Women, the State and Revolution: Soviet Family Policy and Social Life, 1917-1936

Cambridge Russian, Soviet and Post-Soviet Studies

by Wendy Z. Goldman

When the Bolsheviks came to power in 1917, they believed that under socialism the family would "wither-away." They envisioned a society in which communal dining halls, daycare centers, and public laundries would replace the unpaid labor of women in the home. Yet by 1936 legislation designed to liberate women from their legal and economic dependence had given way to increasingly conservative solutions aimed at strengthening traditional family ties and women's reproductive role. This book explains the reversal, focusing on how women, peasants, and orphans responded to Bolshevik attempts to remake the family, and how their opinions and experiences in turn were used by the state to meet its own needs.

Genres: History, Feminism, Nonfiction, Politics, Soviet Union, Russia, Sociology

368 pages, Paperback

First published November 26, 1993

Reviews

[Maja Solar · Rating 5 out of 5]

thoroughly documented history of women's emancipation in Soviet Russia, family policies and the Bolshevik's revolutionary program, especially libertarian ideas of free union & the abolition of marriage, law, state... and the author shows the sharp ideological shift of these issues with Stalin's reactionary policies

[Christopher Saunders · Rating 4 out of 5]

Wendy Z. Goldman's Women, the State and Revolution addresses how the Russian Revolution changed life for women in Russia, for good or ill. Goldman shows how the Bolsheviks came to power promising to enforce strict social equality, and felt pressure from within their own ranks to extend this to women. Thus, the early USSR saw a rash of policies which seemed remarkably feminist: divorce laws were liberalized, abortion made legal, women encouraged to enter the work force. But, as Goldman shows, little of Bolshevik approaches to women's rights could be labeled feminist in the usual sense: rather than affecting the uplift of women, they were meant to extend the Revolution into Russian's private lives. The abortion laws, for instance, were amazingly progressive by standards of their time, but constantly undercut by restrictions and stigmatization before Stalin finally outlawed the practice again. Divorce reforms ran afoul of peasant and bourgeois prejudices towards separations, showing how even totalitarian governments can bend to public pressure. There was no deep-seated devotion to Women's Rights among the Bolshevik elite, allowing them to introduce, then phase out such reforms at a whim, and to backslide into retrograde rhetoric about creating the "socialist family." The result was at once cynical and sincere; the Soviets, like many progressives past and present, viewed an all-encompassing societal revolution as helping all groups, equally. Which is all well and good, in theory; but what good did it serve disadvantaged groups if underlying inequities aren't addressed? Not an easy read - the book is definitely geared towards an academic audience - but an eye-opening read about social and government pressure to confirm traditional gender roles, even in the most left wing regimes.

[Lucas Cazanatto · Rating 3 out of 5]

Livro muito denso, vejo esse livro como uma fonte essencial para pesquisa sobre o assunto de forma acadêmica e científica, então é um livro importante para historiadores, pesquisadores e etc. Já se considerar que eu sou um leigo e não lido com a academia, achei um livro maçante e cansativo.

Com parágrafos e parágrafos de páginas repetitivas e dados que são importantes apenas para casos específicos, como por exemplo entender a forma que o aborto ilegal era lidado na União Soviética em um período breve do calor revolucionário. Aí que a leitura é cansativa, o que torna o livro menos atraente pra quem não sabe nada de nada. Livro pra quem já passou do básico.

No mais, digo que é importante pra ver como as coisas aconteceram de fato no período além da teoria revolucionária.

A teoria quando dialeticamemte confrontada com a realidade material da época gera períodos de muita confusão e dificuldade de lidar com todos os detalhes que surgem a partir disso. Fica esse livro como uma referência pra ter esse registro de tudo.

