What is a patriarchal family? Traditional patriarchal family: what is it Characteristics of a patriarchal family

The most common type of family is patriarchal. The name speaks for itself - the man is the head of the clan. In a global sense, he makes important decisions, decides the fate of his children, manages funds, etc.

According to the periodization of ethnographer M. M. Kovalevsky, the patriarchal family replaced matriarchy. The leadership of a woman in the family took place during the hunting life, about 2 million years ago, but with the transition to agriculture and the formation of communities, the woman lost her rights as the head, property began to become the property of the family, after which the man received the right to dispose. Kinship began to be celebrated along the male line; the entire community was subordinate to one person - the father, the husband. At the same time, the concept of the right of inheritance appeared, which has survived in some countries to this day.

Ancient Greece, Rome, Egypt existed on a single right of inheritance: royal families, as you know, passed their throne and crown from father to eldest son. The same principle persisted in the Middle Ages. Even if the heir was only a few years old, he was still crowned, and until he came of age, the country was ruled by an assigned guardian. Any woman, despite even the highest position in society, was just a woman - a keeper of the home.

Despite the fact that a lot has changed since those times, the patriarchal family is still a fairly common phenomenon. The right of inheritance in ordinary families has sunk into oblivion, society has become much more civilized, but patriarchy still means the dominance of men in the family.

Without going into scientific terms, a family with a man at the head is a common thing in the modern world. Despite the democratization of society and the equality of men and women, the husband is often the sole breadwinner in the family, and a woman, according to a globally established stereotype, must devote all her free time to household chores and childcare.

In a patriarchal family, the wife tacitly submits to her husband, and the children, in turn, obey their parents. The basis of a man’s dominance is his economic independence - he works, receives a salary, supports his family. Due to the fact that he is the breadwinner, he makes the main decisions: which club to enroll his child in, when he can buy his wife a fur coat, where to go on vacation in the summer. Even if the wife has a job and brings quite large amounts of money into the family, the husband still manages the finances.

In a patriarchal family there are divisions into types. Let's say that the husband brings the main income, the spouses have common topics of conversation, interests and understanding. Such a family will be quite happy, and both parties will be quite satisfied with life. In the case when a man does odd jobs and wants to seem in charge, but the woman still brings in the money, the wife will sooner or later rebel. She wants her lover to provide for her, but he is not able to fulfill his dreams, demanding submission. Such a marriage is practically doomed to failure, or constant quarrels. Another possible variant of the patriarchal type of family is an oligarch and Cinderella, whose relationship does not go beyond economic gain. This option is suitable for a woman who needs a rich sponsor and, say, a lover.

One way or another, patriarchal families have a place in the modern world. Many women are quite happy with the dominance of their spouse. After all, the fact that a man is the support of the family does not mean that a woman’s rights are violated. But there is someone to rely on.

Many people dream of having a large family, which can unite several generations of relatives. The patriarchal family is precisely this type of family relationship, where one family unites both relatives close in blood, as well as cousins, second cousins, uncles and aunts, the older generation and the younger.
In the patriarchal families of eastern Arab countries, which still exist in our world, where polygamy is officially permitted, the large composition of relatives is diluted by the husband’s numerous wives. The greatest concentration of such patriarchal families is concentrated there - in the east. Such family traditions were widely developed in many American, European and Eastern civilizations.
A man in such a family is given much more freedoms and rights than the fairer sex. The man here is the main breadwinner and provider of provisions and money. His wives do not work, manage the household, raise their common children and unquestioningly obey the will of their husband. Children are brought up in strictness, and from early childhood they are instilled with obedience and respect for older relatives. Experts in the social field of studying modern society believe that this type of relationship is especially humiliating, enslaving and discrimination for a woman.
The patriarchal family is the basis of the concept of a family business, when several generations of business are passed on from father to son, and relatives work for the benefit of the development of this business.
In modern society, the patriarchal family consists mainly of parents and their children. Sometimes grandparents join in, but the overall atmosphere is democratic. Spouses are increasingly asking each other for advice, but still, the main decisions remain with the man.
It is often quite difficult to build respectful and friendly relationships between members of a patriarchal family, consisting of brothers and sisters living under the same roof with their families, as well as the older generation. There is a potential conflict of interest here. Living by the same rules is problematic; the situation is also exacerbated by unequal property rights to housing, in which all members of one large family are forced to live.
That is why we can say that in practice patriarchal families are far from ideal. Most likely, they are based on the desire to pay tribute to traditions or the inability of young families to purchase their own housing and live independently. This type of family is acceptable for some, but not for others.

Of particular importance is the typology of families, which contains information about the structure of power in the family, the preferential family functions of men and women, and the specifics of intrafamily leadership. In accordance with these criteria, the following types of families are distinguished: traditional patriarchal, traditional matriarchal, neo-patriarchal, neo-matriarchal And egalitarian. The first four types of family can be called asymmetrical, the last type - symmetrical.

IN traditional patriarchal In the family, the husband is its undisputed head, the wife’s dependence on her husband, and the children’s dependence on their parents, is clearly expressed.

