MEN AND WOMEN AT THE ELECTIONS:

Gender Analysis of the Electoral Campaigns
of 1999 and 2000 in Russia

PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS OF 1999

1. Gender Analysis of the Electoral Tickets

139 socio-political movements, including 6 women's movements, had a right to participate in the electoral campaign of 1999. 28 movements, including 2 women's, chose to realize this right and were approved by the Central Electoral Committee. In comparison, in 1995, 43 movements were admitted to participate in the electoral campaign, including one women's movement.

Overall, the percentage of women in all of the electoral tickets was about 16 percent, as compared to 14 percent in 1995, and 7 percent in 1993. It indicates the general tendency of increasing the number of women among candidates to deputies of the State Duma, despite all difficulties of the last electoral campaign.

However, the most popular parties had lower women's representation compared to the average level among all of the participants of the electoral campaign. They had, in average, only 11 percent of female candidates, with 10 percent in the CPRF, 10 percent in "Medved" ("Bear"), 11 percent in "Yabloko" ("Apple"), and 12 percent in "Fatherland - the Whole Russia" (FWR). The Union of the Right Forces had the highest level of women's representation in their electoral ticket - 17 percent.

Women had the best representation in the electoral tickets of those parties and movements that could be considered outsiders of the electoral campaign right from its beginning. In this regard organizations with socio-economic orientation and those lead by women were especially remarkable. Sometimes the two characteristics coincided.

The following movements could be considered unrivaled leaders in this respect: "Peace. Labor. May" whose electoral ticket contained 30 percent of women; "To Civil Dignity" (leader - Ella Pamfilova) - 29 percent of women; "Party for Peace and Unity" (leader - Sazhi Umalatova) - 22 percent of women; the "Kedr" ecological party - 22 percent; "The Block of General Andrey Nikolayev and Academician Svyatoslav Fedorov" - 20 percent; the block "Social Democrats" - 19 percent of women.

The lowest figure of women's representation could be observed in the electoral tickets of nationalistic and imperial panics and movements. Zhirinovsky's block had only 2.5 percent, the block "Support the Army" (Victor llyukhin) ~ 3 percent, and the block "To Faith and Fatherland'" - only 5 percent.

But there is also the issue of sequence. It is clear that those candidates whose names are placed either in the central part of the list, or first for regional parts have most chances to get the deputy's mandate. What chances did various parties and movements give their women candidates? Women were included in the three leading positions (under various numbers) in the following 7 movements:

• Movement "To Civil Dignity" - E.Pamfilova (1).
• "Party for Peace and Unity"- S.Umalatova (1).
• The "Social Democrats" block - T.Tsyiba (2).
• The All-Russia People's Party - T.Bure (2).
• The Union of the Right Forces - I.Khakamada (3).
• 'The Block of General A.ndrey Nikolayev and Academician Svyatosiav Fedorov" - T.Malutina (3).
• The Party of Pensioners - R.Markova (3).

Looking at the number of women in the central part of the lists and at the beginning of the regional lists (i.e. in most competitive parts), the following parties were indisputable leaders:

• The "Peace. Labor. May" party - 3 women in tlie central and 17 in the regional parts;
• Russian Conservative Party of Entrepreneurs - 18 women in the first positions in the regional lists;
• "The Block of General Audrey Nikolayev and Academician Svyatosiav Fedorov" - 6 women in the central part of the list. and 7 as the first in the regions.

In two of them women held all of the main positions in the lists of candidates: in the "Women of Russia" electoral ticket there were no men at all; and in the Russian Party to Protect Women there were 30 percent men candidates.

In "Zhirinovsky's Block" and the "To Faith and Fatherland" party there were no women at these positions at all.

Among the parties that had the highest chances of overcoming the five percent barrier, the leaders in terms of this indicator were FWR (3 women in the central part of the list) and the CPRF (1 and 4 respectively).

Women had lower chances in "Yabloko" ("Apple"): 1 - in the central part of the list, and 3 as the first in the regions.

