Stephanie Coontz presents the idea of divorce and how it affects children. She makes a statement that I found extremely interesting and something that a lot of people would agree with. She said, “We may be heading into what some sociologist call a ‘post marriage society’, where women will raise the children and men will not be there in any stable, institutional way (pg.97).” Coontz goes onto say, “unless we keep the heat on about the damages of divorce, parents will be tempted to put their own selfish concerns above the needs of their children (pg.98).” One of the most mind blowing statements in Coontz’s article reads, “divorce can interfere with effective parenting and deprive children of parental resources (pg. 98).”
“While it is true that children from divorced and remarried families are more likely to drop out of school, exhibit emotional distress, get in trouble with the law, and abuse drugs and alcohol than children who grow up with both biological parents, most kids, from every kind of family, avoid these prevails (pg. 99).” Coontz then goes onto say that, “two researchers compared family types and child outcomes over the period of five years found that children who remained in highly conflicted marriages had more severe behavior problems than children in any other kind of family (pg.102).”
I personally believe that divorce has an effect on children. There are few times where it is positive but in my experience, it mostly has a negative effect. Coontz sheds light on a topic I believe is over looked and does a good job explaining how children get caught up in divorce.
Furstenberg and Cherlin state, “there is evidence that some children show signs of disturbance months, sometimes even years before their parents separate (pg. 492).” With short term adjustment, “the crisis begins for children with shock, anxiety, and anger upon learning about the breakup (pg.493).” Next, Furstenberg and Cherlin discuss long term affects. “Even less is known about the long term consequences than short term consequences. But over the long run there is still great variation in how the process of divorce plays out (pg. 494).”
Furstenberg and Cherlin point out that a “critical key factor in both short term and long term adjustment is how effectively the custodial parent, who is usually the mother, functions as a parent (pg. 496).” A second key factor in children’s well being is “a low level of conflict between their mother and father (pg. 496).” A possible third key factor in children’s successful adjustment is, “the maintenance of a continuing relationship with the non-custodial parent, who is usually the father (pg. 497).”
Carr discusses three factors that are the most important influences on spousal bereavement. The first factor is, “the age of the husband and wife (pg.24).” The second factor is, “how the spouse died (pg.24).” And the third factor is, “what the couple’s life was like prior to death (pg.24).” Carr goes onto say, “Men and women experience loss in very different ways, so they also experience the loss of a spouse differently. These differences include not only psychological responses but also practical readjustments to daily life (pg.25).” Carr points out that men and women grieve differently but from my own experience with loss, I know it is not always what people think how men and women will react. I think it depends on the family and how the members of the family show emotion.
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
Thursday, April 19, 2007
Childhood in a New Age
Thorne and Luria discuss childhood and how it is related to gender. They observed, “children are usually very careful to separate their friendships and activities on the basis of sex (pg.137).” They continue by saying, “the sociological significance of children’s play is that both boys and girls are helping to socialize one another into primary adult gender roles, females being more concerned with intimacy, emotionality, and romance, and boys with sexuality. They are writing ‘scripts’ that they will follow as adults (pg. 137).” Thorne and Luria also explain that boys and girls are separated on a daily basis and the difference of the interactions just between all boys or all girls. It is operated by society on a daily basis and fuels the idea that boys and girls should be separated.
Goldscheider and White talk about housework and how much responsibility is put on children. “Sex typing of children’s household tasks begins very early, so differences have crystallized by adolescents. Girls tend to spend about twice as much time on house work as their brothers, mirroring the different levels of contribution by their mothers and fathers (pg. 809).” However, “it is often the case that neither boys nor girls gain much experience doing household tasks, because in many families their mothers do almost all of them (pg. 809).” Personally, I did not do much housework growing up, nor did my brother, because my mother did almost all of it. Today, it is still the same. My mother still does the dishes and cleans the house while working while my father does next to nothing for housework. I believe most families today are set up like this but I think the set up of parents working and numbers of children have an effect on this.
Lareau breaks down the models of childrearing by race and class. One of the points she brings up is that, “the middle class parents, both white and black, tend to conform to a cultural logic of childrearing I call ‘concerted cultivation’. They enroll their children in numerous age-specific organized activities that dominate family life and create enormous labor, particular for mothers (pg. 748).” Next she talks about the working and poor class. “The childrearing strategies of white and black working class and poor parents emphasize the ‘accomplishment of natural growth. These parents believe that as long as they provide food, love and safety, their child will grow and thieve (pg. 749).” Even though each social class my have a slightly different idea of childrearing, I believe that love and support are at the root of each, and I believe that is what is most important.
