Gender Roles, DDOL and Power Relationships (3) Flashcards
What was the historical development of the housewife role?
Prior to the rise of industrialisation and factory production in the 19th Century the family was a unit of production with greater equality between genders in the family. However, industrialisation led to the separation of laid work from the home. Women were initially part of the labour force but they gradually excluded from the workplace as a result of the factory act and eventually confined to the home with sole responsibility for nursing and childcare while men became the sole breadwinner (wage earner). This enforced women’s subordination and economic dependence on men. The Functionalist Parsons claimed these are natural/biological roles based on physical traits and abilities, while others would argue that the housewife role is socially constructed (created and enforced by society).
The 20th century saw an increase in the number of women working, as a result of the impact of feminism and women’s changing status in society and the workplace. However, the housewife role is still seen as women’s primary role. In additions, women who work are concentrated in low-paid jobs that are often an extension of the housewife role, such as housework, secretarial work or childcare.
What are gender roles?
Patterns of behaviour that are expected of individuals of either sex.
These patterns are influenced by socialists definition of how each biological sex should act, creating a difference between men and women.
What is domestic labour?
Unpaid house work, including cooking, cleaning and childcare.
What is the domestic division of labour (DDOL)?
The sharing out of the jobs.
The division of roles, responsibly and tasks within the home.
The division of these tasks are influenced by societies views on gender roles. As society changes, this DDOL will change to match societies expectations of gender.
What are conjugal roles?
These are the roles played by men and women in a marriage or cohabiting relationship. These roles may follow societies gender roles/DDOL.
What are joint and segregated conjugal roles?
Joint conjugal roles: men and women shared domestic chores and will both participate in housework.
Segregated conjugal roles: men and women do not share domestic work and participate in separate roles. In this case it is often women who will do the homework.
What are the cultural or ideological explanations for the gender division of labour?
Patriarchal norms (Parsons).
Gender division in domestic work is due to different gender roles and Societal expectation’s. Until gender roles & Gender role socialisation changes – there will not be any equality in the domestic division of labour.
In this view, the division of labour is determined by patriarchal norms and values that shape gender roles in our culture. Women perform domestic labour simply because that is what is expected of them.
Feminists argue that in our Patriarchal society, cultural definitions of men as decision makers and women as housewives is instilled through gender role socialisation.
What are the material or economic explanations for the gender division of labour?
Income -> men generally earn more than women.
Gender division in domestic work is due to different incomes. As women earn less than men it means its economically rational for women to do more housework while men spend more time earning money – there will not be any equality in the domestic division of labour until pay differences are removed.
Kan found that for every £10,000 a year more a woman earns, her time spent on housework drops by 2 hours per week.
What are the 6 reasons for changes in family and households?
Parsons (1951): Segregated conjugal roles are normal and natural - patriacal.
Bott: Conjugal roles and social networks - kinship.
Willmott and Young: joint conjugal roles have replaced segregated conjugal roles - families are now ‘symmetrical’ - symmetrical family.
Oakley: conjugal roles are still segregated but this is unfair and socially constructed.
The impact of paid work: conjugal roles are not yet joint, but will become so in the future - lagged adaptation.
Dunne: Lesbian families have joint conjugal roles, unlike heterosexual families.
How is Parsons’ (1951) argument a reason for the changes in families and households?
Parsons (1951): Segregated conjugal roles are normal and natural - patriacal.
Parsons follows the functionalists view on the family arguing that the traditional nuclear family best meets the needs of society. In this argument the roles of husbands and wife are segregated - separate and distinct from one another. According to Parsons’ functionalists model of the family, the husband has an instrumental role which means providing for the family financially and the wife has an expressive role which means meeting the family’s emotional needs, including the primary socialisation of the children.
Parsons argues that men and women are ‘naturally’ suited to these roles and that the domestic division of labour is based on biological differences. He claims that this division of labour benefits individuals and the wider society. The New Right would also hold this view arguing that traditional nuclear families benefit society and its members.
What are the criticisms of Parsons (1951) view that segregated conjugal roles are normal and natural?
Outdated - Parsons view of instrumental and expressive roles many have held some value in the 1950’s when women married and became full time housewives. However, this is not the case today. Most married and cohabiting women are wage earners and both partners share expressive and instrumental roles.
Radical Feminists: Functionalists like Parsons ignore the way women suffer from the sexual divisions of labour. Women take more responsibility for household, reducing their ability to do paid work. This reduces their economic power and keeps dependent on men - this ensures the continuation of Patriarchy in the family and benefits men.
How is Bott’s argument a reason for the changes in families and households?
Bott: Conjugal roles and social networks - kinship.
Bott found that the most influential factor in determining whether a couple had joint or segregated conjugal roles was their social networks of friends, kin and acquaintances. Where couples had a tight knit network of friends and family, with whom they had regular contact, it was possible to see they couple would have segregated roles as each partner had people of their own sex for companionship and help with domestic work. This social network also acted as a form of social control - ensuring that couples did not drift away from traditional gender roles through teasing (e.g. a man that chose to cook or bake could be teased by other males as this activity is not part of the traditional male role).
