Domestic life experiences of same-sex couples in modern Russia

“If the purchase, we understand, some kind of, say, sharing, and not a gift, then we half off, for example, if necessary, we have recently bought a washing vacuum cleaner, naturally, we paid half there” “ Если покупка, мы понимаем, какая-то, скажем, совместного пользования, а не подарок, то мы скидываемся наполовину, например, если надо, там, недавно мы купили моющий пылесос, естественно, мы, там по половине заплатили”. (Interview 9, 40-45 years).

A similar phenomenon was noticed by Burns and colleagues, who found that contributions to the relationships will be equable in a long term perspective (Burns and colleagues, 2008).

Besides, partners consider significant to have private money not to depend on each other if unseen circumstances happen: “I probably think that some kind of material security is just very important for me” “Я, наверное, думаю, что для меня просто очень важна какая-то моя материальная безопасность”. (Interview 11, 20-25 years). A similar phenomenon was found by Dunne, who claims that same-sex couples are more egalitarian due to financial interdependence from each other (Dunne, 2000).

The phenomenon of reciprocity, in terms of economic sociology means sharing goods as gifts following certain rules (Barsukova, 2004), can be seen in the partner's relationships, which means that partners tried to make even contributions but in different situations, which can lead to equalization antes.

An important factor in distributing roles is considering the preferences and interests of the partners. Firstly, domestic arrangements depend on what individuals prefer to do or what activities are disgusting for them: “It depends on who what loves more, that's somehow, that is, I, for example, don't like to wash the dishes, I'd better cook food, rather than I will wash the dishes, and I immediately say this to a person, even before we start living together” “Это зависит от того, кто что больше любит, вот, как-то так, то есть, я, допустим, не люблю мыть посуду, да, я лучше приготовлю поесть, да, чем я буду мыть посуду, и в принципе, сразу человеку это озвучиваю, ещё до того, как мы начинаем жить вместе”. (Interview 11, 20-25 years).

Leisure time is also an essential part in romantic relationships as difference in interests can be a source of contradictions in a couple. So, in order to avoid negative couples usually pay attention on each other's desires or do not discourage each other doing what they enjoy: “No, probably not, because I'm a more domestic person, and she's more social, she won't stay at home for the most part, we're different in that, I understand this difference perfectly, and if she wants to spend time with friends, to go somewhere in a cafe or go to ride a surf, or to ride a motorbike, then I always do not mind, but I also say that if I don't want today, well, as it was, for example, in spring, she went to ride in early spring, I don't know how it is, well, a water surf, well, it was extremely uncomfortable for me, as it was cold, firstly, I didn't want to get sick, so while I was at home, she could meet her friends there and spend time” “Нет, наверное, нет, потому что я более домашний человек, а она более такой, социальный, она не будет по большей части сидеть дома, в этом мы и разнимся, я прекрасно понимаю эту разницу, и если она хочет провести время с друзьями, пойти куда-то в кафе или сходить покататься на серфе, или, там, съездить на мотобайке прокатиться, то я всегда не против, но при этом я говорю, если сегодня я не хочу, ну, как было, например, весной, она достаточно ранней весной ездила кататься на, не знаю как это, ну, водный серф, вот, ну, для меня это было крайне не удобно, потому что холодно, во-первых, я не хотела болеть, поэтому пока я была дома, она могла, там, встретиться со своими друзьями и провести время”. (Interview 5, 25-30 years).

Birth of a child is a particular moment and roles which partners will play in same-sex couples should be discussed. All couples, who have representations about their future family, marriage, and children have deliberated the issue, particularly, who is going to give birth to a child and spend more time at home. Partners discussed the thing far in advance, thus, several factors were mentioned, which affect the role's distribution. First of all, is income and opportunity of career development, secondly, the desire to be pregnant and spend time at home with a child, as some informants do not introduce themselves as a mother and are interested in their career more. Thirdly, physical health is a significant feature as well as getting pregnant for a lesbian couple is a difficult process, which can have negative consequences on the physical and mental health of a woman: “(Name), it seems to me, is ready to give birth, get up and go to work, she doesn't want, I don't know, enjoy motherhood, I don't know, sit at home, breastfeed, look at their first steps, their drooling, tears, teeth…” “ (Имя), мне кажется, готова родить, встать и пойти на работу, она не хочет, там, не знаю, наслаждаться материнством, там, не знаю, сидеть дома, кормить его грудью, смотреть на его первые шажочки, на его слюни, слезы, зубы…” (Interview 1, 20-25 years).

