Republic of the Philippines

POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES

College of Social Science and Development
DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY & ANTHROPOLOGY

Instructional Material for

Gender and Society

Compiled by: Contact Information:

Gil Mari Santero santerogilmari@gmail.com

gmpsantero@pup.edu.ph
09206547767
Mejedin Tena mrtena@pup.edu.ph
09052770270

1
ABOUT YOU

Student Name:

Student Number:

Course and Section:

Email Address:

Contact Number:

Address:

INTRODUCTION:

ABOUT THE SUBJECT:

2
This course will provide a comprehensive understanding of gender through the lens of social,
political, cultural, and economic aspects of this phenomenon. The subject will also examine the
problems that come with the increasing interaction and interconnected relationship of people and
organizations from different places in the world. The instructional materials and readings to be
discussed in class will give students knowledge in understanding and using these social media
platforms responsibly. This module’s contents were adapted from Karen Seccombe’s book,
Families, and their Social Worlds (2014), Sam Atkinson’s The Sociology Book: Big Ideas
Explained (2015) and Ann Oakley’s Sex, Gender and Society (1972). Also, the books mentioned
will serves as its main readings for the subject.

COURSE DESCRIPTION
This will be a completely online course that will be delivered to you once the class schedule is
finalized. Course content, including lecture PowerPoints, readings, videos, quizzes, and
instructions for term paper requirements will be sent via Google Drive. In addition, lecture
presentations will be conducted via video sessions through Google Meet where the instructor will
virtually meet with class to discuss the week’s lecture. All course requirements must be completed
during the semester. Likewise, all discussions, term papers, quizzes, exams, and other
requirements the instructor finds necessary to accomplish must be completed by the due dates
shown on the subject syllabus.

COURSE OUTCOMES
The subject is to provide an educational experience for students to understand the concept of
gender and issues by examining social, economic, political, and cultural processes that shape it.
By completing the course students should be able to:
1. Define and explain gender and the theories related to it.
2. Understand the different social issues that exist within the gender discourse.
3. Understand and apply the theories discussed in class to make sense of social issues.
4. Demonstrate their skills in conducting social research through the methodologies discussed in
class.

GRADE PERCENTAGE BREAKDOWN:

● Class Standing 70%
○ Self-Test/ Class Outputs- 20%
○ Term Paper Output- 30%
■ Content-20 points
■ Grammar and Sentence Construction-10 points
■ Delivery-10 points
■ Teamwork-10 points
○ Class Participation/ Recitations- 20%
● Examination 30%
○ Midterm Exam- 15%

3
 ○ Final Project- 15%

COURSE RULES:

1. MISSED REQUIREMENTS:
If a student misses any class activities such as quizzes, recitations, and group activities, the
faculty-in-charge will not provide any make-up class activities. If the reason for the absence of the
student is excusable, the faculty-in-charge will grade him or her according to her current standing
on the activity he or she missed. On the other hand, if the absence is not excusable, the said
student will receive a grade of zero (0) for the missed activity.

2. SUBMISSION OF REQUIREMENTS:
Submission of papers and other requirements will only be allowed during the class session, unless
otherwise provided for by the faculty-in charge. Outputs of students who have failed to adhere
with the format given by the faculty in-charge will suffer grade deductions.

3. PLAGIARISM AND ACADEMIC DISHONESTY:

The faculty-in-charge will require students to submit homework and other outputs from time to
time. Always cite your sources in APA (6th edition). Your failure to do so will be tantamount to a
grade of zero (0) for the said output. Students who willfully engage in acts of academic dishonesty
shall be given a grade of zero or F on the academic exercise concern.

4
Course Contents
Lesson Title Readings
Lesson 1 The Biology of Sex Ann Oakley (1972) Sex, Gender
and Society
Lesson 2 Sex, Gender and Families Karen Seccombe (2014). Families
and their Social Worlds

Judith Stacey and Timothy J.

Biblarz (2001). (How) Does the
Sexual Orientation of Parents
Matter?

Sam Atkinson (2015). The

Sociology Book: Big Ideas
Explained).

James Henslin (1993). Sociology:

A Down to Earth Approach.

ANN OAKLEY (1972).

Sex, Gender and Society
Lesson 3 Gender, Social Stratification, Social Class,
and Families Karen Seccombe (2014). Families
and their Social Worlds

Karen Seccombe (2000). Families

in Poverty in the 1990s: Trends,
Causes, Consequences, and
Lessons Learned

Sam Atkinson (2015). The

Sociology Book: Big Ideas
Explained).

ANN OAKLEY (1972). Sex,

Lesson 4 Courtship, Intimacy and Partnering
WHEN LOVE FINALLY WINS IT HAS TO
FACE ALL KINDS OF DEFEAT. Ulrich Beck
and Elisabeth Beck- Gernsheim
Marriage: A Personal Relationship and
Gender and Society
Karen Seccombe (2014). Families
and their Social Worlds
Sam Atkinson (2015). The
Sociology Book: Big Ideas
Explained).

5
 Social Institution ANN OAKLEY (1972). Sex,
Gender and Society
Divorce, repartnering and remarriage
Lesson 5 Violence and Abuse Social Worlds

HOUSEWORK IS DIRECTLY OPPOSED Sam Atkinson (2015). The

TO SELF-ACTUALIZATION. Anne Oakley Sociology Book: Big Ideas
Explained).
WESTERN MAN HAS BECOME A
CONFESSING ANIMAL. Michel Foucault ANN OAKLEY (1972). Sex,
Gender and Society

Patricia Hill Collins (2006):

Intersecting Oppressions

Laune Serquina-Ramiro,
Bernadette J. Madrid & Ma.
Lourdes E. Amarillo (2004).
Domestic Violence in Urban
Filipino Families

Lesson 6 Concept of Health and Beauty Horace Miner (1956). Body

Rituals Among the Nacirema

Lesson 7 Feminist movement and Ideologies Freedman, E. B. (2002). “No

Turning Back: The history of
feminism and the future of
women. New York. Ballantine
Books.

OUTPUT FORMAT:
Since this will be an online course that will be delivered to you, the instructor will divide the
following output formats into two kinds of students – Online and Offline Students.

What is an Online Student?

The online students are those who have access to the internet and can participate in online video
lectures. Online students will receive a Google Drive link containing the readings, PowerPoint
slides, and other instructional materials to be used throughout the semester. The instructor will
send a soft copy of this instructional material- Contemporary Social Media, as well as the Google
Drive link to the class at the start of the semester. The student modules will then be compiled by
a designated student in one Google Drive folder and will be sent to the instructor via email by the
end of the term.

6
Format for Self-Tests and Term Papers:
● Arial 11
● Single spaced
● Justified

What is an Offline Student?

Offline students are those who do not have the means to participate in online lectures. If you are
one of these students, a printed version of this module – Sociology of Family, will be delivered to
you. For offline students, this course will imitate the practice of homeschooling where students
will be graded based on their outputs by the end of the term. Offline students could put their
answers in a short bond paper to be attached with this module, to be sent back to the instructor
by the end of the semester.

Format for Self-Tests and Term Papers:

Students could answer the self-tests and term papers in the blank spaces provided per section.
Additional bond papers could be used by the students to answer each self-test and term paper if
it remains true to the format.

7
Contents
Lesson 1 The Biology of Sex...................................................................................................... 9
The Biology of Sex ................................................................................................................. 9
Lesson 2: Sex, Gender and Families ........................................................................................15
Concepts on sex and gender .................................................................................................15
Where Do We Learn Gender? ...............................................................................................19
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE SEXES ARE CULTURAL CREATIONS. Margaret Mead ...22
HETEROSEXUALITY MUST BE RECOGNIZED AND STUDIED AS AN INSTITUTION.
Adrienne Rich. .......................................................................................................................23
Lesson 3 Social Stratification, Social Class, and Families .........................................................27
Concepts on Family and Stratification....................................................................................27
Lesson 4 Courtship, Intimacy and Partnering ............................................................................34
Concepts on Courtship, Intimacy and Partnering ...................................................................34
WHEN LOVE FINALLY WINS IT HAS TO FACE ALL KINDS OF DEFEAT. Ulrich Beck and
Elisabeth Beck- Gernsheim ...................................................................................................42
Lesson 5: Violence and Abuse ..................................................................................................45
Concepts on Family and Violence .........................................................................................45
HOUSEWORK IS DIRECTLY OPPOSED TO SELF-ACTUALIZATION. Anne Oakley ..........49
WESTERN MAN HAS BECOME A CONFESSING ANIMAL. Michel Foucault .......................50
Lesson 6: Health and Beauty ....................................................................................................52
Body Ritual Among the Nacirema ..........................................................................................52
Lesson 7: Feminist Movements and Ideologies .........................................................................56
Concepts on Feminism ..........................................................................................................56
References: ..............................................................................................................................64

8
Lesson 1 The Biology of Sex
Introduction
Everybody knows that men and women are different. But behind this knowledge lies a certain
uneasiness: how different are they? What is the extent of the difference? What significance does
it have for the way male and female behave and are treated in society? While the first questions
are factual ones, the last is a question of value. In practice, of course, fact and value are not
always separated, and the confusion between them has been crucial in the debate about sex
differences (Oakley 1972). This chapter will showcase Biological aspect of sex difference.

Learning Objectives
By the end of this unit students must be able:
1.Learn the biological differences between two sexes.
2.Consider these innate differences when studying gender.

Section of the Unit

The Biology of Sex

To Read:

The Biology of Sex

source: ANN OAKLEY (1972). Sex, Gender and Society pp.17-30

The starting point for the study of sex differences is biology. But biology also demonstrates the
identity of male and female— their basic similarities, the continuity in their development. Far from
falling into two discrete groups, male and female have the same body ground-plan, and even the
anatomical difference is more apparent than real. Neither the phallus nor the womb is organs of
one sex only: the female phallus (the clitoris) is the biological equivalent of the male organ, and
men possess a vestigial womb, whose existence they may well ignore until it causes enlargement
of the prostate gland in old age.

What is 'sex'? How do the differences and similarities of the sexes arise? This chapter looks at
the origin of sex differentiation in biology, and at some of its possible consequences in social life.
In ordinary usage the word sex has two meanings: it refers to the differences between individuals
that make them male and female, and to a type of behavior— the 'mating' behavior that begins
sexual reproduction. Not all organisms, of course, do reproduce in this way; some reproduce
asexually by releasing a cell or group of cells from one organism alone. In humans, reproduction
is sexual because there is an exchange of nuclear cell material between different mating types—
male and female. This process of exchanging and mixing genetic material is what biologists mean
by 'sex'. In evolutionary terms, the division of a species into male and female has adaptive
advantages: greater variation between individuals is possible, and genetic weaknesses can be
bred out.

Both male and female, therefore, contribute genetic material in reproduction, but only one of them,
the male, determines the sex of the child. It is a chromosome in his sperm that decides whether
the new baby shall be male or female. The cells of the female ovary and male testis each contain
twenty-three chromosomes in which all the genetic 'information' for the child is coded. One of the
twenty-three is the sex chromosome and this can be of two types, X and Y. (They are so called
because of their shape. The Y chromosome looks like an incomplete X and is one fifth of its size.)

9
Female ova all contain only the X sex-determining chromosome, while male sperm carry either
the X or the Y chromosome. When a Y sperm fertilizes an ovum, the embryo will have the sex
determination XY, which means that it will be male. If it is an X sperm, the embryo will be XX,
female.

In this way the genetic or chromosomal sex of an individual is determined at conception. However,
the differences between male and female anatomy are the product of nine months' gestation, and
various hazards lie in wait for the developing embryo. Up to about seven weeks of prenatal life
the appearance of the external genitalia is identical in both sexes. The basic plan of the
development of the sex organs and ducts is common to males and females, and the same two
sets of ducts develop in both.

A t first there is a single external opening leading both to the bladder and to the internal genitalia
(the urogenital opening) and a 'genital tubercle' which is the rudimentary penis or clitoris. After
seven weeks the male ducts cease to develop in the female and the female ducts in the male. If
the embryo is chromosomally male, the genital tubercle enlarges to form the penis while the
urethra (the duct through which urine is discharged) extends to pass right through it. The skin
round the urogenital opening unites to form the scrotum, into which the testes descend later,
usually just before birth. If the embryo is chromosomally female, none of these changes occur:
the genital tubercle atrophies and becomes the clitoris, the skin around the urogenital opening
remains divided and becomes the labia.

This period during which embryos differentiate into specifically male or female anatomical forms
is obviously a critical one. Cases in which embryos develop either as incomplete males or as
incomplete females are due to some failure in the critical early period. What makes this anatomical
differentiation occur in the first place? How is the message of the chromosomes transmitted to
the developing embryo? What happens (or fails to happen) in cases of imperfect sexual
development? Despite recent research we are still very far from the answers.

10
It seems clear that, as one endocrinologist (S LeVine) has put it, the basic human form is female,
and masculinity comes about as the result of something 'added'. This conclusion has been
reached because of several pieces of evidence, beginning with the solution of a problem that had
puzzled cattle breeders for centuries— the problem of the 'freemartin', an intersexed calf.
Freemartins are always born as the twin of a normal male and during pregnancy the placentas
nourishing the two calves are joined. The freemartin starts as a genetic female and is
masculinized by hormones produced in the male calf and circulated to the freemartin through the
connecting placental tissue. These hormones are produced by the gonads (testes) of the male,
in both calf and human embryo, and they provide the added something which causes the embryo
to develop in the male direction. The presence of the Y chromosome in the genetic make-up of
the male somehow provokes the embryonic gonad into hormone production, whereas the XX
combination has no such effect, and the female gonad (ovary-to-be) produces hormones only at
a much later stage. Just how genes on the Y chromosome have this effect is not known.

The crucial role played by the gonadal hormones in initiating male development has been
demonstrated by countless animal experiments. In several species the injection of male hormone
into the female during the critical period completely reverses it sex. On the other hand, castrated
embryos of either genetic sex develop into females, and this suggests that the role of the male
hormone is a dual one: its presence ensures the development of male structures, but it is also
needed to prevent the development of female structures, which can develop autonomously. For
an embryo to develop as a female, its gonads do not need to produce female hormones. Normal
sex differentiation depends exclusively on the presence or absence of the male hormone.

Further evidence of the importance of hormones in establishing anatomical sex differentiation is

11
provided by studies of intersexual. It can happen that an individual of one chromosomal sex
develops the gonads of the opposite sex, and the hormones from these gonads produce a
physical appearance as male or female quite unrelated to the chromosomal sex. One form of
intersexuality, in which genetic males have male gonads but female secondary sex characteristics
and female external genitalia, is thought to be due precisely to the failure of the male gonad to
produce male hormones during the critical period of prenatal life. (The cause is probably a sex-
linked recessive gene, carried by females and passed on to genetic males.) The critical period is
(fortunately perhaps) short— in the rabbit castration before embryonic day 21 causes complete
female development of a genetic male, but castration at day 24 fails to interfere with normal male
development. In humans, the critical period occupies the space of a few days late in the third
prenatal month. After this time hormones have no basic irreversible effect.

Because of the importance of hormones in what follows, it will be as well to give a brief account
of their functions as they relate to sex differences. The term 'hormones' covers all the secretions
of the endocrine glands (the pituitary, the adrenal glands, the thyroid gland, the pancreas, the
ovary, and testis). The number and range of hormones produced by males and females is virtually
the same, but normal women usually produce a preponderance of the female sex hormones,
estrogen and progesterone, the normal males a preponderance of testosterone and the general
group of hormones known as androgens, or male sex hormones. The sex hormones are produced
not only by the ovary and testis but by the adrenal glands as well. This fact partially accounts for
the male castrate's ability to maintain a 'normal' sex life despite his sterility, and it also accounts
for some cases in which genital appearance is contrary to chromosomal sex (a type of pseudo-
intersexuality). Just as a male embryo whose gonads fail to function properly takes on female
genital characteristics, so a female embryo can be born with male genital appearance if its adrenal
glands produce an excess of androgenic hormones. Tumors in the adrenal glands of adults can
be responsible for similar hormone reversals, producing changes in the appearance of secondary
sex characteristics.

Methods of measuring the number of hormones that individuals secrete are complicated by the
ability of the body to manufacture male hormones from female hormones and vice versa. An
injection of male hormone testosterone may be partly converted by the body into its near chemical
neighbor, the female hormone estrogen. (This tendency is thought to explain, for instance, the
fact that rapidly maturing male adolescents sometimes acquire small breasts— the substantial
increase in testosterone which accompanies puberty is partially metabolized as estrogen, which
in turn causes breast development.) Despite problems of measurement, there is good evidence
that up to about eight or ten years of age, boys and girls secrete negligible amounts of the sex
hormones. Thereafter, in both sexes, the production of both male and female hormones
increases. With the approach of puberty, the increase in the production of male hormones in both
sexes becomes pronounced (it reaches a peak in the age range twenty to forty, when the
difference between the hormones produced by men and women is also at its highest level). The
increase in the female hormone is much greater for girls than boys, accelerating particularly
around the age of eleven, and becoming cyclic about eighteen months before the onset of
menstruation itself. But estrogen production in boys does increase at puberty, although it never
becomes cyclic— as androgen production in females never becomes cyclic either.