"Medved" ("Bear") did not include women in the central part of the list, but put three at the first positions in the regional lists.

The Union of the Right Forces included one woman in the central part of the list, and two at the first positions in the regional lists.

It is therefore clear that almost all of the political movements that took part in the electoral campaign provided women and men with unequal opportunities for their political careers.

It also became obvious at the selection of candidates for the single mandate electoral districts. Among those put forward in such electoral districts there were only 10 to 12 women.

• The CPRF supported 140 candidates for the single mandate electoral districts, including 18 women;'
• "Yabloko" ("Apple") - 135 candidates, including 18 women; ¹
• FWR - 118 candidates, including 12 women;
• The URF - 109 candidates, including 11 women;
• "Zhirinovsky's Block" - 78 candidates, including 10 women;
• "Medved" ("Bear") - 42 candidates, including 4 women.

The following series of questions for the analysis deals with "qualitative" characteristics of the candidates - both men and women. Did such parameters as age, piace of residence, initial job positions of candidates, and work experience in government structures at the regional and federal levels influence the chances of the candidates? How did these characteristics affect the preferences of the most popular parties during the electoral campaign of 1999?

"Zhirinovsky's Block'" is obviously the ''youngest" party, and the CPR.F is the -'oldest', followed by FWR. "Medved" ("Bear")". the URF, and "Yabloko" ("Apple") have similar age characteristics. The majority of their candidates are middle-aged people.

But despite the obvious difference in the age of the candidates, all of these parties have very few women under 30. Most female candidates are 40 to 50 years old. It should also be noted that women leave the political scene faster than men do. There are almost no women belonging to the age group of over 60 (with the only exception of 4 candidates in the electoral ticket of the URF), whereas among men candidates there are people who are not only over 60, but even over 70 years old.

Why is it so? Maternity and childcare are likely to be the main factors that postpone the entrance of women into politics, and appearance of grandchildren leads to discontinuation of their political careers. But mere love for children can hardly explain the short-term political life of women. Probably, it is aging that drives women out of the political process. And this fact cannot be qualified as anything else than gender discrimination in a certain age group.

It is clear that "Zhirinovsky's Block" does not give women any real chances to make a political career, independent of their place of residence, whereas men from small towns and settlements can succeed rather quickly within this party.

The recruitment of candidates in small towns and settlements is typical, though to a lesser degree, of the CPRF, too. It should be noted that most women candidates also come from small towns and settlements.

The URF and "Yabloko" ("Apple") mostly target Oblast centers. In 1999, most of their candidates, both men and women, come from there.

"Medved" ("Bear") targeted primarily men from the capitals, although women - residents of Oblast Centers had higher chances to be included in the electoral ticket of the party, compared to residents of the two capitals (Moscow and Saint Petersburg).

FWR has most candidates, both women and men, from the capitals. The percentage of representatives from Moscow and Saint Petersburg is almost equal to that of representatives from Oblast Centers.

Another important selection criterion is educational level of candidates to deputies.

The vast majority of candidates to deputies had higher education. Yet it is clear that for men seeking political career, the be found in the electoral tickets of the URF and "Yabloko" ("Apple").

Another important factor that increased chances of candidates to be included in the electoral tickets is law-making experience either at the federal or regional level.

The majority of candidates with law-making experience, both men and women, can be found in the electoral tickets of the CPRF -over one-third. In "Zhirinovsky's Block", candidates with such experience hold one-fourth of the positions, and in "Yabloko" ("Apple") their number is one-fifth. It should be noted that in "Yabloko" ("Apple"), almost half of female candidates previously took part in the law-making activity.

Targeting candidates who had experience working in the federal and regional legislative councils affected the "female" part of the electoral ticket of the FWR, where over one-third of those with previous Duma experience were women.

Such characteristics are less typical of the tickets of the URF and "Medved" ("Bear").

At the same time, "Medved" ("Bear"), FWR and the URF focused on candidates with senior management background.

"Medved" is leading in the number of men - senior managers, while FWR holds the first place by the number of women-managers.