The man is assigned the role of “master”, “breadwinner”, “breadwinner”. Male authority is recognized without question or accepted under pressure. The dominance of paternal power is unlimited. The authority of other family members depends on their gender and age: older people are most revered, men have more rights than women. Clan interests prevail over individual ones. That's why such a family is called authoritarian-patriarchal.

A man makes a fundamental contribution to the material support of the family, manages its financial and economic resources, determines its status and social circle, and makes responsible decisions on the most important issues. He sorts out internal family disputes and represents the family outside. Male sexuality is given an active role, this attitude is concentrated in the concept of “potency”. The spouse is exempt from performing household duties. The wife is either a housewife or earns very little. The organization of normal life and consumption falls on her shoulders, and she is required to run the household in an exemplary manner and create a cozy and comfortable environment in the house. Her responsibilities also include looking after and raising children.

In its classic version, the patriarchal family is briefly characterized as follows: the husband is the sole head and patron of the family, female obedience is the natural duty of the wife. Marriage was perceived as a state established by God, in which a man and a woman live together, in mutual understanding, giving birth to offspring and thereby avoiding fornication. Thanks to the consecration by the church, marriage in the eyes of society acquired the features of constancy and durability. The vitality of marriage was determined by pragmatic goals: it made it possible to strengthen the financial position of the husband's family.

Famous patriarchal image- a virtuous wife. A woman's social activity was limited to household chores and daily care for the spiritual and physical needs of children. Children had to be raised in obedience and piety. The best qualities of a woman were recognition of her dependent position and service to her husband in marriage. It is appropriate here to recall the native Russian words “get married”, “married”. The meaning of female sexuality was seen in childbirth. The spouse is a representative of the superior sex, possessing natural physical and intellectual strength.

This cultural stereotype was reinforced by religious and legitimate formulas of male dominance, which localized women’s social space.

Distinctive features of a patriarchal family - patrilocality And patrilineality. Patrilocality consists in the fact that a woman follows her husband, that is, she settles in his father’s house. Sons, married and unmarried, live in the parental home; his daughters leave him only when they get married. This shows respect for the paternal family. In modern Russian families, the issue of the newlyweds’ place of residence is decided much more freely. Patrilineality means the calculation of kinship through the male line. Consequently, material assets are transferred to the heirs of the male line, and the father has the right to decide whether to reward his sons or not. Fathers of families are still interested in the birth of boys, “continuers of the family name,” at least as the first child. This position of young Russian men is subject to the unconscious “pressure” of centuries-old traditions.

In science, there are conflicting views on the problem of relationships between the patriarchal family, society and the state. Outstanding psychoanalyst Wilhelm Reich in his work “Psychology of the Masses and Fascism” he unambiguously expressed his point of view: “... an authoritarian society reproduces itself in the individual structures of the masses with the help of an authoritarian family... In the person of the father, the authoritarian state has its representative in every family, and therefore the family turns into the most important instrument of his power." For sons, deep identification with the father serves as the basis for emotional identification with any form of authority. In an authoritarian family, there is not only competition between adults and children, but also competition among children in their relationships with their parents, which can have more serious consequences.

According to another point of view, the patriarchal family protected individual rights from attacks on them by the state. Primary in it were the relations of spontaneous cooperation in the process of family production, thanks to which individual egoism was overcome. Views Elton Mayo one of the creators of the famous theory of human relations, can be attributed to the so-called neopaternalism.

The idea of ​​paternalism suggests that relationships in an enterprise or a company should be built on the basis of patriarchal, family ties, when the manager performs the function of a “father.”

Until the middle of the 20th century. traditional values ​​retained their influence in both Europe and Asia. But the process of transforming the family into a “moderately patriarchal” one was steadily gaining momentum. In the 50s in post-war Europe, there was a weakening of the dominant positions of fathers in almost all social strata.

Acceptance/rejection of the patriarchal model by contemporaries is largely determined by the decrease in the social and economic dependence of the wife on her husband. At the same time, working women perform the vast majority of household chores and provide psychological relief for their husbands and children. German historian R.Zider writes that the wife’s relationship with her husband is still of a service nature: “As before, satisfying the objective and subjective needs of the “main breadwinner” has absolute priority over the needs of the wife and children. Patriarchy has not yet been overcome at all. In any case, however, the patriarchal basic relations of family members, essentially socio-economic and determined by cultural tradition, are overlapped by increasingly partner-like forms of address.”

IN traditional matriarchal In the family, personal leadership belongs to the woman. Matriarchy, like patriarchy, did not exist among all peoples. But many peoples had maternal ancestry, for the mother's credibility is objective. At all times, the mother played an exceptional role in maintaining family ties. A woman’s ability to regulate interpersonal relationships and use indirect methods of influencing others helps to win the struggle for power. In some families with formal leadership of men V In reality, the dominant position is occupied by the woman.

If we talk about Russian family, then the feminine, maternal principle is more strongly expressed in her. I.S. Con reminds us that Russian wives and mothers, even in the pre-revolutionary era, were often strong, dominant, self-confident individuals. This is reflected in Russian classical literature: “He will stop a galloping horse and enter a burning hut.”