Schor investigates the commercialization of childhood. She states, “This commercialization of childhood is being driven by a number of factors, including broad social trends. But underlying them all is a marketing juggernaut characterized by growing reach, effectiveness, and audacity. One clue to the marketing mentality is industry language. It's a war out there. Those at whom ads are directed are "targets (pg.1)." This affects child because by the age of 2 they can recognize and want brand names and it may not be in their best interest or the interest of their families to have them. Children are also becoming shoppers and are being sucked into the competitive economic world. “Children's influence is being driven by a number of factors, including changes in parenting style. Older generations were more authoritarian; the famous "children should be seen and not heard" adage meant that parents made most buying decisions (pg. 2).” I believe this commercialization is not good for children because I feel companies are taking advantage of them and are taking away their innocence. Children should be able to enjoy the simple things in life without having to worry about name brands and products.
Goldscheider and White talk about housework and how much responsibility is put on children. “Sex typing of children’s household tasks begins very early, so differences have crystallized by adolescents. Girls tend to spend about twice as much time on house work as their brothers, mirroring the different levels of contribution by their mothers and fathers (pg. 809).” However, “it is often the case that neither boys nor girls gain much experience doing household tasks, because in many families their mothers do almost all of them (pg. 809).” Personally, I did not do much housework growing up, nor did my brother, because my mother did almost all of it. Today, it is still the same. My mother still does the dishes and cleans the house while working while my father does next to nothing for housework. I believe most families today are set up like this but I think the set up of parents working and numbers of children have an effect on this.
Lareau breaks down the models of childrearing by race and class. One of the points she brings up is that, “the middle class parents, both white and black, tend to conform to a cultural logic of childrearing I call ‘concerted cultivation’. They enroll their children in numerous age-specific organized activities that dominate family life and create enormous labor, particular for mothers (pg. 748).” Next she talks about the working and poor class. “The childrearing strategies of white and black working class and poor parents emphasize the ‘accomplishment of natural growth. These parents believe that as long as they provide food, love and safety, their child will grow and thieve (pg. 749).” Even though each social class my have a slightly different idea of childrearing, I believe that love and support are at the root of each, and I believe that is what is most important.
Schor investigates the commercialization of childhood. She states, “This commercialization of childhood is being driven by a number of factors, including broad social trends. But underlying them all is a marketing juggernaut characterized by growing reach, effectiveness, and audacity. One clue to the marketing mentality is industry language. It's a war out there. Those at whom ads are directed are "targets (pg.1)." This affects child because by the age of 2 they can recognize and want brand names and it may not be in their best interest or the interest of their families to have them. Children are also becoming shoppers and are being sucked into the competitive economic world. “Children's influence is being driven by a number of factors, including changes in parenting style. Older generations were more authoritarian; the famous "children should be seen and not heard" adage meant that parents made most buying decisions (pg. 2).” I believe this commercialization is not good for children because I feel companies are taking advantage of them and are taking away their innocence. Children should be able to enjoy the simple things in life without having to worry about name brands and products.
Thursday, April 12, 2007
Fatherhood in America
Joseph H. Pleck’s article, “American Fathering in Historical Perspective” talks about the role of fatherhood. He states, “The father was viewed as a moral pedagogue who must instruct children of both sexes what God as well as the world required of them (pg.352).” Pleck then explains how fatherhood is a ‘duty’. “Notions of the ‘duty’ of fathers to their children, and of children of their fathers, were central to the father-child relationship (pg. 352).” Pleck also mentions the strong connections fathers have with their children emotionally. In the nineteenth and twenty century the father’s role began to shift. “A gradual and steady shift toward a greater role for the mother, and a decreased and more indirect role for the father is clear and unmistakable (pg. 353).”
“Today, the critique of the distant father-breadwinner is intensifying further (pg. 359).” I agree with this statement. From what I have experience and seen growing up, fathers are expected to provide for their family as well as have an active role in their children’s lives. My father run’s his own business and still managed to make every sporting event that my brother and I had. I think this kind of effort is expected out of every father in today’s society.
Francine Deutsh’s article has a discussion with blue collar couples with children who have decided to ‘alternate shifts’ at work. This decision comes about because they need more money to provide for their family because the types of jobs they occupy do not provide enough money to cover all the expenses of a family. For example, men are typically construction workers, firemen, police officers, or delivery men. Their wives are typically nurses or retail clerks (pg. 115). One of the examples Deutsh uses is a construction worker named Stan and who connected with the term ‘Mr. Mom’. Stan says he never thought he would have the type of role he has with his family but is glad he can do what he can for his family. If I were in the situation where my husband and I needed to decide upon working alternating shifts, I would do it. It would be difficult but it would be a way to give our family a better life because we would have more money coming as opposed to just one of us working and each of us would be spending a lot of time with our children and would be able to create good relationships with our children.
