Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 12

Q3: Changes in the family life has brought an end to

gender in equality in the home. Explain and assess this


view. [25]
Answer: with the passage of time, as society has developed
and modernized, the sub-systems of the society have changed
as well the same way, the social institution of family has
changed in that the roles of female and male within the much
argument as to whether the family life has eliminated gender
inequality or not.
Evidence suggests that indeed, family life has caused gender,
inequality to come to its end. This claim is backed by
functionalists who believe that the conjugal roles of male and
female partners within the family have integrated.
Indeed, the inter-family division of labour is determined
somewhat by the social class but as a whole, men are now
seem to do more domestic work. Mainly in the upper class,
since male owners of industries are free from paid workload,
they give a helping hand in the domestic work such as in the
kitchen or whole setting the dinner table.
Young and Walmart (1973) explain the phenomenon of
stratified diffusion by saying that since the lower class tries to
follow the middle class and the middle class idealises the
upper class, stratified diffusion takes place. Due to that, the
integration of conjugal roles seen in the upper class starts to

diffuse in the lower classes, ensuring universal gender


inequality.
Moreover, Sullivan (2008) suggests that industrial revolution
has caused a silent revolution leading towards gender equality.
This show how modernization has contributed to gender
equality. Another claim by suenson (2004) modifies Parsons
theory of expressive and instrumental roles. Talcott Parsons
claims that male are responsible for the instrumental roles for
the family. Instrumental roles require dealing in an objective
the emotional way and doing things like family protection and
formal earning for the family, expressive roles on the other
hand, are roles such as growing of children which are done
with love and care. These are assigned to women in traditional
families where the segregation of conjugal roles somewhat
reflected gender role distinctions.
Hence,-------

(2004)

has claimed

that in contemporary

societies expressive and instrumental roles are fluid. This


means that men and women can switch roles as the primary
goal is to fulfill the needs of the child who performs which role
is a secondary arrangement. By this claim, Swenson clarifies
that in lone parent families, complete socialization can
possibly take place as the lone parent can carry out expressive
and instrumental roles both or take help from someone.
Hemieo it is clear that the changing pattern of family life has
market an end towards gender inequality, making family lives
more harmonious and just.

However, Marxists and feminists considered these apparently


gender equal looking families as myth as deception. Morgan
(2001) presents his rejection to the claim by saying that there
are there types of economies in any family, political emotional
and moral economy.
Political economy refer to the power to make financial decision
in the family. Peel says that the one who decides how
resources are allocated in a family owns the political economy.
Women are seen as the trailing spouse and research confirms
that mostly, men are in hold of the poltivla economy. This
authority shows that men are superior to women in the family,
questioning the claim regarding gender inequality.
Moreover, the moral economy is the economy with the person
who is responsible for --------Morals. Ethnic and carry out
socialization of children. Women ar mostly in charge of this
type of economy. Furthermore, emotional economy is a
variable economy in which the one who love the most gets
exploited by those in the family who love the least. Thus being
the holder of emotional and moral economy puts women at a
disadvantage, as this facilitates gender in equality.
Indeed, gender inequality

is subtle a social phenomenon of

such kind cannot be easily be categorized but can be debated


about Feminists support Marxists by saying that gender
inequality still largely exists, the idea of new man and new
father given by Functionalists says that men and father now a
days

more cooperative and contribute in house work.

McMahon (1999) rejects the idea of new man by calling it a

fantasy something that only exists apparently. Hence, the


claim that gender inequality has ended becomes hard to
believe if feminists and Marxists perspectives are given
importance.
The same way, Duncombe and Marsden (1993) say that
women in the family have to perform a triple shift. By this they
mean that women are not just exploited by capitalist at
workplace due to the work load, but also in the home due to
unpaid domestic work followed by a triple shit of carrying out
emotional gratification of the family members. This suggests
that a women has to be available ever, whereas the man is
considered to be have done enough by dong paid work only.
Other feminists suggest that if a woman wants to work let her
work. Women should be give the freedom of thought, speech
and action which is taken away from her in this unequal
society. Hence, along with the apparent gender inequalities,
women are also a notion of domestic violence. Research shows
that 75% of victims of domestic violence are women, who are
covertly exploits as well. Thus this confirms that gender
inequality exists in family life ever now.
It can be concluded that women experiences of gender
inequality vary social class wise. Women as a whole cannot be
studied altogether as the complex structure for all over,
women do experience gender inequality but it depends on
other social factors as to how intense the inequalities are.
Q: Society acts as an external force that contains and
phase our behavior explain and asses (25)