Under Soviet rule, the “strong woman syndrome” persisted and even intensified. Women bear the main responsibility for the family budget and solving primary issues of home life. Typical of Soviet times is the image of a peasant with a ruble or three rubles in his pocket, given out daily by his compassionate but powerful wife. This is not the fault, but the misfortune of a woman whose husband brought home a salary, the size of which he could little influence. The wife had to contrive and “stretch” this amount until the next salary. She had to take the reins into her own hands. This was the price for the stability of the existence of a socialist family.

The Russian woman's claims to leadership in the family can be understood based on the general trend in the history of Soviet society - the tendency towards the demasculinization of men. The most authoritative specialist in the field of gender psychology and sociology, I.S. Con suggests that neither in professional activity nor in socio-political life the average Soviet man could demonstrate traditionally masculine traits. The stereotypical image of a man includes such qualities as energy, initiative, courage, independence, and self-government. Social and sexual lack of freedom was aggravated by the feminization of all institutions and personified in dominant female images: mothers, teachers, etc. Under such conditions, the strategy of transferring family responsibility to the wife was psychologically justified. A woman hardly gained anything from the deformation of a man’s character. Where a husband rebelled against his wife's authority, she either endured rudeness and humiliation, or sacrificed her abilities and professional achievements. In a family where the husband accepted his subordinate position, the wife was deprived of the necessary support.

More harsh in his judgments V.N. Druzhinin:“...the dominant role of the Russian woman was imposed by the Soviet government and communist ideology, depriving the father of the main paternal functions.” Family relationships in a totalitarian society become psychobiological, rather than socio-psychological. A man is deprived of social and economic opportunities to provide for his family and raise children, his role as the main agent of socialization is reduced to nothing. The totalitarian state takes on the entire burden of responsibility and replaces the father.

At the same time, the importance of the natural psychobiological connection between the child and mother increases. Violation of this connection leads the family to disaster. Then the state and society are again forced to turn to the problems of motherhood. A “vicious circle of imaginary causes and real consequences” arises: “... in the modern Russian family, a woman wants (and is forced by force of circumstances) to rule undividedly and completely. A man is not able to provide for his family, bear responsibility for it and, accordingly, be a role model.” A way out of the current situation V.N. Druzhinin sees it as creating social conditions for the manifestation of male activity outside the family.

The division of family power is also realized in modern married couples. In order to prevent destructive conflicts, it is necessary that such a division suits both spouses and facilitates the family’s fulfillment of its functions. The traditional family model can be quite acceptable if the spouses' positions regarding the power structure are consistent. In relation to the family, the famous question of power is question of family leadership or, more precisely, primacy. The head of the family combines both a leader and a manager.

IN neopatriarchal family the strategic and business (instrumental) leader is the husband, A tactical and emotional (expressive) leader- wife. The spouse determines the long-term direction of the family's development, sets priority goals for its existence, chooses ways and means to achieve these goals, and formulates appropriate instructions and instructions for family members. He knows the current state of affairs well and foresees the possible consequences of decisions made. It is the spouse who plays the role of the authorized representative of the family in society; the position of the family in the outside world depends on his actions. The husband's (father's) extra-family activity - professional, social, political, etc. - is encouraged by the household. The man himself has high aspirations in this area, is distinguished by his business orientation, pragmatism, and cares about the material well-being and social status of his loved ones. A man’s worldview and life strategy serve as a guide for all family members. It sets the style of family life and ensures its implementation. The younger generation sees in their father an example of strong-willed qualities and organizational abilities.

The father is impressed by the children’s desire to express their opinions, realistically assess people and events, and successfully master the skills of independent activity. The wife finds support in her husband, and his work achievements become a source of pride for the whole family.

If the spouse is responsible for long-term planning of family affairs, the spouse develops short-term plans, which easily and quickly correlate with specific actions of adults and children. A woman’s prerogative is to build daily contacts between family members. It develops relationships of mutual assistance and cooperation. Being interested in increasing the cohesion of family members, she organizes joint events, the range of which can be extremely wide, from spring cleaning and Sunday lunches to anniversary celebrations. Her competence in the intricacies of home life is admirable. She is also in charge of the sphere of family leisure. She is endowed with sensitivity to the needs and emotions of all family members. The spouse adjusts the psychological climate in the family, creates an atmosphere of emotional and moral support, and develops her own leadership style and “support style.” The wife (mother) ensures the functioning of the family as an environment for emotional release. In a neopatriarchal family, the father acts as an expert for the children in business and production matters, and the mother in intimate and personal relationships.

IN neo-matriarchal For families, the situation is the opposite. A common feature of the considered family options is joint leadership of husband and wife while dividing their spheres of influence. Conflict in a marital dyad can arise due to an unclear distribution of spheres of influence or the claims of one of the spouses to a different role.

Egalitarian family assumes complete and true equality of husband and wife in all matters of family life without exception. The current Constitution of the Russian Federation and the Family Code of the Russian Federation state the principle of equality of men and women, which is the legal basis for the development of an egalitarian family.

The husband and wife make a (proportional) contribution to the material well-being of the family union, jointly run the household, jointly make all the most important decisions and are equally involved in caring for and raising children.

The role and importance of each spouse in shaping the psychological climate of the family is equal; the status of the family is determined by the spouse who has a higher position. The social circle is formed by both spouses. This marital union is called biarchate, or cooperatively symmetrical marriage. Being spouses means “running in the same team.” Apparently it’s more convenient to do it this way?!