Managers of various non-governmental institutions are better represented in the electoral lists of FWR, the URF, and "Medved" ("Bear"). Interestingly, the URF holds the first place for having most of all women-managers of non-governmental organizations, and FWR goes second. "Zhirinovsky's Block" does not target such candidates.

Thus, over 1/3 positions in the electoral tickets belonged to representatives of business community, including those with senior management background (18 percent), and to leaders of federal and regional non-governmental and political organizations and various not-for-profit associations, such as educational and charitable foundations (19 percent). It should be observed that the former could be primarily found in the tickets of "Medved" (23 percent), while the latter - in the ticket of FWR (36 percent). But what is interesting is that the ratio of men and women in these groups of candidates was principally different.

Among senior managers and deputy senior managers of stock-holding companies, state and private enterprises (industrial, agricultural, trade etc.) there are only 5 percent of women, while among senior managers and deputy senior managers of socio-political movements, federal and regional political units, foundations and various not-for-profit organizations there are 14 percent of women.

This is likely to be determined by characteristics of the gender asymmetry in various spheres of Russian political life. While women have almost no access to business and economic elite, they do get involved in the "third sector" activities, where their achievements gradually alleviate gender disproportion.

How does this disproportion affect the issue of gender equality in legislative structures? Clearly, there is direct influence. Existing experience of the Russian parliamentarism shows that motivation and behavior of representatives of business community and those of the "third sector" are different.

The former are primarily concerned with protection of interests of their industries, and often of concrete commercial enterprises, and tend to lobby these interests. The latter, due to their social experience and deeper concern about finding solutions for social issues, as well as higher competence in this sphere because of commitments before "third sector" organizations, are able to better represent common interests of the population.

We are not talking about populist statements that can be typical of deputies both from the business sector and from the "third sector"; but rather about the policy of making decisions that satisfy collective, versus private or group interests.

The qualitative analysis of the electoral tickets in a way reflects the segmentation of the political area in Russia, as well as the "formation within this area of structures with more or less explicit social interests, including the gender aspect of social interests of men and women. It can be maintained that "Zhirinovsky's Block", the CPRF, and "Medved" ("Bear") are more traditional and authoritarian structures compared to "Yabloko" ("Apple"), the URF, and FWR. What it means is that women seeking political career should prefer to join the URF, FWR, or "Yabloko" ("Apple").

Does this imply that political unions are concerned with the issue of gender representation, or are these trends spontaneous? The answer can be found in the program documents of political organizations.

2. Platforms of Political Parties: Gender Aspect

Before the parliamentary elections of 1999, the CPRF did not adopt any major new documents. It presented its "Minimum Program". In the description of its objectives in this document, the party appealed to "people" and "citizens", mentioned "the person" in general rather than specifically men and women.

Neither the issue of ensuring equal opportunities for men and women in the sphere of politics, nor the more traditional objective of protecting specific interests of women are considered priorities by the CPRF. The party seems to have decided to discard the soviet traditional point of view, which considered the solution of "women's issue" one of the major landmarks on the way to society of social justice.

The "Edinstvo" ("Medved" ("Bear")) inter-regional movement presented its "Theses" as the program document. These statements do not mention women or their political and social interests. There is only one provision in this document that could be conventionally characterized as having certain gender connotation. Among their social commitments it is said that the party "is ready to present a program to support family and motherhood".

Due to at least two factors, "Yabloko" ("Apple") should have been more gender-sensitive. First of all, because modern social liberalism (this is how the ideas promoted by "Yabloko" can be characterized) considers gender equality a natural foundation for strong, consolidated democracy. Secondly, because in the "Yabloko" constituency there is a very high percent of women. Despite this, in its program "Yabloko" has so far demonstrated almost absolute indifference to gender issues, which certainly influences political positions of the block, its successes and failures.

The comprehensive program of The Union of the Right Forces should also be rated as gender-insensitive. Russian democrats seem to overlook the connection and interrelations between the issues of human rights and freedoms and equality of women and men.

