{"title":"Silencing Sex Education in Soviet Latvia in the early 1980s: the Case of the Destruction of the Book Mīlestības vārdā by Jānis Zālītis","authors":"Ineta Lipša","doi":"10.25143/amhr.2022.xv.04","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Through the case study of the publishing and banning of the second edi- tion of the book Mīlestības vārdā (1982, In the Name of Love) by the Latvian physician Jānis Zālītis (1933–2007), the article aims to analyse the changed understanding among medical educators and officials of the Latvian Communist Party on limits of what could be promoted in a handbook on sex education in the early 1980s. The author of the handbook and the publishing house were convinced that the degree of explicitness of the content of the sex education books already published was sufficient to risk expanding it with drawings of sex positions, despite the fact that the message of the illustrations did not correspond to the thesis of the conservative sexual agenda prevailing in the Soviet Union that sexual intercourse should take place only within marriage. Drawings by Edgars Ozoliņš clearly conveyed the message of pleasure and enjoyment, but they did not explicitly state that the woman and man enjoying penetrative sex were in a marital relationship as husband and wife. The article will argue that the decision to destroy the book was ethe nforced by the decision of the Burau of the Central Committee of the Latvian Communist Party of August 17, 1982, and promoted by its First Secretary (1966–1984) Augusts Voss, who called the book pornographic and influenced by Western ideology and harmful to Soviet ideology. The paper will establish that the destruction of the book Mīlestības vārdā shows that not only Zālītis’ ideas about what was and was not permissible in promoting sexual knowledge differed from the Soviet conservative sexual agenda, but that there was also a diversity of opinions within the Soviet Latvian nomenklatura.","PeriodicalId":32259,"journal":{"name":"Acta MedicoHistorica Rigensia","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta MedicoHistorica Rigensia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25143/amhr.2022.xv.04","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Through the case study of the publishing and banning of the second edi- tion of the book Mīlestības vārdā (1982, In the Name of Love) by the Latvian physician Jānis Zālītis (1933–2007), the article aims to analyse the changed understanding among medical educators and officials of the Latvian Communist Party on limits of what could be promoted in a handbook on sex education in the early 1980s. The author of the handbook and the publishing house were convinced that the degree of explicitness of the content of the sex education books already published was sufficient to risk expanding it with drawings of sex positions, despite the fact that the message of the illustrations did not correspond to the thesis of the conservative sexual agenda prevailing in the Soviet Union that sexual intercourse should take place only within marriage. Drawings by Edgars Ozoliņš clearly conveyed the message of pleasure and enjoyment, but they did not explicitly state that the woman and man enjoying penetrative sex were in a marital relationship as husband and wife. The article will argue that the decision to destroy the book was ethe nforced by the decision of the Burau of the Central Committee of the Latvian Communist Party of August 17, 1982, and promoted by its First Secretary (1966–1984) Augusts Voss, who called the book pornographic and influenced by Western ideology and harmful to Soviet ideology. The paper will establish that the destruction of the book Mīlestības vārdā shows that not only Zālītis’ ideas about what was and was not permissible in promoting sexual knowledge differed from the Soviet conservative sexual agenda, but that there was also a diversity of opinions within the Soviet Latvian nomenklatura.
通过对拉脱维亚医生Jānis Zālītis(1933-2007)出版和禁止第二版《m ī lest bas vārdā》(1982年,《以爱的名义》)的案例研究,本文旨在分析拉脱维亚共产党的医学教育者和官员对1980年代初一本性教育手册中可以推广的内容的限制的变化理解。手册的作者和出版社确信,已经出版的性教育书籍的内容的明确程度足以冒险用性姿势的图画来扩大它,尽管插图的信息不符合苏联盛行的保守性议程的论点,即性交应该只在婚姻中进行。埃德加斯Ozoliņš的画作清楚地传达了快乐和享受的信息,但他们没有明确指出,享受插入性的女人和男人是在夫妻关系中。文章将指出,销毁这本书的决定是由拉脱维亚共产党中央委员会1982年8月17日的决定强制执行的,并由第一书记奥古斯特·沃斯(August Voss)(1966-1984)推动的,他称这本书是色情的,受到西方意识形态的影响,对苏联意识形态有害。本文将证明,销毁《m . m . lest bas vārdā》一书不仅表明Zālītis关于在促进性知识方面什么是被允许的,什么是不被允许的想法与苏联保守的性议程不同,而且表明苏联拉脱维亚的权能阶层内部也存在着各种各样的观点。