of gay marriage and equal rights for married couples (equals homosexuals); rejection of the policy of "do not ask, do not tell"; and finally, more attention to AIDS, in form of providing additional funding for medical research (Vershinina, 2008).
The number of countries that have legalized samesex relationships is expanding, as well as the number of countries that allow adoption of children by homosexual couples. However, it is not obvious if we can trust studies that show that there is no effect on the child's mind if they were brought up in a gay family (Isaeva & Sochneva, 2012)? A number of American scientists (for example, Professor Lynn Wardle, among others), are writing about the ambiguity of the study results on the effects on the child's mind that are growing in a homosexual family. There are a lot of questions and comments from the methodological standpoint to this research: small number of control groups and samples, tendentious of sampling, wrong methodological tools, unsubstantiated scientific hypotheses, and ambiguous conclusions. Several studies have identified factors that indicate that children raised in homosexual couples are more prone to homosexual identity, and early in risky sexual behavior (Wardle, 2005; 2010).
TV shows, popular foreign movies, mostly showing same-sex unions in a positive way, make people think about their perception of the phenomenon of contemporary reality. At the same time European and American practice of the same-sex unions legalization is unlikely to be popular in coming years in Russia, despite an active support of the Russian legislation modernization direction (Isaeva, Sochneva, 2012).
The problem of legalization of same-sex marriages that shake up the consciousness of European legislators, is becoming more politically significant in the context of new regulations (made by several countries), aimed at establishing preferences, but has limitations on the public dissemination of same-sex unions "normality" ideas. Securing Russia's prohibition on homosexuality promotion and ban on same-sex couples adoptions are unlikely to lead to the disappearance of the homosexual phenomenon, but actually shape public opinion as unacceptable phenomenon, and the inadmissibility of "a diversification version of the marriage and family institutions" (Tarusina, 2013).
Politics of same-sex unions' rejection has become an actual topic for legislation, not only in Russia, but also in several American states, where religious movements are particularly strong. For example, in February 2014, the lower house of the Kansas Parliament vote (72 against 42) for the law adoption, entitling the right for all workers in Kansas not to serve married couples if some features of their relationships are in the contradiction to their religious marriage beliefs. This right extends to civil servants and private business. However, in the case of civil servants, the State must still provide services to a couple, but they will be in need to pick up a government official with less harsh religious beliefs. Private business, in general, can refuse their services, if an employee replacement is related to unjustified costs. Different forms of prohibitions on gay propaganda work in eight out of 50 US states (USA Adopted Antigay Law, 2009).
Legalization of same-sex relationships is a problem for those whose religious beliefs do not accept homosexual unions. This conflict came to court in the United Kingdom in 2009 in Ladele vs London Borough of Islington. Lilian Ladel worked as marriages registrar. Since 2005, when the Civil unions law came into force, same-sex unions registration became her duties. Due to religious beliefs, she refused to carry out new duties and was prosecuted by the employer (Lewis & Sargeant, 2011). In this case, the Court sided with the employer, because they did not found unequal treatment on religion grounds, when the employer equally ordered all registrars to comply with the law. New British law allows every church to decide whether they will deal with the same-sex marriages registration or not.
Supporters of same-sex marriage in the United States talk about the inadmissibility of the religious beliefs using the argument of social phenomena to be in a secular state. The legislation on marriages registration cannot be
459
ANNALES ■ Ser. hist. sociol. ■ 25 ■ 2015 ■ 3
Elena ISAEVA et ah GENDER AND CIVIC ENGAGEMENT IN MODERN RUSSIA, 451-468
determined by church rules. Supporters of gay marriage use the case of the second marriage registration, as an illustration of actual state ignoring of religious beliefs. The Catholic Church does not recognize divorce, so consider second marriage illegal respectively. However, none of the American states prohibits marriage re-entry (Spilsbury, 2012).
Registered marriage, both abroad and in Russia, gives spouses certain guarantees and privileges. These include family health insurance, family tax benefits, hereditary rights, and the rights not to testify against a spouse in court, and many others, even the household benefits, for example, and a family ticket to the swimming pool. Same-sex couples insist on their union legalization, not only because they want to demonstrate the legitimacy of their relationship (not temporary, but permanent in nature), but also rely on the statutory benefits for spouses (Andryszewski, 2012). Additional questions that same-sex couples confront to the legislator is the question of adoption (Spilsbury, 2012).