“And then, if it's a decree, then I'm not at that stage of financial earnings so that I can leave my child to a partner, and go to work, well, that is, I myself can't provide one family yet, if I can, then it will already be another question, who will sit there with the child” “И потом, если это декрет, то я пока не на той стадии финансового заработка, чтобы оставить ребенка на партнера, а самой работать, ну, то есть я сама одна семью обеспечивать пока не смогу, вот так, если смогу, тогда это будет уже другой вопрос, кто там будет с ребенком сидеть”. (Interview 4, 20-25 years).

In terms of building a family, informants strongly believe that having children among same-sex couples is much more conscious decision in comparison with mixed-sex couples as same-sex couples have to spend much time, energy and patience to have children and be aware of all difficulties and risks, which they can face to: “A child is a conscious thing, you know, and it seems to me that in same-sex couples people are more consciously approaching this, because, well, it's just that you won't succeed because you did not buy a condom, I need to go to a sperm bank, I don't know, IVF or not, well, and I need to think over everything, my budget and so on and so forth, that's why, it seems to me that in same-sex couples the child is more desirable and more conscious” ребёнок - это такое, знаешь, осознанное дело, и мне кажется, в однополых парах люди более осознанно к этому подходят, потому что, ну, как бы, у тебя просто так не получится, из-за того, что ты, там, презерватив себе не купил, это нужно, там, пойти в банк спермы, там, не знаю, эко не эко, ну, и, короче, нужно всё продумать, свой бюджет и так далее и тому подобное, вот, поэтому, мне кажется, в однополых парах ребёнок более желанный и более осознанный”. (Interview 7, 25-30 years).

As for partnership, most informants have traditional views on family life organization, which includes two parents and children, however, a broadened family can be also distinguished, which they proposed ideally, which assumes cohabitation of three people. Firstly, an informant dreams about living threesome, particularly, a girl, who cohabited with another girl represented her ideal family with her and a man in order to fulfill all her needs, however, added that such way of living does not seem to be embodied in real life: “The option that I at one time considered for myself is an option of marriage with a man who will frankly know about my orientation and turn a blind eye to rare trips to the side, or relationships with two people at the same time” “Вариант, который я для себя в какой-то момент рассматривала - это вариант брака реально с мужчиной, который будет откровенно знать про мою ориентацию и закрывать глаза на редкие походы на сторону, либо отношения сразу с двумя людьми”. (Interview 12, 20 - 25 years). Secondly, one lesbian imagines her future life with another girl, who she is going to cohabit with and a man as she believes that their children will have a biological father, who will spend time with their children and take part in children' education as it is important for children' development: “For some kind of social adaptation, a man is needed in life, and from a quite early age to relate to this correctly, because, yes, there are two women who live together, but, there is still a man, as if, he can give you this, this and this, because we can't give him everything” “Для какой-то социальной адаптации нужен мужчина в жизни, причем достаточно с раннего возраста, чтобы правильно к этому относиться, потому что, есть, да, есть две женщины, которые живут вместе, но, вот, ещё есть мужчина, как бы, он может тебе дать это, это, это, потому что мы все ему дать не сможем…” (Interview 11, 20-25 years).

Besides, informants noted that they have seen models of how domestic life is organized only among their parents, but in managing domestic labor and finance distribution couples based on their desires and their ideas of how it should be: “I can only judge by my parents, that is, in my family, dad does stereotypically male work, well, fix a wall, drive a nail, remove something in the yard, but my mom and I always cooked and cleaned “Я могу судить только по своим родителям, то есть в моей семье папа занимается стереотипно мужской работой, ну, там, стену починить, гвоздь прибить, во дворе что-нибудь убрать, а готовили мы и убирались мы всегда с мамой”” (Interview 4, 20-25 years).

