Vikki Turbine

Russian Women’s Perceptions of Human Rights and Rights-based Approaches in Everyday Life

The protracted political, economic and social transformations in former communist states have shown that while formal political rights and freedoms have expanded, this has not necessarily led to the realisation of other fundamental rights.1 Living conditions for many Russian citizens have worsened since the collapse of the Soviet regime, and criticisms of Russia’s human rights record continue to be highlighted by international non-governmental organisations.2 Although these social and economic changes have affected many people living in Russia, regardless of gender, it has been argued that liberalisation and marketisation created ‘two mutually repelling poles — a male dominated pole of wealth, integrated into the hypermodern flow of finance and commodities, and a female dominated (working class) underworld, retreating into subsistence and kin networks.’3 Thus, the transformation process has arguably had a more negative impact on the lives of women. Women’s lack of political representation, discrimination in the labour market as well as chauvinistic attitudes displayed towards women have been identified as the main areas of discrimination against women.4 In addition, increased rates of domestic violence and the trafficking of women and girls into the sex industry have recently attracted attention as some of the major threats to Russian women’s human rights.5

Women's human rights in Russia: outmoded battlegrounds, or new sites of contentious politics?

This article draws on three pieces of qualitative research conducted with women in provincial Russia over the last 10 years. The first section analyses womens discussions of their everyday rights claims and their engagement in “consentful” forms of contention. The second section uses the Pussy Riot case as an example of womens human rights activism coded as “contentious”. Finally, the article highlights the blurred boundaries between contentious and consentful contention that can occur when women engage in online spaces. The article suggests a spectrum of contentious politics for womens rights claims that vary depending on the political opportunity structures available.

Introduction to Special Section ‘Location, Agency and Change in Provincial Russia’

THIS SPECIAL SECTION IS THE PRODUCT OF A long-standing relationship between UKbased academics conducting research on Russia and colleagues based at the REGION research Centre in Ul’yanovsk, Russian Federation. The focus of the section is on a key question arising from the contributors’ individual research findings and in discussions between the contributors; namely, how does geographical location create different opportunity structures and impact on the ability to negotiate or resist social change in post-socialist Russia? This question has been much debated within postsocialist area studies, with a large body of existing research devoted to exploring the diversity of experience both within and between the former socialist countries of Central and Eastern Europe (Hann 2002; Verdery 2002; Twigg & Schecter 2003; Round 2008, Stenning & Hörschelman 2008), as well as contrasting experiences between towns and cities within a country (Round 2006) and showing the interaction of global changes with local spaces (Flynn et al. 2008). This literature points area studies scholars towards approaches to research that generate more nuanced understandings of the specificities of post-socialist transformations within and across locations, and also seek to avoid the danger of stereotyping Central and Eastern Europe as the ‘other’ (Stenning & Hörschelmann 2008). While our approach in this special section resonates with existing studies (Hann 2002; Mandel & Humphery 2002; Flynn et al. 2008; Kürti & Skalnik 2009), the original aspect of this collection lies in presenting a focused exploration of the multiple facets of and responses to social changes among different groups within the one geographical space, namely the Ul’yanovsk Oblast’. Indeed, the essays included in this section are linked by a shared research location, the city of Ul’yanovsk and the surrounding Oblast’, and the contributions are based on findings from research projects conducted in the area. Thus, this special section also contributes to a growing body of literature on the Russian regions, which has explored a range of issues such as regional government, the changing urban landscape, economic development and social change (Ruble et al. 2001; Herd & Aldis 2003; Axenov et al. 2006; Hahn 2001; Ioffe & Nefedova 1997, 2000; Gdaniec 2010; White 2004). While some of this work focuses on a single region or geographic location (Axenov et al. 2006; Hahn 2001; Ioffe & Nefedova 1997, 2000), other studies outline general trends by presenting case studies (Ruble et al. 2001; Herd & Aldis 2003; Gdaniec 2010; White 2004), thus highlighting EUROPE-ASIA STUDIES Vol. 64, No. 10, December 2012, 1811–1821

Review of Frances Nethercott (2007) 'Russian Legal Culture Before and After Communism: Criminal Justice,Politics, and the Public Sphere'

THE PUTIN ERA IN RUSSIA HAS BEEN MARKED BY SUBSTANTIAL popular approval of the leadership—and also by a growing state domination of the mainstreammedia, especially television, from which opposition voices have been largely excluded. It is therefore tempting to infer a causal connection between these two facts and to assume that media controls can effectively ensure the control of public opinion. However, the present book casts grave doubts on this assumption. Professor Mickiewicz, a leading authority on the Soviet and Russian media, who has written on this subject for more than 30 years, has set out to investigate the way in which ordinary Russians absorb official messages. She focuses not just on opinions as such, but on the mental processes by which ordinary Russians arrive at their opinions. She concludes that the media elites have a poor understanding of their audience’s psychology. Her findings are derived from a major research project which she undertook and which came to fruition in January 2002. It was based on focus groups comprising of, in all, 158 participants, selected according to the political profile of the region from which they came and their exposure to different television channels. Care was taken to avoid a ‘Moscow-centric’ bias; and the ‘post-Soviet’ generation in each region was treated separately. Her evidence confirms that most Russians do rely on television in preference to other media, especially where news is concerned. The need for news is very strong, especially in times of crisis. For example, a total of 81% of participants said they got information about Chechnya from central television. This may partly be to do with availability—almost all television is provided free of charge. In comparison with the Soviet era, the media is of course much more diverse (having been relentlessly commercialised, though not exactly democratised) and a growing minority use the internet, particularly at work. However television is preferred, especially outside Moscow and the big cites. This is partly because those on low incomes can barely afford to buy newspapers, satellite television or even go to the cinema. Reliance on television is not, however, the same thing as audience satisfaction. What emerges is not uniformity of views or apathy, but a vast mosaic of opinions which defy easy summary. Viewers are well aware of attempts from above to manipulate them and react with due caution. They distrust one-sided information, and are able to detect the things that television reports conceal. In one test case, the groups were invited to comment on four news stories about the opening of a new oil pipeline in Novorossiisk. Three of the reports—on pro-government channels—were very positive and stressed its economic benefits. The fourth—on TV6, then under opposition control—emphasised the ecological damage that the pipeline might cause. These stories gave rise to lively and sometimes heated discussions: participants were critical of both versions, pointing out their one-sidedness. A similar scepticism emerged with regard to the official coverage of AIDS. Participants seemed aware that the official media tended to ‘smooth over the edges’ by the use of dry statistics which played down the huge human cost of the disease in Russia. And there was an even more negative reaction to election broadcasts. (The group was invited to watch reports of a recent campaign for the post of governor of Yakutia.) Participants were angered by the emphasis on negative campaigning—which gave no proper indication of the candidates’ policies. EUROPE-ASIA STUDIES Vol. 61, No. 2, March 2009, 357–380