The aim of the department is to achieve decision advantage in the fields of comparative social research, sociology of young people, sociology of science and education, and research into cultural diversity and tolerance. The department maintains close research ties and partnerships with the European University in St Petersburg, the HSE Moscow Sociology department, the RAS Institute of Sociology in St Petersburg and many other international partners. Faculty are all experienced teachers and researchers from leading Russian and western universities and research centres.
Edited by: D. A. Alexandrov, A. V. Boukhanovsky, A. V. Chugunov et al.
Cham: Springer, 2019.
Bogolyubova O., Panicheva P., Ledovaya Y. et al.
Sage Open. 2020. Vol. 10. No. 2. P. 1-8.
Koltsov S., Ignatenko V., Pashakhin S.
In bk.: Proceedings of the 5th International Electronic Conference on Entropy and Its Applications. Vol. 46. Iss. 1. MDPI AG, 2020. Ch. 5. P. 1-8.
Bulygin D., Musabirov I.
Basic research program. WP BRP. National Research University Higher School of Economics, 2019
An article was published in Sexuality, citizenship and belonging: trans/national and intersectional perspectives, London: Routledge 2016 under a title: “Sexual citizenship, nationalism and biopolitics in Putin’s Russia” In Putin’s Russia, restrictions on sexual and reproductive rights are justified on both pragmatic and ideological grounds. On a practical level, they are advocated in the name of the national interest and of the state’s biopolitical aims of increasing the population and improving its health. Restrictions on abortion are intended to boost the birth rate and optimise women’s reproductive capabilities; the ‘gay propaganda’ law is meant to contribute to the healthy psychological and moral development of Russia’s younger generations by strengthening ‘traditional’ family values. On an ideological level, these restrictions construct specific models of motherhood, relationships and family as legitimate and ‘traditionally’ Russian. Pragmatic reasons and moral values are deeply intertwined, particularly in the case of reproductive rights: pronatalist policies deploy pro-life rhetoric and construct motherhood as simultaneously a moral issue, a patriotic duty and as a public concern. Importantly, the meaning of Russian ‘traditional values’ is constructed in opposition to European ‘sexual democracy’ (Fassin 2010), particularly in relation to same-sex relationships. Internationally, Russia increasingly presents itself on the international stage as a stronghold of social conservatism and the defender of traditional family values (Wilkinson 2014), whilst domestically, these very values are deployed to shore-up specific notions about Russian national identity. A vision of the Russian nation as an ‘imagined community’ built on tradition and biological kinship promotes specific sexual and gender normativities. Women are valued first and foremost as reproducers of the nation, although not all models of motherhood and family relationships are equally legitimised. Non-heterosexual citizens are constructed as deviant