In the program of the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia there is a separate section called "Women and the LDPR". It is as misleading as the whole program. It starts with the following statement: "The LDPR stands for women's equality and for the improvement of their circumstances and social status". Sounds like a progressive statement, but it is followed by the phrase that makes it meaningless: "...The LDPR in its struggle for a better life for the better half of the Russian nation, is against feminism as an extremist political movement that promotes antagonism between the sexes and aims at putting women on governing positions in society".

In this way "liberal democrats" try to scare people who are tired of wars and conflicts with "feminism" and potential conflicts between men and women, to crown it all! But with mute strings they also contradict the Constitution, because it is the Constitution, and not any of the unheard-of feminist declarations, contains the norm on equal rights and opportunities for women and men, including equal rights and opportunities to hold governing positions in society.

Interestingly, "liberal democrats" talk about "equal opportunities" in terms of "equal social opportunities for women and men". It means that absence of women in the electoral ticket of "Zhirinovsky's Block" is not occasional; it is due to the principle of preventing women from participating in governing structures.

However, there was a gender-sensitive document developed during the electoral campaign of 1999. It was prepared by the political organization that plays an important part at the Russian political scene. It was "Otechestvo" ("Fatherland') that made this breakthrough to the sphere of advocating equal rights and opportunities for women and men, when it published its program called "Fatherland for Women" in the summer of 1999. This program was officially adopted at special women's forum in the city of Ivanovo (July 1999).

The document complies with international standards and principles, as well as with obligation assumed on by Russia as a participant of international agreements on this issue.

The program describes in detail all types of gender inequality and discrimination of Russian women, that was further aggravated by market reforms which had been conducted without taking into account potential social implications. The program offers concrete legislative measures in order to equate the position of women and men in our society, as well as to ensure their equal representation in governmental authorities.

By having published and adopted this program together with representatives of various women's movements of the country, "Otechestvo" created a precedent that can serve as a model of a new approach to interrelations between a political organization and the female part of the Russian society. However, in the process of negotiations on creating an electoral union together with the "Whole Russia" movement, "Otechestvo" lost some of its innovations. While recognizing elimination of gender disproportion one of its program objectives, in practice, during the electoral campaign, "Otechestvo" showed that this objective plays a modest role among the party's priorities.

3. Results of the Elections. Gender Composition of the Third State Duma

There are 450 deputies in the State Duma of the third convocation, including 34 women who constitute 7.6 percent of the total number of deputies. 14 women were put up by political parties. Representatives of women's organizations - "Women of Russia" and the "Russian Party to Protect Women" got 2.04 and 0.8 percent of votes respectively, and, therefore, were not elected to the parliament.

• FWR - 4 women (out of 29 in the ticket);
• The CPRJF - 3 women (out of 27 in the ticket);
• "Edinstvo" ("Unity") - 3 women (out of 18 in the ticket);
• "Yabloko" ("Apple") - 2 women (out of 20 in the ticket);
• The URF - 2 women (out of 33 in the ticket).

It should be noted that there were no women - candidates in every third out of 225 single mandate electoral districts. Women succeeded in 20 electoral districts.

The following number of women won in the single mandate electoral districts:

• supported by the CPRF - 8 women-candidates;
• supported by "Edinstvo" ("Unity") - 4 women;
• supported by FWR - 3 women;
• supported by the URF - 2 women.
• 3 women were elected deputies as independent candidates.

No female candidates supported by "Yabloko" ("Apple") and "Zhirinovsky's Block" were elected deputies in the single mandate electoral districts. Women - candidates supported by the "Women of Russia" movement did not succeed either in the single mandate electoral districts.

• The CPRF fraction - 95 deputies, including 11 women;
• "Edinstvo" ("Unity") - 81 deputies, including 7 women;
• "Fatherland - the Whole Russia" - 43 deputies, including 4 women;
• "The Union of the Right Forces" - 33 deputies, including 4 women;
• "Yabloko" ("Apple") -21 deputies, including 2 women;
• LDPR - 17 deputies, no women;
• "People's Deputy" - 58 deputies, including 3 women;
• "Regions of Russia" - 34 deputies, including 3 women.