Currently, 17 US states legalized same-sex marriage, and 10 recognize certain types of same-sex unions. Most same-sex couples living in the US, according to the research results, are based in California (92,000), New York (46,000), Texas (43,000), Florida (43,000), and Illinois (23,000). A number of US states have gone further, by allowing same-sex couples to adopt children. Several states allow same-sex partner to adopt a child of the biological parent. This adoption is similar to the adoption of a child in heterosexual family. Only 17 US states and the District of Columbia somehow allow the adoption of children by same-sex couples. Among these 17 states, 12 states (California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Indiana, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, and Vermont, to name) and the District of Columbia allowed same-sex couples to adopt children either by statute or through court cases (Wardle, Nolan, 2011). In five other states (Iowa, Nevada, Oregon, Tennessee, and Washington, to name) jurisprudence and legislation, according to Professor Vardla, will probably come to the same decision. However, thirty-three US states do not allow adoption by same-sex partners or spouses (Wardle, 2010). However, nine states (Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Kentucky, Mississippi, Nebraska, Ohio, Utah, and Wisconsin, to name) expressly prohibit the adoption of children by homosexual partners or individually homosexuals at the legislative level. In 23 states (Alaska, Arizona, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming, to name), the issue has not yet been resolved at the legislative level and the level of judicial practice, however the traditional rule of the adoption possibility only by opposite-sex partners still exists. In Oklahoma, this issue is likely to be solved, according to Professor
Wardle, negatively (Wardle, 2010). Parents' sexual behavior in most states of America is one of the criteria for determining the most beneficial family for a child by adoption agencies.
The legalization of same-sex unions conceptually affects both legal tenets and moral norms prevailing in society. The population of a particular State, that decide to legally recognize the new concept of family relations, must be prepared to accept homosexual marriage as a mechanism aimed at achieving equality, not as a weapon of destruction of the traditional family institution that is actually very debatable. At the same time, experience shows that policy decisions cannot withstand even massive protest actions of traditional marriage supporters. Protests in Paris in the spring of 2013, against the legalization of gay marriage, did not affect the selected policy. After the 800 thousand people demonstration in Paris, the mayor of the French capital, Bertrand Delanoe, who does not hide his homosexual orientation, said that protesters caused serious damage to the Champs de Mars lawns and estimated damage of 100 thousand euros. He did not rule out that the invoice for that amount would submit to the Ministry of Internal Affairs, since this agency has authorized the rally. In response, opponents of same-sex marriages have sent to Paris officials about nine thousand checks averaging about 10 cents.
We should also note the growing ideological and practical opposition to the variety of civic engagement by both formal and informal religious associations - in a relatively tolerant, and in an aggressive manner. However, it should be stated that religion and its various institutions gain more and more weight in the public space, playing a significant role in shaping public opinion and the people's will, using all forms of public life participation - from Internet activity, training, and pickets to protest actions. Secular and clerical context of civil activities is mutated and crossed.
It is evident that gender is not only a women's issue. This concept is indicated by a set of social norms of human behavior based on gender. According to Pushkare-va, N. (1998), there is no unanimity in Western science on the question of whether to treat gender as "the thinking construct", or as just scientific definition, determining the social and cultural function of sex, and distinguishing them from biological functions, or «construct social». The latter case assumed at least four groups of characteristics: biological sex, gender stereotypes, gender role, and sex-rules identity. The notions of "gender display", or "gender system" (as less "abstruse"), are using accordingly. They mean "ideas, institutions, behavior, formal and informal rules, and other social interactions, prescribed in accordance with the sex". In Russian social science, basis of gender - being opposed to the west, where the emphasis is traditionally done on biological, psychological, and cultural differences between the sexes - "is social initially, because an individual, regardless of gender, is born and develops (unless, of
460
ANNALES ■ Ser. hist. sociol. ■ 25 ■ 2015 ■ 3
Elena ISAEVA et ah GENDER AND CIVIC ENGAGEMENT IN MODERN RUSSIA, 451-468
course, it is not "Mougli") in the society, in a diverse system of social connections and relationships" (Push-kareva, 1998).
Close attention to the gender theme was paid in 1970-1990s, as another round of relevance after the stage of late XIX - early XX century created new areas of research. So, history of women appeared initially as a kind of attempt to "rewrite history" or, from the Davin's, E., point of view, striving to overcome the almost absolute dominance of the old stories, accompanied by a willingness to replace the common term of «history» (which can be read as «his story», literally: «its history», «history of man») a new term used to describe a different approach to the study of the past, namely the term «her story» (i.e., «its history», «History of a Woman") (Sillaste, 2004). However, gradually, the interpretation of the concept of "gender" has changed in the direction of considering it not in terms of conceptualizing male domination, but as a system of all forms of interaction and "antagonism" of male and female. The study of femininity became impossible without an analysis of masculinity - "women's history" will inevitably meet with "a history of men" (Pushkareva, 1998).
Social and economic aspects become traditional objects of gender-historical research. Prospect of gender approach to political history research emerged more or less clear, with the history of the marginalization of women and their struggle for political and civil rights and freedoms, the analyst of forms "hidden influence on politics and labeled political behavior of women" (before the actualization of "women's issue" and Suffrage movement). However, Pushkareva, N. L., considers gender studies in the field of cultural research, the history of mentalities and social consciousness the most promising. The study of masculinity appeared in sociology, gender asymmetry, and in linguistics, etc. (Tarusina, Isaeva, 2013).