[isabelle · Rating 4 out of 5]

Livro denso e cansativo que pode ser um pouco confuso se você não entrar nele com pelo menos um conhecimento básico sobre a Revolução Russa e alguns eventos que seguiram ela como a Guerra Civil Russa, mas de qualquer forma é muito esclarecedor nos assuntos mais específicos que a autora buscou abordar. Não é um livro onde se vai procurar soluções ou algo assim, é um livro pra entender a história e a ser usado de material pra construção de novas ideias revolucionárias. Me estressei horrores mas valeu a pena hehe

[Eli Paula · Rating 4 out of 5]

Assim, sem palavras para o trabalho da autora, fenomenal.
Mas achei uma leitura muito difícil, que pra mim não fluía, não achei meu ritmo com ela, muito dados, muita referência, massante.
Mas o mais importante, mostra tudo o que foi conquistado e depois foi perdido, não basta mudar a política, precisamos mudar a estrutura, a base do patriarcado está na cabeça das pessoas e não basta derrubar o capitalismo, precisa de uma escola sobre igualdade de gêneros.

[Yuri · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great book. It allowed me to understand how communism would include women in society and what changes would’ve to be done. Also made me curious to know more about Stalin’s government because, even though he supported some of the women’s agenda, he also censored important laws for them, so it’s very strange. I’ve plans to read more about family, as a institution along with how relationships play out in capitalism versus what would be in socialism, too because this theme is dissected throughout the book, but only by the Soviet perspective and I want to understand this topic in a more theoretical way. I took one star because at the end, the book seemed a little repetitive and the constitutional part bored me, although I acknowledge the importance of that section.

[G K]

I went into this book without knowing much of the history of the Soviet Union and not knowing any of the history of women in the Soviet Union other than some cursory details. I read this with a communist reading group, and our hope for the book was that we would be able to get some perspective on the retreat that the Soviet Union made on women’s rights in the 1930s, in particular the illegalization of abortion. Unfortunately, we ended up a fairly disappointed.

Goldman does an amazing job in most of the book charting the history of the Soviet Union’s family code. In particular, she is able to clearly extract and explain all of the factions on each side of the important decisions – the libertarians who wanted to abolish the family, the pragmatists who saw abolishing the family as being short-term detrimental to women, and so on. The detail that Goldman shows really gives the reader a sense of being part of those debates, and she gives a relatively unbiased account of all sides.

However, when she gets to the rollback that occurs in the 1930s, suddenly things feel very rushed. The meticulous attention to detail that made the previous chapters so riveting is replaced by broad strokes and simple explanations. The renewed promotion of family values and the banning of abortion are chalked up mostly to Stalin’s authoritarianism, with little discussion of how the Soviet Union got there. This was particularly frustrating given that one of the reasons our group had chosen to read this was to gain insight into how this rollback occurred. To me, this feels like the most important part of the book and the place where modern communists could take the greatest lessons; most modern communists would agree that banning abortion is a bad idea, both strategically and morally, and so understanding how the Soviet Union got to that point could help us avoid similar mistakes in the future. But this is not the approach that Goldman takes. Instead, her 1.5-ish chapters on this period feel more like a condemnation than an explanation, which is not particularly useful if your goal is to learn from mistakes.

A central theme that Goldman comes back to over and over again is the revolutionaries’ lofty ideals of women’s rights and family abolition running up against the reality that Russia at the time did not have the productive capacity to fulfill most of these ideals: there were thousands of homeless children who lived on the streets, but even when the communists converted old mansions into children’s homes, they still did not have the food, cloth, and staff to take care of most of them; their commitment to women’s rights and free union led them to legalize at-will divorce, but this ran into countless contradictions when applied to the patriarchal peasant communes; the revolutionaries passed laws to pull women out of the drudgery of the kitchen and nursery and into the workforce, but they were stymied by employers who did not want to hire from a female labor force that was mostly unskilled in anything but domestic labor. Goldman goes to great lengths in showing how difficult it is to build communism when your nation has a very low level of development. However, her repeated emphasis on this theme seems to be in complete contradiction with the final passage of the book:

"The tragedy of the reversal in ideology was not simply that it destroyed the possibility of a new revolutionary social order, although millions had suffered and died for precisely this. The tragedy was that the Party continued to present itself as the true heir to the original socialist vision. Cloaking its single-minded focus on production in the empty rhetoric of women's emancipation, it abandoned its promise to socialize household labor and to foster freer, more equal relations between men and women. And the greatest tragedy is that subsequent generations of Soviet women, cut off from the thinkers, the ideas, and the experiments generated by their own Revolution, learned to call this 'socialism' and to call this 'liberation.'"