While men and women produce both male and female hormones, the relative amounts and
proportions vary a great deal between individuals, and one cannot establish biological maleness
or femaleness from the hormone count along. I n one study of two women and three men (all
'normal' individuals) the level of female hormones excreted in the urine was 155.2 and 13.4 units
per day for the two women, and 12.4, 7.6 and 16.8 units for the three men. The production of
male hormones varies in a similar way between individuals of the same and different sexes. Roger

12
Williams in his 'Biochemical Individuality' suggests that it is possible to classify both men and
women in nine categories according to their production of low, medium, or high levels of male and
female hormones (low androgen + low estrogen, low androgen + medium estrogen, and so on for
all nine possible combinations). One would then find a mixture of both sexes in each of the
categories over this range— although some might be more characteristically male than female,
and vice versa. The main function of the sex hormones in both male and female is to ensure that
the body develops in line with its chromosomal sex and so becomes capable of reproduction.
They have other functions too— some directly related to reproductive behavior, some whose
connection with reproduction is obscure. Male hormones encourage hair growth on the body but
are inversely related to hair growth on the scalp. A woman treated with testosterone for cancer of
the breast may develop both hair on the face and the frontal baldness of the scalp which is a male
characteristic. Conversely a man given estrogen for cancer of the prostate may develop a female
pattern of pubic hair and a slower growth of hair on the face. The general growth and maturation
of male and female are directly under the control of hormones. A t puberty, the increase in growth
in both sexes is caused by an increase in the production of androgens. But in girls the
simultaneous rise in estrogen production causes maturation or ossification of the bones, a
process which, once completed, prevents further growth. Thus, because of the relatively low level
of estrogen in their bodies, boys have a longer time in which to grow before their bones mature.
It seems possible that the output of sex hormones controls the secretion of the so-called 'growth'
hormone from the pituitary, but how it does this is not known.

omen seems to be limited to monitoring changes in the womb related to menstruation, ovulation,
conception, and gestation— and to keeping the vagina in a state of lubricated receptivity. The
amount of estrogen produced by a woman does not control her sexual drive, erotic imagery or
sensation, or her ability to have an orgasm. After the menopause, estrogen production declines
to a clinically insignificant level but many women experience at that time a new awakening of
sexual desire. (It is thought that this is due to release from the fear of pregnancy.) The later period
of life brings the sexes closer together in terms of hormone production. Around the late fifties and
early sixties both ovary and testis start to produce radically smaller amounts of hormones, so that
in this way men and women revert to the relatively neuter condition of childhood. In those ways,
chromosomes and hormones influence the development of the sexes. What other sex differences
are determined by biology? Genetic maleness is correlated not only with the possession of penis
and testicles, but also with greater size, weight, and strength. These are, in fact, the sum of the
advantages produced by the Y chromosome.

Sex Differences

The sex difference in both height and weight may be related to food intake— in many societies
the male traditionally takes the greater share of available food. This continues today; in Nigeria,
for example, most, if not all, of the severe malnutrition cases seen by one British doctor in the
period following the Biafran war in 1970 were female children. This doctor, Sylvia Watkins, wrote
that 'if food is scarce, the boys are given what little there is, leaving the girls to starve. It was not
uncommon to see whole families of girls with severe kwashiorkor [a protein deficiency disease]
whilst the son and heir was fit and well.' In one such -family, the two-year-old girl weighed 12
pounds while her five-month-old brother had reached 18 pounds. But males are not always the
favored ones. Margaret Mead described one tribe— the Mundugumor— where the women were
as tall as the men; they also had all the food, doing all the fishing and eating any amount they
chose before bringing the food supply to the men of the village.

In terms of somatotype (body physique) there are sex differences which are visible and accepted
as standard in our own society. The more muscular physiques occur less often among girls, and

13
there is some evidence that genes located on the X chromosome may somehow inhibit the
development of large muscles. The relative proportions of body surface taken up by the trunk,
head, limbs and so on, also differ between the sexes, with females tending to one mean and
males to another.

Again, the degree of difference between male and female somatotypes varies between ethnic
groups. In one small-scale ('primitive') society for which there are good photographic records—
the Manus of the Admiralty Islands— there is apparently no difference at all in somatotype
between males and females as children, and as adults both men and women tend to the same
high degree of mesomorph (broad shoulders and chest, heavily muscled limbs, little
subcutaneous fat) which is not found to the same extent in American and Western European
groups. In Bali, too, males and females lack the sort of differentiation of physique that is a visible
sex difference in our culture. Geoffrey Gorer once described them as a 'hermaphroditic' people;
they have little sex differential in height and both sexes have broad shoulders and narrow hips.
They do not run to curves and muscles, to body hair or to breasts of any size. (Gorer remarked
that you could not tell male and female apart, even from the front.) Another source informs us that
babies suck their fathers' breasts as well as their mothers’.

References
ANN OAKLEY (1972). Sex, Gender and Society

Assessment
No Assessment

14
Lesson 2: Sex, Gender and Families
Introduction:
Sex and gender influence virtually all aspects of families and intimate relationships. For example,
they affect what is expected of us and how we behave in dating relationships, as marriage
partners, and as parents. This chapter introduces the concepts of sex and gender, including both
micro and macro dimensions. (Seccombe 2014)

Learning Objectives:
By the end of this unit students must be able to identify:
1. The difference between sex and gender, including biological differences and those that
are socially constructed.
2. How we learn about gender, including through family members, toys, schools, peers, and
the mass media.
3. Class, race, and ethnicity influences on gender n Rigid gender expectations that can harm
both males and females.

Sections of the Unit:

1. Concepts on sex and gender
2. DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE SEXES ARE CULTURAL CREATIONS. Margaret Mead
3. HETERO SEXUALITY MUST BE RECOGNIZED AND STUDIED AS AN INSTITUTION.
Adrienne Rich

To read:
Concepts on sex and gender
Source: Karen Seccombe (2014). Families and their Social Worlds pp.99-109

Sex and Gender: What is the Difference?

The term sex refers to biological differences and one’s role in reproduction. Typically, people think
of sex based on genitalia: male and female. However, anatomical categories are not always easily
identifiable, as is the case with intersexed individuals. The ambiguity is often the result of
chromosomal or hormonal imbalances during the prenatal stage. It is difficult to get a firm number
of intersexed individuals because it occurs along a continuum, and not everyone agrees on what
exactly constitutes an intersexed person. The frequency of surgery needed to normalize the
genital appearance runs about 1 or 2 for every 1,000 births. The genitals are usually surgically
reconstructed to adhere to the child’s genetic chromosomes, either XX for a female or XY for a
male. In contrast to sex, which is rooted in biology, gender refers to the culturally and socially
constructed differences between males and females found in the meanings, beliefs, and practices
associated with femininity and masculinity. These are learned attitudes and behaviors, not
biological or physical qualities. Gender is socially constructed. We are born male or female, but
we learn the culturally and socially prescribed traits associated with masculine or feminine
patterns of behavior.

Gender Is Socially Constructed

In most societies throughout the world today, and certainly throughout history, men and women
have been viewed as far more different than alike. We even refer to one another as “the opposite
sex.” For example, men are often assumed to be more aggressive, sexual, unemotional, rational,
and task oriented than women, whereas women are assumed to be more nurturing, passive, and

15
dependent. Many social roles played out in families every day reflect these presumed
characteristics. For example, research shows that mothers spend far more time than do fathers
on childcare, even when both work outside the home for pay, because women are thought to be
more innately nurturing.

However, the suggestion that men and women are the opposite of one another is seriously flawed.
Modern social science and biological researchers note that men and women are far more alike
than different (Eliot 2009; Kramer 2007; Lindsey 2011). Both men and women express
aggression, passivity, nurturance, rationality, instrumentality, and other gender-typed behaviors.
We all possess both masculine and feminine traits although to different degrees. The box on the
next two pages, “Using the Sociological Imagination: Getting to Know Yourself,” offers a self-test
so you can assess your own personality traits. Are you more traditionally masculine, more
feminine, or do you lean towards androgyny (having both masculine and feminine traits in near
equal proportion)? Remember, there are no right or wrong answers; just look at yourself.
Gendered expectations are in large part socially constructed (Bonvillain 2007). They are variable
across and within cultures, are historically situated, and reflect broad social patterns. Gender is
not completely innate or instinctive. Rather, much of it is socially and culturally produced.

16
17
Sex Differences
Nonetheless, it is important to note that men and women are not identical; their biological
differences extend beyond the ones necessary for reproduction (Helgeson 2009). Although using
human subjects in this line of research presents a set of challenges, many studies suggest that
males are generally stronger, more active, and more aggressive than females. However, in other
ways males are more fragile. Males suffer from a wider variety of physical illnesses, infant
mortality rates are higher among males and their life expectancy is shorter in almost all countries,
including the United States (National Center for Health Statistics 2009; Population Reference
Bureau 2010b). Males are afflicted with more genetic disorders and suffer from accidents at a
higher rate than do females. Depression, however, is far more common among women (Cambron
et al. 2009). There is also scientific evidence that males and females may solve intellectual
problems differently. Although most research points to no overall differences in levels of
intelligence (measured with IQ tests), men tend to perform better at certain spatial tasks and
mathematical reasoning tests. Meanwhile, women on average outperform men in terms of their
precision with which they perform certain manual tasks. Women also tend to excel on tests that
measure recall of words or matching items. What is the cause of these differences? For many
years, it was popular to attribute sex differences exclusively, or nearly so, to social learning. The
argument was that men and women are treated differently because of gender typing, and
therefore they come to behave differently and develop different skill sets. However, the
accumulating evidence now suggests that some cognitive and skill differences are also present
at very early ages. These differences may result from hormones such as women’s higher levels
of estrogen and progesterone, and men’s higher levels of androgens, including testosterone.
Exposure to different hormones begins in the uterus and may have implications for the way the
brain is “wired.” Studies of female fetuses who have been exposed to abnormally large quantities
of androgens because of a genetic defect, called congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH), showed
that the girls exposed to CAH as children were more likely to prefer playing with more typical
masculine toys, such as construction or transportation toys, as compared to the other girls who
preferred more typically feminine toys (Kimura 2002).

Although brain research is still in its infancy because of its complexity, there is some evidence
that the size, shape, and use of the brain may differ somewhat by sex in regions involved in
language, memory, emotion, vision, hearing, and navigation (Becker et al. 2008; Hines 2005).
Some studies suggest that women may use more parts of their brain at once while men are more
inclined to have focused responses (Onion 2005). One study conducted with mice has shown that
as mammals develop in the womb, testosterone and related hormones trigger cell death in some
regions of the male brain and foster cell development in other regions (Forger et al. 2004).
Removing or adding testosterone to mice shortly after birth causes their brains to develop
according to the presence of the hormone, regardless of their sex. Given these intriguing studies,
what is the role of nature versus nurture, and how would this play out in families? Social scientists
suggest that most sex differences that we see in each society are probably a result of both
biological and social influences, with social factors powerfully shaping biological ones (Eliot 2009).
This process becomes clear as we examine the wide variety of sex and gendered expectations
cross-culturally. What one culture defines as distinctly feminine behavior or activities, another may
see as quite masculine, as the research by the famous anthropologist George Murdock (1949,
1957) has shown. Are females more emotional—or are males? Answers to questions like this are
not universal; they vary across different cultures.

Although we may all possess both masculine and feminine traits, most of us display primarily the
gendered traits that are associated with our sex. Females are indeed usually more “feminine” and
tend to behave in culturally prescribed feminine ways and males are more “masculine.” This is
likely due to the strong cultural messages received throughout our lives as well as biological

18
forces.

Where Do We Learn Gender?

If much of gendered behavior is socially constructed and learned, where do we learn it? Through
a process called gender socialization, we are taught the norms associated with being male or
female in our culture (Bonvillain 2007; Eliot 2009; Helgeson 2009). Gender socialization may be
a conscious effort, such as a teacher criticizing a young girl for being rowdy and “unladylike” in
the classroom or scolding a young boy for displaying his emotions because “big boys don’t cry.”
It also may occur on a less conscious level, such as parents providing different toys for their
children—dress-up clothes for their daughters and war toys for their sons. The agents of
socialization, summarized in Table 1, include the people, social institutions, and organizations
that teach boys and girls their gendered expectations.

Family Members
Parents and other family members have the primary responsibility for introducing the gendered
norms and expectations in their culture (Marks et al. 2009). They teach a child about what to wear,
how to behave, what toys to play with, what the child’s status is, and what the overall expectations
are for the child. Consciously or not, they often treat their sons and daughters differently. They
hold baby girls more gently and cuddle them more than they do boys. Parents of girls describe
their children as daintier and more delicate than do parents of boys, and the choice of dress
usually reflects this (Leaper and Friedman 2006). Differential treatment continues throughout
childhood, repeating itself over and over and creating a self-fulfilling prophecy far beyond any true
existing biological differences. Parents, solely based on sex, may assign rules, toys, expected
behavior, chores, hobbies, and a multitude of other cultural values or artifacts differently. For
example, girls may be required by their parents to do the dishes daily, whereas their brothers
mow the lawn weekly; parents may allow more rough play from their sons than their daughters;
teenage girls may have an earlier curfew than their brothers. When girls and boys are treated
differently it is not surprising that they become more different. This then is seen by many parents
as only natural, and therefore it becomes reinforced.

Fathers tend to encourage their children to behave in different ways because of their sex. They
emphasize achievement for their sons, while focusing more on interpersonal issues with their
daughters (Gurian 1999; Maccoby and Jacklin 1974). Fathers are more involved in families that

19
have boys, and as seen in the opening vignette, families with boys are more stable and parents
may be less likely to divorce (Dahl and Moretti 2003; Landsburg 2003).

Toys
Children’s toys and games are also differentiated based on sex (Diekman and Murnen 2004), and
girls as young as 18 months of age have shown a preference for dolls over trucks (although boys
showed no preference) (Serbin et al. 2001). Toys for boys often emphasize rough-and-tumble
play (e.g., sports, guns, vehicles, action figures), whereas toys for girls often focus on quiet or
nurturing activities (e.g., dolls, arts and crafts, kitchens, and cooking). An analysis of virtually any
children’s toy store will reveal that pink aisles specialize in girl toys whereas others are reserved
for toys for boys. A toy as seemingly gender neutral as a bicycle takes on great gender
significance by its color: pink for girls, blue for boys.

Although both boys and girls play with dolls, the types of dolls they play with are distinctive and
reinforce traditional stereotypes. Baby dolls are popular and often come with a bottle so girls can
practice feeding skills. Dolls such as Barbie reinforce stereotypes about adult women and their
bodies. In contrast, dolls for boys are referred to as “action figures” and are often rugged and
warlike.

Children’s books give a lopsided view of the world and reinforce traditional stereotypes about
males and females. A recent review of 200 top-selling children’s books and a seven-year 105
sample of Caldecott award-winning books discovered a number of examples of gender bias.
There were nearly twice as many male as female title and main characters; male characters
appeared in illustrations 53 percent more than female characters; female characters nurtured
more than did male main characters and they were seen in more indoor than outdoor scenes; and
occupations were more gender stereotypes, with more women than men having no paid
occupation (Anderson and Hamilton 2006).

Schools
Daycare centers, preschools, elementary schools, secondary schools, and even college
classrooms are other important arenas in which gender socialization occurs. Research a decade
or two ago revealed that teachers called on boys to answer questions more often than girls, and
boys were given more public praise by teachers. Teachers appeared to have lower expectations
for girls than boys; teachers solved the problem or gave girls answers more quickly, whereas they

20
expected boys to solve the problem themselves. The hidden curriculum informally taught girls that
academic achievement could mean forfeiting popularity (Orenstein 1994). Consequently, girls
tended to excel in elementary school, but by the time they reached middle and upper school, they
lost confidence, and tested more poorly than boys (KenneyBenson et al. 2006).

But something has changed (Mead 2006). Today, it appears that many girls and young women
have a strong achievement ethic, are doing well in school, and are surpassing boys and young
men. More girls apply to, attend, and graduate from college now than boys. Fifty-four percent of
undergraduate students are women, up from only 36 percent in 1970, as are 60 percent of
graduate students (Fry and Cohn 2010). Many college majors, however, remain sex typed.
Students in nursing, elementary, education, and social work are overwhelmingly female, whereas
students in engineering and computer science are primarily male. Nonetheless, among married
couples under age 45 (born in the United States), wives are now likely to have more education
than their husbands, as shown in Figure 1 (Fry and Cohn 2010).

Peers
Psychologist Eleanor Maccoby (1998) examined children’s play groups and found that children
between the ages of 2 and 3 tend to prefer same-sex peer play groups when provided with the
opportunity to do so. She also noted that when girls were playing with other girls, they were as
active as were boys playing with other boys. However, when girls were playing with boys, they
frequently stood back and let the boys dominate the toys or games. Maccoby speculated that the
boys’ rougher play and greater focus on competition was unattractive to girls, and girls responded
by pulling back rather than by trying to exert their own play style. Maccoby suggests that these
peer groups reinforce different interaction styles that carry over into adulthood: boys’ groups
reinforce a more competitive, dominance-oriented style of interaction, which carries over into adult
male communication patterns that include greater interrupting, contradicting, or boasting. Girls’
cooperative groups reinforce a style that contributes to adult female communication patterns that
include expressing agreement and acknowledging the comments of others and asking questions
rather than making bold pronouncements. A study in Texas found that children who engage in
more same-sex play were better liked by peers and were viewed by teachers as being socially

21
competent (Colwell and Lindsey 2005).