Morozova, O., mentioned that women participate in the political life more indirectly than in public - on the optional roles of advisers, aides, speechwriters, press secretaries, and so on (Morozova, 2008). Another model can be an option - a "partnership of professionals", which contemplates the realization of the idea "there is no sex in politics". However, this is not so much a positive gender problem neutralization, but "changeling", that explains very actual unrepresentative situation through formal equality on the basis of different opportunities for men and women in political identity.
Religious context of gender is recent trend (Tarusina, Isaeva, 2013). Semi-official ideological "coalescence" of the church with the state political machine returns Russian society, through Orthodoxy (almost everywhere), and Mohammedanism (in the respective national territories), to the idea of a traditional female destiny, denying woman's right to control her body, transforming it, in the
case of abortion, in a "killer", and so on. Moreover, the statement of representative of God only through man-priest does not contribute to modernizing and leveling the gender gap. (Bowing to the Mother of God, in our opinion, can be a kind of compromise between apparent patriarchal way of church government and women religious and the subordinate position (Polenina, Skurko, 2009)). A vivid example of the peculiar relationship between the state and religion was the Supreme Court satisfaction of the Russian Muslim groups claim about the abolition of the Ministry of Interior order, prohibiting citizens to be photographed for a passport in hats, hijab headscarves are also among them1.
It is obvious that gender issue is blurring in various ways, the reorientation of emphasis or, alternatively, an open preservation of traditional solving approaches -these are not the only social mechanisms of real equality achievement and social gender equity.
PUBLIC CONTROL
Public control and its mechanisms in Russia are currently the most topical aspects of life of civil society, and important factor and indicator of its development, as well as one of the key elements in the formation of feedback from society and government. The legitimacy and the relative simplicity of public control application forms contribute to the involvement of citizens in the exercise of their right to participate in state management, which is supported by Article 32 of the Constitution. This can have a positive influence on their detachment from the specified activity that can be proved by sociological research; reduce the degree of indifference, which is directly related to the growth of distrust in the government, lack of confidence that in fact protects the interests of the people, and not just their own.
In Russia, various dialogue platforms (i.e., public chambers, public councils) are officially secured and have the authority to expertise, to participate in formation of independent evaluation of work of certain institutions. Public oversight committees, e.g., public councils on internal affairs, the penal, among others, are established in majority of Russian regions in order to monitor rights of people for detention. Public hearings on infrastructure development, public utilities, etc. take place at the regional and municipal levels.
The formation of the federal regulatory framework, providing regulation mechanisms for public control, is relatively recent. However, this process is so dynamic that the objects of control in the Russian regions have come to a clear understanding of inevitability, and demand on public inspection, verification, monitoring, and other forms of civic engagement. At the same time, regulatory sources for public control are still extremely small in Russian regions. In 2014, among complex type
1 For instance, under French Law it is prohibited to wear religious symbols in governmental and educational institutions.
461
ANNALES ■ Ser. hist. sociol. ■ 25 ■ 2015 ■ 3
Elena ISAEVA et al: GENDER AND CIVIC ENGAGEMENT IN MODERN RUSSIA, 451-468
acts, only two should be mentioned, i.e., the laws of Perm' Krai and the Republic of Sakha (Yakutiya). Sectorial, specialized acts on public control, for example, in the field of ecology are much more common.
Adopted in 2014, the Federal Law "On Basis of Public Control in the Russian Federation" creates a basic prerequisite for systematization of legal regulation of this type of civic engagement in regions of Russia. Its purpose is to monitor activities of state and local governments, and other organizations that have certain public authority for public inspection, analysis and evaluation of published legal acts. Thus, the list of control subjects appears to be narrowed, comparing to the original project, thus, it excludes citizens and their associations, and non-profit organization. The law preserves the structures that already possess the relevant socio-control power, such as public chambers of all levels (from federal to municipal), community councils, and supervisory commissions. Associations and other non-profit organizations are entitled to act as organizers of public discussion and monitoring. Range of public control forms became also narrow: monitoring, inspection, examination, discussion remained intact, while survey and public report of heads of agencies were excluded from the direct reference. However, as soon as the list is not exhaustive, other forms of control may be used, if they do not conflict with federal law. The subjects of control are entitled to form associations and to undertake joint activities. The implementation of this law is relevant, because in case of mass creation of community councils and various thematic working groups of the Public Chamber, there crossing control initiatives are possible, with their surplus in one area, and lack of in the other.
At the same time, the law is excessively frame, because it does not contain control mechanisms, does not stipulate possibility (that is mentioned in the foreseen draft of the act) for subjects and objects of social control to register in a special electronic resource center. The law is not innovative, because, in fact, it does not contain anything fundamentally different, which is not contained in other similar acts (for example, the Federal Law «On the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation»). Its main achievement is generalization of tasks, forms, subjects and objects of public control, statement of public recognition of the value of this type of civil society activity. However, his vague wording allows regions of the Russian Federation to create original ideas about various compositions of public control in regional
legislation (although, as analysis of legislative practice shows, similar results can be achieved only in a smaller part of regions).