After six chapters explaining the minutiae of the difficulties in enforcing women’s rights and more equal gender relations in the absence of development, why condemn the party’s “single-minded focus on production”? If anything, the previous chapters would indicate that a focus on production would be absolutely necessary to build up the resources to carry out any of these projects.

This final conclusion has another problem that bothered me quite a bit: Goldman claims that the rollback on women’s rights “destroyed the possibility of a new revolutionary social order” and that future Soviet women were tricked into thinking that the communist party had an interest in women’s liberation. But what then is Goldman’s explanation for future victories for women in the Soviet Union, for instance, the restoration of abortion in the 1950s (far before most of the US and many capitalist countries had it)? How can you claim that the movement for soviet women’s liberation was unsalvageable when they would later make huge strides to bring women into technological fields, including sending the first woman to space?

A criticism that many of us in the group frequently returned to was the lack of comparisons of what was happening in the Soviet Union to other parts of the world. For instance, Goldman spends a chapter detailing how the revolutionaries were struggling to get the problem of homeless children under control, but fails to tell us what child homelessness was like in other nations. Without this information, it’s difficult for the reader to make a judgment on the Bolsheviks. Does the falling short of many of their programs from their high-minded goals indict their socialist project? Without a comparison to non-socialist nations tackling similar problems, we can’t say.

Although this review may seem rather negative, I would still recommend this book to anyone who wants to learn more about early Soviet life. The chapters showing how the revolutionaries’ ideals butted up against the reality of an impoverished nation will certainly be great lessons for any communist. Additionally, the depiction of the debates that were occurring at the time around the family code inspire great optimism for future socialist projects by showing what governance is like once the struggle to achieve a socialist state is behind us; almost everyone in these debates has in mind the goal of women’s liberation, their disagreements are mostly on what that means and how we get there. However, if your goal is to learn from the mistakes of the Soviet Union, the final chapters of the book will leave you disappointed and wanting more.

[Rodolfo · Rating 5 out of 5]

How do you implement a vision of equality for woman in a country ravaged by civil war, where most children have lost their parents and families have disintegrated and where 85% of the people leave in patriarchal peasent households? In this short book, Goldman explores where the Bolshevik vision for women originated, the debates that led to it, and examines how they tried to apply this vision to the USSR in 1917. How the events essentially forced them to retreat in this libertarian vision of free love once and again until the final family code of 1936 which brought a return of some of the worse elements in pre-Soviet Russia, while at the same time claiming to support women liberation. An extremely good read, well sourced, and shows how some ideas simply crash against the material reality. One should not be disappointed by the outcome, but instead use it as a chance to reflect and learn on what went wrong, what went right, and what could have gone better.

[Ela Jung · Rating 5 out of 5]

Livro incrível, abre nosso entendimento para as implicações políticas sociais do divórcio e outras medidas que se envolvem sobre a mulher. Nos mostra que a revolução soviética começou a legítima e abrupta sobre o seus ideais de liberdade e assim arcou com as consequências positivas e negativas de seus atos. Livro detalhado mostra os pontos extremos e de diversas medidas como a liberação do aborto, que provocou a liberdade da mulher mas também o abuso do procedimento médico sem anestesia. É perceptível necessidade da igualdade de gênero para efetuação do socialismo. Vendi também aponta a imagem falsa socialista de Stalin, que imprime como pilar de seu governo a família.