In an egalitarian family, the principle of consistency in the positions of spouses takes on special significance. It is necessary to come to an agreement on a very flexible division of spheres of influence, on a high degree of interchangeability. Everyone should be ready to become a leader, business manager or educator. Disagreements that arise must be resolved through mutual agreements, compromises or mutually beneficial exchanges.

Children are full members of the family and, to the extent possible, participate in the discussion and implementation of decisions made. In their upbringing, humane methods are used, based on trust in the child’s personality and recognition of his rights. The child’s initiative and independence are encouraged, his needs for autonomy, individuality development, and creativity are respected. Children coming from such families may tend to use a similar pattern of relationships in their marriage.

The ideal model of an egalitarian family is presented in the concept of an open marriage, according to which it is believed that in marriage each of the spouses can remain themselves, reveal their abilities, and preserve their individuality. Spouses should not be “one body and one soul.” Marriage is built on mutual attraction and trust; spouses do not seek to manipulate each other’s behavior or subjugate their partner.

Principles of open marriage:

· You need to live in the present, based on realistic desires.

· Your partner's privacy should be respected.

· Communication should be open and based on the consideration: “say what you see and feel, but do not criticize.”

· Family roles should be fluid.

· The partnership should be open: everyone’s right to their own interests and hobbies should be respected.

· Equality is affirmed as a fair division of responsibilities and benefits.

· One should give another the opportunity to live according to his ideas; know your worth and maintain your dignity.

· You should trust each other and respect non-family interests.

Creating an egalitarian union is complex because it requires, firstly, a careful and scrupulous description of the rights and responsibilities of the spouses; secondly, a very high culture of communication, respect for the other person, mutual information and trust in relationships.

Some scientists speak of an egalitarian family as a conflict family: power functions are distributed, but their distribution is a constant basis for conflict. The egalitarian model in Russia is given the role of transition. Its appearance is due to the growing economic independence of the family from the totalitarian state, the increasing economic, social and political role of men. For our country, a family is considered preferable in which, along with equal rights, the father will take responsibility for the upbringing and maintenance of children while preserving other family responsibilities for the mother and children.

In Russia, younger and better educated men are more egalitarian and take on more household responsibilities, including fatherhood, than was previously the case.

Bi-career family

The modern family in the industrialized countries of the world has significant potential for development bicareer families. This is a type of family in which the professional interests of husband and wife are recognized as equally important, and both spouses successfully combine the values ​​of creating their own family and building a career in their chosen profession. Such a family has a high level of integration and unity of value orientations. Spouses evenly distribute household responsibilities among themselves, respect each other's professional plans, show mutual tolerance, and a willingness to provide help and support. Everyone knows that they can rely on their partner in any important endeavors.

Working and free time are used rationally, rest and leisure are organized in such a way that the resources expended at work are restored. Children express their involvement in family affairs, carry out household chores, and gain experience in cooperation with adults and with each other. They are taught responsibility and independence. Children are well acquainted with the professional activities of their parents.

Bi-career family has become a reality thanks to major changes in the social status of women. In the 50s, late 60s - early 70s of the XX century. In industrialized countries, the process of active involvement of women (including married women) in the sphere of productive labor began. In Germany, 40% of women who married in 1962 between the ages of 25 and 30 were employed. After 10 years, 48% of all married women in this age category were already working. By 1982 their share had risen to 59%. In the USSR in 1987, the total number of female workers and employees was 50.8%. In 1938, only one in five Americans approved of a married woman working in business or industry as long as her husband was able to support her. In 1993, 86% of respondents already approved of this type of woman, although almost two-thirds still believed that the ideal family situation for children is a situation where the father works and the mother sits at home and takes care of the children.

Firstly, economic growth has created a steady demand for female labor. The share of women's professions that require high qualifications, satisfy the need for self-affirmation, and allow them to occupy a certain position, in particular in the civil service, is increasing. Women's expansion is visible in the fields of healthcare, education and culture, as well as in government and municipal administration. Secondly, more and more women do not want to limit themselves to the roles of housewife and mother. Through their work, they strive to ensure their own income, relative independence from their husband, gain satisfaction from self-realization in the profession, and expand and enrich social contacts. Girls and young women began to consider professional activity as an integral component of their own lives, having independent value, and not as a transitional stage before marriage and the birth of children.

Most of them intend to implement a “three-phase model”: interrupt work for a while to care for children, and then return to work, combining it with family life. They take into account that opportunities for professional growth after a long break from work are significantly limited. A woman of mature years is also interested in continuing to work, which can fill her life with meaning when the grown-up children leave the parental home.

Despite significant transformations in gender roles, "women's dilemma" continues to exist. This is a conflict of roles, a contradiction between a woman’s professional employment and her family responsibilities. First of all, it is necessary to state the fact that true equality in the world of work has not been achieved. The female half of the population receives two-thirds of all working hours and only one-tenth of world wages; Women account for only a hundredth of the world's wealth. In the Soviet Union, women took lower paid and less prestigious jobs. Another typical image of the Soviet era is a woman in an orange vest, a railway lineman or asphalt paver. Is this the kind of equality you dreamed of? During the country's transition to a market economy, it was discovered that entrepreneurs did not want to hire pregnant women and women with many children. In North America, young men and women are equally likely to graduate from college. For Japanese men, this likelihood is three times higher.