The Mass Media

The mass media, including television and video games, are an increasingly important mechanism
for socializing children. More than two-thirds of American households play computer or video
games; 60 percent of these players are male (Entertainment Software Association 2010). In a
study titled Girls and Gaming: Gender and Video Game Marketing, a look at 27 popular games
found that many promoted “unrealistic body images and stereotypical female characteristics, such
as provocative sexuality, high-pitched voices and fainting” (Media Awareness Network 2008).
Boys, especially middle-class White boys, are at the center of most television programming,
playing the most roles and engaging in the most activity (Aubrey and Harrison 2004; Baker and
Raney 2007). A review of recent children’s television shows reveals that male characters are still
more likely than female characters to answer questions, boss or order others, show ingenuity,
and achieve a goal (Aubrey and Harrison 2004). A study of morning commercials showed that
half of the commercials aimed at girls spoke about physical attractiveness, whereas none of the
commercials aimed at boys mentioned attractiveness (National Institute on Media and the Family
2009). Incidentally, females are less likely than males to be shown eating, not an insignificant
finding given the high rates of eating disorders among girls and women (National Institute of
Mental Health 2009).

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE SEXES ARE CULTURAL CREATIONS. Margaret Mead

Source: Sam Atkinson (2015). The Sociology Book: Big Ideas Explained pp. 298-299
In early 20th-century US society, a man’s role was to provide for his family, while women were
relegated to the private sphere and considered responsible for childcare and housework because
they were thought to be naturally more inclined to such roles. Margaret Mead, however, believed
that gender is not based on biological differences between the sexes, but rather reflects the
cultural conditioning of different societies. Mead’s investigations of the intimate lives of non-
Western peoples in the 1930s and 1940s crystallized her criticisms of her own society: she
claimed that the ways in which US society expressed gender and sexuality restricted possibilities
for both men and women. Mead claims that men and women are punished and rewarded to
encourage gender conformity, and what is viewed as masculine is also seen as superior.

Comparing cultures
Mead takes a comparative approach to
gender in her studies of three tribes in New
Guinea. Her findings challenge
conventional Western ideas about how
human behavior is determined. Arapesh
men and women were “gentle, responsive,
and cooperative” and both undertook
childcare traits the West would see as
“feminine.” Similarly, it was the norm for
Mundugumor women to behave in a
“masculine” way by being as violent and
aggressive as the men. And in a further
reversal of traditional Western roles,
women in Tchambuli society were
dominant, while men were dependent. The

22
fact that behaviors coded as masculine in one society may be regarded as feminine in another,
leads Mead to argue that temperamental attitudes can no longer be regarded as sex-linked. Her
theory that genders role are not natural but are created by society established gender as a critical
concept; it allows us to see the historical and cross-cultural ways in which masculinity, femininity,
and sexuality are ideologically constructed.

Change can happen.

Mead’s work laid the foundations for the women’s liberation movement and informed the so-called
“sexual revolution” of the 1960s onward. Her ideas posed a fundamental challenge to society’s
rigid understandings of gender roles and sexuality. Following on from Mead, feminists such as
US cultural anthropologist Gayle Rubin argued that if gender, unlike sex, is a social construction,
there is no reason why women should continue to be treated unequally. Viewing gender as
culturally determined allows us to see, and therefore challenge, the ways in which social
structures such as the law, marriage, and the media encourage stereotyped ways of conducting
our intimate lives. In comparison to the early 20th century, gender roles for both men and women
in the 21st century have become far less restrictive, with women participating more in the public
sphere.

HETEROSEXUALITY MUST BE RECOGNIZED AND STUDIED AS AN INSTITUTION. Adrienne

Rich.
Source: Sam Atkinson (2015). The Sociology Book: Big Ideas Explained pp.306-309.

What if heterosexuality is not innate or the only “normal” sexuality? Heterosexuality is often seen
as a “natural” foundation for society, but Adrienne Rich challenges this idea in her important essay
“Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence” (1980). Rich was influenced by the French
intellectual Simone de Beauvoir, who argues that women have been urged to accept the roles
placed upon them in a society that views women as inferior. Rich suggests that, far from being
natural, heterosexuality is imposed on women and must be a system of power that encourages
false binary thinking— heterosexual/homosexual, man/ woman—in which “heterosexual” and
“man” is privileged over “homosexual” and “woman.” Compulsory heterosexuality, she says,
presents “scripts” to us that are templates for how we conduct relationships and “perform” our
gender. We are, for example, encouraged to think of men as being sexually active and women as
sexually passive, even though there are no studies to prove this.

Women are therefore expected, according to Rich, to behave in restrictive ways, as passive and
dependent on men; behavior that does not conform to these expectations is considered deviant
and dangerous. Sexually active women, for instance, are labeled as abnormal or called
promiscuous. Patriarchy (a power system that assumes male superiority) is a useful conceptual

23
tool for Rich in explaining women’s oppression over time; she suggests that it is necessary to
think about male power over women as the key to understanding women’s subordinate position.

The power of ideology

Rich discusses many of the ways in which the ideology of compulsory heterosexuality “forces”
women into sexual relationships with men. The unequal positions of men and women in the labor
market, for instance, can result in women being financially dependent on men. And the pervasive
myth that women are at risk of male violence in public spaces, and should restrict their movements
and seek male protection, is another example of how women are coerced into heterosexual
relationships. Women are encouraged to view themselves as sexual prey, and men as “natural”
sexual predators (reinforced by beliefs such as stranger danger), so entering heterosexual
relationships offers women a (false) sense of security.

Despite increasing numbers of people opting to delay marriage, many young women still perceive
it as a normal and inevitable part of their lives: this expectation is an important aspect of Rich’s
argument about the compulsory nature of heterosexuality. Once again, ideology helps shore up
heterosexuality through the promotion of romantic narratives in films such as Titanic and fairy
tales like Cinderella.

So prevalent is the idea of heterosexuality in society that people are assumed to be heterosexual
unless they declare otherwise. The irony then is that when lesbians or gay men “come out” they
are viewed as being more sexual than those who do not have to. Heterosexuality therefore carries
with it an insidious assurance of normality.

Oppressive tactics
Karl Marx argued that capitalism
is, in part, maintained through
violent actions such as conquest
and enslavement.
Heterosexuality, Rich contends,
can be viewed in a similar way.
Under conditions of compulsory
heterosexuality, men and
women no more choose to be
heterosexual or homosexual
than a worker chooses wage
labor. Alongside the symbolic
violence of ideology, physical
violence is often used to control
the behaviors of women. Acts
such as female genital mutilation
and punishment for female
adultery or lesbianism deny
women sexuality. Child and
arranged marriage,
pornographic images that depict
women enjoying sexual violence
and humiliation, child sexual
abuse, and incest— all force male sexuality on women. Rape is another violent tactic; marital
rape was not recognized in many Western nations until the 1990s—a reflection of the belief that
a woman must be sexually submissive to her husband. And Rich says that “using women as

24
objects in male transactions” is another oppressive tactic of compulsory heterosexuality— as
revealed, for instance, in the trafficking of women for sexual exploitation and the use of prostitutes
for sexual pleasure.

The view, persistent in some cultures, that it is preferable to send the son to school because sons
will stay in the family, whereas girls leave to join the husband’s family after marriage, means that
across the globe only 30 percent of girls get a secondary-school education. A poor education will
inevitably mean poor employment prospects. Another method whereby male power is maintained
is through the barring of women from exclusive clubs, and from leisure pursuits such as golf where
important business deals might be made.

It is in these many ways that heterosexuality can be understood as an institution that operates
through rigid social constructions of gender and sexuality. Considerable social control, including
violence, is used to enforce these ideas of gender. The effect is to keep women inside
heterosexuality and to ensure that they remain subordinate within it. A direct consequence of
heterosexuality, for Rich, is the oppression of women.

Erasure and denial of lesbianism in history and culture is one of the ways in which heterosexuality
is maintained. Rich contends that society is male identified, meaning it is a place where men and
their needs are placed above women’s needs. Women feel the need to look beautiful for men and
place more value on romantic relationships with men than on their friendships with women. Rich
calls upon women to try and reshape their lives around other women—in other words, to be
woman-identified. This does not mean that she urges all women to give up men and sleep with
women but, rather, she wants all women to experience that which has arguably only been
available to lesbian communities—namely, to love other women.

The lesbian continuum

Rich challenges preconceptions about what a lesbian is—it is not someone who hates men or
sleeps with women, but simply a woman who loves women. This idea is known as “political
lesbianism”: Rich and others saw it as a form of resistance to patriarchy rather than simply a
sexual preference.

Lesbianism can, then, be placed on a continuum, which includes

those who are sexually attracted to women and those who may be
heterosexual but are politically connected to other women. This
does not mean there are degrees of lesbian experience, with those
who are “less” lesbian being more socially acceptable. Instead,
Rich is suggesting that there have always been women who have
resisted the compulsory way of life and existed in and out of the
continuum for hundreds of years—from the many women in
Europe, in the 16th and 17th centuries, who were hanged or
burned as witches, often for living outside of patriarchy, to the late
19th-century “Wigan Pit Brow Lasses,” colliery workers who
caused scandal in Britain by insisting on wearing trousers.

Rich’s idea of a lesbian continuum has caused considerable debate, partly because it is
desexualizing lesbianism and allows feminists to claim to be part of the continuum without
examining their heterosexuality.

25
References:
Karen Seccombe (2014). Families and their Social Worlds
Sam Atkinson (2015). The Sociology Book: Big Ideas Explained
.
Optional readings:
ANN OAKLEY (1972). Sex, Gender and Society
James Henslin (1993). Sociology: A Down to Earth Approach
Judith Stacey and Timothy J. Biblarz (2001). (How) Does the Sexual Orientation of Parents
Matter?
Margaret Mead (1935). Sex and Temperament in Three Primitive Societies.

Assessment A:
Please write a short essay (500 words) in response to this chapter’s critical thinking questions
activity on “Getting to Know Yourself.

Assessment B:
Write a 700 – 1000-word essay on the importance of studying gender and sex? What is your
stand on the recent term Filipinx used by Filipino members of the LGBTQ community living in the
United States and other Western nations? What is the relevance of the ongoing debate about the
controversial term?

26
Lesson 3 Social Stratification, Social Class, and Families
Introduction:

How does your social class position shape your family and intimate relationships? This chapter
introduces the concepts of social stratification and social class and explores the many ways that
class is interwoven with families. How would your life be different if you had been born among the
richest of families or among the poorest? (Seccombe 2014)

Learning Objectives:
By the end of this unit students must be able to:
1. How social class influences your family relationships.
2. The difference between caste and social class, and a theoretical understanding of these
systems.
3. Differing perspectives on the causes of poverty.
4. The consequences of poverty for members of families

Sections of the Unit:

1. Concepts on Family and Stratification
2. THE MARRIAGE CONTRACT IS A WORK CONTRACT- Cristene Delphy

To read:

Concepts on Family and Stratification

Source: Karen Seccombe (2014). Families and their Social Worlds pp.128-131;133;139-143, 145-
150.

It is really an accident of birth that determines many things about a person’s life. Ascribed statuses
that a person is born with, such as his or her sex, race, ethnic background, and social class, are
important because they lay the groundwork for a range of opportunities, privileges, and
constraints. This chapter introduces the concepts of social stratification and social class. It
explores how, like gender, one’s social class position is interwoven with families and touches
virtually all aspects of our lives. How would your values, opportunities, and family life be different
if you had been born among the richest of families? Conversely, what if you were born among the
poorest—for example, to a single woman on welfare? Although the effects of social class on family
structure and family dynamics are discussed in depth throughout the remainder of this book, it is
important here to introduce these signature concepts and the ways in which they influence our
most intimate relationships.

Social Class and Family Relationships

While social class is less visible than sex, race, or ethnicity, we are all probably aware, at least
vaguely, that social class can have a big effect on our lives. We are bombarded by pictures of the
rich and famous cavorting in Hollywood, and of the poor in the most desperate of situations, such
as Haitians after the earthquake of 2010. In the United States, social class is often downplayed
(Lareau and Conley 2008), but if you think long and hard, you know that where you come from
matters. Social class is not just about money; it encompasses an entire way of seeing and
experiencing the world (Eitzen and Smith 2009; Hurst 2010; Weininger and Lareau 2009). From

27
cradle to grave, social class standing has a significant impact on our lives. Briefly, class standing
influences:
Health status, health insurance, and access to health care. Persons in lower social classes have
higher infant mortality rates and lower life expectancy, rate their health as poorer, and suffer more
mental distress than do those who are more affluent (Cohen and Martinez 2009; Heyman et al.
2009). This is due to a variety of factors, including more dangerous working conditions, more
stressful living environments, poorer diet, and a lack of health insurance that limits access to
health care (Coleman-Jensen and Nord 2010; Seccombe 2011).

Gender expectations for boys and girls, and men and women within the family. More egalitarian
roles are likely to be found in the middle- and upper-middle-class groups, whereas both upper
and lower classes tend to emphasize and exaggerate the differences between males and
females. Parents in lower social classes tend to have a more traditional division of household
labor and socialize their children for more traditional family and work roles (Rubin 1994).

The values that parent socialize in their children. Working-class parents are more likely to value
conformity and obedience to authority in their children, whereas middle- and upper-middle-class
parents tend to value creativity and self-direction (Kohn 1977, 2006). Sociologist Melvin Kohn
(1977) suggests that these values reflect the kinds of jobs parents hold and assume that their
children will hold as well. Working-class jobs are those that tend to involve working with one’s
hands or machinery. They generally do not reward or expect creativity and self-direction; rather,
workers are expected to follow orders and not challenge authority. In contrast, middle- and upper-
class parents tend to work at jobs that focus on people or ideas (and assume that their children
will as well) and, thus, creativity, problem solving, and critical thinking are more highly valued.

How parents interact with their children. The home observation of the measurement of the
environment (HOME) is a widely used tool to measure maternal warmth and learning experiences
provided to the child and is associated with a variety of child outcomes. Poverty has a significant
negative effect on the quality and stimulation of the home environment, even after controlling for
the effects of other variables (Yeung et al. 2002). Impoverished parents are less nurturing, more
authoritarian, and use more inconsistent and harsh physical discipline as a family’s economic
situation worsens (McLoyd 1990). Parents with low and unstable incomes experience more
emotional distress and see themselves as less effective parents than do parents with higher
incomes. Moreover, although child abuse can occur in any type of household, poor children have
a higher probability of being abused, neglected, and injured, and are abused more severely than
are their more affluent peers.

The likelihood of attending and graduating from college. Persons growing up in the middle or
upper class are more likely to attend college than are individuals growing up in working-class or
poor families (National Center for Education Statistics 2010). Families earning $70,000 a year or
more are about three times as likely to see their child earn a bachelor’s degree as are families
who earn less than $25,000 per year. Although some of the difference is due simply to economics,
much of it is due to dissimilar values regarding college, poorer preparation because of
overcrowded and underfunded schools, and the different structural constraints associated with
being able to devote yourself full-time to such pursuits. Persons from the lower classes may know
few people, if any, who have gone to college, and therefore may not value a college education or
see that it is worth the time and expense.

Dating and premarital sexual expectations and behavior. On average, teenage girls and boys
from lower social classes begin dating at earlier ages than their middle- and upper middle-class
counterparts. Moreover, they are more likely to get pregnant outside of marriage (Strayhorn and

28
Strayhorn 2009). Once pregnant, they are more likely to have an abortion than are girls from
middle- and upper-income families (Jones et al. 2010).

The likelihood of marriage and age at first marriage. The relationship between class and the
likelihood of marriage is complex. Although most people do marry, upper middle-class women are
less likely to marry than other groups, and when they do marry, they do so at later ages. However,
a significant number of poor women also do not marry or marry late because of the limited
availability of men they consider to be “good prospects” (Edin and Kefalas 2005). Poor women
value marriage and have a desire to marry, but they have low marriage rates because the men
they are likely to encounter are also poor and often do not have steady jobs.

Income and how money is spent in the family. Consumption patterns vary by social class (Lino
2010). Poor and working-class families spend virtually all of their money on food, shelter, and
basic necessities. Most of their income is spent trying to make ends meet; therefore, they have
little disposable income (Hays 2003). Even holidays such as birthdays or Christmas can strain
the family budget. Families in middle and upper classes have more disposable income for family
outings, vacations, and holiday spending. These types of events can add spontaneity and fun to
an otherwise repetitive daily routine (Seccombe 2011).

Hobbies and pastimes within families. How do you spend your free time—bowling or playing golf?
Should we have Sunday dinner at my brother’s house or at a restaurant? Social class influences
the way in which we view leisure, the time and opportunities we have to participate in leisure
activities, and with whom we share time. Working-class and poor families often spend more time
together than do families in higher social classes and rely on each other for material and social
support (Rubin 1994; Seccombe 2011).