[Laura Hanauer · Rating 5 out of 5]

nessa obra, wendy goldman irá fazer uma análise aprofundada sobre a luta pela libertação das mulheres, durante e após a revolução russa de 1917. a partir de um número impressionante de fontes, goldman discorre sobre os objetivos dos revolucionários em relação às mulheres e a família patriarcal que, enquanto uma instituição burguesa, oprime as mulheres e precisava ser abolida. essa opressão não é novidade para nós, pois até hoje é visível a dificuldade das mulheres em se inserir no campo político e intelectual, tendo que conciliar até triplas jornadas de trabalho, estudando, trabalhando e cuidando do trabalho doméstico. assim, a autora mostra as ideias da época para solucionar esses problemas e as dificuldades para colocá-las em prática. inúmeros debates ocorreram, sobretudo a partir de socialistas libertários que discutiam sobre a necessidade do estado se encarregar dos serviços domésticos e das crianças, sobre a liberação do divórcio, melhores condições de trabalho e a legalização do aborto. no entanto, houveram consequências para essas ações, devido ao contexto social e econômico do país. a autora destrincha essas questões e explica seus motivos de forma crítica, com o intuito de que, a partir do estudo da revolução, possamos compreender seus erros e acertos e aprender com eles. cabe dizer que os ideais revolucionários eram incríveis, porém houve uma dificuldade para conciliar a teoria com a prática, inclusive, é importante perceber como é difícil modificar a mentalidade de um povo, pode-se implementar leis rapidamente, porém os costumes demoram muito tempo para serem modificados, algo que fica visível nesse livro. muitas das questões debatidas na década de 1920 são pautas disputadas até hoje nos feminismos, a legislação da urss nesse período até hoje não foi igualada por muitos países, inclusive o brasil. aprender sobre a urss é essencial, sobretudo vivendo em um país que destila anticomunismo e desinformação. uma resenha no instagram não é o suficiente para que eu consiga explicar as questões abordadas no livro de forma satisfatória, se dependesse de mim ficaria uma meia hora falando sobre.

[insta @grifandolivros]

[Anna Beatriz · Rating 4 out of 5]

O livro trata mais especificamente das questões de materniadade, divórcio e casamento, além do aborto e das dificudades das mulgreres durante os anos da Revolução Russa.
Acredito que, embora os revolucinários lutassem em nome do comunismo, seus ideais foram se perdendo ao longo do tempo, visto que, em primeiro ligar, a Russia não estava pronta para uma revolução comunista naquele momento.
A maioria da população fazia parte do campesinato e possuia modos de vida que não se enquadravam nos Códigos propostos pelos novos governantes.
Dessa forma, acredito que, os revolucionários marxistas deveriam levar em consideração todas as noções e, antes de propor ideias tão ''revolucionárias'' para a época, deveriam preparar a população para o mesmo, isto é, realizar mudanças de acordo com a realidade da população, das mulheres e dos trabalhadores para que, futuramente, pudéssem de fato se engajar nas questões socialistas.
Infelizmente o que ocorreu foi um caos total, a população não mudou de vida, o trabalhador não deixou de ser explorado e as mulharres continuaram oprimidas e refens do sistema.
A Russia foi o primeiro país do mundo a legalizar o aborto, mas com que propósito?
Essa não foi uma vitória feminista, muito pelo contrário, os russos condenavam o aborto e diziam ser um "mal necessário", isto é, sua legalização foi só uma forma de melhorar a situação das mulheres, provisóriamente, mas sem nenhum reconhecimento de que mulheres devessem ter controle sobre os próprios corpos.

[Carolina Marchesin · Rating 4 out of 5]

Quando leio esse tipo de livro só fico pensando no trabalho que deve ter dado fazer tanta pesquisa. É muito acadêmico, cheio de dados e tabelas, de fontes jurídicas e pessoais… e por isso denso e difícil de ler. As vezes me pareceu até meio repetitivo e confesso que em alguns parágrafos rolou aquela leitura dinâmica das exemplificações. Mas é um estudo sen-sa-cio-nal justamente pelo nível de detalhe que apresenta. A autora trabalha a situação da mulher, da família, dos direitos das mulheres, sempre colocando-os em relação com a economia e os projetos políticos ideológicos. Vai desde a revolução de 1917 até meados de 1930, em um trabalho minucioso e que tenta mostrar todos os debates. Mas não é um manualzão porque várias nuances do contexto revolucionário não recebem tanto detalhe, então acho necessário ter um conhecimento prévio seja sobre a Revolução Russa ou sobre ideias socialistas/marxistas-leninistas. É uma obra-prima se pensarmos em construção metodológica de textos de ciências sociais e humanas.
Se eu tivesse lido aos poucos, um capítulo ou outro como livro de consulta, talvez tivesse achado menos cansativo. Mas ler tudo de uma vez foi bom demais pra pegar a genialidade da obra (e alimentou minhas análises sociais fod*). É um 4,5 com louvor!

