A week ago I found myself reading Patricia Hill Collins, “It’s All In the Family: Intersections of Gender, Race, and Nation” and it made me reflect on the ways in which both gender and race are socially built out of distorted interpretations of family. Collectively constructed as opposed to an innate understanding. We have grown dependent on dysfunctional projections of family, giving rise to a hierarchy which aims to serve all: “…a male headship that privileges and naturalizes masculinity as a source of authority…mothers comply with fathers, sisters defer to brothers, all with the understanding that boys submit to maternal authority until they become men.” (Collins 159) The commitment towards this flawed assemblage of characterizations, has in a way, normalized the social hierarchy. However, this expectation has become unrealistic. Many females find that they are not adequately prepared to survive in a male dominated country, although there is little rebellion against these imposed values. It is my opinion that we as women have adopted this image of family and injected it into other hierarchies involving race and sex. We then took it a step further by projecting this image onto our country and its policies. This rose-colored glasses approach is what allows so many to believe that we can rely or expect affluent, influential, white men to act in our best interest. But I’m left to wonder if we’ve taken the same approach in regards to feminist ideals. It seems today,
Through my experiences with people of many backgrounds, as well as my education, I have learned to separate the idea of sex and gender. I still maintain certain traditional views regarding gender, however I’ve come to the realization that the social constructs of men and women are not, and should not, be as rigid. In my opinion, I have acknowledged that there are differences between ‘men’ and ‘women’, however these differences should be used to uplift one another, rather than to tear the other gender apart. For example, a family unit in which the man decides to take on the responsibilities of the
Have you suffered and feel disappointment in your life? Who is willing to support to you without any reason when you fail in doing something? The answer is your family. Usually, family members can tolerate our mistakes and help us to solve our personal problems. Many people believe that having a family is happiness and they don’t need to be alone and support with each other. The family life is a very important to discuss because our attitude on the family value may effect to our views toward the world. In the article “ The Color of Families Ties: Race, Class, Gender, and Extended Family Involvement”, Gerstel and Sarkisian argued that that the social class did not make the poor family had weaker ties and the relationship between the extended family members was more fragment. Actually, Gerstel and Natalia Sarkisian claimed that financial problems create weak ties among the color family.
Due to primary socialisation, the children in the family would then be socialised into their gender roles so then when their time comes to marry and have children, this family structure will continue: the male has the instrumental role and the woman has the expressive role. To contradict with this view from Parsons’, the feminist theory would challenge this view when considering the inequality which comes of this. One argument made by feminists is to do with the oppression which women have dealt with for many years due to their somewhat, ascribed role of being inferior to men, up until around the 1960’s.
Throughout our experience, we have encountered so many challenges when it comes to gender in the society. Gender is being used as a basis for stratifying people in the society. In this article, the racial caste system that used to exist in the United State is depicted. In that the black women were denied the access to justice because of their status. They were perceived to be people who do not have any right within the society and no one could believed them when they were raped by the white men because all the court judges were white men according to this article. The women were classified to be from poor background and they should remain at a low class in the society.
Women and men are nestled into predetermined cultural molds when it comes to gender in American society. Women play the roles of mothers, housekeepers, and servants to their husbands and children, and men act as providers, protectors, and heads of the household. These gender roles stem from the many culture myths that exist pertaining to America, including those of the model family, education, liberty, and of gender. The majority of these myths are misconceptions, but linger because we, as Americans, do not analyze or question them. The misconception of gender suggests that biological truths no longer dictate our gender roles as men and women; they derive from cultural myths. We, as a nation, need
When thinking about feminism in today’s society we tend to direct our minds and thoughts to a more radical and powerful train of thought. Feminism has been going on for centuries, with two main ideologies at the forefront; liberal and cultural feminism. Someone who identifies as a liberal feminist is someone who believes that women and men are a like and equal in most respects and deserve equal roles and opportunities (Wood & Fixmer-Oraiz, 2017, p. 58). And cultural feminism is someone who identifies as someone who believes that men and women are fundamentally differently; you have different rights, role and opportunities (Wood & Fixmer-Oraiz, 2017, p. 58). The women’s rights movement can be understood and broken down into three “waves”.
Some see gender as being “Black and White” and it is, literally. With numerous gender ideologies, not only is there division between the Black (African Americans) and the White (fair skinned Europeans), but between men and women as well. Generally, white men and white men only hold most of the power in the world that there is to possess and it has consciously been set up for them to do so. The technical name for this global concept is hegemonic masculinity. This highly sexist and blatantly racist model has been implemented by bigoted western agendas to then be culturally and systematically carried out for centuries; sometimes without question. In her novel “Black Sexual Politics”, Patricia Hill Collins masterfully highlights just how much hegemonic masculinity altered the once blissful power structure, not just in the western world but specifically within the homes of the Black community. She also confers the several quintessential benchmarks within hegemonic masculinity that the Black man must uphold in order for him to unambiguously maintain his “dominant” status.