Dorothy Roberts article touched upon the Black culture and the family. “The female-headed household – not the nuclear family – is the dominant family arrangements for Blacks (pg.146).” She then goes onto say, “The Black family, moreover, has long served as the scapegoat for the Black community plight for many of America’s ills (pg.147).” In terms of societal forces as well as adding to the myth of the absent black father, Roberts points to chronic poverty and imprisonment. Roberts explains that it may seem that children in Black families are fatherless because it is not that their fathers are not around but are trying to improve life. It is a stereotype I think is hard to break but when looking at the Black culture today, many Black men are beginning to take over the households. More Black men are becoming doctors and lawyers and are able to provide a life for their family that was once not possible. They are also more involved with their kids. I believe the myth of the absent Black father will one day disappear.
“Today, the critique of the distant father-breadwinner is intensifying further (pg. 359).” I agree with this statement. From what I have experience and seen growing up, fathers are expected to provide for their family as well as have an active role in their children’s lives. My father run’s his own business and still managed to make every sporting event that my brother and I had. I think this kind of effort is expected out of every father in today’s society.
Francine Deutsh’s article has a discussion with blue collar couples with children who have decided to ‘alternate shifts’ at work. This decision comes about because they need more money to provide for their family because the types of jobs they occupy do not provide enough money to cover all the expenses of a family. For example, men are typically construction workers, firemen, police officers, or delivery men. Their wives are typically nurses or retail clerks (pg. 115). One of the examples Deutsh uses is a construction worker named Stan and who connected with the term ‘Mr. Mom’. Stan says he never thought he would have the type of role he has with his family but is glad he can do what he can for his family. If I were in the situation where my husband and I needed to decide upon working alternating shifts, I would do it. It would be difficult but it would be a way to give our family a better life because we would have more money coming as opposed to just one of us working and each of us would be spending a lot of time with our children and would be able to create good relationships with our children.
Dorothy Roberts article touched upon the Black culture and the family. “The female-headed household – not the nuclear family – is the dominant family arrangements for Blacks (pg.146).” She then goes onto say, “The Black family, moreover, has long served as the scapegoat for the Black community plight for many of America’s ills (pg.147).” In terms of societal forces as well as adding to the myth of the absent black father, Roberts points to chronic poverty and imprisonment. Roberts explains that it may seem that children in Black families are fatherless because it is not that their fathers are not around but are trying to improve life. It is a stereotype I think is hard to break but when looking at the Black culture today, many Black men are beginning to take over the households. More Black men are becoming doctors and lawyers and are able to provide a life for their family that was once not possible. They are also more involved with their kids. I believe the myth of the absent Black father will one day disappear.
Tuesday, April 3, 2007
Moving Up in Class
When I think of social class, I think about how much my life is affected because of a category. I grew up and still live in a low middle class family with my mother, father, and older brother. My parents made extrodinary sacrifices to send my brother and I to private high schools instead of going to public school. My private school cost $25,000 a year while my town’s public school would have been $4,000. The loans my parents took out from the bank and the extra shifts they took at work to get money is just a small part of what I know they did for my brother and I to go to private school.
When I first asked them why they wanted my brother and I to go to private school, they told me that they wanted us to have a better life with more opportunity and that they wanted me to ‘want more’ out of life. They want me to strive for more and to move up in social class. I noticed during high school that everyone came from a better social class and slowly I began to want what they have. A life without having to worry about money and being able to say you are part of a prestige group is something I wanted.
I think social class has affected my idea of families as well as my idea of family in the future because I am now surrounded by a higher social class and will do whatever it takes so my family will be considered part of the group. My morals and ethics and upbringing I will always carry with me and bring to my family that I will have one day but I will be sure to have them be part of a better class. I think social class affects the way people are seen as well as what is possible for them. Most of my friends and neighbors from my town will always be Blue collar and join their parents in the union and there is nothing wrong with that. But when the idea and the scarifies are made to get something better, I believe it is my responsibility to do the same for my family and to push them to want more out of life.
When I first asked them why they wanted my brother and I to go to private school, they told me that they wanted us to have a better life with more opportunity and that they wanted me to ‘want more’ out of life. They want me to strive for more and to move up in social class. I noticed during high school that everyone came from a better social class and slowly I began to want what they have. A life without having to worry about money and being able to say you are part of a prestige group is something I wanted.