The types of stresses experienced, and coping mechanisms employed. Families in lower social
classes face additional economic and social stresses because their jobs are less stable, offer less
pay, and fewer benefits. Finances and budgeting are a common family stressor. Poor families
worry about the most basic of needs, including an inadequate food supply (Siefert et al. 2004).
Families in higher social classes have a wider range of coping strategies available to them such
as travel, shopping, or working off stress physically in athletic clubs, whereas lower-income
individuals may resort to coping mechanisms that provide a more immediate gratification, such
as smoking or overeating.

It is important to recognize that social class interacts with other statuses and dimensions of
stratification. A person is not simply rich, poor, or somewhere in the middle. Social class interacts
with sex, and with race and ethnic background to shape one’s experience. A person is not simply
working class, but a working-class Hispanic woman; a Chinese American upper-class man; a
Black middle-class boy; or a poor white girl.

What Is Social Stratification?

Social class differences can be perplexing because most Americans believe that the United
States provides nearly equal opportunities for everyone. Nonetheless, U.S. society is highly
stratified and is becoming more so (Hurst 2010). Some people earn extremely high wages or have
amassed great wealth, whereas other families are struggling to meet their basic needs for food,
shelter, and clothing. Americans like to think of their society as a meritocracy, where financial and
social rewards are based on their abilities, education, and skill sets, but the United States is
turning its back on these ideals. For example, 30 years ago the average real annual compensation
of the top 100 chief executives was $1.3 million dollars: 39 times the pay of the average worker.

29
Today, it is $37.5 million, over 1,000 times the pay of the average worker (Economist. com 2004).
Are top executives really a thousand times more able, more educated, and more skillful than the
people they work with? Money is one dimension of inequality, but so are power and occupational
prestige. Social stratification refers to the hierarchical ranking of people within society based on
coveted resources. Some people have more or less of these resources than do others. Those
with resources can pass them on to members of their family.

Caste and Class Systems in a Comparative Perspective

There are two distinct types of stratification systems found throughout the world. In a caste
system, social stratification is based on ascribed characteristics that one is born with, such as
race, ethnicity, or family lineage. There is little or no opportunity for social mobility or movement
in the stratification system based on individual effort or achievement. For example, in traditional
rural Indian villages, caste members generally stay with their “own kind”; they work, marry, and
socialize only with other members of their caste. Caste membership is handed down from parent
to child, regardless of the child’s talent, skill, beauty, or education.

Social class, in contrast, is a system of social stratification that is based on ascribed statuses from
both birth and individual achievement. Social class segments the population into groups that
broadly share similar types of resources, similar lifestyles, similar values, and a generally shared
perception of their collective condition. Social class is an obscure concept because there is no
universally agreed-upon division, and we cannot immediately identify which people belong to
which class.
Boundaries are
theoretically
open so that
people who gain
schooling, skills,
or income may
experience a
change in their
social class
position.
Nonetheless,
we know that
social classes
exist in a
hierarchy and
are generally
based on some
combination of
income, wealth,
occupational
prestige, and
educational
level, although
some schools of
thought may
emphasize one
resource over
another.

30
Families in Poverty
Dee is a single mother who left an abusive marriage to begin anew with her 11-year-old daughter.
She works the evening shift to support the two of them, while her daughter stays home alone.
Kate is a middle-class woman who left her husband after his infidelity. She now lives in a small,
seedy apartment, trying to support herself and her two young children on a low-paying job without
child support. Robert and Maria are a happily married couple who face a crisis because Robert’s
serious illness caused him to lose his job, cutting off the primary source of support for them and
their four children. What do these families have in common? They are all poor (Seccombe 2007).

Yet, when most people conjure up a picture of a poor person, they visualize someone who is on
the fringes of society: inner-city unemployed Black men, women on welfare raising numerous
children, or mentally ill homeless persons begging for change on the street. If these are the
images that come to your mind, you are in for an awakening. Although inner-city Black men,
women on welfare, the homeless, and other stereotypically vulnerable groups comprise a portion
of those in poverty, a surprising finding is that most Americans will experience poverty and will
turn to public
assistance at
some point during
their lives. As
sociologist Mark
Rank reveals,
“rather than
poverty and
welfare use being
an issue of them, it
is more of an issue
of us” (Rank
2003). Along with
colleague Tom
Hirschl, Rank used
national
longitudinal data to
estimate the
percentage of the
American
population that will
experience
poverty at some
point during
adulthood and the
percentage that
will use a safety
net program, such
as food stamps or
cash welfare. They
used an approach
frequently used by
health researchers
who want to
assess the risk of a
particular disease

31
such as breast cancer. They found that by the time Americans have reached age 75, 59 percent
would have spent at least a year below the poverty line during their adulthood (Rank 2003).
Moreover, approximately two-thirds will have received public assistance as adults for at least one
year (Rank 2003). If poverty spells are this common, then why do we have so little understanding
of poverty, its causes, and its consequences? Part of the reason is that poverty is generally
examined by using cross-sectional data, which look at only one moment in time rather than looking
at trends over time.

Causes of Poverty.
Individualism
Tales of Horatio Alger–types abound—the “rags-to-riches” stories— with the moral that anyone
can pull themselves up by their bootstraps with hard work, sweat, and motivation. The poor, and
particularly welfare recipients, are blatant examples of those who have failed to “make it.” An
individualistic perspective argues that poverty is primarily a result of personal failings, and the
poor generally have only themselves to blame for their predicament. This perspective suggests
that the United States is still a land of meritocracy, and that hard work will reap financial and social
reward.

Proponents of individualism argue that because everyone theoretically has an equal chance to
succeed, those who fail to make it have largely themselves to blame. The popular rags-to-riches
stories promote the idea that virtually anyone can pull themselves up by their bootstraps with hard
work and motivation. There is great ambivalence toward the poor (Browning 2008; Hancock
2004). Almost two-thirds of Americans believe that we can create our own fate through our own
efforts (National Opinion Research Center 2009). A study of middle-class Americans across the
country found that 50 percent claimed that the biggest cause of poverty is that people are not
doing enough to help themselves (NPR Online 2001). Many poor persons are assumed to be
lazy, unmotivated, and living off the public dole. Although most Americans rate the economy as
the most important issue facing Americans today (CBS News/New York Times Poll 2009), they
are relatively unconcerned about poverty and do not see it as bad for the country (60 percent). In
fact, in a 2001 poll, one in five Americans thought that there were too few rich people (probably
because they had not yet become rich) (Zimmerman 2001).

Social Structuralism
In contrast to individualism, a social structural approach assumes that poverty is a result of
economic or social imbalances within the social structure that serve to restrict opportunities for
some people (Swedberg 2007). Drawing from a conflict theoretical perspective, the focus is on
inequalities that are rooted in the social structure. For example, the U.S. economy has been
changing over the last several decades, resulting in an erosion in the purchasing power of the
minimum wage, a growth in low-paying service jobs, and job relocation from inner cities to the
suburbs (Newman 2008; Wilson 1996). As shown in the opening vignette, Barbara Ehrenreich
found that it is virtually impossible to live on a minimum or near-minimum wage, let alone support
a family. Yet more than two million workers do just that, half of whom are over 25 years of age
(Bureau of Labor Statistics 2009b). Although low wages may be enough to support a single
person, a family trying to make ends meet would be living near or below the poverty threshold.
Moreover, low-wage jobs often fail to provide families with health insurance.

Culture of Poverty
The culture of poverty perspective blends features of the previous two approaches and suggests
that the poor have developed a subcultural set of values, traits, and expectations as a direct result
of the structural constraints associated with living in isolated pockets of poverty. The subculture

32
is assumed to foster a weak family structure, present-time orientation, and people display a
helplessness and resignation toward work (Burton 1992). The subculture is at odds with the
dominant middle-class culture and downplays the importance of hard work, self-discipline, and
deferring gratification. Concern is voiced about the transmission of these values from parents to
their children. However, most poor adults have grown up in nonpoor, “pro-social” households
(Ludwig and Mayer 2006). Oscar Lewis (1966) first introduced this perspective as he studied poor
barrios in Latin American communities. His work has sometimes been criticized as “blaming the
victim,” in which deviant values are the causes of poverty itself. Others have suggested that his
work has been misinterpreted and that Lewis’s ideas are firmly grounded in a Marxist critique of
capitalism. A subculture is a positive adaptation constructed to ease the pain associated with
being part of a reserve and discarded labor force, “a process by which the poor pragmatically
winnow what works from what does not and pass it on to their children” (Harvey and Reed 1996).

Fatalism
Finally, some people believe that poverty is attributable to quirks, chance, luck, inevitable human
nature, illness, low intelligence, or other forces over which people have little control, a theoretical
perspective referred to here as fatalism. Fate does not necessarily imply destiny, but rather a form
of victimization that is rooted in complex events beyond one’s immediate control. Poverty is not
anyone’s fault per se, but rather is a potential consequence of unplanned, random, or natural
human events or chain of events. For example, Herrnstein and Murray (1994) suggest that low
intelligence is a primary cause of poverty. Arguing that intelligence is largely genetic, they claim
that poor people with low intelligence quotients (IQs) give birth to another cohort with low IQs,
and therefore their children are likely to remain impoverished. Seccombe and Hoffman (2007)
found in their detailed in-person interviews that health problems were a primary reason why
families leaving welfare for work remained poor.

References:
Karen Seccombe (2014). Families and their Social Worlds

Additional readings:
Karen Seccombe (2000). Families in Poverty in the 1990s: Trends, Causes, Consequences, and
Lessons Learned
Sam Atkinson (2015). The Sociology Book: Big Ideas Explained. THE MARRIAGE CONTRACT
IS A WORK CONTRACT- Cristene Delphy

Assessment C:
Write a 700-word essay explaining the connection between family characteristics and social
experiences. Give examples.

33
Lesson 4 Courtship, Intimacy and Partnering
Introduction:
How do people become life partners? This seems like such a personal question that no amount
of social research could answer it. However, personal choices are patterned and are surprisingly
shaped by many intriguing social, cultural, and historical forces. This chapter explores how these
forces shape courtship patterns, sexuality, and the mate selection process.

Learning Objectives:
By the end of this unit students must be able to:
1. What love has to do with courtship and mate selection?
2. Gender difference in the emotion of loving
3. General cultural principles guiding sexuality and intimacy.
4. Sexual orientation and its causes

Sections of the Unit:

1. Concepts on Courtship, Intimacy and Partnering
2. WHEN LOVE FINALLY WINS IT HAS TO FACE ALL KINDS OF DEFEAT. Ulrich Beck
and Elisabeth Beck- Gernsheim

To read:
Concepts on Courtship, Intimacy and Partnering
Source: Karen Seccombe (2014). Families and their Social Worlds pp. 197-212

Courtship and Mate Selection

A lot is at stake when two people marry. They make a lifelong commitment to one another and
agree to conduct themselves in a manner befitting a married couple in that culture. More is at
stake in marriage than the wishes of two individuals. Families, communities, and the state have
an interest in marriage as well because marriage serves political, social, and economic functions.
Marriage is a social institution as well as a personal relationship. Marriage is a way to consolidate
wealth, transfer property, construct alliances, and organize the division of labor. These important
functions are not simply left to individuals to negotiate.

What’s Love Got to Do with It?

Since families, communities, and the state all have an interest in marriage, they also have a hand
in controlling the mate selection process. Sociologist William J. Goode suggests that this is done
by controlling or channeling love, which he defines as a strong emotional attachment with at least
the components of sex, desire, and tenderness (Goode 1959). Goode argues that all societies try
to control or channel love
to some degree because
as a basis for marriage,
love could be disruptive
to families, communities,
and to the state if not
controlled. The
connection between love
and marriage that is

34
 found in many
countries is a relatively
recent phenomenon,
as illustrated in the
following box, “Using
the Sociological
Imagination: The
Historical Relationship
between Love and
Marriage”—and the
connection is not
without risks,
according to historian
Stephanie Coontz
(2004).

What are the various

ways that families,
communities, and the
state try to control
love?

1. Child
marriage. One
common method of
controlling love is to
have the child married
or betrothed prior to
puberty before feelings
of love for another person can even develop. A child has no social or financial resources
to oppose such a marriage.
2. Kinship rules. Some cultures clearly define the pool of eligible future spouses, such as a
cousin. The major decision then is primarily when, rather than with whom, the marriage is
to occur.
3. Isolation of young people. Socially segregating young people from one another can be a
very effective means of controlling love. The goal is to eliminate opportunities for formal
or informal interaction.
4. Close supervision. Short of isolation, some cultures watch their young people, especially
young women, very carefully. A high value is placed on female chastity, and therefore,
they are highly supervised whenever they are in the company of men.
5. Formally free. Love is encouraged and it is an expected element of mate selection.
However, love remains controlled and channeled by the social contacts available to young
people. Because people fall in love with those with whom they associate, love can be
controlled by managing the social environment such as sending a child to particular
schools, living in a certain neighborhood, involving the family in church or other civic
associations, and channeling children toward a specific set of peers.

The Origins of Dating

As you have learned, the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries brought industrialization,
urbanization, and a higher standard of living and disposable income for many people. This led to

35
new freedoms stemming from a prolonged period of adolescence, greater interaction between
males and females in schools, and the availability of the private automobile. These changes
created a social situation known as dating. The movement away from parental control and
supervision brought a change of power and roles in the couple relationship. Dating was now done
away from home and away from parents and family members. The young couple usually went
somewhere: to a dance, a party, or dinner, or later, to a movie theater. Young men were expected
to initiate and pay for dates. Men decided where the couple would go, they would decide for the
needed transportation, and they made the decision about what the couple would do on the date.
Women largely waited to be chosen yet frowned on last-minute invitations (saying yes indicated
that no one else had chosen them). Women had little say-so in where the couple would go or
what they would do. Their only realm of control was related to the degree of intimacy and sexuality
within the date.

The Changing Nature of Courtship

Margaret Mead may be pleased that today partner selection has evolved into something much
less formal. Groups of young men and women often spend time together socializing, referring to
the process as “getting together” or “hanging out” rather than “dating.” In a group situation, young
people feel more relaxed and informal. Norms have also changed so that women feel more
comfortable initiating getting together. The age at first marriage has increased considerably for
both men and women, which eases some pressure among young people.

Where Do We Meet?
As you may guess, most people meet
each other at work, at school, or through
friends or family, as shown in Table 2. A
study of 3,000 Internet users found that,
among people who are married or in
committed relationships, over 38
percent met at work or school, and 34
percent met through family or friends.
Only 3 percent met through the Internet
(Madden and Lenhart 2006). In other
words, most people who are married or
in long-term relationships first met their
partners the old-fashioned way—through face-to-face contact. However, even if only 3 percent of
married or committed persons have met their partner on the Internet, online dating services and
websites have become an increasingly popular way to look for romantic partners. There are
approximately 1,400 online dating sites, the largest being eHarmony with over 20 million users
and Match.com with 15 million users (Scott 2009). Nearly half of adults (49 percent) know at least
one person who has dated someone they met online, according to a nationwide study conducted
in July 2009 (Greenberg 2009). This represents a significant increase from 2006 when only about
a third said that that they knew someone who participated in online dating (Madden and Lenhart
2006). Among those who have tried online dating, almost two-thirds believe it is a good venue for
finding a mate (Madden and Lenhart 2006).

36
Who participates?
As shown in Table 3, they are somewhat more likely to
be male, a racial or ethnic minority, urban, young, and
to have lower levels of income and education, although
these factors may be related to the fact that a high
proportion of Internet daters are under age 30
(Madden and Lenhart 2006). Another study of over
3,300 people ranging in age from 19–89 found that
those who use online Internet dating are more
sociable, despite stereotypes to the contrary (Kim et
al. 2009). What is the allure of online Internet dating?
Many Internet users agree it helps people find a better
match because you can get to know a larger number
of people. However, online daters themselves are split
as to whether it is the easiest and most efficient
method of dating. Most see it as potentially dangerous
and are somewhat wary of the risks, including other
people misrepresenting themselves (say, by claiming
they are single when they are really married) or trying
to obtain personal information. Nonetheless, equal
numbers of online daters report positive and negative experiences (Madden and Lenhart 2006).

Love
When we think about love, we usually see it as a private, personal relationship—full of warmth,
intimacy, and passion. We care deeply about someone, and he or she in turn cares deeply about
us. We feel love on this level, and we like it. However, our feelings do not exist in a vacuum. The
way we experience love is also shaped by the social context in which we live. First, love is related
to culture. In the United States, for example, the focus is on romantic love. In other cultures, this
type of passion is thought to be foolish. Second, people have been socialized to see and
experience love differently depending on their sex, social class, and race and ethnicity. The
meanings attached to love and how we express it differ. For example, women often express their
love with words, whereas men may express their love more with actions. Third, love is also related
to the relationship between the people who love, including parents and children, friends, and
romantic partners. These relationships are different from one another, but all contain an emotion
that we call “love.”

Love is a critical foundation for developing intimate relationships in the United States. How can a
“feeling” be the subject of so many rules, regulations, and norms? What power does this emotion
hold that parents, religions, or cultures will try to control and channel it?