• The CPRF fraction - 137 deputies, including 15 women;
• The NDR fraction - 65 deputies, including 7 women;
• The LDPR fraction - 50 deputies, including I woman;
• "Yabloko" ("Apple") - 44 deputies, including 5 women;
• "Russian Regions" - 43 deputies, including 5 women;
• "Power of People" - 42 deputies, including 6 women;
• Agrarian Deputy Group - 35 deputies, including 3 women;
• Independent candidates - 26 deputies, including 3 women.

On the senior positions of the State Duma of the third convocation women were represented as follows: among 9 deputy chairs there is one woman (L.K.Sliska from the "Edinstvo" Block); among chairs of the 29 committees there are two women. S.P.Goryacheva, representative of the CPRF, serves as the head of the Committee for Women, Family, and Youth Issues; and V.N.Pivnenko, representative of the "People's Deputy" Group chairs the Committee for the North and Far East Issues.

All women who were elected deputies have higher education, and belong primarily to the 40-50-year-old age group. There are no women aged under 30 or over 60 years old. It should be. noted that there are 13 men deputies who are younger than 30 years old, and 7 men deputies are over 70. Among women deputies there are mainly those who come from Oblast centers, and many (over one-third) of women deputies started their career either within the CPSU or the Young Communist League.

Here's where we come across with one of the paradoxes of the Russian political life. The CPRF is an organization of authoritarian and patriarchal type, but nonetheless it has managed to promote more women to the legislative level than organizations claiming themselves democratic. What is the reason for this? This is likely to happen due to the fact that communists, though denying the idea of women's equality in its program documents, traditionally continue to preserve women's representation in the legislative structures. The party leaders are used to this, as well as constituents who obediently vote for women put up by the CPRF.

Democratic parties, even though they put up approximately the same number of women as the communists, are likely to be unable to persuade their supporters to vote for their representatives without special propaganda (which means without the program). To illustrate, we can refer to the fact that during the parliamentary elections in 1999, "Yabloko" ("Apple") tried to promote approximately the same number of women as the CPRF in single mandate electoral districts, and succeeded in neither of them.

This contradiction has far-reaching implications. As a result, those women who make it to the legislative authorities both on the federal and regional levels, are not bearers of the new democratic attitude to the issue of gender equality; they either have no idea of the existence of the issue, or share patriarchal ideas.

It is hard to say at this point in what way this contradiction will be solved. But it is clear that in order to solve it, additional efforts will be needed on the part of the concerned subjects of the political process.

The gender composition of the current State Duma clearly reflects the "masculine" profile of the Russian legislative power. It is disproportionate and is not able to take into consideration either political and social interests of Russian women, or their specific social experience.

This disproportion tells negatively on the day-to-day life of Russian women. Just to cite one example: the average wage of the female worker in the so-called women's industries (light and textile industry) during the last several years has been only about 40 percent of the average wage level in the country; whereas the average in such exclusively "men's" industry as oil production has been 360 percent. In other words, all economic legislation developed by the Russian parliament (tax, customs, credit, and finance legislation) objectively contributes to the preservation and aggravation of gender inequality, because it is aimed at creating more favorable conditions for "men's", rather than "women's", industries.

But the gender disproportion of the representative power also directly affects the stability and effectiveness of the Russian political system, as well as the decision-making on the major issues of the development of our society. As it is established, men tend to solve issues using force, while women are characterized by higher flexibility, and they tend to compromise in conflicts. If women and men were more or less equally represented in the Duma, Russia might have avoided getting into the long and painful war conflict with Chechnya.

4. Gender Behavior of the Electorate²

In 1999, 66 percent of women and only 59 percent of men took part in the elections. Having demonstrated their usually higher level of electoral activity, women, who also constitute the larger part of the population, had a greater impact on the results of the elections - among their participants there were 56 percent of women and 44 percent of men.

* The statistics on participation in the elections and distribution of votes among the political parties and movements are slightly different from the official statistics. The difference, however, is insignificant, and thus can be ignored.