Family care requires a lot of effort, and it is difficult for a woman to compete with men. The increased work activity of married women does not free them from preparing food, daily serving family members, caring for elderly parents, contacts with caregivers and teachers, etc.

Raising children remains in women's hands. Men strive for unlimited self-realization in the sphere of professional work, into which they invest not only personal, but also family resources. In addition, there is a prejudice, usually learned from the parental family, that men are less suitable for education than women, although it is known that for many centuries the father determined the social status of the child.

The triple burden of motherhood, housekeeping and work acts as an obstacle to social and political activity.

This calls into question the possibility of free, diversified development of a woman’s personality.

Concept "women's dilemma" is more complex in its content and is not limited to the conflict of professional and family roles. This conflict of self-realization models, the contradiction between autonomy and service to one's neighbor. Some women try to copy the traits of a man's personality, imitate the rationalism of men, which does not bring the desired effect, since equality does not mean identity. Many women strive for independence in order to break out of the imaginary captivity of emotionality. This leads to conflict; most women are tormented by the fear of losing love.

The formation of a bi-career family largely depends on the productivity of solving the “female dilemma.” This problem must be considered only in the context of gender interaction, taking into account the life positions of both husband and wife, their interpretation of marital roles. If a woman is not burdened by household duties, then reproaches to her husband regarding his reluctance to help his wife can be avoided. If a man encourages his wife’s individual needs, including those related to extra-family activities, the woman’s attempts to succeed both in her career and in her family will be more successful.

It is worth highlighting a number of factors that can strengthen the position of a bi-career family. These include: the right and practical possibility of women’s participation in public and political life; activation of men in raising children; rational division of labor in the household; increasing the social significance of domestic work; modernization of traditional role structures; formation of gender-appropriate professional and family roles.

An extreme version of a bi-career family suggests that professional or socio-political activities are more important for husband and wife than family ones. Spouses may be engaged in a joint business. Their housework is reduced to a minimum and is redirected to specially hired people. A large number of household appliances and instant food products are purchased. Family members often take advantage of consumer services offerings.

Children are supervised by a nanny or left to their own devices, and as they grow older they are involved in the family business. Spouses are like business partners, each of them can pursue their own individual interests. Serious conflicts arise if these interests and needs are infringed. But more often, family members, especially children, experience a lack of emotional warmth and attention. Therefore, parents who devote themselves to professional work must balance their costs and devote time to activities with their children.

In Russia, as in other countries of the world, the bi-career family model finds its supporters, although tension in relations between people associated with gender mismatch remains. According to futurologists, in the information society, thanks to computerization, family and place of work will unite, family production will become the center of the socio-economic life of society.

The fact of the diversity of family and marriage types has direct practical significance for a psychologist. Our ideas about a “normal” or “model” family have an unconditional impact on the entire course of work with a client. The point is not which types of families are more common, but what role they play in the development of conflicts and crises and what resources they have to overcome the difficulties that arise.

6. MODERN TRENDS IN FAMILY DEVELOPMENT

The family, being a social institution, is certainly influenced by society. The patterns of family change are consistent with the changes that occur in society as a whole. Therefore, it is possible to understand the state of the modern family and assess the prospects for its further development only by taking into account the fundamental changes that have occurred in public life and in mass consciousness throughout the 20th century. At the same time, it is necessary to take into account that there is also an evolution of the family, determined by its own internal laws of development.

Industrialization, increasing complexity of production processes, urbanization, etc. led to increased mobility of the population, increased personal freedom, emancipation of women, emancipation of children from their parents, more complex methods of socialization, etc.

In general, the changes that have occurred I.S. Con denotes “the growth of the value of individuality in culture.” At the level of psychology, this was reflected in the growth of self-awareness, the increase in autonomy (and the need for it) of modern man. For family relationships, this result is contradictory and cannot be assessed in terms of “good or bad”: it resolved some problems and created others. For a psychologist working with families, it is necessary to know how changes that have occurred in mass consciousness can affect the psychological problems of the family as a whole and its individual members.

From the middle of the 20th century. There have been significant and irreversible changes in the institution of the family. The changes that have taken place in the family are generally described by all authors as a crisis of traditional family foundations. There is a rejection of commitment to lifelong marriage, an intensification of divorces and the breakdown of marriages, a rejection of the stereotypical impartial attitude to raising offspring, an increase in the number of single-parent families and families with stepparents, a wide spread of abortions and out-of-wedlock births. Do these changes really mean a crisis of the family as a social institution or do they concern only certain forms of organization of family life? To answer this question, let’s take a closer look at the existing trends characteristic of industrialized countries, which includes Russia.

Currently, changes can be noted at all stages of the family life cycle, from its inception to the end of the existence of the family as a whole: at the premarital stage, throughout the entire period of family life, at the stage of family disintegration.

Premarital stage

Marriage is no longer presented in the public consciousness as the only possible way to live life. This is manifested in the fact that changes have occurred in the process of choosing a marriage partner, in attitudes towards marriage and sexual behavior, in the value system in the field of gender-role behavior.

