Gender

Homosexuality has always been an easily misunderstood aspect of human’s sexual life. People have diverse opinions but also very complex feelings over homosexuality. From the ancient years homosexuals were called “human garbage” and thought to be unclean by society. They were always isolated and rejected because of their sexual preferences, which were something different and unusual in comparison with the standards of society. However the way each of us deal with the fact of homosexuality depends on our own background, confusion, and personal experience with this issue.

In the last years it has appeared the phenomenon of gay marriages, which actually worries society and raises many speculations about its probable legalization. Gay marriages happen more frequently in the recent years and they provoke disagreements and disputes among people.

The moral issue that arises is whether gay marriages should be made legal or not. The majority of people are against legalization of this kind of marriages because they consider it as something abnormal and as a terrible sin against society, which unavoidably leads to disaster.

According to the common belief gay marriages never existed in the past so there is no reason to change the already existing and well built foundations of this society. Whatever differs from the widely accepted establishment, is isolated and thrust aside. Consequently gay are not allowed to have a family and live their life as they dreamed it of.

Furthermore, homosexuals are despised and rejected from the Christians and the religion in general. They are thought to be the “black ships” which do not deserve to be loved by God or by anyone else. According to our religion the two sexes have to married each other and anything else beside that is considered as blaspheme. They don’t follow the “rules” of society and religion and they have to be punished.

Consequently society, decides for the structure of the most appropriate kind of family and it actually excludes the minority of homosexuals by depriving them the right of getting married, creating a family and even have or adopt children.

Additionally they are not suitable to bring up a child with the normal way because inevitably one of the two sexes is absent. According to Freud the lack of one of the two sexes in a marriage ends up to be disastrous for the personality of the child. This comes as a natural consequence because the child has only one sex model to imitate and learn from. Things become even more complicated when the child is of the opposite sex from the parents.

On the other hand, according to homosexuals and their supporters same sex marriages should be legalized, because all people despite their sexual preferences must be able to get married with the person they love. Homosexuality is not something repulsive but just something different that heterosexuals are not used to.

Gay support the opinion that sexual orientation is something, which seems to be “‘given” and it can’t change. Homosexuals can’t deny the truth about themselves and they get in a process of discovering and accepting themselves as they are. We must do the same thing and avoid criticizing them for their choices. Sexual orientation has nothing to do with morality. Homosexuals as well as heterosexuals can be involved in sexual sin, including promiscuity, infidelity and abuse.

They are just like the rest of us, they have the same rights and they deserve the same opportunities in life. Consequently, they should be allowed to get married and create a family. They can be as good parents as the ordinary parents. They can offer love, tenderness and they can contribute to the formation of their children’s personality.

In conclusion homosexuality has many supporters but also many enemies. The problem that arises is whether it should be legalized or not. As we know from history all kind of discriminations led humanity straight to disaster in the past years. So as we accept every person with its benefits but also its disadvantages, we should also accept the homosexuals. Even if people cannot easily accept something new and different that inclines from what is considered as normal we must try to accept it and give homosexuals the chance to fulfil their dreams and live their lives without any unfair discriminations through legalization of gay marriages.

Despite the laws and movements, women still do not enjoy equality in the workplace, in position or wages. In this essay I will discuss the origins of gender inequality in an effort to find out where this was first instigated. Initially I will talk about the historical motives of gender inequality and the work of the earlier women’s movements and campaigns for equal rights in the early 1900’s. I will then discuss various feminist theories of gender inequality, including recent government statistics.

Finally I will conclude with my own viewpoints on gender inequality in the workplace in an attempt to discover why it continues to exist today. Ann Oakley 1981(cited in Haralambos and Holborn) gave a historical analysis of the changing role in society for women from before the industrial revolution in the 19th century to the 1970’s housewife. Oakley says that men and women and also the children of the working class were employed in the factories. 1819 saw the beginning of the factory act that gradually restricted child labour.

From 1841 to 1914 (the beginning of World War 1) women were seen as a threat to men and their employment. In 1852 women’s employment was greatly reduced by The Mines Act which banned women from working in the mines, tradition said women should be in the home as a housewife and mother. In 1851 only 1 in 4 women were in paid employment by 1911 it was 1in 10. With the combination of these various acts passed and the growing restrictions on women’s employment, more and more women began to stay at home but not by their own choice.

Harolambos and Holborn 2000 p. 144) World War I saw many women return to the workforce while men were away fighting in the war; the economy needed women in the workforce even though they were paid less than they were worth. In February of 1918 the representation of people’s act gave 2 Women the right to vote for the first time. Under this act only women over 30 were allowed to vote if they were householders, wives of householders, paying annual rent over i??5, or graduates of British universities or women who were qualified although not graduates.