In considering implementation of the civil (public) control in practice, we try to determine readiness of population to take part in civil control of public authorities, and local government; and to identify the most common practice of civilian control, used by NGOs, to determine the attitude of the authorities to such activity.
On April 14, 2014, Public Opinion Foundation published data on assessment of readiness of Russians to unite, and to stand up for their rights (Are Russians Ready to Defend Their Rights? 2014). Despite the low readiness to defend their rights, more than half of Russians (52%) say that they are willing to join the fight for their rights with others. The most active are the young respondents (59%), and urban residents in number of from 50 to 250 thousand of people (61%). Not ready for joint action in this area are 32% of Russians, which are aged people with low incomes, living in cities-millionaires.
47% of respondents believe that people are not ready to defend their rights, while 36% believe that citizens are ready at 18% of abstentions. At the same time, more educated a respondent is, less sure they are about citizens' readiness to defend their rights. 40% of respondents with secondary or elementary education are confident in readiness of citizens, among respondents with secondary special education - 37%, with high education - 28%, correspondingly. Another criterion is locality type of the respondent. Thus, in Moscow, only 22% of Russians are convinced of willingness to defend their rights; in the cities-millionaires - 26%, in cities with populations of 250,000 to 1,000,000 - 32%; in cities with populations less than 250,000, and urban-type settlements, their share - 44%, in rural areas - 39%, correspondingly.
Among 1500 respondents, 52% are willing to join other people in order to defend their rights, 32% - are not ready, 18% - abstained. More often than others, are willing to join: Internet audience (59%), 18-30 years (59%), residents of cities with populations of 50 000 to 250 000 people (61%), residents of the Urals Federal District (64%). Most of others, who are not ready to unite, are inhabitants of the Volga Federal District (38%), with an income of less than 9,000 rubles (40%), people older than 60 years (43%), and residents of cities-millionaires (44%).
	Average
population	3,75
NGO representatives	3,52
government officials	3,70
Table 6. What do you think to what extent civilian control is developed in the Yaroslavl' region? (1 to 10 points)
462
ANNALES ■ Ser. hist. sociol. ■ 25 ■ 2015 ■ 3
Elena ISAEVA et ah GENDER AND CIVIC ENGAGEMENT IN MODERN RUSSIA, 451-468
	%
Yes, personally experienced	26,0
I heard that friends faced with such situation	16,4
I heard of such cases in general	13,8
I never heard of it	34,7
Hard to answer	9,1
Table 7. Have you or your friends ever faced with a situation when there was a need for you to protect legal rights from local or regional authorities? (Population)
As research results demonstrate, the level of civilian control in the Yaroslavl' region is relatively low - survey participants rated it in 3.7 points on average (see Table 6).
In general, a significant number of inhabitants personally experienced situations when they needed to defend their legitimate interests from local and regional authorities (26%). This is mostly the case for rural areas (40% of population), less in Yaroslavl', and small and medium-sized cities in the region (23%), correspondingly. Every second citizen who participated in such practices said that they managed to solve their problems, protect their rights (48%), but, another 24% said that the problem was solved partially. Most of these cases occurred in the housing sector (30%), and health care (11%).
It is noteworthy that 34.7% of the Yaroslavl' region population have never heard of such precedents (Table 7).
Most of the citizens who applied to procedures of public control, achieve their objectives fully, or partially. This indicates that these mechanisms are effective. Therefore, a third of respondents who had not heard of such situations should be aware that there are ways to solve problems.
70% of the population is aware that there is a need for creating citizens association in order to interact with public authorities, 15% - said that there is no need to unite. Willingness to participate in such associations is expressed by more than a half of questioned citizens
(54%). At the same time, during the study no significant differences were found on such socio-demographic categories, as gender, age, and education in the structure of potential participants of these associations.
Most NGO representatives consider participation of public organizations to be necessary in implementation of civil control: 85% chose "yes", and "probably yes." 40% of surveyed organizations have participated in formal types of civilian control. Public hearings (attended by 33% of organizations), public monitoring (24%), public reports of federal and regional executive authorities, municipal authorities (24%), public discussion, and public examination (22%) are the most common forms of civil society participation. Less frequent is participation in public inspection (13%), or public inquiry (7%). Frequency of participation in similar initiatives in most organizations ranges from one to five cases.
Most of organizations that are not involved in monitoring activities of federal and local government do not have any technique for its implementation (26% of organizations). Complexity of civilian control implementation (13%), lack of confidence in the success of civilian control (11%), authority's ignorance to the results of civilian control (9.3%), lack of time, and excessive employment (9.3%), among others, were mentioned as reasons to not participate.