I think social class has affected my idea of families as well as my idea of family in the future because I am now surrounded by a higher social class and will do whatever it takes so my family will be considered part of the group. My morals and ethics and upbringing I will always carry with me and bring to my family that I will have one day but I will be sure to have them be part of a better class. I think social class affects the way people are seen as well as what is possible for them. Most of my friends and neighbors from my town will always be Blue collar and join their parents in the union and there is nothing wrong with that. But when the idea and the scarifies are made to get something better, I believe it is my responsibility to do the same for my family and to push them to want more out of life.
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
Marriage and Society
In Sharon Hays’s, “From Rods to Reasoning”, Hays discusses four historical stages of development. “In late seventeenth and early eighteenth century New England we find no notion of childhood innocence, no protected place for children, no separate children’s toys and games (pg. 26).” Hays discusses that ‘obedience training’ was also a big factor in early New England. It was previously stated that, “The model of intensive mothering tells us that children are innocent and priceless, that their rearing should be carried out primarily by individual mothers and that it should be centered on the children’s needs, with methods that are informed by experts, labor intensive, and costly (pg.21).” Beside Puritan New England, Hays brings up Catholics. She states, “breaking the child’s will through physical punishment was not an absolute necessity since the child’s sin could be expunged through baptism and other sacraments (pg.28).” Hays goes onto say that “the development of a child’s conscience was thus grounded in moral affection (pg.32).”
When I think of my mother and my development, I think her intensity has enabled me to be socially developed and to understand how to create and react in relationships. I can say I have also seen this with my friend’s mothers because they were brought up in a similar way. The Catholic concept applies to me directly because I am Catholic and my parents do not believe in physical punishment of my brother and I.
Ann Crittenden’s, “The Price of Motherhood: Why the Most Important Job in the World Is Still the Least Valued”, discuss mothers being devalued, particularly in the United States. “A mother’s work is not just invisible; it can be a handicap. Raising children may be the most important job in the world, but you can’t put it on resume (pg.3).” Crittenden goes onto say, “the devaluation of mothers’ work permeates virtually every major institution. Not only is care giving not rewarded, its is penalized (pg.4).” I believe Crittenden’s best point is that, “the United States is a society at war with itself (pg.5).” She also states that marriage is ‘still not an equal financial partnership (pg.6).’ A third point is that “government social policies don’t even define unpaid care of family dependents as work……for all of these reasons motherhood is the single biggest risk factor for poverty in old age (pg.7).”
I agree with the idea that today’s society is at war with itself and that motherhood is devalued. It is hard for women to move up in the working world and I believe it is save to say that many people overlook the duties and responsibilities of being a mother. Crittenden makes valid arguments that I agree with and feel society should listen.
Patricia Hill Collins’s “Black Women and Motherhood,” discusses two types of mothering Black women tend to do. The first is ‘Superstrong Black Mother’ “who praise’s Black women’s resiliency in a society that routinely paints them as bad mothers (pg. 174).” “The institution of Black motherhood consists of a series of constantly renegotiated relationships that African American women experience with one another, with Black children, with the larger African American community, and with self (pg. 176).” When talking about the subject of power, Collin’s comments, “Much of US Black women’s status within women-centered kin networks stems from their activist mothering as community other mothers (pg.192).”
Kathryn Edin and Maria Kefalas’s “Unmarried with Children”, discusses women, particularly those who are financially challenged, and raising a family. Edin states, “promoting marriage among the poor has become the new war on poverty…..and demographics still project more than seven in ten women who had a child outside a marriage will eventually wed someone (pg.17).” A girl interviewed, Jen, admitted that it was not ideal for her have a child out of wedlock but expressed that it would be possible to manage regardless the situation. “For the poor, marriage has become an exclusive goal – one they feel ought to be reserved for those who can support a ‘white picket fence’ lifestyle: a mortgage on a modest row home, a car and some furniture, some savings in the bank, and a enough money left over for a ‘decent’ wedding (pg.18).” “Given the economic challenges and often perilously low quality of romantic relationships among unmarried parents, poor women may be right to cautious about marriage (pg. 21).”
Society is encouraging getting married and completing degrees because there is a tax break for married couples. Effort is being made to banish poverty but I believe it is an up hill battle that will take a lot of time and effort from everyone. I believe young women should get married to ensure a little fit of finical security because of tax breaks and because you have two people trying to improve family life in stead of one.
When I think of my mother and my development, I think her intensity has enabled me to be socially developed and to understand how to create and react in relationships. I can say I have also seen this with my friend’s mothers because they were brought up in a similar way. The Catholic concept applies to me directly because I am Catholic and my parents do not believe in physical punishment of my brother and I.