About eight and a half million women were able to vote in the 1918 election. Women also became eligible to stand as MPs. Several suffragette campaigners stood for Parliament in the 1918 election. None were successful. Between 1914 and 1950 many women returned to work, but their primary role was still seen as that of the housewife/ mother, the industrial revolution had initiated many significant changes for women. Men were not happy about this as seen in the words of Jack Tanner: “We, as an organisation are opposed to the introduction of women as a general principal. “(Cited in Walby 1987).

Braverman (1974) disagreed with Tanner saying there was a strong case for women being encouraged into the labour force, and that necessity for cheap unskilled labour was a requirement created by employers. Jack Tanner (at the time the leader of the Amalgamated Engineering Union in 1940) was doing his utmost to prevent women entering the male dominated workplace. The reason why men like Tanner should be so opposed to women to work in his male dominated union was not just because of their fear that women would work for fewer wages than men it was more a system of patriarchal objections which women’s employment threatened to disrupt. Walby 1987 p2-3) 1970 saw the Equal Pay Act, which meant that women were to receive equal pay to men if they were employed to do similar work of the same value.

In 1975 the Sex Discrimination Act was brought in to stop discrimination on the grounds of sex in employment, education and equal chances of promotion. Women in work i. e. paid employment have recently increased, between 1971 and 1997 (E. O. C. briefings, Work and Parenting) the percentage of women in work has increased so that women have now caught up with men in the labour market.

The main reason for this is that more and more married women are going outside the home to work, although lone mother’s statistics have dropped. (Harolambos and Holborn) 3 Sylvia Walby in Gender Transformations (1997) agrees with these findings, saying that since the 1980’s integration of women in the male dominated workplace has increased dramatically, the number of women occupying higher ranking positions mainly in the professional and managerial careers has risen by 155% as opposed to a 33% rise by men.

An increase in women’s educational qualifications is seen as one of the main reasons for this remarkable boost to women’s participation in higher ranking jobs. (Cited in Robinson and Richardson 1997) Norris (1987) says unquestionably women have always worked, but it is in caring for children and the elderly and the preparation and serving of food and looking after a household, known as unpaid labour, this has constantly been invisible in official statistics.

One of the most significant changes for women in the labour force since the 1960’s has been the percentage of women returning to the workforce and the decline of men’s employment. Recently for every 6 men in paid employment there were 4 women, it has been predicted that these trends will continue to increase. However there are visible differences between some countries, in Scandinavia and North America, for example, women make up half the official labour force compared with less than a third in Spain, Ireland and America.

In countries such as Canada Portugal and Norway the number of women in paid employment doubled. However in countries such as France, Britain and Germany, Women have been known to leave the workforce to start a family only to return in later years, this is known as the ‘M’ curve. (Politics & Sexual Equality1987) Women in work i. e. paid employment has recently increased, between 1971 and 1997 the percentage of women in work has increased so that women have now caught up with men in the labour market.

EOC briefings, work and parenting1997) The main reason for this is that more and more married women are going outside the home to work, although lone mother’s statistics have dropped (Hood 1997) 4. Barron and Norris (Haralambos and Holborn2000) argued that there are 2 not 1 labour market as outlined below: Primary labour market is made up from good salaries, job security, good working conditions and good promotion prospects; secondary labour market is made up from lower paid jobs, less job security, lower working conditions and less opportunities of job promotion.

These work side by side but it is near impossible for someone from the secondary labour market to be promoted to the primary labour market. Primary sector workers include professionals and managerial, highly skilled manual workers, secondary include unskilled and semi skilled workers manual and non manual workers. Dual labour market results from employers using these methods to keep the type of labour they require so incentives are offered to keep highly skilled in the workplace, secondary sector are seen as dispensable, easily replaced, no incentives for high wages, job security, or promotions is offered to them.

The dual labour market can apply to both men and women but mainly women, who are seen as easy to replace and having no interest in learning new skills and less concerned with high wages. Men are still seen as the major bread winner and women’s seen as having low status in society and not normally belonging to unions is one of the reasons why they are not as likely to aim for primary sector employment. Normally once a woman begins secondary employment there is little chance she will progress to the primary sector (Haralambos and Holborn 2000)

Gender divisions and inequality has been linked to feminist campaigners who have tried to put an end to sexual discrimination and inequality in the workplace. The dominance of males throughout society is known as Patriarchy. Patriarchy explains gender and radical feminist explain male power. Radical feminists like Susan Walby in 1997 explains that ‘Patriarchy is seen as the primary form of social inequality’ the domestic area is not the only one that women participate in. She shows how the idea of patriarchy is useful in explaining the relationship between women’s restriction’s in 5 he private and public area by showing that they work equally to achieve this dependence as well as maintaining patriarchy. Walby explains that it is men who are to blame for women’s oppression; women are treated unequal because of their unwaged position in society and also because of household commitments. (Robinson and Richardson 1997)

