The political exclusion and commodification of women - Environmental and Human Security in the Arctic - page 263

Conclusions
Thus, we can state that there is a mixture of approaches towards women as
child bearers and mothers through what I would argue is a distorted under-
standing of democratic values and liberalism. It became widely accepted that
every 'real man' has a right (as a result of liberalism) to have sex and to be
entertained by women whether she is his wife or a prostitute. At the same
time a double standard was evoked towards women. As a response to decades
of socialism that included (at least formally) women's equality, women now
could take a break from the demands of equality by becoming good house-
wives, devoting their lives to family (time to remember the famous 'kitchen,
church, children'). Democratization early on, then, was articulated through a
classic patriarchal framework. At the same time, however, one was suddenly
'free', where such freedom was articulated through market principles. Thus
one had the freedom to choose the things one wanted to do, including work-
ing as a prostitute or buying sex. 'Prostitution', 'sex' and 'pornography' had
been banned under socialism; in the era of democracy, they became an expres-
sion of new-found freedom. If prostitution was then a free choice, a 'career
option' so to speak, and something that could develop unregulated in a mar-
ket economy, the newly emerging phenomenon of trafficking that involved
complicated, similar but different issues with prostitution was not taken very
seriously, and definitely was not considered being relevant to 'big politics'.
The failure to understand or see this situation unfolding, and the resulting
threat to the personal security of women, can be traced to a public/private
dichotomy exercised by the state. 'The family sphere of life was identified
with all that was female, and was counterpoised to general, social and state
issues' (Voronina 1994:40). Thus those issues that had to do with women
were private matters, and the state could hardly be concerned about these
private matters since they were not important for public policy. Askola
posits that this attitude can be seen in the different ways smuggling and traf-
ficking have been treated. Smuggling is considered to be a crime against the
state, because it violates state security and the state's boundaries. However,
trafficking 'is a crime against the individual, and only secondary a violation
of state sovereignty' (Askola 2001:18). Since Russian politicians continue to
consider women as an attachment to family, they are not inclined to treat
women as independent individuals in need of state support or protection.
If a woman takes a risk (makes a choice, in the free market) to improve her
earnings by working abroad, she has to bear the responsibility for the conse-
quences. This logic of exclusion is rather simple: if a woman does not function
as mother or wife and dares to challenge the state (and societal) position
towards women, then she does not deserve to be protected. Unfortunately,
individual rights are frequently violated in Russia. And the situation is even
more complicated when it comes to women, who are often viewed as second-
class citizens.