“A man of Dagestan would rather die on his feet than become a woman”

Women, Raise Your Hands

Russian politicians believe that Russian women do not need feminism. They portray feminism as a disease. First, according to them, feminists convince women to stop shaving their armpits. Next, they say, comes hostility toward men. Before you know it, they embrace a child-free ideology, become lesbian separatists, and join the anti-war movement. These politicians use feminists to scare women and children without ever explaining what is supposedly so bad about them. 

“A man of Dagestan would rather die than become a woman. Mountain women must remain mountain women and not become lesbians. Neither the West nor anyone else will ever bring Russia to its knees!”

Three months after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine began, Gadzhimurad Magomedov, the head of a Dagestan Olympic reserve football school, made these statements at a rally in support of the Russian armed forces. His short speech vividly illustrates three gender-related issues that have escalated sharply since the beginning of the war: transphobia, which intensified after the ban on gender transition; the persecution of LGBTQ+ individuals; and opposition to the West’s supposed corrupting influence on Russian women and children, which is said to aim at their moral degradation. Russian authorities and propagandists claim that women must be protected from feminists, whom they accuse of being nurtured by the West and eager to turn everyone into genderless, childless beings.

The following is an excerpt from a column by poet and publicist Igor Karaulov. Having somehow mysteriously absorbed all women’s pain, the author concludes that shaving one’s armpits is an act of self-assertion: “In our country, women do not need feminism. A successful woman won’t insist on being called a ‘female manager,’ ‘female editor,’ or ‘female entrepreneur.’ She won’t be offended if a man offers his hand or opens a door for her, because she doesn’t see it as demeaning. She won’t assert herself by refusing to shave her armpits because she knows of better ways to do so. She values her femininity. She values masculinity in men and wants to be attractive to them. These examples demonstrate that the supposed choice between ‘feminism’ and a patriarchal Domostroy is a false dichotomy. One need not frame the issue as a choice between these two alternatives.”

The author addresses people in their 30s and 40s who grew up during the era of Tinto Brass’s erotic films. In these films, the women do not shave their armpits or other body hair. This does not prevent them from being feminine or sexy. And yet, scary stories about hairy feminists still resonate with some Russian readers. Is this tactic still effective after four years of full-scale war? Or does it now require more serious accusations to achieve the same effect?

Thesis No. 1: Feminists Have Stolen Our Children. Or Have They?

“While feminism may seek to protect women’s rights, it can also have significant negative consequences. If women’s rights are expanded, girls may choose not to get married or have children. That’s the problem. They want to be equal to men. And that’s understandable. But men can’t give birth. We need to be very careful with feminism.” This quote from Vladimir Zhirinovskiy, the late leader of the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia, is a rather candid statement about the supposed ‘harm’ of feminism. In today’s Russian public discourse, opponents of feminism frequently treat this idea as self-evident — a woman’s role is to be a wife and a mother, and nothing more. “The most important thing for a woman is giving birth to and caring for children. The ability to give birth is a precious gift, and the family is the state’s absolute priority,” Vladimir Putin congratulated Russian women with these words on March 8, 2024. He has repeatedly said that having children should be perceived as fashionable and that Russia should take the North Caucasus region as an example, where women give birth more often and at a younger age. He pointed to the Chechen Republic as a model, saying that women there have six children and start almost right after finishing high school.

But how accurate is this claim? According to official statistics, the average age at which women have their first child is 23.1 years in the Chechen Republic and 23.4 years in Dagestan. On average, men in the Chechen Republic register their first official marriage at around 30 years old, while women register at around 25. While the Chechen Republic does have the highest birth rate in Russia, it is only 2.67 children per woman, not five or six. In other North Caucasian republics, the average number of children per woman is 1.86 in Ingushetia and 1.78 in Dagestan. Aside from periodic spikes, birth rates are declining in the North Caucasus region just as they are across the country. Caucasian women still have the most children per woman, but the days when women were forced to have many children are long gone.

In the North Caucasus, the idea that a woman’s primary purpose is motherhood and marriage remains especially strong. Therefore, it is not surprising that many women in these Russian republics may respond positively to such messages. However, reliable official data on the actual preferences of women in the region are unlikely to become available anytime soon. What feminists have supposedly ‘imposed’ on these women often amounts to raising their expectations of men. For example, Dagestani women bloggers have increasingly been explaining to future brides which documents their groom-to-be should provide before marriage. These documents include certificates confirming the groom has no criminal record or outstanding child support obligations, as well as clearance from a narcological clinic. Men frequently criticize the women for this kind of informational outreach, arguing that they have begun to make excessive demands.