Recently in America there have been various discussions about the Glass Ceiling Syndrome and that there is a certain plateau that women can progress to in the workplace, then reach no further. Below are the three methods by which these are implemented; . Networking by word of mouth – most large companies fill vacancies through word of mouth connections, employees are sometimes identified and interviewed (at lunches, dinners or clubs) and then made an offer of employment outside normal working hours 2. Networking by Employee Referrals – an employee refers another employee from a group of (mostly) men mainly from within their own social group; this again does little for the promotional prospects of women. 3. Executive Search Firms – some companies use executive search firms to fill a large number of highs ranking jobs.

Some companies have not made some of these firms aware of the equal opportunity obligations under the law. (www. theglassceiling. ) One of the projects that the government has recently introduced is the Work track Programme; this was said to benefit long term unemployed and to help them gain new skills and also to help them back into the workforce. It was said to be particularly beneficial to single parents (mainly women) with children as the family credit top up could be claimed. The downside of this was that it only lasted for 6 months. It created a false feeling of wealth and it was short term, the after effects are longer lasting.

Personally I participated in this programme and although I thoroughly enjoyed my work experience it was very difficult to go back to income support. Many other non Work track jobs I applied for were not as flexible, wages were a lot lower and childcare was not as easily accessible, and there was also no follow on programme 7 either which would have been very helpful. On completing this Programme participants are informed that they will be ineligible to partake in any other Worktrack courses for the next three years.

Personally I believe this is very unfair, on one hand he government is giving long term unemployed the opportunity to get a taste of what it is like to get back into the labour market, many of the women in this project had not worked for a long time either because they had stayed at home to raise a family or because of lack of skills or educational qualifications and just when they believe they are getting out of the poverty trap the government takes it away from them. Basically it looks to me like another way for the government rigging the unemployment benefit statistics to look as though there are more women in employment than there actually is.

Unfortunately I can only account here for some of the reasons I believe exist for the continued gender inequality in the workplace today, in my remit of 2000 words it would be impossible to cover everything. It is, I feel significant and ironic that it had to be a woman, Ann Oakley, who undertook the first ever study on women and housework, she was incidentally told by her boss (probably a man) ‘to go away and come back with a proper topic’. (Harolambos and Holborn 2000))

In my research for this assignment I have to confess to feeling at times more than a little angry at the blatant and visible discrimination of women in the workplace down through the years. Gender equality in the workplace is still a myth that I personally believe will not be solved in the immediate future, although it has certainly improved in past few decades. I acknowledge that men have been somewhat discriminated against also but nowhere near the same level that women have been and not for such a long period of time. In an ideal world men and women would share equal rights, equal pay and equal status in all societies.

a) The term androgyny is the meaning for a person who uses both male and female characteristics.

b) Content analysis is the analysing of different communications and the sort of message they’re giving out. An example of this is a study of British TV adverts conducted by Manstead and McCulloch in 1981. They found evidence that stereo-typing of the male and female role was significant and that because of this, the adverts are likely to play an active part in shaping cultural attitudes towards women.

c) One study in which the experimental method was used was by Money & Erhardt (1972). They were interested in seeing whether a boy who’s identity had been changed would develop as a biological male or, because of his new identity, a male. They could compare this with his identical twin brother.

The method was that due to an accident during surgery, this child of 7 months suffered injuries to his genitals so badly that the doctors advised to the parents that he should be castrated and given plastic surgery to create a female appearance. During adolescence, the hormone oestrogen was given to the child (known as Joan) to encourage breast development. Money monitored the behaviour of Joan until early adolescence.

The results were that Joan did in fact develop as a normal female. She assumed a traditional female identity and was far more feminine than her identical twin brother.

The conclusion to this experiment is that if it was presented in the nature vs. nurture debate, nurture would win in this case. Even though Joan was a biological male, the results showed that Joan developed a female gender identity.

d) The use of cross-cultural research to investigate gender differences is essentially to point the differences in cultures by environmental factors, shaping the development of gender identity.

Mead (1935) conducted a study of three societies to see whether there were differences in gender roles looking at the nature vs. nurture idea.

She went to New Guinea for six months to study ‘The Arapesh’ who lived in the mountains, ‘The Mundugamor’ who lived by the riverside and ‘The Tchambuli’ who lived on the lakeside. She wasn’t campring the differences between the three groups, but the differences of their culture compared to traditional Western culture.