The above said statistics show that women more often than men voted for the parties that did not overcome the five percent barrier. It can be partly explained by the fact that women wanted to support the "Women of Russia" movement. But it can be also assumed that women are somewhat less pragmatic when it comes to the act of political choice. It should be noted that 16 percent of women who took part in the elections were not sure that the parties they voted for would overcome the five percent barrier, whereas significantly lower number of men - only 10 percent had similar doubts with respect to their candidates.

But "the lost votes" of the female electors that they cast for outsiders did not lead to any significant decrease of women's influence on the distribution of deputy mandates, because another type of "impractical" electoral behavior - voting "against all" - was more typical of representatives of the sterner sex. As a result, almost equal shares of men's and women's votes were lost.

Based on the above mentioned statistics, women more often than men voted for "Medved" ("Bear"), "Yabloko" ("Apple") and FWR, and less often - for the URF and, especially, for "Zhirinovsky's Block". Their electoral preferences differed quite significantly, which can be proved by comparing the gender compositions of the constituencies of the 6 parties elected to the Duma.

It is not worth commenting that the only political party that received more men's than women's votes was "Zhirinovsky's Block". If several years ago the reason why the LDPR was unpopular among women was probably women's negative attitude towards extreme views, today we should probably talk about features of the semicriminal political subculture that is being formed in Russia, whose bearers are primarily young men.

"Yabloko" had the highest percentage of female constituency. It should be noted that women have always sympathized with Grigory Yavlinsky's movement more than men, and the events of the fall of 1999 made the gap wider. The matter is that the loss of the political weight by this movement was mainly due to its critical attitude towards the methods of the anti-terrorism campaign at Northern Caucasus. The more determined the Russian society got in approving the government's actions and the war "right to the victorious end", the lower dropped the rating of "Yabloko".

Although the tough policy of the government during the electoral campaign quickly captured the headlines, which is true both with respect to men and women, the latter still were not that excited in supporting such policy. As the statistics below show, the differences between opinion of men and women were quite substantial.

It is not surprising, therefore, that among former supporters of "Yabloko" who shifted away from it just before the elections there were more men than women; thus women's representation in the "Yabloko" constituency grew.

What is surprising though is the fact that women voted for "Medved" more often than men in spite of their lower, compared to that of men, intention to vote for this party expressed throughout the electoral campaign. Interestingly, but a week before the elections men demonstrated higher loyalty to this new political establishment.

* What political party (movement) did you vote for? (Only those who took part in the elections were asked the question)

Thus, electoral preferences of women underwent significant changes during the last several days before December 19. It is supported by the results of the survey conducted right after the elections.

*The previous question: What political party (movement) did you vote for?

Attention should be paid to the fact that percentage of men and women who made their final decision right before the elections or just before voting is the same. Thus, while staling that women are somewhat less stable in their electoral preferences, it cannot be concluded that they tend to make absolutely impulsive decisions more often than men do.

But why did the majority of women who had not determined who to vote for before preferred "Medved" at the homestretch of the elections? In order to answer this question, let us take a look at the data that describes the motives of electors' political choice. It turned out that gender differences came out here quite noticeably.

Women more seldom than men explained their choice by their agreement with the program of a given party, or by their confidence that the party "will be able to get Russia out of the crisis". In other words, they are less often driven by rational reasons, and more frequently mention their sympathy towards party leaders.

As we know, the Russian elector, as a rule, tends to personify competing political forces, and the mechanisms of party identification are relatively underdeveloped in the Russian political culture. The above-cited statistics are quite convincing in showing that. It cannot be otherwise as long as the process of party formation would start almost anew at the beginning of each electoral campaign. Only two national political organizations - the CPRF and "Yabloko" ("Apple") function as more or less "regular" parliament parties versus one-time electoral movements.

It is representative that women should readily admit their trust or sympathy to party leaders as the main motive to determine their choice. This fact only allows us to conclude that women are more susceptible to propaganda than men are.