Discussion

Same-sex couples have to come across the lack of legal rights and legal difficulties, as well as negative reactions and lots of stereotypes. Thus, same-sex couples develop adaptive coping strategies to reduce effect of negative attitudes. First of all, private home has a tremendous importance for LGBT people as it provides a sense of security and a place, where same-sex couples can express their feelings to each other not worrying about aggression or other negative reactions towards them. Secondly, same-sex couples are very careful interacting with landlords and neighbors and control their behavior to reduce manifestation of negative homophobic reactions, particularly, they try to ignore negative information towards the, conceal facts about their private life if there is such a need or do not tell about their romantic relationships if nobody asks. Moreover, partners need to come together against a “common enemy” (McLelland & colleagues, 2014) and develop strategies to cope with homophobic conditions in Russian society. Therefore, same-sex couples declare values of justice, parity, and egalitarianism of partners and demand compliance of such informal rules.

The results support the findings from the previous research: partners, who cohabit in same-sex couples achieve a great level of egalitarianism in labor distribution at home, finance division and due to their thoughts on family arrangements, in childcare as well (Barrett, 2015; Dunne, 2000; Perlesz & colleagues, 2010; Bauer, 2016). The explanation for such a phenomenon can be found in the fact that same-sex couples do not have any models of relationship functioning and gender and role expectations as mixed-sex couples have so gay and lesbian couples share domestic labor and costs due to their preferences, time availability and financial possibilities. Moreover, it is important for partners to have private money as security in any case.

Major principles of household activities distribution are parity, justice and preferences. What it means is that same-sex couples try to make equal contribution to the domestic labor as well as to financial costs or evaluate each other's efforts at work and make arrangements on this basis. Preferences play a significant role in domestic labor distribution and childcare as well. What is more, informants make assumptions that childbirth leads to big changes in income, time structure, so, based on these things as well as on physical health and preferences, desires and opportunities of career development, partners can predict, who is going to take a major part in childcare. Partners relate respectively to each other's labor at work and at home and strongly believe that disputes about household responsibilities are not worth it. Thus, during the analysis, it was found that same-sex couples on early stages of their relationships enter into contracts with each other, establish informal rules about the division of household activities and financial costs in order to avoid contradictions which can be caused by unfair labor during cohabitation and affect the quality of romantic relationships.

In terms of mixed-sex couples, gendered labor division and imbalances in household activities still present in heterosexual couples and there is a high perception of injustice among women, which especially amplifies when women come across the low time availability being involved in the labor market and household chores (Braun & colleagues, 2008). However, it does not apply to all mixed-sex couples. For instance, Windebank and Martinez-Perez found that some mixed-sex couples make arrangements in domestic labor distribution and strive to less traditional forms of household activities division and decline load by using paid domestic services (Windebank & Martinez-Perez, 2018). Jansen and Liefbroer suppose that gender role is extremely important in making decisions of household chores should be distributed in a mixed-sex couple. The more equal are partner's relationships the more equal is labor division among partners, although, the appearance of children can lead to significant adjustments in the issue (Jansen & Liefbroer, 2006).

In terms of marriage, same-sex couples shared two adaptive coping strategies of their future life organization. On the one hand, those, who do not consider perspective of having children in the future would like to get married abroad and come back to Russia as they want to register their relationships or believe that they do not have any need in marriage. On the other hand, same-sex couples, who have a desire to have children in the future have to move to another country as it can be noticed that having a child in a same-sex couple makes it impossible to hide their private life and forces pressure from society. A similar phenomenon was marked by Blackwell and colleagues. The authors found that children in same-sex couples make their life more public and leads to tense between public and private life of LGBT couple. One of the main problems, which same-sex couples face is a misconception that LGBT people endanger their children, however, studies show that children, who grew up in same-sex couples are similar to children, who grew up in mixed-sex couples (Amato, 2012; Rosenfeld, 2010). Furthermore, same-sex couples with children have to come across various institutional difficulties, like interaction with public institutions or other problems such as childcare enrollment forms or healthcare (Blackwell and colleagues, 2016). Fisher and colleagues support the opinion and claim that LGBT families face stigma, prejudice, and discrimination and need to resist society, where heterosexual couples prevail (Fisher & colleagues, 2008).

Conclusion

To conclude, partners in same-sex couples in Russia build their romantic relationships on principles of justice and parity, taking into account each other's preferences, which is manifested in distributing household activities on fair basis, based on time availability and work load. What is more, same-sex couples do not divide domestic labor following traditional gender expectations. The presence of homophobia in Russia is reflected on the importance of private space for same-sex couples and leads to features in dealing with landlords and neighbors, such as production of certain communication strategies, applying ignorance or concealing facts about their private life if there is such a need. It should me mentioned that childbirth in same-sex couples can be a more conscious decision as with children appearance life of same-sex couples becomes more public therefore, they face much more strain and pressure, including legal difficulties. So, same-sex couples consider opportunity of moving abroad to have a full-fledged family with all legal rights as mixed-sex couples have.

