Мақолада аёлнинг оила институтини шакллантириш, мустаҳкамлаш, этноаъаналардан фой-
даланишдаги ўрни масалалари муҳокама қилинган. Тарихий манбалар, хусусан, “Авесто”даги қараш-
ларга таянган ҳолда, аёлларнинг оила ва жамиятдаги ўрни, функцияларининг тарихий илдизлари
ҳақида фикр юритилиб, патриархат муносабатлар доирасида аёлнинг оиладаги ўрнида рўй берган
ўзгаришлар таҳлил этилган. Аёлларнинг оила ва жамиятда тенг ҳуқуқлилиги масаласи ҳозирги
кунда ҳам кун тартибида турганлиги қайд этилади.
Мақолада аёлнинг оила институтини шакллантириш, мустаҳкамлаш, этноаъаналардан фой-
даланишдаги ўрни масалалари муҳокама қилинган. Тарихий манбалар, хусусан, “Авесто”даги қараш-
ларга таянган ҳолда, аёлларнинг оила ва жамиятдаги ўрни, функцияларининг тарихий илдизлари
ҳақида фикр юритилиб, патриархат муносабатлар доирасида аёлнинг оиладаги ўрнида рўй берган
ўзгаришлар таҳлил этилган. Аёлларнинг оила ва жамиятда тенг ҳуқуқлилиги масаласи ҳозирги
кунда ҳам кун тартибида турганлиги қайд этилади.
В статье обсуждаются вопросы места и роли женщины в формировании и укрепленении инсти-
тута семьи, в использавании этнотрадиций. Опираясь на исторические источники, в частности,
на положения “Авесты”, рассматриваются исторические корни вопроса места и функций женщины
в семье и обществе, а также их изменение с укоренением патриархатных отношений. Подчер-
кивается, что вопросы равноправия женщин в семье и обществе остаются злободневными и в
настоящее время.
While discussing the role of a woman in the family, first of all we mean her reproductive function. This kind of approach is correct from the scientific point of view, but the woman’s role and place do not begin and end with this function.
The woman can do the same social functions as the man in the formation of the family institution.
The woman’s reproductive function is noted in “Avesto”. It says that the woman should think more of bearing a healthy child during the pregnancy, shouldn’t get exicited for any trifle things. “Avesto” explains to eat “halal” food allowed by muslim religion, to do jobs that keep her body hale and hearty. Spinning thread from wool, weaving cloths, dressmaking, wrestling with boys, horse riding, fencing, self defending from her enemy with shield, jumping over the barriers with horse, swimming, long distance running, bayonet fighting, shooting arrows and the like acquiring physical and military skills were compulsory. The woman’s social functions are stated in details in those orders. According to the rules she was not only the giver of birth or the keeper of a fire place, but she was considered to be a member of a society, defender of herself and her tribe, doer of necessary acts for the family, for example, cattle breading, farming, housekeeping. One can see the influence of matriarchy and appearance of patriarchal relations. It difficult to say exactly when and where began the role of the woman in the formation of the family institution. But scientific observations combine this proces with matriarchy. Ancient residences of people were called “Olduway” and the archeological sources show that the first society of people came into being 1,75 million years ago. As the special radioisotope method and the scholars of the world say that men and women hunted together around the residencies but pregnant women, the sick and old people, babies stayed in the hovels and did not participate in hunting.
If family relations, sexual contacts were settled by the woman head of the tribe or the council of women during the period of matriarchy, the influence of the men took the leading position in low paleolith age. It was the man who did labour division and decided family relations.
Men played a major role in the extention of the production processes. Women were at the head of intensification of kinship relations among ethnic groups. That was a tradition corresponding to labour division which appeared during the tribal age.
The issue of women became a serious problem in the XX th c, the solution of which became possible on international scales.
Three “K” theory kirche, kuche, kinder, (church, kitchen, children) which came into being in the XX th c in Germany started the movement to keep women within the boundaries of the family.
The General Assembly of The United Nations Organization adopted the Declaration against the emancipation of women in 1967 and the international world conference of women’s organizations held in Nairobi (1976), Peking (2006), the conventions on the struggle against the discrimination of women showed that the problems of women are still standing on the agenda. Because of the discrimination in the family divorces and tragedies are occurring even nowadays.
Today all the nations, states, striving to civilization and progress are paying attention to the problems of women. But conservative views in the family traditions, as well as experiences want women to be housekeepers. Labour division inside the family, reproductive functions of women and conservative approaches on the education of children have already taken deep place in the social intelligence that the realization of it is sure to take a long time.
№ | Муаллифнинг исми | Лавозими | Ташкилот номи |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Abdukarimova S.S. | tadqiqotchi | UrDU |
№ | Ҳавола номи |
---|---|
1 | 1. Древние авторы о Средней Азии. Хрестоматия – Ташкент: Госуд. изд-во научно-техн. и социально-эконом. лит-ры УзССР, 1940. – 150 с. 2. Бобоев Х., Ҳасанов C. “Авесто” – манавиятимиз сарчашмаси. – Тошкент: Адолат, 2001. 102 б. 3. Авесто: Яшт китоби. М.Исҳоқов таржимаси. – Тошкент: Шарқ, 2001. – 128 б. 4. Файнберг Л.А. У истоков социогенеза: от стада обезьян к общине древних людей. – Москва: Наука, 1980. – 145 с. 5. Вардиман Е. Женщина в древнем мире. – Москва: Наука, 1990. 6. Гитин В.Г. Эта покорная тварь женщина. – Москва: АСТ-ПРЕСС, 2001.-544 с 7. Семья. Т.1. – Москва: Политиздат, 1991. 8. Кон И. Дети и родители. // Семья. Книга для чтения. Кн.1. – Москва: Изд-во Политич. литературы. 1991. – С. 268-269. 9. Миловидова Э. Женский вопрос и женское двежение. Хрестоматия. – Москва-Ленинград: Гос. изд-во, 1929. – 507 с. 10. Дэвис А. Женщины, раса, класс. – Москва: Прогресс, 1987. – 280 с. |