During the research, leaders of NGOs were asked to assess what forms of social control, in their opinion,
Response	Effective (%)	Convenient (%)
Public examination	22,2%	13,0%
Public inspection	14,8%	3,7%
Public monitoring	9,3%	16,7%
Public reports by federal, and regional executive, and municipal authorities	7,4%	13,0%
Public hearing	3,7%	9,3%
Public discussion	3,7%	7,4%
Public inquiry	3,7%	0%
Pard to answer	48,1%	44,4%
Table 8. The most effective and convenient form of civilian control (representatives of NGOs)
463
ANNALES ■ Ser. hist. sociol. ■ 25 ■ 2015 ■ 3
Elena ISAEVA et ah GENDER AND CIVIC ENGAGEMENT IN MODERN RUSSIA, 451-468
Reply	%
Yes	3,7
Rather yes	53,7
Rather no	27,8
No	3,7
Hard to answer	11,1
Table 9. Do you think that the state is ready to develop civil control institutions? (NGOs representatives)
are the most effective (Table 8). Assigned task caused difficulty for the half of the NGO representatives' (48%). Just over 20% of nonprofit organizations managers indicated that the most effective form is public examination, 15% - social verification; and 9% of NGO representatives mentioned public monitoring as the most effective form of civilian control. The most convenient forms of civilian control are believed to be public monitoring (16.7%), public examination (13%), and public reports by federal, and regional executive, and municipal authorities (13.0%).
The lack of information about civilian control is the main problem associated with its implementation. Therefore, there are a large number of abstentions in the evaluation. People do not know how to implement it and in what way it can help. Educational work aims at changing the situation, which includes seminars, training events, and handling useful literature on methods of civilian control.
Most of the surveyed community leaders believe that the state is ready to develop the institutions of civil control - 57.4% (the answers "yes", "probably yes"). The opposite view is held by 30.5% of representatives of the third sector (Table 9).
The vast majority of answers with the prefix "most" indicate uncertainty regarding the development of institutions of civil control. On the one hand, the mood on this issue is more optimistic. On the other, it is not
clear what will be a stimulus to the development of this sphere. Whether political will of public bodies will play the leading role or the initiative will come from the public.
The most common form of civilian control, according to the survey, is public report by federal and regional executive, and municipal authorities. This form is used by 37% of authorities (only 71 times). This form has been rated by the authorities as the most efficient (average - 3.7 points on a scale of 5).
Public hearings are the second most common type of representatives' participation. 31% of the experts noted that this form applied to their activity (the frequency of occurrence - 45 times). Effectiveness of implementation of this form was evaluated slightly above average - 2.8 points. Approximately every tenth expert pointed out that such forms as public examination, public inspection, public monitoring, and public discussion were used in their activities. Experts evaluated the last one very high -3.1 points, slightly above average. The experts evaluated other forms of civilian control below average.
Every other representative of the government believes that the most beneficial for their activities is a public report (Table 10). Public debate, monitoring, examination are also common among other forms of civilian control. Despite the fact that the public hearing is the second most popular form of public control, only 17% of the authorities consider this form useful for their activities.
Format	%
Public reports by federal and regional executive, and municipal authorities	50,0%
Public discussion	36,5%
Public monitoring	32,7%
Public examination	28,8%
Public hearing	17,3%
Public inspection	5,8%
Public inquiry	5,8%
Other	1,9%
Hard to answer	7,7%
Table 10. What mechanisms of civilian control you consider useful for your activities (Government officials)
464
ANNALES ■ Ser. hist. sociol. ■ 25 ■ 2015 ■ 3
Elena ISAEVA et ah GENDER AND CIVIC ENGAGEMENT IN MODERN RUSSIA, 451-468
	%
Yes, always	34,6
Yes, partially	21,2
Yes, but very rarely	17,3
No, do not take into account	7,7
Hard to answer	19,2
Table 11. Do you take into account the results of civilian control? (Government officials)
Here are given ideas to improve the forms of civil control, which can be distinguished from proposals of the authorities' representatives, quote: "Informing the public about the results of civilian control", "consider the level of education and competence for all possible candidates of public commissions", "an appropriate legal framework, the actual adoption of the regional law on public control", "making personnel decisions based on people's estimation", "monitoring and coordination of investigative journalism on topics related to specific challenges and problems arising in implementation of priority national projects", unquote.
Among the main challenges of realization of civilian control, government officials note the following: the problem of competence of regulatory bodies, low initiative of citizens, "closed bodies - formalism and indifference of officials," no need for the society to engage in civilian control.
56% of the government officials indicated that in general they take into account the results of civilian control (Table 11).
The tools of civilian control will be effective and popular, if their realization will attract competent people. It is important for individuals to be motivated in community service. Mutual interest in the work of all involved parties, the principle of the inadmissibility of "doing for show", and creating a visible activity are also important. Thus, proposed establishment of regulatory foundations of civilian control in order to make this process transparent and open to the public are crucially important.
More than half of experts believe, with varying degrees of confidence, that the government is ready to develop the institution of public control. However, position on the choice of the dominant factors is not determined (whether it is the political will or the public initiative). While it is also clear that consolidation of forms and techniques of civic activity does not give expected result, thus, public hearing on the budget does not involve an explicit public attention, and prompts low demand on law examination. Community Government portal that was created for discussion of strategic documents on regional development, does not raise much interest from civil society activists, that can be explained by inertia, lack of motivation, and lack of relevant practical experience in civic engagement.