Changing the process of choosing a marriage partner. The process of choosing marriage partners has changed.

The study of ethnographic sources indicates that at least until the middle of the 19th century. In Russia, there was a custom of marriage through matchmaking and weddings. Matchmaking was carried out by special intermediaries (matchmakers, close relatives). The consent of the head of the family - the father - was mandatory for marriage. Marriages by personal agreement between the bride and groom, without the prior consent of the parents, were rare. At the same time, the interests of the family were taken into account first of all - economic, everyday, prestigious, and not the desires or relationships of young people.

In the second half of the 19th century. The pre-marital ritual is being transformed almost everywhere. Youth premarital communication arises. It usually takes place within one social stratum. The goals of premarital communication are marriage. Young people can negotiate their own marriage and notify their parents about it. Economic motives for starting a family fade into the background. However, parents still act as advocates for the interests of the family as a whole. They participate in the planning and organization of pre-marital leisure (parties, birthday celebrations, etc.), and focus on the family’s expectations regarding the future of the children. Quite often there is pressure from parents on their children to marry within their social class. Parents continue to interfere in relationships and disrupt unwanted marriages, resorting to threats of economic sanctions.

In the second half of the 20th century. there is a further increase in openness in youth communication. Firstly, it becomes more diverse in composition of participants. Now young people participating in communication can vary widely in terms of social, ethnic and educational indicators. Secondly, it is not limited to any spatial framework. It is possible to meet at work, at an educational institution and during leisure time; Quite a large number of young people find a mate during their summer holidays or under random circumstances on the street. Thirdly, they change functions youth communication - now it does not pursue only the goal of marriage, but turns into a relationship that is valuable to the individual. Boys and girls no longer see each partner as a future spouse; love relationships become valuable in themselves.

Thus, we can talk about increasing the share of individual freedom and individual preferences in the process of choosing a marriage partner and when entering into marriage.

Presumably this can be regarded as a positive, marriage-stabilizing trend. But it should not be assumed that boys and girls are completely independent in their choice from their parents and immediate social environment. Parental programming in the field of choosing a marriage partner is preserved. It becomes less frank, and therefore less conscious, and this can contribute more to the formation of intrapersonal conflicts.

Removing economic, social and national barriers expands the circle of potential acquaintances and ultimately increases the possibilities of choosing a marriage partner. But the simultaneous individualization of a person causes the opposite trend - an increase in mutual claims between men and women against each other, which leads to a more careful and lengthy process of choosing spouses and to less satisfaction with the result of this choice.

Changing attitudes towards marriage and sexual behavior. Modern attitudes towards marriage and sexual behavior differ significantly from those that existed half a century ago. The first important point of this change can be called rethinking the meaning of sexuality.

Rethinking the significance of sexuality means increasing its value and significance for the individual. Sex is perceived as a source of pleasure, and sexual attractiveness is perceived as a valuable personal quality. This manifests itself in changes in sexual behavior. Firstly, it is increasingly extending beyond the boundaries of marriage- sexual relations are now possible both before marriage and outside marriage. Secondly, sexuality becomes equally significant for both men and women. Women, just like men, strive for sex, desire to have sexual relations, and do not consider them as a duty that they need to fulfill in relation to a man. In this regard, it is becoming widespread practice of premarital sexual behavior among young people.

Premarital sexual behavior of young people often has pleasure as the main motive and is not associated with either marital interests or the intention to have children.

In connection with the previously noted tendency towards increasing autonomy, marriage is no longer considered as the only possible way of living life. A sufficient number of both men and women do not intend to get married even if they want to have children. Many people postpone marriage to a later date, when a certain level of material well-being has been achieved and self-realization in the professional field has taken place. The age of partners entering into marriage is increasing.

There is a change in the value system in the field of gender-role behavior. There is a weakening of the normative imperative prescribing marriage, maintaining marriage, having children, limiting intimate relationships within the framework of marriage and dividing roles into purely male and purely female. This applies not only to premarital or extramarital sex, but also to sexual orientation. Attitudes towards so-called “sexual minorities” are becoming more tolerant, and membership in them is less often hidden.

Another manifestation of the softening of morals regarding sexual and marital behavior is the widespread premarital cohabitation (“trial”, actual marriages) among young people.

The strict criteria for assessing the behavior of men and women as “decent - dishonest” and “normal - abnormal” have disappeared. Modern normativity takes into account the personal identity of a person and the system of his motives to a greater extent than traditional normativity.

But it is premature to talk about the formation of a new regulatory system. The problem of finding criteria for assessing the morality of a person’s behavior in his personal life is extremely relevant. Pre-existing strict norms created clear guidelines for assessing the ethics of one's own sexual behavior and the behavior of other people.

The absence of such norms in modern society confronts young people with the difficult task of developing their own criteria at a time when their own egos are not yet mature, sexual behavior is not yet mature, and when the norms of their parents cannot serve as a suitable basis.