[Fabiele · Rating 2 out of 5]

"Não seremos esquecidos, pois, tendo um efeito decisivo sobre o mundo inteiro, demos nova vida ao termo humanidade."

-Propaganda antistalinista ☆ (tem que ficar de olho nessas publicações da boitempo)
-Um recorte muito mais restrito do que eu queria, focado demais nos primeiros anos da União Soviética (pode ser interessante para outras pessoas, não exatamente pra mim)
-Repetitivo ao esgotamento: cada capítulo podia ser cortado pela metade se ela decidisse levar o argumento a diante e não repetisse a mesma coisa uma e outra vez
-A escolha da tradução de não traduzir algumas palavras com tradução direta é péssima, não traz nenhuma contribuição, só confunde.

[Melanie · Rating 4 out of 5]

While I don't agree with Goldman's thesis on the 1930s representing a reversal of socialist ideology, I love everything else about this book. Though she uses statistics often, Goldman humanizes her data by inserting illustrative stories that help contextualize the data. She also draws from pamphlets, books, and reports to understand intellectual origins of Bolshevik thoughts on women and the family.

[Camila · Rating 5 out of 5]

Uma ótima análise da situação das mulheres na Rússia pós revolucionária e na URSS. Com bom embasamento e dados históricos, traz uma reflexão sobre a ideia de família, as condições materiais das mulheres e mães, a legalização do aborto e sua consequente proibição durante o stalinismo. Ótimo para conhecer e refletir as contradições que permeiam a luta feminista socialista.

[Jasmine · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book serves well as a reference, but for a full picture of women’s issues in the USSR, there is a considerable amount of context missing. 

Goldman’s introductory chapter provides a brief but excellent history of feminist and socialist thought up through 1917. Though initial conceptions of the role of the family in a socialist state were radical, with this intellectual history, the Bolshevik 1918 family code and the discourse around it are shown to be well-reasoned and strongly grounded in the progressive philosophy of the time. What would have made this chapter indispensable would be a comparison with family code legislation in other countries (recall that French women only got the right to vote in 1944, French illegitimate children only became equal to legitimate children in 2002, and at-will abortions are still illegal in England and massively restricted in many countries in the West). The innovation in the 1918 Soviet family code was not really brought home in the way it should have been. How did feminist achievements in the first socialist state impact the movement elsewhere? 

Alas, answering these questions would have been a very different book, and Goldman keeps the readers eyes focused tightly on the interior of the country, with little comparison to the legal treatment of women and children in other countries. (How did other countries handle the surplus of orphans following a war? How did other industrializing nations handle unemployment of women and lack of birth control technology?). We also see little in terms of foreign relations (largely hostile) or economic challenges that provide context towards the country’s challenges in feeding and clothing its people; to what other ends did the country direct its resources, and were its investments successful?

Most of the subsequent chapters provide detailed statistics and touching first person accounts about the difficulties experienced by orphans and women during the aftermath of the first world war and the civil war. The author editorializes somewhat, with each instance of suffering being terrible, but every attempt to fix it being somehow worse. Was there anything the author believes should and could have been done differently, with the wisdom of hindsight? These chapters were informative, but not particularly insightful.

Chapters 5 and 6, however, were more illuminating. In these chapters, Goldman skillfully maps out the fiery and varied debate about the 1926 code. The challenge of finding a robust set of rules that would serve both the urban proletariat and the peasantry — a way of life already diminishing by 1917 — and protect women and children and advance feminist conceptions of love and gender was an unsolvable puzzle. 