CONCLUSIONS
Research on trends and components of civil activity in Russian society has shown that it is directly linked to development of civil society institutions, which have gone through a long process of formation and are currently manifested in various forms. Social movements and non-profit organizations, initiative groups of civil society activists, protest movements, expert public commissions, community committees, and unions perform as forms of civic engagement. It is proved that civil activity can manifest protest that requires changing.
New mechanisms of civic engagement are expanding the boundaries of citizens' initiatives, with the unions and a variety of interactions taking place on the Internet. Civic engagement aims at using more operational relationship in on-line platforms for discussion, with positive results of a number of civil campaigns raising the level of civic responsibility.
Thus, the current stage of civil society development in Russia bears the emergence of new forms of expression and promotion interests of society. The state does not remain on the sidelines, and each year pays more attention to the third sector. The conversion has been done in legislation on NGOs, and in increasing their funding. Revitalization of NGOs, growth of civil movements, development of Internet technology, and state work are few yielding results. Importance of civil society is increasing, as well as the number of people involved in the NGOs activities and civil movements, and qualities of civic participation are becoming very intense.
We can also talk about increasing attention to social initiatives in the country. They are based on already proven effective movements and organizations that are built on the network principle. New mechanisms expand scope of citizens' initiative, where interaction takes place via Internet. Implementation of civic engagement can be implemented through more operational relationship, online forums and discussion. Positive results of some civil campaigns raise the level of civic responsibility.
The main difficulty in the existence of associations is connected with the involvement of supporters in relationship between the authorities and publics. If a public organization conducts its activities on an ongoing basis,
465
ANNALES ■ Ser. hist. sociol. ■ 25 ■ 2015 ■ 3
Elena ISAEVA et ah GENDER AND CIVIC ENGAGEMENT IN MODERN RUSSIA, 451-468
they face with a difficult task to explain the importance of its objectives and working methods. Attitude towards them is still not unique in the society.
A key resource for public sector is enthusiastic motivation. Lack of motivation may push public initiatives to naught. The disadvantage of this resource can be linked to the fact that social benefits of activities are difficult to calculate, i.e., express financially. Often, success of an action or campaign is visible only in the medium or long term. This is an obstacle to attract supporters, volunteers, material resources, and sponsors.
Tools of civilian control will be effective and popular, if their implementation attracts competent people. It is also important for individuals to be motivated to influence community service. Taking into account interest of all involved participants, principle of the inadmissibility of "doing for show" and creating a visible activity are also significant. Thus, proposed establishment of normative base of public control will make the process transparent and open to the public.
More conditions for implementation of civic engagement are formed in the present Russia. Revitalization of
NGOs, growth in civil movements, and state work are aimed at the third sector, producing results. Importance of civil society is growing, as well as the number of people that are involved in activities of NGOs, and civil movements. Every year more funding from the federal, regional, and local budgets is allocated on activities of public organizations and movements.
The Russian Federation is currently developing new mechanisms for implementation of civil activity; the quality of the citizens' participation is also changing. Citizens participate in various social processes more meaningfully, they are self-fulfilling themselves, and they get together with like-minded people, and try to improve the society around them.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This paper is prepared with the support of Russian Foundation for Humanities (Project # 15-33-01262 "Evaluation of the implementation of regularity mechanisms provided for activation of civic participation in modern Russia")
spol in državljansko udejstvovanje v sodobni rusiji
Elena ISAEVA
Yaroslavl Demidov State University, Department of Social and Family Law 10 Soviet Street, 150000, Jaroslavl, Russian Federation e-mail: elenia2000@mail.ru
Alexander SOKOLOV
Yaroslavl Demidov State University, Department of Socio-Political Theories 10 Soviet Street, 150000, Jaroslavl, Russian Federation e-mail: alex8119@mail.ru
Nadejda TARUSINA
Yaroslavl Demidov State University, Department of Social and Family Law 10 Soviet Street, 150000, Jaroslavl, Russian Federation
POVZETEK
Raziskava o trendih in komponentah državljanske aktivnosti v ruski družbi je pokazala, da je angažiranje neposredno povezano z razvojem institucij civilne družbe, ki so iz dolgega procesa formiranja izšle v različnih oblikah. Družbena gibanja in neprofitne organizacije, skupinske iniciative aktivistov civilne družbe, protestna gibanja, komisije strokovnih javnosti, odbori krajevnih skupnosti in razna združenja delujejo kot oblike državljanskega udejstvo-vanja. Novi mehanizmi državljanskega angažiranja širijo meje državljanskih pobud, saj se združe(va)nja in paleta interakcij odvijajo na spletu. Cilj državljanskega udejstvovanja je doseči bolje delujoč odnos na spletnih platformah za razprave, ob čemer pozitivni rezultati številnih civilnih akcij dvigujejo raven državljanske odgovornosti. V sedanji fazi razvoja se civilna družba v Rusiji tako sooča s pojavom novih oblik izražanja in spodbujanja družbenih interesov. Med že doseženimi rezultati so oživitev nevladnih organizacij, porast civilnih gibanj, razvoj spletne tehnologije in
466
ANNALES ■ Ser. hist. sociol. ■ 25 ■ 2015 ■ 3
Elena ISAEVA et al: GENDER AND CIVIC ENGAGEMENT IN MODERN RUSSIA, 451-468
državno delo. Pomen civilne družbe se krepi, narašča tudi število ljudi, vključenih v dejavnosti nevladnih organizacij in civilnih gibanj, intenzivnost državljanske soudeležbe postaja zelo velika. Lahko govorimo tudi o naraščajoči pozornosti do družbenih iniciativ v državi.