Everyone wants to experience love. We want to receive love (from parents, friends, our children,
and our partners) and we want to love others. In the United States today, love is a primary basis
for marriage—but exactly what is love? Can we find a useful definition that would include the love
between a mother and child, as well as the love shared by married or cohabiting partners? The
dictionary defines love as: (1) a strong affection for one another arising out of kinship or personal
ties; (2) attraction based on sexual desire; or (3) affection based on admiration, benevolence, or
common interests (Merriam-Webster Online 2010). How does this differ from Goode’s definition
provided earlier?

Many sociologists, social psychologists, and anthropologists have studied attraction and love,
attempting to describe and explain this deeply profound feeling. Anthropologist Helen Fisher

37
studies the brain chemistry of people in love and argues that much of our romantic behavior is
hardwired. Using a functional magnetic resonance imaging machine on her subjects, she
suggests that our brains create dramatic surges of energy and chemicals including
norepinephrine, dopamine, and seratonin that fuel such feelings as passion, obsessiveness, joy,
and jealousy (Fisher 2004). Using an evolutionary perspective, Fisher views love as a drive so
powerful that it can override other drives, such as hunger and thirst (Fisher 2004, 2010; Fisher
and Thomson 2007).
Other researchers take a more process-oriented approach and look at the stages that love may
pass through to fully develop (Kerchoff and Davis 1962; Reiss 1960), or look at the different
dimensions of love and try to categorize different styles of loving (Lee 1973, 1974, 1988;
Sternberg 1986). For example, Canadian sociologist John Lee (1973, 1974, 1988) reviewed
thousands of works of fiction and nonfiction across the centuries dealing with love and interviewed
young heterosexual men and women living in Canada and Great Britain. From his review, he
developed a six-category classification scheme on various styles of love. These styles are distinct
from one another, yet relationships can also be characterized by having more than one style.
1. Eros. Eros is a love that is passionate, all-consuming, and highly sexual. This is the type
of love most often presented in movies, television, and popular culture.
2. Storge. Storge (pronounced STOR-gay) represents a love that develops slowly with the
passage of time. A couple may begin as friends, and over time the relationship moves
forward in its degree of commitment and intimacy. It is a comfortable love, with mutual
trust, compatibility, and respect.
3. Pragma. Pragma is a rational, down-to-earth (pragmatic) style of love based on practical
considerations.
4. Ludus. Ludus is a playful, carefree type of love. Ludus lovers are not possessive, and are
more about fun and games than about commitment.
5. Agape. Agape (pronounced ah-GAH-pay) is self-sacrificing, altruistic, kind, and patient.
Partners are completely selfless, giving without any thought of getting something in return.
6. Mania. Manic relationships are characterized by possessiveness, dependency, and
jealousy. Partners are very demanding, have a high level of anxiety about their partner,
and always obsess over the other’s whereabouts, as shown in the box on the next page,
“Families as Lived Experience: ‘Living in Mania’.”

38
Sex Differences in Loving
It may come as no surprise to you to read that men and women, on average, experience love
differently. Most people believe that women are more interested in love than are men. A cursory
look at women’s magazines at the supermarket checkout stand will confirm this:

“How to Make Him Fall Crazy in Love”

“The Sex Tips That Will Make Him Fall Head Over Heels.”
“Don’t Take No for an Answer: How to Land Your Man.”
“Five New Recipes That He Is Guaranteed to Love.”
“Where to Meet the Man of Your Dreams? We’ll Tell You”
“Stand by Your Man Twenty-First-Century Style.”

As you have learned, in the nineteenth century, love became more “feminized” and was
associated with the caregiving that women do in the home; it became a private feeling, separated
from the outside world of work or politics (Cancian 1987). Hence, it was often viewed as the
domain of women.

However, surveys show that men in fact are more likely than women to be in or looking for
committed relationships (Madden and Lenhart 2006; Madden and Rainie 2006), and they report
falling in love sooner and with more people than do women (Covel 2003; Saad 2004). Men are
also more preoccupied with love and relationships.

If men fall in love more quickly than do women and are more focused on love, why does cultural
rhetoric claim the opposite is true—that women are the ones obsessed with love? There may be
several reasons for this myth. In reviewing the different loving styles, one study found that, in
general, men were more ludic (carefree), whereas women tended to lean towards storge
(comfortable and compatible) and pragma (rational) (Hendrick and Hendrick 1992). Not
surprisingly then, some women believe that men are “afraid of commitment” or “commitment
phobic” (Gerson 2009; Whitehead and Popenoe 2002).

Another reason we assume that women are more loving has to do with the different ways that
men and women express love and our belief that women’s expressions are somehow better. This
is referred to as the feminization of love (Cancian 1987). The problem is not that men don’t
express love—they do, but they often don’t get credit for it because we ignore or minimize
masculine-type expressions. Thus, the man who is a good provider, who takes his daughter to
soccer, who folds the laundry may be showing as much love as the woman who says “I love you”
regularly. He may think that “actions speak louder than words”, but his partner is waiting for the
words and miscommunication can result.

Men and women fall in love for many of the same reasons—similar values, emotional maturity,
dependability—but men are more likely than women to fall in love for reasons related to physical
attractiveness. Women are somewhat more cautious about love, taking a bit longer and using a
wider variety of factors in deciding whether they are in love. These factors include physical
attractiveness and similarity in values and other traits, but also ambition, industriousness, and
financial prospects (Eastwick and Finkel 2008).

Reasons for falling in love appear to be associated with the ways that sex and gender are defined
in our society. For most of history women have been financially dependent on men in marriage,
therefore, it made good sense to closely examine a man’s economic prospects before choosing
a mate. But as the context changes, so too do the reasons for choosing a mate. Since the 1970s,
more married women are working outside the home for pay and their financial dependence on

39
men in marriage has declined (U.S. Census Bureau 2010c). Therefore, with less need for a
husband as a provider, women focus on other qualities for their intimate relationships. As couples
fall in love, they share increasing intimacy. Sexuality may be one way of expressing this intimacy.

Sexuality

Sexuality is a universal human experience. Even young children are keenly interested in their
genitals and in feelings of arousal (Thigpen 2009). Among adults, sexuality is used as an
expression of many different, even competing emotions. It can express love and tenderness or
exploitation and revenge. Despite the universal nature of this biological phenomenon, sexual
attitudes and behaviors vary remarkably by sex, across subpopulations in the United States, and
across cultures throughout the world (Stombler et al. 2010). How can something as personal and
private (as well as so biologically driven) as sexuality be rooted in social and cultural norms?
Anderson and Taylor (2008) remind us of the following principles:

1. Sexual attitudes and behaviors are substantially different across cultures. For
example, in many cultures it is expected that a woman will be a virgin on the
wedding day. A husband, in-laws, or other kin may demand proof that this is
indeed the case; they may require the woman to undergo a physical
examination by a doctor who will verify her virginity, they may oversee a
surgical procedure to remove the stitching that has closed off her vagina, or
they may want a bloody sheet as evidence that the hymen was ruptured on the
wedding night (although not all women bleed when their hymen is ruptured).
2. Sexual attitudes and behaviors change over time. We may have overestimated
the “prim and proper” stereotype of the colonial and Victorian eras, because
birth records indicate many women and men were indeed sexually active prior
to marriage. However, sexuality was valued primarily in the confines of
marriage and most religious and medical authorities generally did not believe
that women experienced true sexual desires. Today things have changed a
great deal. Sex outside of marriage is no longer taboo under many
circumstances, and women are generally considered to be full sexual beings.
3. Social institutions channel and direct sexuality. Every culture regulates sexual
behavior. Cultural norms make it clear who can have a sexual relationship with
whom and under what circumstances. However, even within a culture, social
institutions channel and direct sexual behavior. Institutions such as the family,
religion, and government dictate with whom we can have sex and under what
circumstances. For example, in U.S. culture these social institutions channel
adults away from sex with children or with animals. They even influence
consenting adults who exchange sex for money or have a sexual relationship
with someone other than their spouse.

Sexual Orientation
Another aspect of who we are concerns our sexual orientation, which refers to an enduring pattern
of romantic, emotional, and sexual partners we choose (American Psychological Association
2009). Research now strongly suggests that sexual orientation is the result of a complex set of
factors that may have a strong root in biology. A heterosexual orientation refers to an attraction
and preference for sexual and romantic relationships with members of the other sex (e.g., a man
and a woman), and a homosexual orientation refers to a preference for same sex sexual and
romantic relationships. The term gay usually refers to homosexual men, whereas lesbian refers
to homosexual women. Bisexual refers to an orientation in which a person is attracted to both
males and females and engages in both heterosexual and homosexual relationships. Early

40
researcher Alfred Kinsey was instrumental in showing sexual orientation as a continuum rather
than as a pair of opposites (Kinsey et al. 1953). He found that around one-quarter to one-third of
survey respondents reportedly had at least some homosexual experience, although most still
thought of themselves as heterosexual. He estimated that at least 3 percent of females were
almost or exclusively homosexual as were at least 8 percent of males (Kinsey et al. 1953).

Counting the number of persons who are gay, or lesbian is challenging. One reason is because
having a gay or lesbian identity can be a very different thing from having a gay or lesbian
experience (Ward 2010). Many people have a gay or lesbian experience, or many experiences,
yet still think of themselves as heterosexual (Vrangalova and Savin-Williams, 2010). When
researchers asked in one survey, “Do you think of yourself as heterosexual, homosexual,
bisexual, or something else?” about 3 percent of men and slightly less than 2 percent of women
claimed either a homosexual or bisexual self-concept (Vrangalova and Savin-Williams 2010).
Other studies suggest the number is a bit higher. In a national survey that draws upon a large
representative sample of adults aged 18–45, 4.1 percent of respondents identified themselves as
gay, lesbian, or bisexual (Gates 2006). Yet the likelihood of having a same-sex sexual experience
may be two or three times higher (AVERT.ORG 2010b; Erens et al. 2003). Moreover, the number
of people with samesex interests (whether they have any experience) is even higher (Vrangalova
and Savin-Williams 2010). One study of young adults aged 19–26 found that 10 percent of men
and 25 percent of women reported having some homosexual experience, interest, or identity
(Pedersen and Kristiansen 2008). Thus, the number of persons who see themselves as
homosexual or bisexual is significantly smaller than the percentage of persons who have had, or
think about, a same-sex sexual experience.

What Causes Sexual Orientation?

How do we come to have a specific sexual orientation? There has been a longstanding debate
regarding choice versus biology, but scientists are concluding that a complex set of biological
factors (genetics and hormones), along with possible social factors shape who we are. In other
words, sexual orientation is not really a choice (American Psychological Association 2009). One
study examined different sets of siblings—identical twins, fraternal twins, and adopted siblings—
one of which was known to be gay or lesbian. The purpose of the study was to determine if a
homosexual orientation was more likely to occur in the other sibling in one type of sibling pair over
another. The researchers found that 52 percent of the male identical twins, and 48 percent of the
female identical twins (who share genetic material) were both homosexual. In contrast, in only 11
percent of the adopted siblings were both homosexual. The likelihood of fraternal twins (who
share only half of their genetic material) both being homosexual was between these two groups
(22 percent and 16 percent for fraternal male and female twins, respectively) (Bailey and Pillard
1991; Bailey et al. 1993). Other research also reinforces the conclusion that biology plays an
important role in sexual orientation. For example, a study published in the Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences found that gay men’s brains respond differently from those of
heterosexual males and are more like women’s brains when exposed to chemicals derived from
male and female sex hormones.

41
WHEN LOVE FINALLY WINS IT HAS TO FACE ALL KINDS OF DEFEAT. Ulrich Beck and
Elisabeth Beck- Gernsheim
Source: Sam Atkinson (2015). The Sociology Book: Big Ideas Explained pp.320-323.

Sustaining a happy, intimate relationship

can be a difficult and tiring business, yet
at the same time a compelling one. In the
Normal Chaos of Love (1995), German
husband-and-wife team Ulrich Beck and
Elisabeth Beck-Gernsheim try to explain
why this is so. They trace the
development of a new social order that
has transformed the ways in which we
conduct our personal lives, arguing that
one of the main features of this new order
is “a collision of interests between love,
family, and personal freedom.” The
traditional nuclear family— “built around
gender status”— is disintegrating “on the
issues of emancipation and equal rights.”
The fading away of traditional social
identities means that the antagonisms
between men and women over gender
roles emerge “in the very heart of the
private sphere,” with the result that more
couples are divorcing or separating, and different family forms are taking shape. All this is part of
“the quite normal chaos called love.

Individualized living
Following on from Beck’s earlier Risk Society (1986), which suggests that women are torn
between “liberation” and the continuance of traditional gender roles, the couple makes the case
that a new age of new risks and opportunities. The particular social and economic conditions of
global capitalism have led to a greater sense of individual identity; life is less predictable and
personal narratives have more of a sense of “do-it-yourself.”

The couple explains that “individualization” is the opposite principle to that used in Germany’s
Code of Civil Law in the late 19th-century, which established that “marriage is to be viewed [as] a
moral and legal order independent of the will of the spouse.” Individualization has facilitated new
forms of personal and social experimentation. The couple’s views echo those of Anthony Giddens
who, in The Transformation of Intimacy (1992), argues that in contemporary society we make our
identity rather than inherit it. Such a change has, he says, altered how we experience the family
and sexuality.

According to Giddens, in the past, when marriages were economic partnerships rather than love
matches, expectations were lower and disappointments fewer. Now that men and women are
increasingly compelled to reflexively create their identity through day-to-day decisions, Giddens
argues that they can choose partnerships on a basis of mutual understanding, leading to what he
describes as “pure relationships”—entered for their own sake and only continuing while both
parties are happy. Such partnerships, he says, bring greater equality between individuals and
challenge traditional gender roles.

42
Intimate but unequal
Although Beck and BeckGernsheim agree with Giddens that there is far more scope in the modern
world for men and women to shape their own lives and thus weaken gender stereotypes, they are
not wholly optimistic. Individuals are subject to forces beyond their control; life may be do-it-
yourself, but it is not do-as-you-like. Women and men, say the couple, are “compulsively on the
search for the right way to live”— trying to find a model of the family that will offer a “refuge in...
our affluent, impersonal society.”

Individualization may have released people from the gender roles prescribed by industrial society,
but the material needs of modern life are such that they are forced to build up a life of their own
that is adapted to the requirements of the labor market. The family model, Beck and Beck-
Gernsheim say, can mesh “one labor market biography with a lifelong housework biography, but
not two labor market biographies,” because their inner logic demands that “both partners have to
put themselves first.” Inequality will.

Fragile yet resilient

Beck and Beck-Gernsheim contend that, for the most part, intimate relationships cannot be
egalitarian; if equality is what is required, then relationships must be abandoned: “Love has
become inhospitable.”

Men and women face choices and constraints that differ significantly from those faced by their
counterparts in previous eras because of the contradiction between the demands of relationships
of any kind (family, marriage, motherhood, fatherhood) and the demands of the workplace for
mobile, flexible employees. These choices and constraints are responsible for pulling families
apart. Rather than being shaped by the rules, traditions, and rituals of previous eras, Beck and
Beck-Gernsheim argue that contemporary family units are experiencing a shift from a “community
of need,” where ties and obligations bound us in our intimate lives, to “elective affinities” that are
based on choice and personal inclination. Despite these difficult changes, the lure of the romantic
narrative remains strong. In an uncertain society, “stripped of its traditions and scarred by all kinds
of risk,” as Beck and Beck-Gernsheim put it, love “will become more important than ever and
equally impossible.”

Individuals now have a greater desire for emotionally fulfilling relationships, which has fueled
industries such as couples’ therapy and self-help publishing. But the ties that bind are fragile, and
people tend to move on if perfection is not achieved. As the couple say, even when individuals do
fall in love (“when love finally wins”), there are often more battles ahead—division, resentment,
and divorce, for example. Beck and Beck-Gernsheim suggest that nurturing personal
relationships and attending to the demands of a rapidly changing economic world require a
delicate balancing act; consequently, there is a rise in divorce. Yet so strong is the hope of
happiness that many divorcees marry again.

The importance of children

While Beck and Beck-Gernsheim argue that we have come too far to return to old ways, and
neither men nor women would wish to, the pressures of an individualized life mean that it can be
tinged with nostalgia and a longing for certainties that perhaps never existed—those “family
values” that governments often hark back to. The more fragile our relationships are, the more we
hanker after love.

One way in which this yearning for the past exerts itself is through the increased significance
placed upon children in contemporary society. While love between adults might be viewed as

43
temporary and vulnerable, love for children becomes more important, with both parents investing
emotionally in their children, who are providing unconditional love.

In this respect, Beck and BeckGernsheim suggest that men may be challenging women for the
role of emotional caretakers in the family. This can be seen in the increased numbers of fathers
who seek custody of their children post-divorce and the rise of groups advocating equal parenting
rights for fathers, such as Fathers4Justice.

The feminist academic Diana Leonard supports this view, saying that parents are “spoiling” their
children with gifts to keep them close to them. Connection with the child in this context becomes
ego-driven and intense, providing a feeling of permanence not found in the chaos of adult
relationships.