Ann Crittenden’s, “The Price of Motherhood: Why the Most Important Job in the World Is Still the Least Valued”, discuss mothers being devalued, particularly in the United States. “A mother’s work is not just invisible; it can be a handicap. Raising children may be the most important job in the world, but you can’t put it on resume (pg.3).” Crittenden goes onto say, “the devaluation of mothers’ work permeates virtually every major institution. Not only is care giving not rewarded, its is penalized (pg.4).” I believe Crittenden’s best point is that, “the United States is a society at war with itself (pg.5).” She also states that marriage is ‘still not an equal financial partnership (pg.6).’ A third point is that “government social policies don’t even define unpaid care of family dependents as work……for all of these reasons motherhood is the single biggest risk factor for poverty in old age (pg.7).”
I agree with the idea that today’s society is at war with itself and that motherhood is devalued. It is hard for women to move up in the working world and I believe it is save to say that many people overlook the duties and responsibilities of being a mother. Crittenden makes valid arguments that I agree with and feel society should listen.
Patricia Hill Collins’s “Black Women and Motherhood,” discusses two types of mothering Black women tend to do. The first is ‘Superstrong Black Mother’ “who praise’s Black women’s resiliency in a society that routinely paints them as bad mothers (pg. 174).” “The institution of Black motherhood consists of a series of constantly renegotiated relationships that African American women experience with one another, with Black children, with the larger African American community, and with self (pg. 176).” When talking about the subject of power, Collin’s comments, “Much of US Black women’s status within women-centered kin networks stems from their activist mothering as community other mothers (pg.192).”
Kathryn Edin and Maria Kefalas’s “Unmarried with Children”, discusses women, particularly those who are financially challenged, and raising a family. Edin states, “promoting marriage among the poor has become the new war on poverty…..and demographics still project more than seven in ten women who had a child outside a marriage will eventually wed someone (pg.17).” A girl interviewed, Jen, admitted that it was not ideal for her have a child out of wedlock but expressed that it would be possible to manage regardless the situation. “For the poor, marriage has become an exclusive goal – one they feel ought to be reserved for those who can support a ‘white picket fence’ lifestyle: a mortgage on a modest row home, a car and some furniture, some savings in the bank, and a enough money left over for a ‘decent’ wedding (pg.18).” “Given the economic challenges and often perilously low quality of romantic relationships among unmarried parents, poor women may be right to cautious about marriage (pg. 21).”
Society is encouraging getting married and completing degrees because there is a tax break for married couples. Effort is being made to banish poverty but I believe it is an up hill battle that will take a lot of time and effort from everyone. I believe young women should get married to ensure a little fit of finical security because of tax breaks and because you have two people trying to improve family life in stead of one.
Sunday, March 18, 2007
The Family In-Depth
Chris Hafner-Eaton and Laurie K. Pearce’s article “Balancing Individual Freedoms and Protection of the Public Health” discusses the idea of midwifes. One of the reasons discussed about why some women prefer the assistance of a midwife is because today midwives express their new philosophy and “teach women how to give birth (pg.819).” It is also discussed that women have said they would of preferred a non-hospital birth but there was “no medical backup available (pg.814).” Personally, I believe child birth should take place in a hospital because if there are any complications, the tools and medicine is on hand. Also, with technology becoming more advanced, along with modern medicine, I believe child birth will become easier for women and will become less risky.
Lawrence Friedman’s article “Who are our Children? Adoption, Past, and Present,” talks about adoption and its development. It is stated in the article that parents “at one time, parental control over children continued as long as children lived (pg.273).” In 1851, the first adoption law was passed and eventually formal adoption was formed (pg. 273). “The changes in family life we have seen over the past century are relative changes (pg.273).” This thought lead to the idea that, “The government has no right to tell parents how to raise their children (pg.273).” And that this changed the purpose of formal adoptions.
Sharon Hays’s article, “Money and Morality," drives into the discussion of welfare. Conservative and liberal views of welfare differ. “The conservative critics of welfare offered the primary fuel for negative public sentiment. They accused welfare participants of being lazy, promiscuous, and pathologically dependent, and they argue that the welfare system encouraged those bad values (pg.12).” “Liberal scholars have agreed that there were problems in the old system and among the poor. They have argued that any problems of morality that existed among poor families were primarily the result, rather of economic hardship (pg.12).” TANF “established the absolute demand that mother’s participate in the full labor force (pg. 15).” “Mothers must be prepared to leave the home to find paying jobs that will support themselves and their children (pg.15).” When I think about the values of our society in relation to welfare, I think our values have shifted. It was once not expect for a woman to work to help support her family, her job was to take care of the home and the children. Today, I believe a woman is expected to carry her weight and help provide for the family financially. I do not see this as being a bad thing but simply as a change in society.