Answer:
Society is a word familiar to all of us. Society can be
interpreted differently by different people depending upon how
the society influences different individuals of a society. It is
that society is a force that limits and moulds human behavior.
This suggests that socialization and nurture, reflect societys
influence on an individual and is detrimental in deciding
human behaviour.
Functionalist sociologists asset this claim by saying that
indeed, it is the structural force of society that decides how
people behave. This claim of functionless is supported by their
general theory that there is consensus in society meaning that
society is in harmony with each other as everyone is behaving
unfortunately in the same way. This suggests that society is a
one-way process meaning that behaviour is inst from the
society and it cannot be negotiated by humans as they do as
ordered to do b societys norms and values.
Moreover, Parsons explains the theory of socialization as being
done by the society by explaining the four functions of the
society. These four functions begins with adaption. This means
that individuals try to adapt with the society and welcome the
evolutionary change in the society. Secondly, society functions
as a force which sets goals for its people and helps them
achieve these goals. Thirdly society helps its social being
integrate in the society by making them conform them to the
norms and values of society.

Lastly, society functions for making laws that are long-term


and consistent, making them simple and easy to follow.
Durkheim also confirms this one way process of socialization
by stating that humans are cultural dopes. He also says that
social beings get a sense of belonging, which explains that
society is a meto normative, the big picture. This, society is a
moral entity where individuals feel they belong together.
Thus, society and its subsystems wholly and solely coach the
individuals of a society as to how to behave. The institutions of
a society, like family, mass media, religion and education
integrate the norms and values of a society. Hence, a
socialized individual is formed when her/she is well-educated,
up to date with the world through media and morally strong
due to religion. Thus this indeed explains that society acts as
an external force that constrains and shape our behaviour.
However, it is not necessarily true that it is only the external
force of society that constrains and moulds a humans
behaviour as this would be and under-statement. Interpretists
believe that socialization, the learning process is a two way
process. If society influences humans, humans influences the
society as well. There is a two-way relationship between the
society and the individuals and this suggests that behaviour is
not uniform. It changes from person to person and varies
according to the social context.
If society sets the behaviour of individuals, it would mean that
every individual would respond similarly in a similar situation
but saying this would be unjust as this not taken in account

the complex, varying nature of an individual for instance, if a


person gets his hand burnt, it would depend upon the situation
that would decide reaction. If a child gets his hand hurt he
could cry in public where as an adult would try to control his
emotions similarly, a female child might react more fiercely
compared to a male adult. This, here the individual himself I
sin the power to make a decision about how to react, Similarly
Bloomer explains that the society influences and individual
behaviour. Hence, society would mean different things to
different people, confirming that humans themselves negotiate
their behaviour role taking individuals.
what e society wants him/her to do alone is not enough. This
explains the theory of G.H Mear about the un-socialized I and
the social Me, this explains how the socialized Me would
react, depending upon the social context.
Moreover, Cooley explained this by saying that a person looks
glass self, suggesting that a person views himself/herself by
looking at how others view that person. Thus, the value of
structural forces is over-rated because what the society says is
not everything, the human himself is also responsible for what
he does, and why he does, and why he does it.
Hence, the concept of an over socialized man. This suggests
that societys influence on a human is over estimated. Wrong
says that humans write their own lines that are written for
them. This clearly explains the way relationship between
human action and the structural forces of society.