Inevitably, criticisms have been leveled at Beck and BeckGernsheim’s arguments. Several
theorists, including Swedish scholars Diana Mulinari and Kerstin Sandell, have objected to the
implication that women are responsible for the increased divorce rates. Nevertheless, The Normal
Chaos of Love transformed academic work on the family—from being an institution that responds
to social change, it was acknowledged as one that contributes to change.

References:
Karen Seccombe (2014). Families and their Social Worlds
Sam Atkinson (2015). The Sociology Book: Big Ideas Explained

Assessment D:
Write 1000-word essay discussing the following:
a) How are love and sexuality related?
b) Contemporary world and love

44
Lesson 5: Violence and Abuse
Introduction:
Many gender issues are also social problems. Violence is one of these. It is rooted in complex
and longstanding traditions promoting violence and male privilege. This chapter will discuss not
only physical and overt violence but also the mental and covert violence applied to vulnerable
sectors.

Learning Objectives:
By the end of this unit students must be able to:
1. Gender-based violence as a national human rights issue n
2. How violence is defined and measured
3. About dating violence, sexual aggression, and rape n Features of spouse/partner abuse,
including its frequency, the factors associated with abuse, and how victims cope.

Sections of the Unit:

1. Concepts on Family and Violence
2. HOUSEWORK IS DIRECTLY OPPOSED TO SELF-ACTUALIZATION. Anne Oakley
3. WESTERN MAN HAS BECOME A CONFESSING ANIMAL. Michel Foucault

To read:

Concepts on Family and Violence

Source: Karen Seccombe (2014). Families and their Social Worlds pp.337-349

Gender-Based Violence: An International Human Rights Issue

Violence is a widespread problem around the world, and women and girls are overwhelmingly its
victims. Because violence against women and girls is so common, it is often referred to as gender-
based violence, defined by the U.N. General Assembly as (Senanayake 1999): Any act of gender
violence that results in or is likely to result in physical, sexual, or psychological harm and suffering
to women, including threats of such acts, coercion, or arbitrary deprivations of liberty, whether
occurring in public or private life. This would include, among other things:

1. Intimate partner violence

2. Sexual abuse
3. Forced prostitution
4. Female genital mutilation
5. Rape
6. Honor killings n Selective malnourishing of female children

Gender-based violence is an epidemic and occurs in both developed and developing nations
(Kristof and WuDunn 2009; United Nations Population Fund 2007). It causes more death and
disability in women between the ages of 15 and 44 years than cancer, malaria, traffic accidents,
and war combined (Senanayake 1999). Human Rights Watch and the United Nations, both
international organizations dedicated to protecting the human rights of people around the world,
report that many countries have horrendous records on addressing violence against women and
girls. For example, in Uganda, many women are infected with HIV and will eventually die because
the government has failed in any meaningful way to condemn, criminalize, or prosecute violence

45
against women in the home. In Pakistan, officials at all levels of the criminal justice system do not
believe domestic violence is a matter for criminal courts. Moreover, women who have been
sexually assaulted and attempt to file charges face police harassment and disbelief and may
themselves face arrest and prosecution for engaging in extramarital sex. In South Africa, the
police and courts treat complaints by battered women as less serious than other assault
complaints, and there are persistent problems with the provision of medical expertise to courts
when women have been abused. In Jordan, “honor killings” occur when families deem women’s
behavior improper, and despite some legislative reforms, the perpetrators receive lenient
sentences from the courts. In Russia and Uzbekistan, police scoff at reports of domestic violence
and harass women who report such violence to stop them from filing complaints (Human Rights
Watch 2001, 2010a). Abuse of women and girls is often tolerated by the legal system.
Discriminatory attitudes of law enforcement officials, prosecutors, and judges, who often consider
domestic violence a private matter beyond the reach of the law, reinforce the batterer’s attempts
to demean and control his victim. Women’s low social status and a long-established pattern of
active suppression of women’s rights by successive governments have contributed to the
escalation in violence. Government often fails to acknowledge the scale and severity of the
problem, much less take action to end the violence against women. As a result of such dismissive
official attitudes, crimes of violence against women continue to be perpetrated with virtual
impunity.

Trafficking
Trafficking in persons (the illegal and highly profitable business of recruitment, transport, or sale
of human beings into all forms of forced labor and servitude) is a tragic human rights issue
affecting over 12 million people throughout the world (U.S. Department of State 2010b). Some
are forced into manual, military, or domestic labor (Bales and Soodalter 2009; Beah 2007), but
many become sexual slaves (Kristof and WuDunn 2009). The U.S. State Department estimates
that 1.4 million persons, mostly women and girls, are trafficked across international borders
annually for use as involuntary sex workers (U.S. Department of State 2010b). Many are coerced,
kidnapped, sold, deceived, or otherwise trafficked into sexual encounters, as illustrated in the
story of Maya and Parvati in the box on the next two pages, “Our Global Community: Maya and
Parvati: The End of a Dream.” Increasingly around the world, girls are sought out in the mistaken
belief that they are less likely to be HIV-positive. In reality, they are most vulnerable to HIV
infections because their bodies are physically unready for sex and may tear more easily.

Sexual trafficking results from a broad range of factors, including poverty, inequality, and
economic crises. Globalization has triggered an influx of money and goods, further aggravating
disparities between rich and poor, and promoting new levels of consumerism. Coupled with
patriarchal norms in which women and girls are disvalued, some families sell their daughters to
traffickers or put them in vulnerable positions as domestic workers in far-off urban locations.
Husbands, who have virtually complete control over their wives, may sell or “rent” them out for
money. Women and children who are trafficked into prostitution face many dangers (Farr 2005;
Territo and Kirkham 2010; U.S. Department of State 2009). In addition to injuries and disease
associated with multiple sexual encounters, they become dangerously attached to pimps and
brothel operators and become financially indebted to them. Moreover, they may become addicted
to drugs that have been given to subdue them. If women and children do manage to escape and
return to their families, they may be rejected because of the stigma associated with prostitution.

Intimate Partner Violence

Intimate partner violence refers to violence between those who are emotionally or sexually
intimate, such as spouses, partners, or those who are dating. The violence can encompass

46
physical, economic, sexual, or psychological abuse, and many abusive situations involve more
than one type.

The “dark side” of families, including spouse and partner abuse, was not widely discussed among
family scientists, or researched systematically until the 1970s. What we did know about abuse
before then was obtained from small, nonrepresentative samples in isolated case files of social
workers, psychologists, or the police. These data had the potential to be very biased because
only certain types of abuse, and certain types of abusers, come to the attention of professionals.

However, since the 1970s, with the help of the women’s movement and a spotlight on women’s
issues, family and social scientists have been trying to piece together a more accurate depiction
of spouse and partner. Researchers have been trying, with some success, to amass large and
representative samples to understand how often spouse and partner violence occurs, who is likely
to be a victim, and its causes and consequences.

Sociologist Murray Straus and his colleagues conducted some of the earliest nationwide studies
of family violence in the United States beginning in the mid-1970s. They conducted interviews
with over 2,000 married or cohabiting adults with children between the ages of 3 and 17, and from
these interviews they developed an important conflict assessment tool known as the Conflict
Tactics Scale (CTS) that is commonly used today (Straus et al. 1980). In the CTS, people are
asked about how they deal with disagreements in relationships. The following list is used in part
or in its entirety in a variety of studies:

Nonaggressive Responses: Discussed an issue calmly. Got information to back up your side of
things. Brought in or tried to bring in someone to help settle things. Cried.

Psychologically Aggressive Responses: Insulted him/her or swore at him/her. Sulked or refused

to talk about the issue. Stomped out of the room or house. Did or said something to spite him/her.

Physically Aggressive Responses: Threatened to hit him/her or throw something at him/her.

Threw or smashed or hit or kicked something. Threw something at him/her Pushed, grabbed, or
shoved him/her. Slapped him/her Kicked, bit, or hit him/her with a fist. Hit or tried to hit him/her
with something. Beat him/her up. Choked him/her. Threatened him/her with a knife. Used a knife.

Is There a Twist?
Who do you think is more likely to be a victim of violence, males, or females? Some studies using
the CTS have found that men are more likely to be victims of physical aggression than are women.
This twist may seem surprising. Is it true that men are more likely to be victims?

Not really. These counterintuitive findings have been questioned on several grounds (Fulfer et al.
2007; Kishor 2005). For one thing, men are less likely than women to remember their own acts of
violence, and they may not perceive their acts as abusive. A second problem is that CTS
respondents are asked to tell the researcher how they responded to a situation of conflict or
disagreement. Yet, violence and abuse can take place without a preceding disagreement, and
therefore the CTS may again underreport some violence by men. A third problem is that women
are more likely to experience the most extreme forms of violence, some of which the CTS does
not list, including severe beatings and even murder. Finally, the CTS does not include acts of
sexual violence or aggression, which are far more likely to be perpetrated by men.

Consequently, more recent studies show that women are more likely to be victims of intimate
partner violence than are men. However, this does not mean that intimate partner violence against

47
men is rare or inconsequential. Almost one-quarter of intimate partner homicides are committed
against men, nearly 350 a year (U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics 2007).

Typology of Violence
Relationship violence can take many forms. Family researcher Michael Johnson draws attention
to the importance of making critical distinctions among types of violence, motives of perpetrators,
the status of both partners, and the cultural context in which violence occurs. He has identified
four patterns of violence (Johnson 2000, 2008, 2009):

1. Common couple violence (CCV) (or situational couple violence) arises out of a
specific argument in which at least one partner lashes out physically. It is less
likely to escalate or involve severe injury; yet it is this type of violence that is
usually captured in research studies.
2. Intimate terrorism (IT) is motivated by a desire to control the other partner. It is
more likely than CCV to escalate over time and to cause serious injury,
although some cases of IT involve relatively little injury. The primary feature of
this type of abuse is the general desire for control.
3. Violent resistance (VR) is the nonlegal term associated with self-defense.
Research on VR is scarce, and it is conducted almost entirely by women.
Engaging in violent resistance may be an indicator that a person will soon leave
the abusive partner.
4. Mutual violent control (MVC) refers to a pattern of behavior in which both
partners are controlling and violent; they are battling for control. Again, this is
an understudied phenomenon.

Johnson suggests that if we want to understand the true nature of domestic violence, we must
distinguish between these different types. For example, victims of intimate terrorism are more
likely to be injured, to experience posttraumatic stress syndrome, to use painkillers, and to miss
work than are other types (Johnson and Leone 2005). Moreover, common couple/situational
violence dominates the general surveys, whereas intimate terrorism and violent resistance
dominate agency caseloads, which may lead to different conclusions (Johnson 2008).

Factors Associated with Violence

Although most women who are assaulted are done so by intimate partners rather than by
strangers, it is important to recognize that most men do not abuse their partners. What specific
factors are associated with intimate partner violence? Several characteristics increase the odds
(Delsol et al. 2003; DeMaris et al. 2003; National Coalition Against Domestic Violence 2009),
although violence occurs in all types of relationships:
1. Youth. In most violent relationships, the partners are under the age of 30.
2. Low levels of education. Often, the husband/male partner has a high school
diploma or less.
3. Low income or employment problems. Family income may be below or near
the poverty line, or the man may be unemployed. They may live in a poor
neighborhood.
4. Drug or alcohol use. Often, one or both partners use drugs or alcohol frequently
and may use it as an excuse for conflict and violence.
5. Abuse in family of orientation. One or both partners may have witnessed or
experienced abuse as children.
6. Specific personal traits. These may include extreme jealousy, possessiveness,
a bad temper, low self-esteem, unpredictability, verbal abuse, aggressive
tendencies such as fighting with others, and cruelty toward animals.

48
Researchers have rarely studied the relationship between occupations and violence, other than
to use broad categories, such as between white-collar and blue-collar jobs. Sociologist Scott
Melzer (2002) looked carefully at the relationship between a man’s job and his likelihood of
committing violence. He wondered whether people in violent jobs were more likely to be violent
toward their partners. Melzer used data from the National Survey of Families and Households, a
large and nationally representative sample of adults, to answer these questions. The key violent
occupational categories are (1) supervisors of police and detectives; (2) supervisors of guards;
(3) police and detectives (public service); (4) sheriffs and bailiffs; (5) correctional institution
officers; (6) guards and police (excluding public service); (7) protective service occupations; and
(8) current members of the armed forces. Persons in these violent occupations were compared
with those holding managerial jobs to see if they were more likely to commit violence. Other
important variables were controlled statistically so that the specific independent effects of
occupation on violence could be seen. These variables included the man’s age, education,
children in the home, whether he had an alcohol or drug problem, unemployment, and the
proportion of the couple’s income earned by the woman. The study found that men who work in
physically violent occupations were 1.43 times more likely to commit violence against a spouse
or intimate partner than were those in managerial jobs (Melzer 2002). These, however, were not
the only occupational categories significantly more likely to commit violence. Those men in clerical
jobs (a traditionally female occupation) and those in professional positions were also far more
likely to be violent compared to those holding managerial jobs. Men who were unemployed or
who earned less than a third of the couple’s income were also at a greater likelihood of committing
violence. Age was also noted as a strong predictor of male violence; an 18-year-old man is twice
as likely as a 38-year-old man to be violent. However, the single strongest predictor of violence
is a man having an alcohol or drug problem. These men are 4.6 times as likely to commit violence
as are men without such a problem (Melzer 2002).

HOUSEWORK IS DIRECTLY OPPOSED TO SELF-ACTUALIZATION. Anne Oakley

Source: Sam Atkinson (2015). The Sociology Book: Big Ideas Explained pp.318-319.

Most of the women’s work is still domestic

labor that takes place in the home. More than
a generation ago, in 1974, sociologist Ann
Oakley undertook one of the first feminist
sociological studies of domestic labor when
she interviewed 40 London housewives
between the ages of 20 and 30, all of whom
had at least one child under five. The
pioneering study looks at housework from the
perspective of these women.

Oakley argues that housework should be

understood as a job and not a natural
extension of a woman’s role as a wife or
mother. This was a controversial standpoint at
a time when housework was not seen as “real
work.” Women are compelled to engage in
domestic duties for no wages—an essential form of exploitation that enables capitalism to function
and succeed: by providing the needs of the male worker, housewives ensure male workers can

49
provide the needs of the economy.

A woman’s role?
Domestic duties have often been regarded as natural for women, due
to their ability to give birth; although why that capacity means a woman
is better able to iron out creases in clothes is unclear. Arguably, it does
not occur to most women to demand wages for the work they give “for
free.

Karl Marx’s argument that male workers are exploited in paid

employment is applicable to women’s exploitation in the home.
Ideology serves to disguise this fact by presenting housework as
“natural” for women and not worthy of a wage. Oakley contends,
however, that gender, and gender roles, should be reflecting cultural
and historical processes, rather than as being tied to biology.

Alienation
Marx claims that workers, in a system of private ownership, experience alienation or
estrangement from their work because they do not own the fruits of their labor. Similarly, Oakley
insists, most housewives are dissatisfied with their lot, finding nothing inherently satisfying about
their work, which is lonely, monotonous, and boring. They resent the low status that is associated
with being a housewife. Like factory workers, they find their jobs repetitive, fragmented, and time
pressured. Oakley’s studies reveal that women report feelings of alienation from their work more
frequently than factory workers. This is due in part to their sense of social isolation as
housewives—many of them had careers before marriage, which they subsequently gave up.
These women, Oakley says have no autonomy or control; responsibility for the work is theirs
alone and if it is not done, they risk an angry husband or sick children. Viewed in this way,
housework prevents women from reaching their full potential. Oakley’s findings remain significant
today: recent research by, among others, British sociologist Caroline Gatrell shows that 40 years
later women are still doing most of the housework, despite engaging more in paid employment.

WESTERN MAN HAS BECOME A

CONFESSING ANIMAL. Michel Foucault
Source: Sam Atkinson (2015). The Sociology
Book: Big Ideas Explained

Why do people talk so much about sex these

days? This is one of the key questions posed by
the influential French philosopher Michel
Foucault in The History of Sexuality: Volume I
(1976). Foucault claims there is an important
relationship between confession, truth, and sex.
He suggests that to understand sexuality in the
West, we must consider how knowledge
operates and how particular forms of
knowledge, such as the science of sexuality
(scientia sexualis) and psychology, have

50
increasingly dominated our ways of thinking about gender and sexuality.

These knowledges are a form of “discourse”—ways of constructing knowledge of the world that
create their own “truths.” Incitement to discourse, says Foucault, began in the West four centuries
ago. The Christian Church’s emphasis on “sins of the flesh” in the 17th century led to a greater
awareness of sexuality, and to the rise in the 18th century of “scandal” books—fictional accounts
of illicit sexual behavior. The discourse culminated in the 19th-century science of sex that created
modern sexuality—from being an act, it was transformed into an identity.

The confession
With the advent of psychiatry and psychology at the end of the 19th century, the Christian ritual
of confession—admitting to sins and seeking penance from a priest to regain the grace of God—
became reconstructed in scientific form. Revealing sexual habits and desires was a way to
unearth the “authentic” self.