Block, Korteweg and Woodward also discuss poverty. A country such as Norway is remarkable because of how the government improves the lives of its citizens. It is difficult for countries such as Norway to understand poverty because it is not the same experience there as it is in the United States. Inflation and the economy as well as lack of jobs have contributed to poverty and its theories. Block, Korteweg and Woodward believe that the government cannot solve poverty. “True Compassion” is what the authors believe can help make the American Dream come true (pg.19).”
Clawson and Gerstel believe US child care could be approve if regulations and paperwork were stricter (pg. 34). The idea of ‘core programs’ would also assist in the improvement. Centers and after school programs regulated would be an extreme help (pg.35). I agree that child care needs to be improved. I also feel it is improving and soon the government will make stronger regulations.
Lawrence Friedman’s article “Who are our Children? Adoption, Past, and Present,” talks about adoption and its development. It is stated in the article that parents “at one time, parental control over children continued as long as children lived (pg.273).” In 1851, the first adoption law was passed and eventually formal adoption was formed (pg. 273). “The changes in family life we have seen over the past century are relative changes (pg.273).” This thought lead to the idea that, “The government has no right to tell parents how to raise their children (pg.273).” And that this changed the purpose of formal adoptions.
Sharon Hays’s article, “Money and Morality," drives into the discussion of welfare. Conservative and liberal views of welfare differ. “The conservative critics of welfare offered the primary fuel for negative public sentiment. They accused welfare participants of being lazy, promiscuous, and pathologically dependent, and they argue that the welfare system encouraged those bad values (pg.12).” “Liberal scholars have agreed that there were problems in the old system and among the poor. They have argued that any problems of morality that existed among poor families were primarily the result, rather of economic hardship (pg.12).” TANF “established the absolute demand that mother’s participate in the full labor force (pg. 15).” “Mothers must be prepared to leave the home to find paying jobs that will support themselves and their children (pg.15).” When I think about the values of our society in relation to welfare, I think our values have shifted. It was once not expect for a woman to work to help support her family, her job was to take care of the home and the children. Today, I believe a woman is expected to carry her weight and help provide for the family financially. I do not see this as being a bad thing but simply as a change in society.
Block, Korteweg and Woodward also discuss poverty. A country such as Norway is remarkable because of how the government improves the lives of its citizens. It is difficult for countries such as Norway to understand poverty because it is not the same experience there as it is in the United States. Inflation and the economy as well as lack of jobs have contributed to poverty and its theories. Block, Korteweg and Woodward believe that the government cannot solve poverty. “True Compassion” is what the authors believe can help make the American Dream come true (pg.19).”
Clawson and Gerstel believe US child care could be approve if regulations and paperwork were stricter (pg. 34). The idea of ‘core programs’ would also assist in the improvement. Centers and after school programs regulated would be an extreme help (pg.35). I agree that child care needs to be improved. I also feel it is improving and soon the government will make stronger regulations.
Saturday, February 24, 2007
Finding Balence
Arlie Russell Hochschild’s chapter titled ‘Joey’s Problem: Nancy and Evan Holt’,
sheds light on the myth of being an egalitarian. Hochschild elaborates on this myth by explaining that Nancy halt, “wants a similar balance of spheres and equal power (pg.34).” She goes onto state, “Nancy began her marriage hoping that she and Evan would base their identities in both their parenthood and their careers, but clearly tilted toward parenthood and. Evan felt it was fine for Nancy to have a career, if she could handle the family too (pg. 34).” The idea of handling both a career and family is then discussed when Nancy explains that she feels she almost has to beg to have a little help. She uses the example of setting the kitchen table for dinner as an example and talks about the emotions involved. “I hate to ask; why should I ask? It’s begging (pg.34).” The balance between emotion and work is presented through this example and is later expanded when the topic of the love life between Nancy and Evan is brought up as well as putting their son Joey to bed. It is made clear that Joey does not go to bed easily and that Evan has a difficult time and passes on the responsibility to Nancy. After a long day Nancy will at times give in and allow Joey to sleep in their room. “It is part of their current arrangement that putting Joey to bed is ‘Nancy’s Job’ (pg.34).” In terms of love making, Nancy explains, “sex seems like more work….the Holts consider their fatigue and impoverished sex life as a result of Joey’s problem (pg. 34).” These issues are related to the myth because while Nancy wants equal power and similar balance, it is not the case because Evan expects her to take care of the family.
