Задать вопрос специалисту

Приобрети журнал - получи консультацию экспертов

To top
NBU Rate


Dear Friends!

Probably, you have noticed too, with which perseverance the journalists have recently hyped the topic of sexism and gender equality. The comments from “female experts” are poured from TV screens time and again; “directresses”, “doctoresses of science” are invited to TV studios; bold “authoresses” storm Internet space. The contradictory statements sound from high political platforms, the show business catches up, the sluggish campaigns are run…

However, for some reason (may my colleagues forgive me, the advocates of gender equality) this process partakes of the slight dummy. No, not the phenomenon of sexism itself, no matter how broadly and intricately it is interpreted. I am willing to bet that everybody in our country periodically faces gender discrimination. However, let us not be so categorical: in most, but not in all, cases, namely women become the victims. Just think: what parent will more likely get custody of the child in the divorce according to the court decision, or just count how many grumpy directresses manage departments, where the men are not less than 50% of the staff. I cringe at how suddenly this topic hyped and from what absurd and one-sided angles it is being discussed. I admit that in the native language, even a suffix “-ess” in feminitives, such as “lectress” (intended for raising social and professional role of the woman in the society) still sounds somehow disparagingly. However, it is the language tradition: historically, “female” names of professions, derivatives from “male”, are often used pejoratively.

In fact, any struggle and breaking the rules bear risk of going into radicalism. Therefore, defending the psychology of freedom, fighting for that you are perceived, first of all, as the personality, but not only as the representative of this or that gender, it is important not to cross the line. We decided to take a blatant disadvantageous position and attempted to figure out what we mean by “sexism” and how not to see it there, where it could not even be. Investigating this topic, the journalist Roman Barashev attempted to give answers to quite difficult questions: “Are the women’s rights really infringed upon so that it is required to completely rethink traditional views on the relationships of genders, or should we treat this struggle skeptically and ironically, like the adult game? Then what goals does this game have? Because if some significant funds are invested in it, there should be some pay-off..?”

See you!

Yulia Mostova,

Что для Вас криптовалюта?

Виртуальные «фантики», крупная махинация вроде финансовой пирамиды - 41.1%
Чем бы она не являлась, тема требует изучения и законодательного регулирования - 24.2%
Новая эволюционная ступень финансовых отношений - 22.2%
Даже знать не хочу что это. Я – евро-долларовый консерватор - 6.5%
Очень выгодные вложения, я уже приобретаю и буду приобретать биткоины - 5.2%

Вы верите, что Надежда Савченко планировала устроить госпереворот, совершив теракт в Верховной Раде?

Нет, это фейки Генпрокуратуры, очередной спектакль для недовольного властью народа - 50.8%
Мне все равно. Жаль, что не осуществила заветную «мечту народа» - 15.6%
Нет. Все спланировано. Так из Надежды делают народного политика - 13.3%
Нет, но политик, открыто призывающий к госперевороту, должен сидеть - 12.5%
Да, она такая. Юрий Луценко не мог солгать с трибуны Верховной Рады - 7%