Ključne besede: državljansko udejstvovanje, spol, nadzor javnosti, institucije civilne družbe
REREFENCES
Andryszewski, T. (2012): Same-Sex Marriage. Minneapolis, Twenty-First Century Books.
Bondarenko, T. (2009): Socializing in Virtual World of Internet. Don State Technical University Reporter, 9, 4, 728-735.
Bykov, I. (2013): Net Political Communication: Theory, Practice, and Methods for Research. Saint Petersburg, SPbGU.
Dyatlov, A. (2008): Social Resources in Context of "Dynamic Field". Theory and Practice of Social Development, 1, 26-79.
El-Nawawy, M., Khamis, S. (2013): Egyptian Revolution 2.0: Political Blogging, Civic Engagement, and Citizen Journalism. New York, NY, Palgrave Macmillan.
Feifer, G. (2014): Russians: People behind Power. New York, Boston, Twelve.
Gerasimenko, A. P. (2006): Internet evolution as a tool for the free exchange of information in the present and future. Russia and the Asia-Pacific region, 4, 197-200.
Gerges, F. A. (2014): The new Middle East: protest and revolution in the Arab World. New York, Cambridge University Press.
Gillion, D. Q. (2013): Political Power of Protest: Minority Activism, and Public Policy Shifting. Cambridge, New York, Cambridge University Press.
Internet in Russia: Dynamics of Spreading. Winter 2013-2014. Public Opinion Fund. Retrived form http:// fom.ru/SMI-i-internet/11417. Accessed on May 30, 2014.
Irkhin, Y. (1996): Politics. Moscow, Publishing House of Nations Friendship University.
Isaeva, E. (2012): Same-Sex Marriages and Kids: Aspects of British and American Legislation. Social and Legal Notebook, 2, 139.
Isaeva, E., Sochneva, O. (2012): Upbringing by Same-Sex Couples: Theory and Practice. Historic and Social Thought 5(15), 9-13.
Isaeva, E., Sokolov, A. (2015): Formation of the Volunteering Institute in Russia as an Indicator of the Civil
Society Development. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 6, 2, 402-408.
Isaeva, E., Maklashyn, I., Sokolov, A. & A. Frolov (2015): Regional Aspects of Civic Activism in Contemporary Russia (in example of the Yaroslavl' region). Moscow, Prospect.
Ivanov, D. (2002): Imperative of Virtual Reality: Modern Theories of Social Transformations. Saint Petersburg.
Kiesbye, S. (2013): Occupy Movement. Detroit, Gre-enhaven Press.
Kinsbursky, A., Topalov, M. (2006): Russian "civil swing": from mass protests to reforms support. Power, 5, 51-58.
Kirichek, A. I. (2011): On the issue of content categories differentiation "political activity", "political behavior" and "political participation". Society: politics, economics and law, 3, 34-37.
Kleman, K. (2007): Challenge for Personal Attitudes. Civic Protest Movements within Close Political System. Independent Thought, 1, 2-3.
Kostyushev, V. (2009): Sociology of Public Movements. Study Course.
Kurochkin, A. (2005): Institutalization of Nets in Governing Russian Educational System. Politeks, 2, 66-70.
Lewis, D., Sargeant, M. (2011): Employment Law. Concentrate. London, Oxford University Press.
Lukashenko, A. (2013). There will be No Same-Sex Marriages as long as I am President. NTV. Retrieved from http://www.ntv.ru/novosti/564576/. Accessed on July 20, 2013.
Mansley, D. (2014): Collective Violence, Democracy and Protest Policy. Abingdon, Oxon, Routledge.
Mersiyanova, I., Jacobson, L. (2007): Civic Activity of Population and Perception of Civil Society Development. Moscow.
Milan, S. (2013): Social Movement and Its Technique: Wiring Social Transformation. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire, New York, Palgrave Macmillan.
Mitchell, W. J. T. (2013): Occupy: Three Inquiries in Disobedience. Chicago, London, The University of Chicago Press.