Until quite recently, the traditional view of family that has predominated society has been comprised of gender roles. The “ideal” family in the past has consisted of a white, middle-class, heterosexual couple with about 2.5 children. In this heteronormative nuclear family, the father is the head of the household and the breadwinner of the family, while the mother is the one who cares for the children and completes household duties. Of course, most families do not fit into this mould and those who do not fit have been repeatedly marginalized due to their differences. It is no question that race, class, sexuality, ability, and many other identity markers intersect in how forms of family may vary. As explained by the concept of intersectionality, gender must be analyzed through a lens that includes various identity markers which contribute to how an individual experiences oppression. It is through the use of intersectionality, the discussion of patriarchy, and the deconstruction of “family” that bell hooks (1990) and Michelle K. Owen (2001) paint family as a site of belonging and contestation.
The process of gender socialization reveals much about how gender identities are formed, but gender is not just a matter of identity: Gender is embedded in social institutions. This means that institutions are patterned by gender, resulting in different experiences and opportunities for men and women. The concept of the term “gendered institutions” means that entire institutions are patterned by gender. In a gendered institution, men and women are channeled into different, and often differently valued, social spaces or activities and their choices have different and often unequal consequences. Gendered institutions are the total pattern of gender relations, which includes the following (Acker 1992): stereotypical expectations, interpersonal relationships, and the division of labor along lines of gender. As well as, the images and symbols that support these divisions and the different placement of men and women in social, economic, and political hierarchies of institutions.
Institution, ones traditions, and everyday lives are filled with examples of men in positions of authority over women” (Kay, 2012). Inequalities in gender can be seen in marriage as well as parenting. It is believed that by many that a man should have a higher income than a female. In some cases women are being paid less than men in their work place and yet they hold the same credentials as men, this is where secondary status comes in. In most households it’s the female who cooks and clean look after the kids while the men work but roles can be divided when faced with certain duties, to accommodate one another. “Gender inequality forms the basis of sexism, misogynist and the prejudiced beliefs that males overpower females” (Anon. 2016).
Society is complex and diverse. In such a diverse society, individuals may have different life experiences to one another. While some individuals have positive viewpoints in the society, others may differ in an negative aspect. In this socio-autobiography, I argue that the society is an nightmare as humans develop a whole range of complex sociological concepts. The following paragraphs will explain the struggle of my life experiences being influenced by using the concepts of gender, race and ethnicity and power.
In her book The Unfinished Revolution, Kathleen Gerson argues that today, family pathways are more important than family structure. In this context, family structure refers to the organization of a family, and the way that it has been changing as a result of the gender revolution. For example, some nontraditional family structures that are explored in the book include double parent families with both parents earning, single parent families (mostly single mothers), and families with same-sex parents. Gerson argues that while family structures are not negligible, it is family pathways that are more important for the children of the gender revolution. That is to say, the children value the dynamics of their family more than the structure. They are more concerned about how well their parents are able to provide them with the necessary emotional and financial support than they are about how well their families follow a norm. For them, it is more about feeling like they’re part of a family rather than just physically being in one. Gerson emphasizes this when she explains that the people she interviewed “focused on the long-term consequences of parental choices, not on the specific form or type of home these choices produced at any one moment in time.” One important implication of this argument is the way in which the children of the gender revolution imagine their own romantic relationships unfolding. Even there, they prioritize a feeling rather than a format. For example, one
8). The traditional views of gender roles are indeed quite different from the modern views. The men in society are the bread-winners where as the women take care of the children and home. There are basic and common work roles, however in terms of behaviour and involvement there are gender role distinctions. The sex roles generally play out in modern society as well, some sex roles and stereotypes for girls are that they are “nonaggressive, nonathletic, emotionally expressive, tender, domestic, and nurturing. Boys on the other hand are “aggressive, value achievement, attain goals through conflict, and work towards monetary success” (Whicker and Kronenfeld, 1986; pp. 8). The males in the society are “emotionally anesthetised, aggressive, physically tough and daring, unwilling or unable to give nurturance to a child” (Lewis and Sussman, 1986; pp. 1). These traits are carried out by this particular gender mostly outside the society to demonstrate their strength. Those individuals who ignore to carry out these personality traits are seen as weak and unmanly. The women on the other hand are given the responsibility of looking after the family and are supposed to have the opposite personality traits. For instance a woman can show emotions but not outside of the family because of the shame that would bring to the
Patriarchy usually means a family that is male-dominated and headed by the father. It is a social construct in which men and masculine roles are considered to be absolutely superior to women and feminine roles. A society is considered patriarchal when it is male-dominated, male-centered, and male-identified. Being a male-dominated culture means that positions of power and authority in the political, economic, legal, religious, domestic, educational, and military spheres are usually reserved only for men. Male-identification means that a culture’s ‘normal’ way of living is based on men and their lives. Male-dominance means that the culture has been shaped by men in a way that mostly serves male interests. Patriarchal societies are male-identified because their core ideals concerning what is morally right, desirable or normal are connected with how they think about masculinity or men in general. They are always male-centered, with the culture’s focus is
Have you ever stopped and take a look around you when you walk on the streets? There are so many changes in our society that are pushing us to equality for human rights; and all these changes connect us together. These connectors are ties between our families, marriage, and gender in our society.