According to Foucault, the confession has become one of the most valued ways to uncover “truth”
in our society. From being a ritual, it has become widespread and is now part of family life,
relationships, work, medicine, and policing. As Hungarian sociologist Frank Furedi posits,
confession now dominates personal, social, and cultural life, as evident in reality TV shows and
in social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter.

Healthy relationships, we are continually assured, require truthtelling. Thereafter, an “expert” (a

therapist or doctor, for example) is required to reveal our “authentic” self. The compelling promise
of the confession is that the more detailed it is, the more we will learn about ourselves, and the
more we will be liberated. A person who has experienced trauma is often told that retelling the
experience will have a curative effect. But this “will to truth” is a tactic of power, says Foucault,
that can become a form of surveillance and regulation. Confession, he claims, does not reveal
the truth, it produces it.

Foucault’s work has had an immense impact on feminism and studies of sexuality since the
1980s. His ideas have influenced British sociologist Jeffrey Weeks, who uses Foucault to unearth
the ways in which legislation has served to regulate gender and sexuality in society.

References:
Karen Seccombe (2014). Families and their Social Worlds
Sam Atkinson (2015). The Sociology Book: Big Ideas Explained

Additional readings:
ANN OAKLEY (1972). Sex, Gender and Society
Patricia Hill Collins (2006): Intersecting Oppressions
Laune Serquina-Ramiro, Bernadette J. Madrid & Ma. Lourdes E. Amarillo (2004). Domestic
Violence in Urban Filipino Families

Assessment E:
Write a 1000-word essay tackling the following:
a) What is the difference between physical and symbolic violence?
b) Explain Patricia Hill Collins’ Intersecting Oppressions.

51
Lesson 6: Health and Beauty
Introduction:
Perception of beauty and health varies across different cultures. However, the mainstream media
and cultural imperialism change the way we think. Advertisements promote girls to have bigger
busts, white teeth, and smoother skin. In this chapter we will explore this concept and its effects
on other culture.

Learning Objectives:
By the end of this unit students must be able to:
1. The effects of western influence on perception of beauty
2. Apply critical thinking.

Sections of the Unit:

The Body Ritual Among the Nacirema

To read:
Body Ritual Among the Nacirema
source: Horace Miner (1956) Body Rituals Among the Nacirema

Most cultures exhibit a particular configuration or style. A single value or pattern of perceiving the
world often leaves its stamp on several institutions in the society. Examples are “machismo” in
Spanish-influenced cultures, “face” in Japanese culture, and “pollution by females” in some
highland New Guinea cultures. Here Horace Miner demonstrates that “attitudes about the body”
have a pervasive influence on many institutions in Nacirema society.

The anthropologist has become so familiar with the diversity of ways in which different people
behave in similar situations that he is not apt to be surprised by even the most exotic customs. In
fact, if all the logically possible combinations of behavior have not been found somewhere in the
world, he is apt to suspect that they must be present in some yet undescribed tribe. The point
has, in fact, been expressed with respect to clan organization by Murdock[1]. In this light, the
magical beliefs, and practices of the Nacirema present such unusual aspects that it seems
desirable to describe them as an example of the extremes to which human behavior can go.

Professor Linton first brought the ritual of the Nacirema to the attention of anthropologists twenty
years ago, but the culture of this people is still very poorly understood. They are a North American
group living in the territory between the Canadian Cree, the Yaqui and Tarahumare of Mexico,
and the Carib and Arawak of the Antilles. Little is known of their origin, although tradition states
that they came from the east. According to Nacirema mythology, their nation was originated by a
culture hero, Notgnihsaw, who is otherwise known for two great feats of strength—the throwing
of a piece of wampum across the river Pa-To-Mac and the chopping down of a cherry tree in
which the Spirit of Truth resided.

Nacirema culture is characterized by a highly developed market economy which has evolved in a
rich natural habitat. While much of the people’s time is devoted to economic pursuits, a large part
of the fruits of these labors and a considerable portion of the day are spent in ritual activity. The
focus of this activity is the human body, the appearance and health of which loom as a dominant
concern in the ethos of the people. While such a concern is certainly not unusual, its ceremonial
aspects and associated philosophy are unique.

52
The fundamental belief underlying the whole system appears to be that the human body is ugly
and that its natural tendency is to debility and disease. Incarcerated in such a body, man’s only
hope is to avert these characteristics through the use of ritual and ceremony. Every household
has one or more shrines devoted to this purpose. The more powerful individuals in the society
have several shrines in their houses and, in fact, the opulence of a house is often referred to in
terms of the number of such ritual centers it possesses. Most houses are of wattle and daub
construction, but the shrine rooms of the more wealthy are walled with stone. Poorer families
imitate the rich by applying pottery plaques to their shrine walls.

While each family has at least one such shrine, the rituals associated with it are not family
ceremonies but are private and secret. The rites are normally only discussed with children, and
then only during the period when they are being initiated into these mysteries. I was able,
however, to establish sufficient rapport with the natives to examine these shrines and to have the
rituals described to me.

The focal point of the shrine is a box or chest which is built into the wall. In this chest are kept the
many charms and magical potions without which no native believes he could live. These
preparations are secured from a variety of specialized practitioners. The most powerful of these
are the medicine men, whose assistance must be rewarded with substantial gifts. However, the
medicine men do not provide the curative potions for their clients but decide what the ingredients
should be and then write them down in an ancient and secret language. This writing is understood
only by the medicine men and by the herbalists who, for another gift, provide the required charm.

The charm is not disposed of after it has served its purpose but is placed in the charm box of the
household shrine. As these magical materials are specific for certain ills, and the real or imagined
maladies of the people are many, the charm-box is usually full to overflowing. The magical packets
are so numerous that people forget what their purposes were and fear to use them again. While
the natives are very vague on this point, we can only assume that the idea in retaining all the old
magical materials is that their presence in the charm-box, before which the body rituals are
conducted, will in some way protect the worshipper.

Beneath the charm-box is a small font. Each day every member of the family, in succession,
enters the shrine room, bows his head before the charm-box, mingles different sorts of holy water
in the font, and proceeds with a brief rite of ablution. The holy waters are secured from the Water
Temple of the community, where the priests conduct elaborate ceremonies to make the liquid
ritually pure.

In the hierarchy of magical practitioners, and below the medicine men in prestige, are specialists
whose designation is best translated as “holy-mouth-men.” The Nacirema have an almost
pathological horror of and fascination with the mouth, the condition of which is believed to have a
supernatural influence on all social relationships. Were it not for the rituals of the mouth, they
believe that their teeth would fall out, their gums bleed, their jaws shrink, their friends desert them,
and their lovers reject them. They also believe that a strong relationship exists between oral and
moral characteristics. For example, there is a ritual ablution of the mouth for children which is
supposed to improve their moral fiber.

The daily body ritual performed by everyone includes a mouth-rite. Despite the fact that these
people are so punctilious about care of the mouth, this rite involves a practice which strikes the
uninitiated stranger as revolting. It was reported to me that the ritual consists of inserting a small
bundle of hog hairs into the mouth, along with certain magical powders, and then moving the
bundle in a highly formalized series of gestures.

53
In addition to the private mouth-rite, the people seek out a holy-mouth-man once or twice a year.
These practitioners have an impressive set of paraphernalia, consisting of a variety of augers,
awls, probes, and prods. The use of these items in the exorcism of the evils of the mouth involves
almost unbelievable ritual torture of the client. The holy-mouth-man opens the client’s mouth and,
using the above mentioned tools, enlarges any holes which decay may have created in the teeth.
Magical materials are put into these holes. If there are no naturally occurring holes in the teeth,
large sections of one or more teeth are gouged out so that the supernatural substance can be
applied. In the client’s view, the purpose of these ministrations is to arrest decay and to draw
friends. The extremely sacred and traditional character of the rite is evident in the fact that the
natives return to the holy-mouth-men year after year, despite the fact that their teeth continue to
decay.

It is to be hoped that, when a thorough study of the Nacirema is made, there will be careful inquiry
into the personality structure of these people. One has but to watch the gleam in the eye of a holy-
mouth-man, as he jabs an awl into an exposed nerve, to suspect that a certain amount of sadism
is involved. If this can be established, a very interesting pattern emerges, for most of the
population shows definite masochistic tendencies. It was to these that Professor Linton referred
in discussing a distinctive part of the daily body ritual which is performed only by men. This part
of the rite includes scraping and lacerating the surface of the face with a sharp instrument. Special
women’s rites are performed only four times during each lunar month, but what they lack in
frequency is made up in barbarity. As part of this ceremony, women bake their heads in small
ovens for about an hour. The theoretically interesting point is that what seems to be a
preponderantly masochistic people have developed sadistic specialists.

The medicine men have an imposing temple, or latipso, in every community of any size. The more
elaborate ceremonies required to treat very sick patients can only be performed at this temple.
These ceremonies involve not only the thaumaturge but a permanent group of vestal maidens
who move sedately about the temple chambers in distinctive costume and headdress.

The latipso ceremonies are so harsh that it is phenomenal that a fair proportion of the really sick
natives who enter the temple ever recover. Small children whose indoctrination is still incomplete
have been known to resist attempts to take them to the temple because “that is where you go to
die.” Despite this fact, sick adults are not only willing but eager to undergo the protracted ritual
purification, if they can afford to do so. No matter how ill the supplicant or how grave the
emergency, the guardians of many temples will not admit a client if he cannot give a rich gift to
the custodian. Even after one has gained and survived the ceremonies, the guardians will not
permit the neophyte to leave until he makes still another gift.

The supplicant entering the temple is first stripped of all his or her clothes. In everyday life the
Nacirema avoids exposure of his body and its natural functions. Bathing and excretory acts are
performed only in the secrecy of the household shrine, where they are ritualized as part of the
body-rites. Psychological shock results from the fact that body secrecy is suddenly lost upon entry
into the latipso. A man, whose own wife has never seen him in an excretory act, suddenly finds
himself naked and assisted by a vestal maiden while he performs his natural functions into a
sacred vessel. This sort of ceremonial treatment is necessitated by the fact that the excreta are
used by a diviner to ascertain the course and nature of the client’s sickness. Female clients, on
the other hand, find their naked bodies are subjected to the scrutiny, manipulation and prodding
of the medicine men.

Few supplicants in the temple are well enough to do anything but lie on their hard beds. The daily
ceremonies, like the rites of the holy-mouth-men, involve discomfort and torture. With ritual

54
precision, the vestals awaken their miserable charges each dawn and roll them about on their
beds of pain while performing ablutions, in the formal movements of which the maidens are highly
trained. At other times they insert magic wands in the supplicant’s mouth or force him to eat
substances which are supposed to be healing. From time to time the medicine men come to their
clients and jab magically treated needles into their flesh. The fact that these temple ceremonies
may not cure, and may even kill the neophyte, in no way decreases the people’s faith in the
medicine men.

There remains one other kind of practitioner, known as a “listener.” This witchdoctor has the power
to exorcise the devils that lodge in the heads of people who have been bewitched. The Nacirema
believe that parents bewitch their own children. Mothers are particularly suspected of putting a
curse on children while teaching them the secret body rituals. The counter-magic of the
witchdoctor is unusual in its lack of ritual. The patient simply tells the “listener” all his troubles and
fears, beginning with the earliest difficulties he can remember. The memory displayed by the
Nacirema in these exorcism sessions is truly remarkable. It is not uncommon for the patient to
bemoan the rejection he felt upon being weaned as a babe, and a few individuals even see their
troubles going back to the traumatic effects of their own birth.

In conclusion, mention must be made of certain practices which have their base in native
esthetics, but which depend upon the pervasive aversion to the natural body and its functions.
There are ritual fasts to make fat people thin and ceremonial feasts to make thin people fat. Still
other rites are used to make women’s breasts larger if they are small, and smaller if they are
large. General dissatisfaction with breast shape is symbolized in the fact that the ideal form is
virtually outside the range of human variation. A few women afflicted with almost inhuman hyper-
mammary development are so idolized that they make a handsome living by simply going from
village to village and permitting the natives to stare at them for a fee.

Reference has already been made to the fact that excretory functions are ritualized, routinized,
and relegated to secrecy. Natural reproductive functions are similarly distorted. Intercourse is
taboo as a topic and scheduled as an act. Efforts are made to avoid pregnancy by the use of
magical materials or by limiting intercourse to certain phases of the moon. Conception is actually
very infrequent. When pregnant, women dress so as to hide their condition. Parturition takes place
in secret, without friends or relatives to assist, and the majority of women do not nurse their
infants.

Our review of the ritual life of the Nacirema has certainly shown them to be a magic-ridden people.
It is hard to understand how they have managed to exist so long under the burdens which they
have imposed upon themselves. But even such exotic customs as these take on real meaning
when they are viewed with the insight provided by Malinowski when he wrote:

Looking from far and above, from our high places of safety in the developed civilization, it is easy
to see all the crudity and irrelevance of magic. But without its power and guidance early man could
not have mastered his practical difficulties as he has done, nor could man have advanced to the
higher stages of civilization.

References:
Miner, Horace (1956). Body Rituals Among the Nacirema

Assessment F:
Critical Thinking. Write a 500-word reflection on the assigned reading: Miner, Horace (1956). Body
Rituals Among the Nacirema

55
Lesson 7: Feminist Movements and Ideologies
Introduction:
The term feminism can be used to describe a political, cultural or economic movement aimed at
establishing equal rights and legal protection for women. Feminism involves political and mostly
sociological theories and philosophies concerned with issues of gender difference, as well as a
movement that advocates gender equality for women and campaigns for women's rights and
interests.
Learning Objectives:
By the end of this unit students must be able to:
1. Understand the History of Feminism
2. Understand its importance in transforming the society,
3. Familiarize themselves with different theories and movement of feminist movements,

Sections of the Unit:

History of Feminism
Movements and Ideologies
Contribution to societal change

To read:

Concepts on Feminism
Source: Freedman, E. B. (2002). “No Turning Back: The history of feminism and the future of women.

History of Feminism
The history of feminism can be divided into three waves. The first feminist wave was in the
nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, the second was in the 1960s and 1970s, and the third
extends from the 1990s to the present. Feminist theory emerged from these feminist movements.
It is manifest in a variety of disciplines such as feminist geography, feminist history and feminist
literary criticism.

First-wave feminism
First-wave feminism refers to an extended period of feminist activity during the nineteenth century
and early twentieth century in the United Kingdom and the United States. Originally it focused on
the promotion of equal contract and property rights for women and the opposition to chattel
marriage and ownership of married women (and their children) by their husbands.First-wave
feminism started in regions in the West and the United States, primarily because of early political,
cultural, and economic reforms that were challenging the early established capitalist system.
Women learned to questions their position is society, especially their rights to suffrage and
education.

Second-wave feminism

56
 Second-wave feminism refers to the period of activity in the early 1960s and lasting through the
late 1980s. The second wave was a continuation of the earlier phase of feminism involving the
suffragettes in the UK and USA. Second-wave feminism has continued to exist since that time
and coexists with what is termed third-wave feminism. The first wave focused on rights such as
suffrage, whereas the second wave was largely concerned with other issues of equality, such as
ending discrimination.
The feminist activist and author Carol Hanisch coined the slogan "The Personal is Political" which
became synonymous with the second wave. Second-wave feminists saw women's cultural and
political inequalities as inextricably linked and encouraged women to understand aspects of their
personal lives as deeply politicized and as reflecting sexist power structures.

Simon de Beauvoir and the Second Sex

One of the most prominent second-wave feminists in her time. sets out a feminist existentialism
which prescribes a moral revolution. As an existentialist, she accepted Jean-Paul Sartre's precept
existence precedes essence; hence "one is not born a woman but becomes one." Her analysis
focuses on the social construction of Woman as the Other. This de Beauvoir identifies as
fundamental to women's oppression. She argues women have historically been considered
deviant and abnormal and contends society considered men to be the ideal toward which women
should aspire. De Beauvoir argues that for feminism to move forward, this attitude must be set
]
aside.

The Feminine Mystique

This is the idea that women are victims of a false belief system that requires them to find identity
and meaning in their lives through their husbands and children. Such a system causes women to
completely lose their identity in that of their family. Feminists locate this system among post-World
War II middle-class suburban communities. At the same time, America's post-war economic boom
had led to the development of new technologies that were supposed to make household work
less difficult, but that often had the result of making women's work less meaningful and valuable.

Women’s Liberation in the USA

The phrase "Women’s Liberation" was first used in the United States in 1964 and first appeared
in print in 1966. By 1968, although the term Women’s Liberation Front appeared in the magazine
Ramparts, it was starting to refer to the whole women’s movement. Bra-burning also became
associated with the movement, though the actual prevalence of bra-burning is debatable. One of
the most vocal critics of the women's liberation movement has been the African American feminist
and intellectual Gloria Jean Watkins (who uses the pseudonym "bell hooks") who argues that this
movement glossed over race and class and thus failed to address "the issues that divided
women." She highlighted the lack of minority voices in the women's movement in her book
Feminist theory from margin to center (1984).

Third-wave feminism
Third-wave feminists often focus on "micro-politics" and challenge the second wave's paradigm
1- as to what is, or is not, good for females. The third wave has its origins in the mid-1980s. The
current feminist movements can be considered as part of the Third-wave feminism, although there

57
are differences among different feminism movements when it comes to their ideologies, which will
be discussed in the latter part.