Whereas, couples with a loose-knit or weaker social network have less constraints on their roles and are more likely to have joint or shared conjugal roles.
What are the criticisms of Bott’s view of conjugal roles and social networks?
Botts work was relatively small and only based on 20 families, living in the London area. Therefore her research is not representative or generalised and therefore cannot be applied to all families.
How is Willmott and Young’s argument a reason for the changes in families and households?
Willmott and Young: joint conjugal roles have replaced segregated conjugal roles - families are now ‘symmetrical’ - symmetrical family.
Willmott and Young carried out structured, telephone interviews with working-class, nuclear families living in Bethnal Green in the 1950’s and again in the 1970’s.
1950’s: most families had traditional segregated conjugal roles. Men were the breadwinners, most often working in the docks. They played little part in home life and spent their leisure time with workmates in pubs. Women were full-time housewives with sole responsibility for housework and childcare, helped by their female relatives.
1970’s: there had been a march of progress: family life had improved over the years, becoming more egalitarian and democratic. The role of husbands and wives are not identical but much more similar: the symmetrical family.
Willmott and Young argue that the rise of the symmetrical family is due to the major social changes which have occurred in the last century.
What are the three main characteristics that the symmetrical family has?
It is nuclear instead of classically extended.
It is home-centred or ‘privatised’ - leisure time is shared at home together instead of separately, and the family socialise less with people outside of the immediate nuclear family.
It is based on joint conjugal roles: couples share domestic tasks such as housework and childcare. (Willmott and Young claimed that 72% of husbands now ‘helped in the house’).
What are the social changes and how do they give rise to symmetrical families?
Changes in women’s position - married women going out to work.
Geographical mobility - more couples living away from the communities they grew up in and are likely to have lost contact with extended family kin.
New technology and labour-saving devices - housework is now easier and homes more comfortable.
Higher standards of living - married women bring in a second wage.
What are the criticisms of Willmott and Young’s view that joint conjugal role have replaced segregated conjugal roles - families are now ‘symmetrical’?
While there does mean to be some evidence that there is more role integration in leisure activities and some decision making. Housework and childcare remains predominantly women’s work. While men may be more involved in childcare. It is more of the fun activities while women ares still responsible for feeding and bathing.
Feminist: Oakley disagrees with Willmott and Young evidence of “jointness” / symmetrical families. Of married men, 72% claimed to ‘help their partner in the home in some way other than washing up at least once a week’. As Oakley points out, this could mean vacuming once a week, tucking the children into bed or making their own breakfast. This does not necessarily reflect an equal division of labour.
How is Oakely’s argument a reason for the changes in families and households?
Oakley: conjugal roles are still segregated but this is unfair and socially constructed.
Oakley carried out a study of housework to prove that Willlmott and Young were wrong, Oakley argues that 72% of men claiming to do housework (as Willmott and Young suggested) is not evidence of symmetry or equality in marriage. Oakley argues that men and women remain unequal within the family and women still do most of the housework and childcare. Oakley claimed her study showed that wives have acquired a dual burden of paid earning and unpaid housework. The family remains patriarchal as men are benefiting from both women’s earning and unpaid domestic labour.
What were the results from Oakley’s view that conjugal roles are still segregated but this is unfair and socially constructed?
15% of husbands had a high level of participation in housework, 25% of husbands had a high level of participation in childcare.
What does Oakley mean by a ‘High Level’ of participation in housework? Why might this measurement be problematic?
Doesn’t explain what ‘high level’ is - it’s subjective means data isn’t valid.
What are the problems with Oakley’s sample/method when trying to show that conjugal roles are still segregated but this is unfair and socially constructed?
Small sample, only in London (unrepresentative), maybe if the women had more than 1 child, men might help more.
How is the impact of paid work a reason for the changes in families and households?
The impact of paid work: conjugal roles are not yet joint, but will become so in the future - lagged adaptation.
Gershuny’s research found that wives who moved from part-time work into full-time did less domestic work and their partners began to do a bit more. He claimed that this was evidence of some progress of a more equal division of labour in the home. However, this is a slow progress. He concludes that conjugal roles will become more equal over time but that men will adapt to changes more slowly than women - a progress he called lagged adaptation.
However, while men are increasing their contributions to domestic work, they still tend to take responsibility for masculine defined tasks such as DIY and GARDENING and a bulk of domestic and caring tasks are still left to women as these are defined as female tasks.
What are the criticisms that the impact of paid work meaning that conjugal roles are not yet joint, but will become so in the future?