Meanwhile, reports of women being killed by their partners emerge almost weekly. Feminists are also blamed, but only for helping such information spread. Despite the risks and even though child support debt in Russia consistently exceeds 150 million rubles (with more than 70% of non-payers being men), women still want to become mothers.

Despite fears of losing custody, women continue to have children. In the event of a breakup with the father, a child can be taken from the mother according to unwritten rules and local traditions. According to these norms, children are expected to live with the father’s family. Activists from the project Caucasus Without a Mother receive dozens of requests from women trying to regain the right to see their children. This most often occurs in the republics of Chechnya and Ingushetia, but some Russian men have started abducting children from their former wives and taking them to cities such as Makhachkala and Grozny, reportedly because they find this practice appealing. 

Have feminists really influenced how women view motherhood? To some extent, yes, primarily through the educational efforts of activists and human rights defenders. For instance, Marem, the crisis organization, has spent the last five years informing women about their rights and helping them combat violence. This kind of work can indirectly affect birth rates because it shifts women’s priorities toward a better quality of life. However, this has nothing to do with the propaganda of a child-free ideology or the alleged hatred toward men imposed by ‘crazy feminists.’ Studies show that only 2.4% of Russian women never want to have children. Those who have not become mothers most often cite health problems or difficulty finding a partner as reasons why.

Most importantly, the ongoing war, now in its fifth year, is not encouraging for having children. According to a recent study, one-third of Russian women have delayed having children until the situation in Russia improves.

Since February 24, 2022, Russian authorities have voiced growing concern about the country’s demographic decline, which could be improved through consistent efforts to combat domestic violence, reduce societal tolerance for violence, and create better conditions for childbirth and those who assist in it. Other possibly effective improvements include providing comprehensive sex education and support with contraception and family planning; backing women in obtaining professional education to help them provide for their future children; and creating safe cities with accessible infrastructure. Such changes would make it possible to conclude without hesitation that women are not afraid to give birth and raise children in Russia.

For example, on Mother’s Day, the Alliance of Women’s Initiatives of Russia published a petition for dignified motherhood, which outlined eight key demands. These include the right to reproductive choice, respectful and high-quality maternity care, and stable economic and social conditions for families. These are the issues that deserve serious attention, rather than shifting blame onto women and those who defend their rights. 

Thesis No. 2: How Misogynists Manipulate Statistics

“State institutions are dominated by women. They hold 73% of positions and comprise 81% of the courts and prosecutors’ offices,” complained several months ago Vladimir Maslov, a delegate to fathers’ congress, gloomily describing this phenomenon as the ‘feminist deep state.’ This reflects a common claim among feminism’s opponents: women are well-represented in the workforce. Russia inherited the ‘best practices’ of the USSR, so they are allowed to do anything they want. Shouldn’t they stop asking for more? 

At the same time, statistics enthusiasts conveniently omit the fact that women in state institutions rarely reach the highest levels of leadership. These positions remain almost entirely occupied by men. Russia has more female judges than any other country, yet they are nearly absent from the top echelons. The Supreme Court, for example, holds less than 30% of the women’s seats, and only two serve as chairpersons. Of the 10 judges currently serving in the Constitutional Court (out of 11 seats), only one is a woman. In 2024, of the 700 judges in military courts, just 17 were women.

Even if one overlooks the fact that women rarely attain top positions and focuses only on their greater presence overall in the system, it's important to acknowledge that this doesn’t make the courts more just or lenient toward women. Conversely, women are often imprisoned for crimes that, for men, might result in a suspended sentence. The Higher School of Economics recently noted that women are supposedly treated more leniently, receiving an average of 12 months less than men for murder. However, the accompanying infographics show that, in many cases, women were not supposed to serve prison time for murder at all, as they were acting in self-defense against an intimate partner.

It is precisely in wartime that the harshest sentence in modern Russian history was handed down to a woman: Darya Trepova was sentenced to 27 years in prison for her role in the café explosion in St. Petersburg that killed pro-war blogger Vladlen Tatarsky. Nadin Geisler, a volunteer who had been helping refugees since the start of the full-scale invasion, could have received the same sentence, but hers was reduced to 22 years.