Limitations

The sample was limited by young couples (the vast majority of informants were at the age between 20 - 30 years) from Russian megalopolises - Moscow and Saint-Petersburg and have relatively similar Socioeconomic status (SES) (is usually measured by education, income, occupation (Winkleby & colleagues, 1992)). Probably in less homogeneous same-sex couples there can be more significant differences and future research can focus on this issue. Moreover, the sample did not include same-sex couples with children, although, it was found that the rise of the number of young children increases significantly the time, which wife in mixed-sex couples spends doing household activities (Ross, 1987; Erickson, 2005). Therefore, probably in same-sex couples can be seen as a similar phenomenon and the appearance of young children can be reflected in a more unequal division of domestic labor.

Same-sex couples mostly represent themselves as people, who value their partner, care about the favorable climate in a couple, as it was found during the interview analysis, and do not cover negative aspects of their life probably due to the fact that same-sex couples are not totally accepted in Russia and publication of negative facts about same-sex relationships can provoke more homophobic reactions in society. So it can be concluded that same-sex couples try to create an auspicious image of the community and take care of the community representation. For instance, a conflict arose between LGBT community representatives and an author of one sociological research (Solodnikov & Chkanikova, 2008) because of the contradictory methods of the research which were used, particularly, the community participants were involved in the research without agreement and were made to be responsible for personal and frank statements which they shared in a closed community. LGBT community participants disputed results gained by the author as, in their words, they were full of preconceived opinions so readers get a false image of same-sex couples' behavior as they do not pose themselves as society's enemy or strive for deviant behavior (Monitoring, 2011). LGBT people can be seen as people, who have a high level of social intelligence and the ability to get along with others, change their behavior in society and minimize aggression (Vaughan & Rodriguez, 2014), possess a big amount of personal insight and reflection, are able to empathize with others. What is important, same-sex couples are resilient, authentic and free to enjoy egalitarian relationships (Riggle & colleagues, 2008; Russell & Richards, 2003). Thus, it can be evidence that same-sex couples try to create a positive image of their community.

References

1. Abubikirova, N. I. (1996). Chto takoye «gender»? Obshchestvennyye nauki i sovremennost, (6), 123-125.

2. Allison Tong, Peter Sainsbury, Jonathan Craig, Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups, International Journal for Quality in Health Care, Volume 19, Issue 6, December 2007, Pages 349-357, https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzm042

3. Amato, P. R. (2012). The well-being of children with gay and lesbian parents. Social Science Research, 41(4), 771-774.

4. Andronov, D. A. (2008). Ispolzovaniye tendernykh roley kak koping-resursa u muzhchin s gomoi geteroseksual'noy identichnost'yu. Izvestiya Rossiyskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta im. AI Gertsena, (54).

5. Barrett, C. (2015). Queering the Home: The domestic labor of lesbian and gay couples in contemporary England. Home Cultures, 12(2), 193-211. https://doi.org/10.1080/17406315.2015.1046298

6. Barsukova, S. YU. (2004). Retsiproknyye vzaimodeystviya. Sushchnost', funktsii, spetsifika. Sotsiologicheskiye issledovaniya, (9), 20-29.

7. Bauer, G. (2016). Gender Roles, Comparative Advantages and the Life Course: The Division of Domestic Labor in Same-Sex and Different-Sex Couples. European Journal of Population, 32(1), 99-128. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10680-015-9363-z

8. Becker GS. A treatise on the family. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1981.

9. Bella Rapoport (2020). Gendernyy poryadok I yazyk (samo) representatsii v odnopolykh parakh (na material Sankt-Peterburga).

10. Bilimoria, D., & Stewart, A. J. (2009). " Don't ask, don't tell": The academic climate for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender faculty in science and engineering. NWSA Journal, 85-103.

11. Blackwell, L., Hardy, J., Ammari, T., Veinot, T., Lampe, C., & Schoenebeck, S. (2016, May). LGBT parents and social media: Advocacy, privacy, and disclosure during shifting social movements. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 610-622).

12. Blood RO, Wolfe DM. Husbands & wives--The dynamics of married living. 2 Auflage. New York: The Free Press of Glencoe; 1960.