Perhaps particularly because of how brilliantly Goldman untangles this discourse, the subsequent rollbacks in family law in the 1930s appear to come a little out of nowhere. Was it truly so difficult to find writing regarding the thought process over the criminalization of abortion and the increased emphasis on the family as an institution for promoting economic security? The last two chapters felt a bit lazy; the conclusion was presupposed that these regressions in social policy were all “political” ploys by the Stalinist regime, and it was not necessary to dive deep into archives to understand why. Wendy writes, "The ideological reversal of the 1930s was essentially political, not economic or material in nature, bearing all the marks of Stalinist policy in other areas." A “political” decision to what “political” end? Unclear.

I picked up this book in part to answer the question of why the first nation to legalize abortion rolled it back not two decades later. I have my answer: initial legalization of abortion was viewed as a remedy to the problem of vast child poverty that the state was unable to support, and somewhat secondarily as a way to alleviate health issues arising from illegal abortions. It was not primarily an issue of the right of a woman to bodily autonomy. Conversely, when abortion law became once again more restrictive, it was viewed as a remedy to declining birth rates (discussion of the impacts of illegal abortion appears to have been minimal), and sold as something no longer necessary due to increasing economic resources for women. In the West, we view abortion so firmly within the language of bodily autonomy and right to choose that to take away this right is seen as a despicable encroachment on human rights. The USSR’s changing attitudes towards abortion do make more sense when viewed as a method of addressing social issues. Though, of course, I think they were wrong to take away this right.

This is a tragic story. The Bolsheviks correctly saw marriage as a tool of patriarchal oppression of women, and wished to bring about its withering away. Now, a century later, it has, in many ways, withered. Better birth control methods give women the confidence to enjoy sexual relationships outside of marriage, better educational and work opportunities give more women the independence to support themselves without a partner, and the laws of many countries have caught up to this material reality by providing legal protections to “de facto” marriages, much like the Bolshevik feminists fought for.

[Amanda Ananias · Rating 5 out of 5]

Livro incrível, aprendi muito sobre a revolução Russa, União soviética e o feminismo soviético. Feministas, vocês precisam ler! Não feministas, vocês precisam virar feministas e se juntar à luta com nós.

[Kristy · Rating 3 out of 5]

Read this for class and found it interesting but very academic and somewhat dry with the amount of statistics. But then I prefer the stories over statistics.

[Marina Totis · Rating 5 out of 5]

livro brabo demais, leitura fácil e uma discussão incrível sobre ideias vs suas implementações materias

[Lia Silva · Rating 5 out of 5]

Um ótimo livro para aprender mais como foi a vida da mulher no período da revolução russa, leitura obrigatória a todos professores de história. ❤️🤩

[Matheus e Silva · Rating 4 out of 5]

Baita leitura sobre as mulheres no início da URSS. Tudo muito bem pesquisado e escrito.

[Garth · Rating 3 out of 5]

How did the lives of Russian women improve after the Russian Revolution? Did the new Soviets push the envelope on women’s rights, and if they did, how so? Wendy Goldman’s book provides a fascinating and much needed look into the development of women’s rights in the Soviet Union of the 1920’s, immediately after the revolutionary period. In writing a historiography, the same event can be represented many different ways through the biases of the writers, their interpretation and presentation of events, or just omissions. The Soviet Union of the 1920’s is a field of study that deserves a more proper and thorough examination to balance the present historiography. While far from perfect, Wendy Goldman provides an examination of family policy and women’s issues in the early USSR that is unknown in the West. In this book, Wendy Goldman examines multiple women’s issues such as reproductive rights, family law, childcare, Soviet law, and the family codes of 1926 and 1936.

In the aftermath of a revolution and civil war, the Bolshevik party embarked on an ambitious path to build a utopian vision of society. Against all odds, they blazed a trail and made achievements that would not be seen for decades in the world at large. The legalization of abortion in 1920 was a landmark event that preceded the legalization of abortion in the West by decades, even taking into account the USSR’s 1936-1955 moratorium on abortion. While the Bolsheviks of the 1920’s approached the abortion debate of the 1920’s from a utilitarian lens rather than the position of women’s choice, their achievement should not be overlooked. A century later, the threat of a rollback of reproductive rights in places such as the United States stands as a testament to the Soviet achievement.