Post-Feminism
post-feminists believe that women have achieved second wave goals while being critical of third
wave feminist goals. The term was first used in the 1980s to describe a backlash against second-
wave feminism.
French feminism
compared to Anglophone feminism, is distinguished by an approach which is more philosophical
and literary. Its writings tend to be effusive and metaphorical, being less concerned with political
doctrine and generally focused on theories of "the body”. ]
Theoretical Schools
Feminist theory is an extension of feminism into theoretical or philosophical fields. It encompasses
work in a variety of disciplines, including anthropology, sociology, economics, women's studies,
literary criticism, art history, psychoanalysis and philosophy. Feminist theory aims to understand
gender inequality and focuses on gender politics, power relations and sexuality. While providing
a critique of these social and political relations, much of feminist theory focuses on the promotion
of women's rights and interests. Themes explored in feminist theory include discrimination,
stereotyping, objectification (especially sexual objectification), oppression and patriarchy.

Feminist Movements and their Ideologies

Feminist Movements exist in different waves of feminism, and as you would notice later on, there
are principles and ideologies that are overlapping and even the tiniest differences make their
movement separate from the other.

Anarcha-Feminism
Anarcha-feminism (also called anarchist feminism and anarchofeminism) combines anarchism
with feminism. It generally views patriarchy as a manifestation of involuntary hierarchy. Anarcha-
feminists believe that the struggle against patriarchy is an essential part of class struggle, and the
anarchist struggle against the State. In essence, the philosophy sees anarchist struggle as a
necessary component of feminist struggle and vice-versa. As anarchism is a political philosophy
that opposes all relationships of power, it is inherently feminist.

Socialist and/or Marxist Feminism

They see the need to work alongside not just men, but all other groups, as they see the oppression
of women as a part of a larger pattern that affects everyone involved in the capitalist system.Marx
felt when class oppression was overcome, gender oppression would vanish as well. According to
some socialist feminists, this view of gender oppression as a sub-class of class oppression is
naive and much of the work of socialist feminists has gone towards separating gender phenomena
from class phenomena.

58
Radical Feminism
Radical feminism considers the male-controlled capitalist hierarchy, which it describes as sexist,
as the defining feature of women’s oppression. Radical feminists believe that women can free
themselves only when they have done away with what they consider an inherently oppressive
and dominating patriarchal system. Radical feminists feel that there is a male-based authority and
power structure and that it is responsible for oppression and inequality, and that if the system and
its values are in place, society will not be able to be reformed in any significant way. Some radical
feminists see no alternatives other than the total uprooting and reconstruction of society to
achieve their goals.

Liberal Feminism
Liberals asserts the equality of men and women through political and legal reform. It is an
individualistic form of feminism, which focuses on women’s ability to show and maintain their
equality through their own actions and choices. Liberal feminism uses the personal interactions
between men and women as the place from which to transform society. According to liberal
feminists, all women can assert their ability to achieve equality, therefore it is possible for change
to happen without altering the structure of society. Issues important to liberal feminists include
reproductive and abortion rights, sexual harassment, voting, education, "equal pay for equal
work", affordable childcare, affordable health care, and bringing to light the frequency of sexual
and domestic violence against women.

Black Feminism
Black Feminism co-exists with other feminists. However, Black Feminism posits that the issue of
sexism, class oppression and racism are inextricably bound together. Forms of feminism that
strive to overcome sexism and class oppression but ignore race can discriminate against many
people, including women, through racial bias. Black feminists want to include black women in the
narrative of gender oppression. The Combahee River Collective argued in 1974 that the liberation
of black women entails freedom for all people, since it would require the end of racism, sexism,
and class oppression.

Post-Colonial and/or Third-World Feminism

Postcolonial feminists argue that oppression relating to the colonial experience, particularly racial,
class, and ethnic oppression, has marginalized women in postcolonial societies. They challenge
the assumption that gender oppression is the primary force of patriarchy. Postcolonial feminists
object to portrayals of women of non-Western societies as passive and voiceless victims and the
portrayal of Western women as modern, educated and empowered.

Multi-racial Feminism
Multiracial feminism (also known as “women of color” feminism) offers a standpoint theory and
analysis of the lives and experiences of women of color. The problem that multi-racial, black and
post-colonial feminists that they noticed is that, the narrative of gender oppression, primarily
focused on the experiences of White or Western women.

59
Libertarian Feminism
Classical liberal or libertarian feminism conceives of freedom as freedom from coercive
interference. It holds that women, as well as men, have a right to such freedom due to their status
as self-owners.
There are several categories under the theory of libertarian feminism, or kinds of feminism that
are linked to libertarian ideologies. Anarcha-feminism (also called anarchist feminism or anarcho-
feminism) combines feminist and anarchist beliefs, embodying classical libertarianism rather than
contemporary conservative libertarianism. Anarcha-feminists view patriarchy as a manifestation
of hierarchy, believing that the fight against patriarchy is an essential part of the class struggle
and the anarchist struggle against the state. Anarcha-feminists such as Susan Brown see the
anarchist struggle as a necessary component of the feminist struggle. In Brown's words,
"anarchism is a political philosophy that opposes all relationships of power, it is inherently
feminist". Recently, feminists defined a position (which they label "ifeminism" or "individualist
feminism") that combines feminism with anarcho-capitalism or contemporary conservative
libertarianism, arguing that a pro-capitalist, anti-state position is compatible with an emphasis on
equal rights and empowerment for women. Individualist anarchist feminism has grown from the
US-based individualist anarchism movement.
Post-structural and Post-modern Feminism
Post-structural feminism, also referred to as French feminism, uses the insights of various
epistemological movements, including psychoanalysis, linguistics, political theory (Marxist and
post-Marxist theory), race theory, literary theory, and other intellectual currents for feminist
concerns. Many post-structural feminists maintain that difference is one of the most powerful tools
that females possess in their struggle with patriarchal domination, and that to equate the feminist
movement only with equality is to deny women a plethora of options because equality is still
defined from the masculine or patriarchal perspective.
Postmodern feminism is an approach to feminist theory that incorporates postmodern and
poststructuralist theory. The largest departure from other branches of feminism is the argument
that gender is constructed through language. The most notable proponent of this argument is
Judith Butler. In her 1990 book, Gender Trouble, she draws on and critiques the work of Simone
de Beauvoir, Michel Foucault and Jacques Lacan. Butler criticizes the distinction drawn by
previous feminisms between biological sex and socially constructed gender. She says that this
does not allow for a sufficient criticism of essentialism. For Butler "woman" is a debatable
category, complicated by class, ethnicity, sexuality, and other facets of identity. She states that
gender is performative. This argument leads to the conclusion that there is no single cause for
women's subordination and no single approach towards dealing with the issue.
In A Cyborg Manifesto Donna Haraway criticizes traditional notions of feminism, particularly its
emphasis on identity, rather than affinity. She uses the metaphor of a cyborg in order to construct
a postmodern feminism that moves beyond dualisms and the limitations of traditional gender,
feminism, and politics. Haraway's cyborg is an attempt to break away from Oedipal narratives and
Christian origin-myths like Genesis. She writes: "The cyborg does not dream of community on the
model of the organic family, this time without the oedipal project. The cyborg would not recognize
the Garden of Eden; it is not made of mud and cannot dream of returning to dust."
A major branch in postmodern feminist thought has emerged from the contemporary
psychoanalytic French feminism. Other postmodern feminist works highlight stereotypical gender
roles, only to portray them as parodies of the original beliefs. The history of feminism is not
important in these writings - only what is going to be done about it. The history is dismissed and

60
used to depict how ridiculous past beliefs were. Modern feminist theory has been extensively
criticized as being predominantly, though not exclusively, associated with Western middle class
academia. Mary Joe Frug, a postmodernist feminist, criticized mainstream feminism as being too
narrowly focused and inattentive to related issues of race and class.

Environmental Feminism
Ecofeminism links ecology with feminism. Ecofeminists see the domination of women as
stemming from the same ideologies that bring about the domination of the environment.
Patriarchal systems, where men own and control the land, are responsible for the oppression of
women and destruction of the natural environment. Ecofeminists argue that the men in power
control the land, and therefore they can exploit it for their own profit and success. Ecofeminists
argue that in this situation, women are exploited by men in power for their own profit, success,
and pleasure.
Contribution of Feminist in Society
The feminist movement has effected change in Western society, including women's suffrage;
greater access to education; more nearly equitable pay with men; the right to initiate divorce
proceedings and "no fault" divorce; and the right of women to make individual decisions regarding
pregnancy (including access to contraceptives and abortion); as well as the right to own property.

Civil Rights
From the 1960s on the women's liberation movement campaigned for women's rights, including
the same pay as men, equal rights in law, and the freedom to plan their families. Their efforts
were met with mixed results. Issues commonly associated with notions of women's rights include,
though are not limited to: the right to bodily integrity and autonomy; to vote (universal suffrage);
to hold public office; to work; to fair wages or equal pay; to own property; to education; to serve
in the military; to enter into legal contracts; and to have marital, parental and religious rights.

International Campaign
The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) is an
international convention adopted by the United Nations General Assembly. Described as an
international bill of rights for women, it came into force on 3 September 1981. Several countries
have ratified the Convention subject to certain declarations, reservations, and objections. Iran,
Sudan, Somalia, Qatar, Nauru, Palau, Tonga, and the United States have not ratified CEDAW.
Expecting a U.S. Senate vote, NOW has encouraged President Obama to remove U.S.
reservations and objections added in 2002 before the vote.

Language
Gender-neutral language is a description of language usages which are aimed at minimizing
assumptions regarding the biological sex of human referents. The advocacy of gender-neutral
language reflects, at least, two different agendas: one aims to clarify the inclusion of both sexes
or genders (gender-inclusive language); the other proposes that gender, as a category, is rarely
worth marking in language (gender-neutral language). Gender-neutral language is sometimes
described as non-sexist language by advocates and politically correct language by opponents.

61
Heterosexual Set-up
Feminist criticisms of men's contributions to childcare and domestic labor in the Western middle
class are typically centered around the idea that it is unfair for women to be expected to perform
more than half of a household's domestic work and child care when both members of the
relationship also work outside the home. Several studies provide statistical evidence that the
financial income of married men does not affect their rate of attending to household duties.

Religion
Feminist theology is a movement that reconsiders the traditions, practices, scriptures, and
theologies of religions from a feminist perspective. Some of the goals of feminist theology include
increasing the role of women among the clergy and religious authorities, reinterpreting male-
dominated imagery and language about God, determining women's place in relation to career and
motherhood, and studying images of women in the religion's sacred texts.
Feminist theology is a movement found in several religions to reconsider the traditions, practices,
scriptures, and theologies of those religions from a feminist perspective. Some of the goals of
feminist theology include increasing the role of women among the clergy and religious authorities,
reinterpreting male dominated imagery and language about God, determining women's place in
relation to career and motherhood, and studying images of women in the religion's sacred texts.
In Wicca "the Goddess" is a deity of prime importance, along with her consort the Horned God.
In the earliest Wiccan publications she is described as a tribal goddess of the witch community,
neither omnipotent nor universal, and it was recognized that there was a greater "Prime Mover",
although the witches did not concern themselves much with this being.
Architecture
Gender-based inquiries into and conceptualization of architecture have also come about in the
past fifteen years or so. Piyush Mathur coined the term "archigenderic" in his 1998 article in the
British journal Women's Writing. Claiming that "architectural planning has an inextricable link with
the defining and regulation of gender roles, responsibilities, rights, and limitations," Mathur came
up with that term "to explore...the meaning of 'architecture" in terms of gender" and "to explore
the meaning of "gender" in terms of architecture".

Women’s Writing
Women's writing came to exist as a separate category of scholarly interest relatively recently. In
the West, second-wave feminism prompted a general reevaluation of women's historical
contributions, and various academic sub-disciplines, such as Women's history (or herstory) and
women's writing, developed in response to the belief that women's lives and contributions have
been underrepresented as areas of scholarly interest. Virginia Balisn et al. characterize the growth
in interest since 1970 in women's writing as "powerful". Much of this early period of feminist literary
scholarship was given over to the rediscovery and reclamation of texts written by women.

The Riot Grrrl Movement

Riot grrrl (or riot grrl) is an underground feminist punk movement that started in the 1990s and is
often associated with third-wave feminism (it is sometimes seen as its starting point). It was
Grounded in the DIY philosophy of punk values. Riot grrls took an anti-corporate stance of self-
sufficiency and self-reliance. Riot grrrl's emphasis on universal female identity and separatism

62
often appears more closely allied with secondwave feminism than with the third wave. Riot grrrl
bands often address issues such as rape, domestic abuse, sexuality, and female empowerment.
Some bands associated with the movement are: Bikini Kill, Bratmobile, Excuse 17, Free Kitten,
Heavens To Betsy, Huggy Bear, L7, and Team Dresch. In addition to a music scene, riot grrrl is
also a subculture; zines, the DIY ethic, art, political action, and activism are part of the movement.
Riot grrrls hold meetings, start chapters, and support and organize women in music.

Feminist’s Sex War

The "Feminist Sex Wars" is a term for the acrimonious debates within the feminist movement in
the late 1970s through the 1980s around the issues of feminism, sexuality, sexual representation,
pornography, sadomasochism, the role of transwomen in the lesbian community, and other sexual
issues. The debate pitted anti-pornography feminism against sex-positive feminism, and parts of
the feminist movement were deeply divided by these debates.
1st ist the Anti Bloc
They argue that such issues such as pornography is degrading to women, and complicit in
violence against women both in its production (where, they charge, abuse and exploitation of
women performing in pornography is rampant) and in its consumption (where, they charge,
pornography eroticizes the domination, humiliation, and coercion of women, and reinforces sexual
and cultural attitudes that are complicit in rape and sexual harassment).
2nd is called the Sex-Positive Bloc.
Sex-positive feminists are also strongly opposed to radical feminist calls for legislation against
pornography, a strategy they decried as censorship, and something that could, they argued, be
used by social conservatives to censor the sexual expression of women, gay people, and other
sexual minorities. The initial period of intense debate and acrimony between sex-positive and
antipornography feminists during the early 1980s is often referred to as the Feminist Sex Wars.
Other sex-positive feminists became involved not in opposition to other feminists, but in direct
response to what they saw as patriarchal control of sexuality.
References:
Freedman, E. B. (2002). “No Turning Back: The history of feminism and the future of women. New
York. Ballantine Books.

Assessment G
You are asked to do these three assessments for this unit:
1. In maximum of 300 words, do you consider sex work as work? Choose between the anti
porn/sex work block and the sex positive block and defend your answer using their position
to the said issues.
2. In maximum of 300 words, differentiate the wave of feminism from one another.
3. In 500 words, explain the importance of feminism in contemporary society.

63
References:
• Atkinson, Sam. 2015. Differences between the Sexes are Cultural Creations-
Margaret Mead. The Sociology Book: Big Ideas Explained: pp. 298-299
• Atkinson, Sam. 2015. Families are Factories that Produce Human Personalities-
Talcott Parsons. The Sociology Book: Big Ideas Explained: pp. 300-301
• Atkinson, Sam. 2015. Heterosexuality must be recognized and studied as an
Institution-Adrienne Rich. The Sociology Book: Big Ideas Explained: pp. 306-309
• Atkinson, Sam. 2015. Housework is Directly Opposed to Self-Actualization-Anne
Oakley. The Sociology Book: Big Ideas Explained: pp. 318-319.
• Atkinson, Sam. 2015. Western Man Has Become a Confessing Animal-Michel
Foucault. The Sociology Book: Big Ideas Explained
• Atkinson, Sam. 2015. When Love Finally Wins it has to face all Kinds of Defeat-
Ulrich Beck. The Sociology Book: Big Ideas Explained: pp. 320-323.
• Freedman, E. B. (2002). “No Turning Back: The history of feminism and the
future of women. New York. Ballantine Books.
• Miner, Horace (1956). Body Rituals Among the Nacirema
• Seccombe, Karen. 2014. Concepts on Courtship, Intimacy and Partnering.
Families and their Social Worlds: pp. 197-212.
• Seccombe, Karen. 2014. Concepts on Family and Stratification. Families and
their Social Worlds: pp. 128-131;133;139-143, 145-150.
• Seccombe, Karen. 2014. Concepts on Family and Violence. Families and their
Social Worlds: pp. 337-349
• Seccombe, Karen. 2014. Concepts on Sex and Gender. Families and their Social
Worlds: pp.99-109.
• Seccombe, Karen (2014). Functions of the Family: Variations and Universals.
Families and their Social Worlds: pp. 42-45
• Seccombe, Karen (2014). The Sociological Imagination. Families and their Social
Worlds: pp.8-9
• Seccombe, Karen. 2014. Theoretical Perspectives in Marriage and Family.
Families and their Social Worlds: pp.15-17.
• Seccombe, Karen. 2014. What are Families? Families and their Social Worlds:
p.5
• Seccombe, Karen. 2014. Where do we learn gender? Families and their Social
Worlds

64