A 2008 British social attitudes survey found that 80% of women with partners said that they ‘always or usually do the laundry’. A 2011 survey by the social issues research centre, ‘The changing face of motherhood’, found that even though most mothers work full or part time today, they are twice as likely to be involved in childcare as fathers. A 2013 survey by Legal and General on ‘The value of a parent’, found that women with children spend an average of 71 hours a week on household tasks and childcare. If this work was paid, it would be valued at approx. £31,627 per year.
Radical feminists: the family is a patriarchal unit. As women a left to do a majority of the housework - men benefit from their free labour as women have less time to do paid work which restricts their economic power in the family and limits their ability to contribute to decision making.
Marxist feminists: capitalism benefits from women’s domestic labour as they provide free work to help maintain the family unit - but can also be used as a reserve army of labour who are temporarily brought into work at busy times. When women also perform their role as the ‘takers of shit’ (Ansley) they help maintain adult personalities in the family ensuring the continuation of capitalism.
How is Dunne’s argument a reason for changes in families and households?
Dunne: Lesbian families have joint conjugal roles, unlike heterosexual families.
Gender scripts are the expectations or norms that set out the different gender roles men and women in heterosexual couples are expected to play. In her study of 37 cohabiting lesbian couples with dependent children, Dunne found evidence of symmetry because household tasks are not linked to particular gender scripts. This allows lesbian couples to create a more equal relationship. This supports the radical feminist view that relationship between men and women are inevitably patriarchal and that women can only achieve equality in a same sex relationship.
What are the criticisms of Dunne’s view that lesbian families have joint conjugal roles?
Dunne found that while there is more equality / choice in how roles are divided. When one partner doe more paid work than the other, the domestic division of labour was likely to be unequal. Therefore, paid work is an important influence on the domestic division of labour in both heterosexual and same-sex relationships.
What is the postmodern views on the domestic division of labour?
Postmodernism in society has created more flexibility and choice in the domestic division of labour in the home. Couples can negotiate and pick and mix roles. The number of ‘house husbands’ has trebled in the last 15 years and the study estimates there are 62,000 men in Britain who are economically inactive and say that they solely care for their family or their homes. Almost a third (30 per cent) of men do between seven and 12 hours or housework, while 45 per cent do at least 13 hours. Just three per cent of married women, meanwhile, spend less than three hours a week on tasks around the home. The survey found that only 13 per cent of married women said their husbands did more housework than them.
The 2013 British social attitudes survey found a fall in the number of people who think that it is the men’s job to earn money and the women’s job to look after the family. In 1984 45% of men and 41% of women agreed with this view compared to only 13% men and 12% of women by 2012.
What are the criticisms of postmodern views on the domestic division of labour?
Despite 50 years of feminism, it is still women who take responsibility for the housework Eight out of ten married women do more housework than their husbands despite 50 years of feminism, according to a new study. A report by the IPPR think tank shows that couples are still more likely to split into traditional ‘breadwinner’ and ‘homemaker’ roles than they are fully to share employment, childcare and domestic duties.
What is Globalisation and the impact on the domestic Division of Labour?
The increasing levels of Globalisation and immigration has also had an impact on the way in which the family divides up the domestic labour.
- Caribbean families are more likely to be loan parent with a female led - this results in these women taking on a greater responsibility for the families domestic labour.
- South Asian families are more likely to adopt traditional gender roles in which husbands have authority over wives, women’s roles as a housewife and mother is often expected and followed.
- The growth of globalisation has also lead to the growing tend of purchasing family personal care, such as home helps and Nannies from poorer countries across the world, for those who can afford it.
What did Edgell suggest was a factor affecting equality in relationships?
Edgall - Decision making.
He found decision making in the home was divided. Traditionally the very important decisions - involving money e.g. moving house were made by men (as typically men earn more money). Important decisions - children’s education - was a joint decisions but men still had the final say. Less important decisions - clothes, food - made by women. One important factor in decision making is economic power, as men traditionally earn more money they had more power. However, as women have gained more financial power they have been able to have a greater input.
What were the criticisms of Edgell’s view that decision making is a factor affecting equality in relationships?
Despite changes in financial power, men are generally the higher wage earner and can make more final decision.
Recent studies have also highlighted that is some cases when women earn more than their husband / partner - women will let their husband make more of the decisions so their masculinity is not threatened.
What did Pahl and Vogler suggest was a factor affecting equality in relationships?
Traditionally couples with a Division in conjugal roles would have operated an allowed system in which the husband would provide his wife with a set amount of money likely to opt for a pooling system - both partners have access to income and joint responsibility e.g. joint bank account, this is on the increase and more common when both partners work full-time.
What are the criticisms of Pahl and Vogler’s view that there is control over family income?
Just because pooling is taking place, it doesn’t necessarily mean that there is equality. Research from 2011 found that although 59% of married couples consult each other an financial issues, only 44% of women have sole responsibility for financial decisions.
Smart (2007) some gay and lesbian couples attached no importance on who controlled the money and were perfectly happy to leave this too their partner as they did not see this as a sign of equality or inequality in the relationship.
