The Myth Of Family Institutions

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

Throughout human history individuals around the world, of various ethnic, racial, cultural backgrounds have linked together to form what people call today families. A lot of questions come to mind when contemplating the complex relationship people have. Since families have a direct bearing on society now and on future generations it is essential to take seriously what is happening to the family. Is the American family in decline, and if so what should be done about it? “Traditionally, family has been defined as a unit made up of two or more people who are related by blood, marriage, or adoption: live together; form an economic unit, and bear and raise children (Benokraitis, 3).” The definition of decline is to “fail in strength, vigor, character, value, deteriorate, slant downward.” The traditional nuclear family consists of a father provider, mother-homemaker, and at least one child (Brym and Lie, 252).” The nuclear family is a distinct and universal family form because it performs five important functions in society:sexual regulation, economic cooperation, reproduction, socialization, and emotional support. Research from the 1950 's to the present will emphasize what trends are taking place among American families. Family trends might not have expected???

Gender coding is not a natural or biological characteristic. People are born with different physical and biological characteristics, but make sense of their gender roles through cultural influences. “Stereotypes are amazingly powerful, and we may not realize the degree to which our thoughts, beliefs, and actions are shaped by them” (Silverman, Rader, 2010). Boys and girls are labeled as masculine or feminine, which is considered the “norm” for society. Children are not born masculine or feminine, they learn these roles from parents, peers, media, and even religion. Concepts of gender identity are sometimes placed on children even before their birth, such as with the selection of paint colors for the nursery.” Children begin to form concepts of gender beginning around the age of 2, and most children know if they are a boy or girl by age of 3” (Martin & Ruble, 2004). From an early age, children are encouraged to identify with gender coding. Gender is formed at birth, but self-identification as being male or female is imbedded into their minds by parents and society. A child learns to understand their gender role and their identity by what is taught and expressed to them by others. Yet as a child grows, gender coding can cause cultural confusion, and insecurity issues throughout the course of their life.

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.

Family. A word that has about as many meanings as there are stars in the sky. Can family truly be defined, or is it merely interpretive? According to Seccombe, family is a relationship by blood, marriage, or affection, in which members may cooperate economically, may care for children, and may consider their identity to be intimately connected to the larger group (Seccombe 4). Although I do agree with the above explanation of family, I believe that it is inadequate in that it only supplies a framework of family rather than the duties and purpose. To me, family is a unit of individuals, related or not, that symbolize and exude comfort, solace, and support through all the trials and triumphs life throws our way.

There is sufficient, vital unfairness in gender relations within the family or home that can take many dissimilar forms. Family arrangements can be quite unequal in sharing the load of

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.

A family consists of a group of interacting individuals related by blood, marriage, cohabitation, or adoption who interdependently perform relevant functions by fulfilling expected roles. (Edelman, Kudzma, & Mandle, 2014, p. 150)

A family is seen as a group of people who are biologically or psychologically related. They connect on historical, emotional

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.

The first social institution I became a member of was the one I was born into, my family. My family is a nuclear family, “a familial form consisting of a father, a mother, and their children (Conley 453).” In some ways, my family is what one would consider a stereotypical family regarding gender roles, “sets of behavioral norms assumed to accompany one’s status as male or female

Throughout the time and space individuals across the world seek to identify gender, mainly between the men and women. Gender expectation and stereotypes are common in the United States today, although many men and women are working hard to alert them. Gender equality an important trend in all around the world in recent years. According to our traditional stereotypes, men have always been portrayed as strong as the ones who work in order to maintain the family, while women are portrayed as weak and submissive housewives who stay at home cooking, cleaning, and taking care of their children. Jakob F. Jensen & Amy J. Rauer & Brenda Volling in “A Dyadic View of Support in Marriage: The Critical Role of Men’s Support Provision”

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

Gender roles, the public image of being a particular gender that a person presents to others (gender roles, n.d.), have seen many changes through the years, especially in families. The changes can be seen in many aspects, including television shows, from the traditional family in the I Love Lucy sitcom of the 1950s to the plethora of shows about women and men who balance working and family life of the 2000s. A traditional family can be defined as “… the ‘natural reproductive unit’ of mom, pop, and the children all living under one roof… (Ball, 2002).” The 1940s, a period dominated by this type of family, were primarily a time of single-income families where the father was the ‘breadwinner’ and the mother the ‘homemaker (Hayghe, H.V., 1990).’

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