Throughout the book, Goldman gives many examples of the USSR’s efforts to build a better society for its citizens, regardless of its limitations. The early USSR had to rebuild a country that was ravaged by war, revolution, and famine. Even with all these limitations, the State did all it could to provide a better life and rights for its citizens. Contrary to the Western view of a state run by an all powerful dictator, there were intense debates in the Soviet Communist Party regarding issues such as the family code and introduction of women into the workforce. In several chapters of the book Goldman writes about the ‘besprizornost’ or homeless children of the 1920’s now forgotten to history. Lacking resources and barely able to provide for millions of orphans, the Soviet state nevertheless did all it could to help all these orphaned children. Estates formerly belonging to the nobility were expropriated to provide housing and children who had to resort to crime to make ends meet, were treated with rehabilitation rather than harsh justice. If a state lacking all resources can attempt to do all this for its citizens, what excuse do the governments of the West have when faced with poverty and declining living standards at home?

While the book provides a lot of information, I felt that the last two chapters were the book’s weakest point. The 1936 Soviet family code banned abortion, and the book provided almost no explanation as to the decision making process that led to such a repeal. The book just implies that this was pushed through by a Stalinist government that was more socially conservative. In hindsight, one can see that such a decision was incorrect. But to provide almost no information on the reasons for such a decision detract from the book. Did geopolitical considerations play a part in such a repeal? The Spanish Civil War was raging in 1936 and the Soviet Union provided military aid, on the other side of the world the Soviets were also engaged in military skirmishes with Imperial Japan. Perhaps the Soviet administration sought to increase birth rates for the coming war? Or were there other considerations? Overall, I would recommend reading this book for the wealth of knowledge it provides into the social developments of the USSR in the 1920’s.

[Left_coast_reads · Rating 5 out of 5]

Women, the State, and Revolution by Wendy Goldman is a brilliant historical review of Soviet family policy from 1917-1936. Before the Revolution, Russian women had few rights. Divorce was very difficult, largely controlled by the church. The traditional peasant farm was a deeply patriarchal institution. The Revolution brought massive changes.

The USSR was one of the first countries to legalize divorce and abortion (which was free). It allowed women to sue for alimony and child support. It ended legal discrimination against children born out of wedlock. Goldman describes the 1918 Family Code as, "the most progressive family legislation the world had ever seen."

The government established the Zhenotdel, a department devoted to women's issues. Their goals included state-run cafeterias, laundromats, and child care facilities to free women from domestic work. There was a clear Marxist, materialist basis for the Bolshevik understanding of women's oppression.

The main challenge to this vision was poverty. The state simply did not have the resources to achieve its goals. Plus, the largely agricultural economy made these policies difficult to administer. The traditional form of property in the Russia was a quasi-communal family farm(dvor). How could this be divided in divorce? How could a man pay alimony if he didn't even have currency? These difficulties highlight the concerns of some Marxists like Kautsky who argued that socialism could not be built before a period of capitalist industrialization to break traditional property relations.

Under Stalin the state reveresed most of this, outlawing abortion, banning paternity suits, and disbanding the Zhenotdel. Growing impatient with orphaned street children, the state chose a more punitive approach, imprisoning children as young as 13 for theft. The new legal philosophy focused on personal responsibility and violent repression, rather than addressing the root causes of the problems.

This is the first book I've read on this topic, so I should resist drawing strong conclusions, but Goldman paints a clear picture. She uses historical research to make an argument for a materialist understanding women's oppression. Excellent book.

[Marina Burity · Rating 5 out of 5]

A Revolução Russa me interessa muito e adorei ler esse livro que mostra com detalhes como foi a participação da mulher soviética na revolução e na sociedade, quais problemas ela enfrentava, como a teoria do movimento foi barrada pelo dia a dia e pelo pensamento machista presente na maior parte da população. Os fatos tratados datam dos primeiros anos da União Soviética.

É impressionante perceber como a revolução foi vanguardista na questão dos direitos das mulheres e da igualdade de gênero, sendo inclusive mais progressista que o Brasil do século XXI. E é igualmente triste ver porque esses ideais não deram certo.

Livro muito bem escrito, muito bem fundamentado e imprescindível para quem se interessa pelo tema.