The system spares neither the young nor the politically active. Four years ago, Zarema Musayeva, the elderly mother of Chechen opposition bloggers, was dragged barefoot into the street in winter by Chechen security officers and taken from Nizhny Novgorod to Grozny. Zarema, who struggles to walk without assistance, has remained imprisoned ever since. The authorities show no intention of releasing her, fabricating new charges to keep her detained. And yet, it is said that women in the Caucasus are treated with great honor.

Women Are a Force That Those in Power Want to Control

War is a heavy burden for Russia, and with each passing month, it becomes harder to explain to people why they must carry it on. Feminists, who oppose all forms of violence, clash with a narrative in which the state not only legitimizes aggression daily but also celebrates the ‘heroes of the special military operation.’

The wave of protests against mobilization provides a striking example of how active women can challenge the Russian state. One of the largest protests took place in Makhachkala in September 2022. Hundreds of women of different ages, nationalities, and beliefs took to the streets, demanding that their family members not be sent to war. Initially, the police were uncertain how to respond to the women's activism. It’s one thing to confront a young man whose arm you can twist without hesitation, but how do you handle a crying old lady? Yet, law enforcement found ways to suppress the women. Some are still closely monitored by officers from Center E, the Main Directorate for Combating Extremism of the Russian Interior Ministry.

What do we observe today? Young schoolgirls are taught that their primary goal is to become mothers. Rather than receiving guidance from sex educators, they are steered toward priests. Women’s health clinics are filled with anti-abortion materials, and the head of the state-funded Women for Life foundation openly destroys guides on different forms of contraception. Feminist literature is banned as “extremist,” yet a book by Abu Umar Sasitlinskiy, who was on Interpol’s most-wanted list for financing terrorism for ten years, can be bought for only a thousand rubles — even though people in Russia have been jailed for alleged connections to him. 

Meanwhile, programs aimed at developing women’s potential in the North Caucasus republics focus on initiatives such as “culinary and sewing workshops for vulnerable girls from families in difficult life situations,” never once addressing the issue of violence. Women are also encouraged to join groups under the banner of United Russia, the ruling political party of Russia. They support ‘veterans of the special military operation’ and collect humanitarian aid for those still at the front. As examples of supposedly women-friendly policies, officials сite gender-segregated pharmacies in the Chechen Republic and a special women’s café in Grozny, which, oddly, is managed by a man.

Nevertheless, women’s voices continue to be heard, whether by openly advocating feminism, which often carries significant risk, or simply opposing violence. Kseniya Goryacheva, a member of the New People party, quietly advances initiatives in support of women in the State Duma and defends survivors of violence. Nina Ostanina, though cautious, supports harsher penalties for domestic abuse. Despite leaving politics, Oxana Pushkina continues her public work advocating for women.

Despite growing pressure, grassroots initiatives run by women for women continue to offer assistance. Activists from Marem now face anonymous threats from self-proclaimed defenders of tradition, who accuse them of inciting hatred toward men and allege Western funding. Occasionally, even law enforcement recognizes that these issues cannot be overlooked. One such case is that of Ayna Mankiyeva, who fled her family in Ingushetia to escape violence. She was released from a Moscow police station instead of being handed over to her relatives. Thanks to the support of members of the Presidential Human Rights Council and State Duma deputies, the police no longer list her as a wanted person.

There is still so much work to be done. Tragedies such as the murder of Ayshat Baymuradova in Yerevan and the death of Seda Suleymanova in Chechnya demonstrate that women fleeing violence remain extremely vulnerable. At the same time, it is becoming clearer that more people are refusing to ignore what has happened. This includes not only concerned outsiders, but also members of national diasporas. After Larisa Arsanukayeva was murdered in Nice, France, Chechen women who had remained silent for years took to the streets in anger. They demanded an end to the disregard and silence surrounding the killings of women within diaspora communities.

So, is the propaganda campaign against feminists effective? It is still too early to say. Yet, by the fifth year of the war, more and more people have begun to realize that the real danger does not come from feminists, but from neighbors who might kill their partners, sisters, or friends and then flee to the front to escape accountability. They would later return home, having been decorated with state honors. Thus, the message is clear: violence is forgiven and even rewarded.

‍