A change in the value system in the field of gender role behavior has led to changing its traditional design. To a lesser extent, men are required to demonstrate strength in its various forms (physical strength, power, money, moral responsibility), and men’s demonstration of softness of character and emotionality has become more common. It is not considered inappropriate for women to show initiative, ambition and willpower, and they are more often both open initiators of dating a man and an active party in the formation of relationships. As a manifestation of this, we can consider a tendency to change ratio of the ages of the bride and groom. If at the beginning of the 20th century. more often unions were concluded in which a sufficiently mature and independent man married a girl much younger than himself, but now the proportion of marriages in which the husband is younger than his wife in age has increased significantly.

It should be noted, however, that changes in patterns of sex-role behavior in both men and women may be associated not only with changing values, but also with disruptions in their formation in childhood due to the increasing prevalence of single-parent families. The presence of one mother in a family unjustifiably expands the range of roles she performs and deprives them of gender specificity. In this regard, the behavior of children raised in such conditions (both men and women) may also lack pronounced sexual identity.

To summarize and generalize the described trends, we can characterize the changes in the premarital stage as follows:

· changing social norms regarding marriage and sexual behavior;

· reduction of the regulatory potential of these standards;

· changing patterns of gender-role behavior;

· increasing personal freedom and strengthening manifestations of individuality in gender-role behavior and choice of marriage partner.

This exacerbates the psychological problems of choosing and accepting responsibility.

We have been living in a family since childhood. We are surrounded by parents, grandparents, and if there are any, then uncles and aunties. This is, of course, the best case scenario. We know that the family is the unit of society, perhaps the strongest. It can be full and incomplete, monogamous and polygamous. Divided into types and types. Its most common type is patriarchal. This is what we will talk about in our article.

The man is in charge!

From the name it is clear that a patriarchal family is one in which the husband, the father, predominates. It is he who makes the most important and significant decisions, he decides the fate of the children and is the manager. This refers to the classic version of this concept.

Why did the transition happen?

According to ethnographic data, the patriarchal family became the next after the matriarchal family, when women dominated. With the formation of communities, women lost their rights, which men began to fully enjoy. The entire community was subordinate to one person - the father. Such concepts as heir and

The heir gets the throne

From history we know that according to the king-father, the throne was passed on to the eldest of his sons. The age of the heir did not matter: until he reached the age of majority, all the functions of the monarch were carried out by the guardian.

Stereotypes

There are various patriarchal ones - the most common option. Some canons are already forgotten, such as the right of inheritance. As before, in such surnames the main thing is the man. Although society has become democratic and equal, very often it is the husband who remains the sole breadwinner. A woman, as in ancient times, carries with her the stereotype of a homemaker.

Why is he the head?

In such a unit of society as a traditional patriarchal family, the wife is subordinated to her husband (an unspoken rule). The man gained his dominant role mainly due to his economic independence. Since he works, that means he receives income. Having concentrated the financial capabilities of the family in his hands, he makes significant decisions for it. This applies to additional activities for a child, a new purchase for a wife or home, planning a vacation, and the like. Very often, the spouse also works, but the spouse still manages the budget, even if her financial contribution is no less than her husband’s income.

The modern patriarchal family has several types:

1. When the main income belongs to the spouse, and the woman is quite satisfied with this state of affairs. There are common interests, communication takes place, mutual understanding reigns. This is the type of happy family: he and she are happy with each other.

2. When the husband does not have the main income, but only a temporary one, the woman is the main breadwinner. A disadvantaged husband will sooner or later begin to rebel. The reason is banal: the husband seeks to subjugate his wife, and she does not like that her husband does not provide for her and the children. This union is doomed.

3. The third type, which is based on economic benefits. The husband is not so young, but rich, the wife is young, but without education and money. Marriage is concluded by mutual consent and agreement.

As life shows, a patriarchal family is quite happy with the female gender. The man, who is also the representative of the stronger sex, is the main support of their union. In contrast to the infringement of women's rights, she stands behind her husband, which means she and her children are provided with protection and care.

Marriage and family relations in Ancient Rus' of the 9th-13th centuries are characterized by the formation of patriarchal relations in the family. Patriarchal family- This is a form of monogamous monogamous family, the head of which is the eldest man.

At the first stage of the formation of Russian statehood, the first place among the Slavs was the satisfaction of the sexual instinct, mutual assistance in housekeeping, procreation and further provision of the family with food and household items. Before the adoption of Christianity, both polygamous and monogamous families could be found in society, and it was the first variety that predominated, especially among the rich segments of the population. So, besides his wife Olga, Prince Igor had other “wives”, and Vladimir the Great, in addition to 300 concubines, had 5 wives, the union with whom was concluded according to a pagan rite. Moreover, among the Slavs, unlike Muslims, where there is a limit on the number of wives - no more than 4 - there could be more.

In a monogamous family, there were strict patriarchal relationships; a woman remained a profitable commodity that could be exchanged, sold or given as a gift, and this concerned not only the daughter or sister, but also the wife. An interesting fact is that it was customary among the Slavs to marry the widow of a deceased brother, which also led to polygamy.

Family after accepting Christianity

The adoption of a single religion made its own adjustments to marriage and family relations, radically changing the Slavs’ idea of ​​marriage and family and its role in human life.

Marriages in most cases were concluded by agreement of the newlyweds' parents, which was largely determined by the young age of marriage - for girls 12 years old, for men 14 years old, but at the same time, if there was strong coercion of the bride or groom into marriage, which led to a suicide attempt then the parents were responsible for this to the metropolitan.