13. Braun, M., Lewin?Epstein, N., Stier, H., & Baumgдrtner, M. K. (2008). Perceived equity in the gendered division of household labor. Journal of Marriage and Family, 70(5), 1145-1156.

14. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2012). Thematic analysis.

15. Butler, J. (2011). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. routledge.

16. Burns, M., Burgoyne, C., & Clarke, V. (2008). Financial affairs? Money management in same-sex relationships. Journal of Socio-Economics, 37(2), 481-501. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2006.12.034

17. Caretta, M. A., & Bцrjeson, L. (2015). Local gender contract and adaptive capacity in smallholder irrigation farming: A case study from the Kenyan drylands. Gender, Place & Culture, 22(5), 644-661. https://doi.org/10.1080/0966369X.2014.885888

18. Catherine E. Ross, The Division of Labor at Home, Social Forces, Volume 65, Issue 3, March 1987, Pages 816-833, https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/65.3.816

19. Chukurov, A. YU. (2016). Gendernaya identichnost' v kontekste feministskoy kritiki i kvir-teorii. Vestnik psikhofiziologii, (3), 23-29.

20. Civettini, N. (2016). Housework as Non-Normative Gender Display Among Lesbians and Gay Men. Sex Roles, 74(5-6), 206-219. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-015-0559-9

21. Dunne, G. A. (2000). Opting into motherhood: Lesbians blurring the boundaries and transforming the meaning of parenthood and kinship. Gender & Society, 14(1), 11-35.

22. Emeshkina, D. (2020). Same-sex Couples in Modern Russia: Domestic Life Experiences. Project Proposal

23. Erickson, R. J. (2005). Why emotion work matters: Sex, gender, and the division of household labor. Journal of marriage and family, 67(2), 337-351.

24. Fisher, S. K., Easterly, S., & Lazear, K. J. (2008). Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender families and their children. In Family Influences on Childhood behavior and Development (pp. 205-226). Routledge.

25. Foucault, M. (2019). The History of Sexuality: 1: The Will to Knowledge. Penguin UK.

26. Goffman, E. (1979). Gender advertisements. Macmillan International Higher Education.

27. Goldberg, A. E. (2013). “Doing” and “Undoing” Gender: The Meaning and Division of Housework in Same-Sex Couples: Housework in Same-Sex Couples. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 5(2), 85-104. https://doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12009

28. Hopkins, J. J., Sorensen, A., & Taylor, V. (2013). Same-Sex Couples, Families, and Marriage: Embracing and Resisting Heteronormativity 1: Same-Sex Couples, Families, and Marriage. Sociology Compass, 7(2), 97-110. https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12016

29. Isayeva, Ye. A., & Sokolov, A. V. (2013). Legalizatsiya odnopolykh brakov: realizatsiya politiki ravenstva ili razrusheniye instituta sem'i?. Yaroslavskiy pedagogicheskiy vestnik, 1(3).

30. Jansen, M., & Liefbroer, A. C. (2006). Couples' attitudes, childbirth, and the division of labor. Journal of family issues, 27(11), 1487-1511.

31. Kondakov, A. (2010). Same-Sex Marriage in Russia: Obscure Past, Dull Today, and'Bright'Tomorrow (Odnopolyy Brak v Rossii:«Temnoye Proshloye», Seryye Budni i «Svetloye» Poslezavtra). Gender Studies (Gendernyye issledovaniya), 20, 51-71.

32. Kurayeva, D. V. Problema Geteronormativnosti, Agendernoye Obshcestvo. Krasnoyarsk, Sibirskiy federal'nyy universitet, 15-25 aprelya 2016 g., 24.

33. Lehmiller, J. J., & Agnew, C. R. (2006). Marginalized relationships: The impact of social disapproval on romantic relationship commitment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32(1), 40-51.

34. McLelland, M., & Mackie, V. (Eds.). (2014). Routledge handbook of sexuality studies in East Asia. Routledge.

35. Namaste, K. (1994). The politics of inside/out: Queer theory, poststructuralism, and a sociological approach to sexuality. Sociological theory, 220-231.

36. Nash, C. J. (2016). Queer Methods and Methodologies (Open Access): Intersecting Queer Theories and Social Science Research. Routledge.