467
ANNALES ■ Ser. hist. sociol. ■ 25 ■ 2015 ■ 3
Elena ISAEVA et ah GENDER AND CIVIC ENGAGEMENT IN MODERN RUSSIA, 451-468
Morozova, O. E. (2008): Transformation of gender boundaries in the field of economic and political life of Russian society. Gender discrimination, 9, 12, 58-65.
Morozova, E., Miroshnichenko, I. (2011): Net Communities under Conditions of Emergency; New Opportunities for Civils and Power. Polis: Political Investigations, 1, 140-152.
Nagaitsev, V. V., Noyanzina, O. E. & N. P. Goncharov (2011): Potential of population's protests of modern Russian. News of Altai State University, 2-1, 233-236
Nikovskaya, L. I., Yakimets V. N. & M. A. Moloko-va (2011): Civil initiatives and modernization of Russia. Moscow.
6 Beachain, D., Polese, A. (2010): Colour Revolutions in Former Soviet Republics: Successes and Failures. New York, Routledge.
Patrushev, S. V., Aivazova, S. T., Kertman, T. D., Cleman, K. M., Mashezerskaya, L. Y., Miryasova, O. A., Pavlova, T. V., Hlopin A. D. & T. A. Tsysina (2008): Confidence, civil actions, policies: the experience of the old and new democracies. Russia reformed. Yearbook. Moscow, Institute of Sociology.
Polenina, S., Skurko, E. (2009): Law, Gender, and Culture in Globalization. Moscow.
Pushkareva, N. (1998): Woman. Gender. Culture. Moscow, MZGI.
Report on State of Civil Society in Russian Federation in 2013. Moscow, Civic Chamber of the Russian Federation, 45.
Rice, R. (2013): New Politics of Protest: Indigenous Mobilization in Latin America's Neo-Liberal Era. University of Arizona Press.
Robertson, G. B. (2011): Politics of Protest in Hybrid Regimes: Managing Dissent in Post-Communist Russia. New York, Cambridge University Press.
Shestopal, E. B. (2000): The psychological profile of Russian policy in 1990s. Moscow, ROSSPEN.
Sillaste, G. (2004): Gender Sociology: State, Contradictions, and Perspective. Social Research, 9, 78.
Singh, P., Chatterjee, K. (2013): Interpreting Arab Spring: Significance of New Arab Awakening? New Delhi, KW Publishers.
Skobelina, N. A. (2010): Relative deprivation as an indicator of an unstable society. Saratov University News, 10, 4, 32-35.
Smorgunov, L. (2001): Net Approach to Politics and Administration. Polis: Political Investigations, 3, 103112.
Spilsbury, L. (2012): Same-Sex Marriage. New York, The Rosen Publishing Group.
Strizoe, A. L. (1999): Politics and Society: Social and philosophical aspects of the interaction. Volgograd.
Sviridenko, S. S. (1997): Information technologies in intellectual property. Moscow, MNEPU.
Tarusina, N. (2013): About Marriage Concept: Tendencies, Doctrines and Legislation. Social and Legal Notebook, 13, 85.
Tarusina, N., Isaeva, E. (2013): Gender: Neutralization and Positive Discrimination. Study Book. Yaroslavl.
Tarusina, N., Isaeva, E. (2014): Gender Tendency of Russian Political Activity from the Perspective of Jurisprudence. American Journal of Applied Sciences, 11, 12, 1976-1979.
Tihonov, D., Peskov, D. (2013): Vladimir Putin -Master of Compromising. Kommersant. Retrieved from http://www.kommersant.ru. Accessed on July 20, 2013.
Trubitsin, D. V. (2010): "Modernization" and "negative mobilization." Constructs and nature. Sociological researches, 4, 13-16.
USA Adopted Antigay Law. Retrieved from http:// www.drugoe.us/articles/21 -gay/1 31 00-kansas-antigay. Accessed on July 20, 2013.
Vershinina, D. (2008): Problem of Rights for Sexual Minorities in Context of Presidential Elections 2008 in USA. Reporter of Perm' State University, 8, 10, 47-58.
Wardle, L. D. (2005): The "Inner Lives" of Children in Lesbi-Gay Adoption: Narratives and Other Concerns. St. Thomas Law Review, 18, 511.
Wardle, L. D. (2010): Comparative Perspectives on Adoption of Children by Cohabiting, Nonmarital Couples and Partners. Arkansas Law Review, 63, 31, 86.
Wardle, L. D. (2010): Comparative Perspectives on Adoption of Children by Cohabiting, Non-Marital Couples and Partners. Arkansas Law Review, 62, 31, 47.
Wardle, L. D., Nolan, L. C. (2011): Family Law in the USA. London, Wolters Kluwer.
Wegren, S. (2013): Return to Putin's Russia: Past Imperfect, Future Uncertain. Lanham, Rowman & Little-field Publishers.
Yanitskii, O. (1995): Evolution of Environmental Movement in Modern Russia. Sociological Research, 8, 50-55.
468