The patriarchal foundations of the family provided not only for the father’s rights to his children, but also for his duties to them - he had to provide a future for his children; if the daughters were not married off, then they paid a fine to the metropolitan, and after the death of their parents they became dependent on their older brothers.

The patriarchal family assumed the enormous responsibility of the spouse to each other. So if one of them fell ill, the other was obliged to care for him until his death. But at the same time, the husband had the right to punish his wife, including physically; moreover, it was his duty to raise his wife. Only her husband or father could punish a woman; neither the rural community nor the prince had the right to punish women, since they were considered the property of their husband. The only exception is the church, which could interfere in family relations in matters of marriage and divorce.

Housekeeping

The patriarchy of the ancient Russian family was largely due to the fact that the man was the main source of the family’s well-being. A woman was assigned the role of an assistant in housekeeping and procreation - there was no regulation of childbirth at that time.

All property owned by the family was considered the property of the husband; the wife did not receive any rights to jointly acquired property. The only thing that remained in her property was the dowry she received - clothes, household items, if the husband died and the woman remarried, she took the dowry with her. Only her children inherited the dowry.

Under patriarchy, ordinary peasant women did not have their own land, unlike the privileged classes - so princesses could own entire cities.

Divorce

The patriarchal dependence of women can be traced even in matters of divorce. So, a church divorce was allowed if a wife cheated, but if the husband cheated, then a temporary penance was imposed on him, but there was no talk about divorce. In addition, the husband could leave his wife if he found out about her communicating with other men outside the home without his permission.

An interesting fact is that if a wife left for another man, then the new husband had to pay a fine to the metropolitan.

Patriarchy then and now

Patriarchal families have not become a thing of the past in the 21st century; they have changed and persist today.

In the comparative table below, you can see the dramatic changes that have occurred with the patriarchal family over 800 years. Despite the fact that in the 21st century patriarchal foundations remain in some families, the position of women has undergone dramatic changes.

Comparison of ancient Russian and modern families:

	Old Russian family	Modern family
Head of the family	The eldest man in the family
Place of residence		A family can live in both the wife's and husband's house
Living together between generations	Three or more generations of a family lived in one house	As a rule, no more than 2 generations
Financial support	A man, he manages finances	A man and a woman, both in equal and unequal shares, the man manages the finances
Parenting
Children growing up	Sons bring their wives home, daughters go to their husband's house	Married children can live with their parents or separately
Enforcement measures		Men and women have equal rights, physical punishment can be punished by law
Woman's position		A woman has the same rights as a man
Physical punishment	Physically punishing your wife is the norm	Physical punishment is punishable by law
Solving financial and other issues	The man makes all the decisions	The man has the last word, but the woman takes an active role in discussing all issues
Property	Everything belongs to the man except his wife's dowry. Inheritance through male line only	Property acquired during marriage belongs to both spouses in equal shares, acquired before marriage to each individual
	Only on the initiative of a man, in the case of a wife’s infidelity, the husband’s infidelity is not a reason	The initiative may come from both spouses

The main difference between a modern family, even with a patriarchal bias from the ancient Slavic one, is the equality of men and women before the law; if intra-family problems arise, they can be resolved in court.

Pros and cons of the patriarchal foundation of the family

Strange as it may seem, the strict foundations of the ancient Slavic patriarchy have a lot of positive effects on the family. So the advantages are:

• the husband is obliged to provide for his family,
• spouses cannot leave each other if one of them falls ill,
• children are instilled with honor and respect for the older generation,
• caring for the older generation (grandparents).

However, we should not forget about the large number of disadvantages of such families:

• complete submission of wife and children to husband and father,
• lack of legal rights for women,
• the use of unpunished physical and psychological violence against both his wife and children,
• a woman has no financial and property rights,
• a woman cannot get a divorce.
• children usually marry at the will of their parents.

Despite all the disadvantages of patriarchal families, it is worth noting that modern families with a similar structure are very strong and even in our time divorces are extremely rare in them.

Why patriarchy is becoming a thing of the past

In modern society, there are fewer and fewer patriarchal families left. There are many reasons for this, but the main one is that women have equal rights with men. More and more often, women achieve success in politics, earn good money, and do not need financial support from men. Unlike the ancient Slavs, when a woman could not earn her own living and was completely dependent on her husband or father, a modern woman does not need guardianship and can live and provide for herself on her own.

In addition, more and more often young families seek to escape the care of their parents and live independently, which means that the authority of the patriarchal father is lost or is of a moderately advisory nature. In addition, if in patriarchal families of antiquity the mother was entirely responsible for the education of children, and most often they had no other knowledge except religious knowledge, now children studying in kindergartens and schools at an early age strive for independence and do not want to live under the authority of their parents after reaching adulthood.

Modern social, state and economic transformations have led to the fact that patriarchal foundations in families are becoming a thing of the past. The patriarchal-feudal family of the Slavs persisted for a long time; its principles largely remained in our society until the beginning of the 20th century, however, after the change in the political and religious system in the country, the family also underwent a change. In our turbulent 21st century, a return to the patriarchal foundations of the family becomes impossible.