The opinion of the surveyed on the influence of the mass media on their electoral behavior quite positively attests to this premise.

Equal number of women tended to completely deny such influence or, on the contrary, said that it was critical, whereas men more often claimed that they had made their decision without any influence of the mass media. We have to admit that such statements should not be taken for granted. The vast majority of the electors received information on the parties that took part in the elections primarily from coverages made by national radio and television channels, which was further confirmed by surveys. It is true that even for sophisticated electors very much involved in politics it is sometimes hard to distinguish between objective facts and image-building interpretation and propaganda. It means that the declared non-conformity of those surveyed and their denial of the mass media's influence on their electoral choice are not evidence of some kind of "immunity" of the constituency against the mass media activity, but rather of their desire to critically and selectively process information.

Still it is quite remarkable that this desire should be more typical of men than of women. Moreover, the latter more often than men admitted that the mass media made the pre-electoral situation clearer for them, and somewhat more seldom that the mass media "confused them and prevented from making the final decision". Thus, women demonstrated greater trust to the mass media than men did. Plus more of them said that the mass media attracted their attention to elections. Such admission attests to the fact that women originally, without the mass media's influence, had lower interest to elections compared to men. And lower level of political involvement usually leads to higher receptivity to the impact of propaganda.

Thus, women turned out to be easier targets in the "information battle" that largely determined the outcome of the electoral campaign, compared to men. They were more well-disposed and trustful towards the mass media, and more often accepted the implicit recommendations made by news and analytical television programs.

The statistics cited below prove the higher level of receptivity and acceptance of women of external influences, including those related to their political choice.

Although when answering a more specific question about whose opinion they took into consideration, women (as well as men) more often mentioned their family members, relatives and close friends, and extremely rarely admitted that they relied on advice of politicians or journalists. But the very tendency to take into account someone else's opinion implies non-critical acceptance of recommendations expressed by information channels.

It is not therefore surprising that during the last stage of the electoral campaign the sympathy of women who had not previously made their electoral choice, should have been won by "Medved" that received incomparably greater support in the mass media compared to all other parties and movements.

As it was mentioned earlier, women more often than men admitted that they based their decision on the day of elections on trust and sympathy towards leaders of the parties. Those who voted for "Medved" especially frequently cited this reason. While among them there were 55 percent who answered in such a way, among those who voted for FWR, the URF, "Yabloko" ("Apple") and "Zhirinovsky's Block" there were only 42 to 48 percent of such answers. (As far as the communist party's constituency is concerned, only few people mentioned the leaders at all - some 21 percent of those surveyed.)

Despite the high reputation of S.Shoigu, it is hard to believe that the names of the newly born politicians who stood at the head of the "Medved" electoral ticket were actually drawing more supporters to the party than such names as E.Primakov, G.Yavlinsky, S.K-irienko, and V.Zhirinovsky - to their respective parties - FWR, "Yabloko", the URF, and "Zhirinovsky's Block". When talking about their trust and sympathy towards the leaders of "Medved", the surveyed most likely meant that they rather supported V.Putin, the main promoter of the party of the government, than S.Shoigu, A.Karelin, and A.Gurov. And Putin's "recommendation", many times repeated by the mass media during the electoral campaign, mostly impressed women, which is quite natural given their lower, compared to that of men, political involvement and increased inclination to conformity in their political behavior.

^{1) The numbers may be not exact, as the data was derived from: "Elections of Deputies to the State Duma Federal Council of the Third Convocation, December 19, 1999. Final Results. Issued by the Central Electoral Committee". Moscow, 2000. In this issue, names and patronymics of the candidates are not mentioned (only initials are given), and a number of surnames have no gender identity. However, these data provides information on the proportionate gender composition with adequate reliability, and, therefore, serves our purpose.}

^{2) Source of the data: Weekly national representative sampling surveys conducted by the "Public Opinion" Fund in 56 localities of 29 Oblasts, Krais, and Republics of all economic and geographical areas of Russia. Interviews conducted at the place of residence of the surveyed. Sampling size -1.500-2.000 people.}