When I think of my own family, there is a similarity to Nancy and Evan. My mother had a career and then would take care of my brother and I when I got home. When it came to doing dishes, setting the table, or giving my brother and I bath, it was always my mother, my father would be there to ‘supervise’ per se. Even today at the age of 21, and my brother at 26, my mom is still doing the second shift that is discussed. My father has never held my mother back in terms of perusing her career as long as our family was taken care of. Luckily for myself and my mother, she was able to have both a career and take care of the family even though I am sure it was extremely difficult.
Joan Williams’ article focused on domesticity. Domesticity is defined as “a gender system comprising most centrally of both the particular organization of market work and family work that arose around 1780 and the gender norms that justify, sustain, and reproduce the organization (pg.1).” She goes onto explain that it has two defining characteristics, one being the ideal worker and its market world and then other a worker who does not take time out to raise a family. Williams explains, “the ideology of domesticity held that men ‘naturally’ belong in the market because they are competitive and aggressive; women being in the home because of their ‘natural’ focus on relationships, children, and an ethic of care (pg.1).” Constraints include minimizing father’s involvement, pressures on men to perform as ideal workers, as well as areas of live unrelated to gender. In hunter and gathers society, I believe everyone played a role and had a job to fulfill so it was unrelated to gender. Example, everyone collected food and contributed to the family. However, I also believe that there is pressure on men to be an ideal worker because it is they that the everyone turns to. Things were slightly different in colonial society. Although each member of the family had a job to do, it was the men who had pressure on them to be an ideal worker because they were the main provider for the family. For example, men were seen as superior and his wife would refer to him as ‘sir’.
Williams makes some fascinating arguments about sex discrimination and ‘free choice’. “if women were to choose the same work patterns as men then they could and would enter more skilled occupations, and the male-female wage gap would be substantially reduced. To the extent that sex differences in labor force participation patterns are not themselves caused by discrimination, sex difference in occupations and wages are thus the result of free choice made by men and women (pg. 14).” Another expert, Vicki Shultz has documented “that courts in sex discrimination cases often accept the argument that women ‘lack interest’ in traditionally male positions. Shultz has argued persuasively that women’s choice are framed by the actions of their employers, since most ordinary women do not spend time trying to get jobs for which women are never hired (pg. 14).” I found the most fascinating part of the article to be about free choice. Williams states, “acknowledging the impact of the second shift makes women vulnerable only if one accepts the claim that women’s ‘choice’ to marginalize precludes discrimination. ‘Choice’ is only a defense against discrimination if women’s marginalization is freely chosen in the same sense that some people choose Mars Bars over Baby Ruths (pg.15).” I agree with her argument because I believe women feel they have to choose between both a career and a family. I like to believe that I will be different and will be able to have both and be very successful at both but I am sure with time things could change. It is a decision every woman with a career and a family makes and it has been brought down to the level of this or that, just like the candy bar metaphor. Williams makes some brilliant points and brings some fascinating ideas to the table.
Carrington explores the breaking up of duties in homosexual couples. He created a study and stated, “most participants in this study, when asked to describe in general terms how they divide up household responsibilities in their relationship, relied upon the language of egalitarianism. Typical responses included, ‘Oh, I would say it’s 50-50 around here’, or ‘we pretty much share all of the responsibilities’ or ‘everyone does their fair share’, or ‘its pretty even’. These perceptions persist even in the face of obvious empirical observations to the contrary. Many lesbigay family members fail to make much of a distinction between what they consider equal and what they consider fair. The blurring of these two quite distinct matters is necessary to maintaining the myth of egalitarianism (pg.83).” However, what Carrington found was quite different. He uses the example of a deaf lesbian couple used in the study and “the inequality in the division of work was apparent to the three of us (pg.84).” In his conclusion Carrington states, “True equality, measured with a plumb line, eludes many of these families, but that has little to do with the families per se, and much more to do with the character and quality of employment opportunities that avail themselves to these families. If the reality is that only one member of the family can make money in a fulfilling way, then lesbigay families adjust to that reality (pg.106).” There is not much difference between lesigay families and heterosexual families.
sheds light on the myth of being an egalitarian. Hochschild elaborates on this myth by explaining that Nancy halt, “wants a similar balance of spheres and equal power (pg.34).” She goes onto state, “Nancy began her marriage hoping that she and Evan would base their identities in both their parenthood and their careers, but clearly tilted toward parenthood and. Evan felt it was fine for Nancy to have a career, if she could handle the family too (pg. 34).” The idea of handling both a career and family is then discussed when Nancy explains that she feels she almost has to beg to have a little help. She uses the example of setting the kitchen table for dinner as an example and talks about the emotions involved. “I hate to ask; why should I ask? It’s begging (pg.34).” The balance between emotion and work is presented through this example and is later expanded when the topic of the love life between Nancy and Evan is brought up as well as putting their son Joey to bed. It is made clear that Joey does not go to bed easily and that Evan has a difficult time and passes on the responsibility to Nancy. After a long day Nancy will at times give in and allow Joey to sleep in their room. “It is part of their current arrangement that putting Joey to bed is ‘Nancy’s Job’ (pg.34).” In terms of love making, Nancy explains, “sex seems like more work….the Holts consider their fatigue and impoverished sex life as a result of Joey’s problem (pg. 34).” These issues are related to the myth because while Nancy wants equal power and similar balance, it is not the case because Evan expects her to take care of the family.