37. Nomerovskaya, A. D. (2014). Problema normativnosti v diskurse kvir-teorii. Istoricheskiye, filosofskiye, politicheskiye i yuridicheskiye nauki, kul'turologiya i iskusstvovedeniye. Voprosy teorii i praktiki, (11-2 (49)).

38. Noy, C. (2008). Sampling Knowledge: The Hermeneutics of Snowball Sampling in Qualitative Research. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 11(4), 327-344. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645570701401305

39. Perlesz, A., Power, J., Brown, R., McNair, R., Schofield, M., Pitts, M., Barrett, A., & Bickerdike, A. (2010). Organising Work and Home in Same-Sex Parented Families: Findings From the Work Love Play Study. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Family Therapy (ANZJFT), 31(4), 374-391. https://doi.org/10.1375/anft.31.4.374

40. Problemnaya situatsiya: Deti v odnopolykh sem'yakh i etika sotsiologa // Monitoring. 2011. №3 (103).

41. Riggle, E. D., Whitman, J. S., Olson, A., Rostosky, S. S., & Strong, S. (2008). The positive aspects of being a lesbian or gay man. Professional psychology: Research and practice, 39(2), 210.

42. Rosenfeld, M. J. (2010). Nontraditional families and childhood progress through school. Demography, 47(3), 755-775.

43. Rostosky, S. S., Riggle, E. D. B., Gray, B. E., & Hatton, R. L. (2007). Minority stress experiences in committed same-sex couple relationships. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 38(4), 392-400. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.38.4.392

44. Russell, G. M., & Richards, J. A. (2003). Stressor and resilience factors for lesbians, gay men, and bisexuals confronting antigay politics. American journal of community psychology, 31(3-4), 313-328.

45. Semenova, V. V. (1998). Kachestvennyye metody: vvedeniye v gumanisticheskuyu sotsiologiyu. M.: dobrosvet, 292, 15.

46. Solodnikov, V. V., & Chkanikova, A. M. (2008). Deti v odnopolykh sem'yakh. Monitoring obshchestvennogo mneniya: ekonomicheskiye i sotsial'nyye peremeny, (1 (85)), 136-148.

47. Tongco, M. D. C. (2007). Purposive sampling as a tool for informant selection. Ethnobotany Research and applications, 5, 147-158.

48. Uest K. Sozdaniye gendera / K. Uest, D. Zimmerman // Gendernyye tetradi. Vyp. 1; pod red. A. Kletsina. - SPb: SPb filial IN RAN, 1997. - S.94-124.

49. Umberson, D., Thomeer, M. B., Kroeger, R. A., Lodge, A. C., & Xu, M. (2015). Challenges and opportunities for research on same?sex relationships. Journal of Marriage and Family, 77(1), 96-111.

50. Vaughan, M. D., & Rodriguez, E. M. (2014). LGBT strengths: Incorporating positive psychology into theory, research, training, and practice. Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 1(4), 325-334. https://doi.org/10.1037/sgd0000053

51. Voronina, O. A. (2000). Sotsiokul'turnyye determinanty razvitiya gendernoy teorii v Rossii i na Zapade. Obshchestvennyye nauki i sovremennost', (4), 9-20.

52. Windebank, J., & Martinez-Perez, A. (2018). Gender divisions of domestic labour and paid domestic services. The Service Industries Journal, 38(11-12), 875-895.

53. Winkleby, M. A., Jatulis, D. E., Frank, E., & Fortmann, S. P. (1992). Socioeconomic status and health: how education, income, and occupation contribute to risk factors for cardiovascular disease. American journal of public health, 82(6), 816-820.

54. Yadov, V. A., Yanitskiy, O. N., Andreyeva, G. M., Amelin, V. N., Astaf'yev, YA. U., Batygin, G. S., ... & Golenkova, Z. T. (1998). Sotsiologiya v Rossii.

Online resources:

1. Fuko M. Rozhdeniye biopolitiki. Kurs lektsiy // Tsentr gumanitarnykh tekhnologiy. (2015, July 28) Retrieved from http://gtmarket.ru/laboratory/doc/6709

2. Vneseny izmeneniya v zakon o zashchite detey ot informatsii, prichinyayushchey vred ikh zdorov'yu i razvitiyu. (2013, June 30). Retrieved from http://kremlin.ru/events/president/news/18423

Appendix A

Information about informants

Appendix B

Interview guide.

Размещено на Allbest.ru