It can be concluded that society is indeed essential in shaping


a persons identity. But, society is not all that there is as
human perception of behaviour is important and equally
detrimental in further shaping human behaviour.
Q : In MIS individual are free to choose their own social
identities. Explain and assess this view. [25]
Answer: Social Identity is a term heard be most of us, but the
first thing that would come into mind when this term is said
varies from person to person, Personal Identity is a subjective
clinched term that can be interpreted and versaltiy of identity
has changed as times have modernized and the social
structure of society has become complex in nature.
To a lot of extent the modern industrialized societies have
freed individuals to choose their identities.
Indeed, in the modern era that is formed after the process of
urbanization,

rationalization

and

industrialization

social

identity has become more fluid than ever. Identity has become
categorized by class, ethnicity and gender in all societies but
the criteria of classifying identity and the meaning of their
indicators of social identity have evolved as well.
It

can

be

seen

that

unlike

is

traditional

societies,

manufacturing identities have fallen in importance and have


been replaced by service industries that are ever growing
today. Thus, they has given birth to a new working class, which
itself is a sub-class in the social class strata.

Indeed, the effect of modernization can be seen as new


working class individuals have become privatized and
individuals have started to focus on their aspect of life than
work.
As the working class has stopped seeing work as a means to
an end, similarly, the middle class has also widened, ranging
from shopkeepers to professors. In modern industrial societies,
upper middle and lower classes are not uniformly densely
populated and thus shows the freedom of choice of identity.
Thus, the blurring of class identities in the modern day have
led to integration and creation of social classes, as claimed by
Reese (2004).
Furthermore, now a days individuals are dealt with accordingly
to their achieved status rather than their ascribed status. This
shows that it is more vital to be self-made than to be inscribed
with wealth. This brings the concept of organic solidarity of the
modern era defines people by what they do rather than by
who they are, as dene in traditional societies where
mechanical solidarity prevailed in deed, the modernist
theorists continue to explain the freedom of social identity.
Moreover, the variety of gender identities
One page is missing here

Re-asserts the clash regarding freedom of choice of social


identities. As Ups (1993) says that women and men are
socially, not biologically constructed, it is clear that as the

society would change, so would the social constructions that it


forms. This explains the threats to the dominant,
heganomonirs masculine identities as female values today
are converging with male values of greater leisure time etc.
What Kitchen (2006) defines as complicit feministy , a time
where women were glad of male being dominant, is something
easing from the society showing that social identity has
become chosable time basket of ingredients of identity are
explains by Rampton (2002) who says that construction of
identities involves assembling certain aspects together.
Similarly, ethnicity, a social group has also changed as
freedom of choice has increased, Waimmer (2008) says that
the perception of ethnic group, as minor or major and the
dwelling of ethnicities worldwide has led to lack of influence of
ethnicities

on

identity

construction.

Thus,

the

complex

structure of society speaks for itself showing how modern


theories assert the given class.
However, social identity is not entirely left to individual choice,
there are some constraints that act upon it to make it confined
to a certain limit. Functionalists explain that a society some its
norms and values with the help of societys subsystems. This
way, society becomes the decision maker of social facts and
decides that identities are predetermined.
This explains that ascribed status is still of great significance in
todays time. Showing the lack of choice of changing identities.

However, Durkheim called social beings as cultural dopes, he


confined society to the limits and boundaries of its culture.
Thus the importance of choice of identity has been ever ruled
by the importance of fixed identities.
Moreover, Talcott Parsons explanations of the four functions of
society of adaptation, goal attainment, inpretation and
latency further confirm the lack of individual choice and the
dominance of social forces. The function of goal attainment
here explains that society sets goals for its individuals that its
then helps them fulfill. This reassures that society is the one to
decide undermining the value of its individuals choice.
In doing so, functionless successfully claim replace the postmodern societies with post-industrial societies. Functionalists
explain that social class is still an important factor which
means that its significance cannot be ignored. Similarly, the
crisis of make identities does not mean that males have lost
their power and patriarchal hegemony moreover the basis of
all gender identities would be the traditional gender role so
their influence will always exist.
No matter how much the global economic changes integrate
different ethnicities, a black would always be identified
differently from a white or from a yellow person the basis of
varying social characteristics.
Indeed it can be seen that there is freedom of choice of social
identities in the modern identical societies but their also some
limitations to this freedom which would continue to fix social
identity in one way or another.