When I think of my own family, there is a similarity to Nancy and Evan. My mother had a career and then would take care of my brother and I when I got home. When it came to doing dishes, setting the table, or giving my brother and I bath, it was always my mother, my father would be there to ‘supervise’ per se. Even today at the age of 21, and my brother at 26, my mom is still doing the second shift that is discussed. My father has never held my mother back in terms of perusing her career as long as our family was taken care of. Luckily for myself and my mother, she was able to have both a career and take care of the family even though I am sure it was extremely difficult.
Joan Williams’ article focused on domesticity. Domesticity is defined as “a gender system comprising most centrally of both the particular organization of market work and family work that arose around 1780 and the gender norms that justify, sustain, and reproduce the organization (pg.1).” She goes onto explain that it has two defining characteristics, one being the ideal worker and its market world and then other a worker who does not take time out to raise a family. Williams explains, “the ideology of domesticity held that men ‘naturally’ belong in the market because they are competitive and aggressive; women being in the home because of their ‘natural’ focus on relationships, children, and an ethic of care (pg.1).” Constraints include minimizing father’s involvement, pressures on men to perform as ideal workers, as well as areas of live unrelated to gender. In hunter and gathers society, I believe everyone played a role and had a job to fulfill so it was unrelated to gender. Example, everyone collected food and contributed to the family. However, I also believe that there is pressure on men to be an ideal worker because it is they that the everyone turns to. Things were slightly different in colonial society. Although each member of the family had a job to do, it was the men who had pressure on them to be an ideal worker because they were the main provider for the family. For example, men were seen as superior and his wife would refer to him as ‘sir’.
Williams makes some fascinating arguments about sex discrimination and ‘free choice’. “if women were to choose the same work patterns as men then they could and would enter more skilled occupations, and the male-female wage gap would be substantially reduced. To the extent that sex differences in labor force participation patterns are not themselves caused by discrimination, sex difference in occupations and wages are thus the result of free choice made by men and women (pg. 14).” Another expert, Vicki Shultz has documented “that courts in sex discrimination cases often accept the argument that women ‘lack interest’ in traditionally male positions. Shultz has argued persuasively that women’s choice are framed by the actions of their employers, since most ordinary women do not spend time trying to get jobs for which women are never hired (pg. 14).” I found the most fascinating part of the article to be about free choice. Williams states, “acknowledging the impact of the second shift makes women vulnerable only if one accepts the claim that women’s ‘choice’ to marginalize precludes discrimination. ‘Choice’ is only a defense against discrimination if women’s marginalization is freely chosen in the same sense that some people choose Mars Bars over Baby Ruths (pg.15).” I agree with her argument because I believe women feel they have to choose between both a career and a family. I like to believe that I will be different and will be able to have both and be very successful at both but I am sure with time things could change. It is a decision every woman with a career and a family makes and it has been brought down to the level of this or that, just like the candy bar metaphor. Williams makes some brilliant points and brings some fascinating ideas to the table.
Carrington explores the breaking up of duties in homosexual couples. He created a study and stated, “most participants in this study, when asked to describe in general terms how they divide up household responsibilities in their relationship, relied upon the language of egalitarianism. Typical responses included, ‘Oh, I would say it’s 50-50 around here’, or ‘we pretty much share all of the responsibilities’ or ‘everyone does their fair share’, or ‘its pretty even’. These perceptions persist even in the face of obvious empirical observations to the contrary. Many lesbigay family members fail to make much of a distinction between what they consider equal and what they consider fair. The blurring of these two quite distinct matters is necessary to maintaining the myth of egalitarianism (pg.83).” However, what Carrington found was quite different. He uses the example of a deaf lesbian couple used in the study and “the inequality in the division of work was apparent to the three of us (pg.84).” In his conclusion Carrington states, “True equality, measured with a plumb line, eludes many of these families, but that has little to do with the families per se, and much more to do with the character and quality of employment opportunities that avail themselves to these families. If the reality is that only one member of the family can make money in a fulfilling way, then lesbigay families adjust to that reality (pg.106).” There is not much difference between lesigay families and heterosexual families.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)