На удару идеологија : брак, породица и полни морал у Србији у другој половини 20. века

Abstract

„Неупитне“ истине социјалистичке идеологије и друштва, као што су еманципација жена, посебна заштита материнства, еманципација деце и подруштвљавање и демократизација породице, бар теоријски су биле усмерене ка хуманизацији породичних и друштвених односа и развоју индивидуализма. Ипак, о њиховој вредности или макар о њиховој применљивости требало би судити на основу њиховог реланог друштвеног учинка. Пораст броја самачких и старачких домаћинстава, брачних парова без деце, свих облика ванбрачних заједница, ванбрачног наталитета, непотпуних, дезорганизованих породица, самохраних мајки, разведених и напуштених особа, пораст породичног насиља, сукоба генерација и психичке, полне и социјалне неусклађености, чини се да представљају јасан показатељ ограниченог успеха својеврсне световне догме, која је, барем декларативно, почивала на хуманистичким идеалима слободе.

The paper is a result of studies of marriage, family and gender morality in Serbia in the second half of XX century. The elaboration of basic theoretical and methodological issues, problems and framework in the first part is followed by a critical analysis of social theory, policy and legal regulations which refer to the mentioned institutes in the relevant period. The paper emphasizes key processes and ideas which had impact on transformation of marriage and family towards modern trends. The processes of industrialization, urbanization and economic restructuring, founded in the ideas of progress, modernization and democratization of the society, resulted in a specific trend in transformation of marriage and family in modern society in Serbia. The paper emphasizes interweaving of ideological and material levels of changes; thus, the cause-and-effect analysis elaborates the economic measures for the transformation of material base for existence of the traditional family (agrarian reform, Law on inheritance, compulsory deliveries, collectivization) and the society (migrations caused by processes of industrialization and urbanization), as well as different ideas proclaimed and conducted through the measures of official (as well as alternative) social and cultural policies (introduction of atheism and secularization, introduction of compulsory elementary education, emancipation of women and children, desacralization of marriage, socialization of the family, the idea of free parenthood, family planning, limitation of birthing). In the stated framework, the idea of “freedom” appeared as an overwhelming ideology aimed at “liberating” a human being from any kind of forced activity: from economic and work related to legal and moral. Abolishment of authority which may be singled out as one of the key traits of the studied period primarily referred to abolishment of belief in eschatological justification of historic facts, so that “liberation” from Divine authority appears as a cause and result of all other “freedoms”: freedom from work, freedom of/from love, freedom from parental and marital obligations, freedom from responsibility, sanctions, etc. The changes caused by these processes and ideas are documented in the demographic and statistical reports from the period. Thus, the paper contains comparative data on values and rates of birth, fertility, birth rates in different intervals in the second half of XX century, as well as data on the number of marriages and divorces, family structures, the number of abortions, sterility, and all the other data related to transformation of marriage, family, and gender morality in contemporary society in Serbia. The first part of the paper is thus dedicated to general trends and changes at global society level, while the second part comprises results of the study of marriage and families in the village of Dubona and nearby villages in north Sumadija, which serves as an operational and synthesized example of developments in general. The village is treated in a monographic manner, and the major part of this segment of the study relates to relevant institutions. Therefore, the emphasis lies upon changes in relations between private and public life in the countryside which largely resulted in changes in structure of social powers and authorities. This is the perspective from which inter-family relations are observed, as well as the change in the position of women, men, children, and the elderly. Reducing social life in the village to ritualized, traditional forms (without traditional Abstract 399 meaning and functions, however), suited erosion of authority of male members of the community, which proved to be the key moment in the change of the position (or, rather, behavior) of women, especially children and youth. The lack of social sanctions that used to exist in the traditional cultural context, which is also connected to the changed relation between the public and the private, caused changes in limits between the forbidden and the allowed, the desirable and the real. The consequences of the developments mentioned were most transparent in the field of marriage and family relations and gender morality, especially in the segments connected to changed behavior of women, that is, girls. The conclusion reached based on the analysis of the collected materials, which may also be applied at the global society level, is that the family no longer represents “the society on a small scale”, but a community which is increasingly placed in a gap between more or less traditional values and requirements of modern culture. In such a situation, as well as in previous ones, the family is still a reflection of social reality, but its value models decreasingly influence behavior selected by its members and determination of value models of the global society. The conclusion of the study aims at providing the answer to the question why the stated ideas and processes, which were generally implemented in order to contribute to humanization and democratization of the society and welfare of its members resulted in extremely unfavorable psycho-socio-demographic trends, explained in each chapter of the study. It has been suggested that a wholesome anthropological approach should imply answers to fundamental issues of human existence, which, however, is not possible in case social and cultural phenomena are regarded only on their “horizontal” level. Although the proposed “vertical” dimension does not suit the principles of science oriented and determined in a positivistic manner, the lack of insight into historic periods conditioned by the “vertical” coordinate of human existence makes any answer to the above questions incomplete.