Her results showed that The Arapesh showed that there were similarities between themselves and Western society, although they were more interested in the community than reaching their own individual targets. The Mundugamor showed traits that were described as masculine. Both males and females were ‘fierce’ and ‘cannibalistic’. The Tchambuli had very obvious gender roles, although they were the reverse of the West; men were more artistic and women held more status and economic power.

Her conclusion to this was that culture is the major socialising and conditioning agent, particularly in the early years. There’s no relationship between biological sex and gender role.

Although this has been a hugely studied work, there is some criticisms that should be brought up. She was very young when she produced this study, so she was with little life experience and her judgement may have been influenced and slightly ‘over-the-top’ in places. She was known to have believed strongly in the idea that the environment is a major factor in shaping gender roles. Mead only spent six months in these places, so didn’t get the full yearly cycle. Errington and Gewertz (1989) recognised all of these problems and went to do the same study that Mead had done over 50 years before them. They went to the Tchambuli and recognised that women didn’t diominate men, nor did men dominate women. They believed that Mead being a women and experiencing what she may have thought ‘unfair’ at the time in 1930’s Western culture, may have changed her idea of what she was observing.

Despite the flaws, this was still a great study that used cross-cultural research to investigate gender differences.

In conclusion, I think that cross-cultural studies into gender differences has certainly provided a lot of evidence over the years to show that gender differences are a socially shaped. Traditions and values certainly shape cultural ideas, but maybe due to the nature of evolution, what might appear to be social to us, may now be biological within our bodies, so it would be harder for us to change our ways that we live.

In reality Britain is not a meritocracy, this is due to discrimination and labelling. It is a capitalist economy. The type of stratification system used in Britain is the Class System, which divides society into a hierarchy of unequal social groups based on their occupation this defines whether they are working-class or middle-class. However, the social divisions are not clearly separated.

The class system is an open society, social mobility is possible across the social hierarchy on the basis of personal achievement, from which you can gain achieved status. However, there are obstacles to social mobility including prejudice, labelling, discrimination, racism and sexism. Lack of Educational achievement can also be an obstacle.

Conjugal roles are the roles played by a male and a female in a marriage or cohabiting relationship. The inequalities in social class between the working-class and middle-class exist in the conjugal roles played in the family.

Traditionally the roles played by the male and female were very different. For example the male did the DIY and the ‘manly’ jobs and the female took care of the more domestic jobs like housework and looking after the children. They had segregated conjugal roles. These roles are the gender stereotype of what is expected of us even today.

However, we have seen a shift from segregated conjugal roles to joint conjugal roles where the male and female do similar tasks. This idea of joint conjugal roles is called ‘The Symmetrical Family’ (Young and Willmott).

Statistics have shown that more men are choosing to become ‘house-husbands’, the ‘New Man’. The reversal of the traditional roles normally occurs where the women earn more than the man, and it is financially practical to swap roles. The importance of female partners earnings gives them more equality to men as they agree to the housework and are then encouraged with the housework.

This shift has been seen mainly amongst middle-class couples, other reasons for this are that middle-class men have been encouraged to stay at home by shorter working hours and improvements in living standards and material comforts in the home because they can afford them. Working-class suffer from material deprivation and cannot afford these material comforts. Young and Willmott (1975) argued modern home-centred families have increasingly more joint conjugal roles.

More geographical mobility also meant a decline of the traditional extended family network so there is no longer the pressure of the extended family on the woman to act, as a housewife and stay at home like tradition.

Those couples who moved to new areas because of work and re-housing during industrialisation tend to have joint conjugal roles and have loose-knit social networks. Each male and female are less likely to have their own friends and relatives outside the family. They tend to rely on each other more for support, leisure and spend more time together and share domestic responsibilities.

Those couples who have close-knit social networks (traditional working-class) tend to have segregated conjugal roles. Each partner has their own network of friend and relatives. The man and woman tend to be less socially dependant on each other than middle-class symmetrical families.

Our primary agency of socialisation is our family. Working-class parents are continually teaching their sons and daughter differently to each other, teaching the gender stereotype on conjugal roles through gender role socialisation, so that inequality between men and women continues to exist through future generations.

It could be argued, the middle-class have different values which mean they have different attitudes towards who does what domestic tasks. However, the ‘New’ working-class (argued by Goldthorpe et al) arguably have become more like the middle-class due to embourgeoisement (Marxist theory devised by Karl Marx) and this includes their attitudes towards conjugal roles.

However, evidence still shows that the majority of women still perform the domestic tasks around the home (the gender stereotype), even though they have paid jobs outside the home. The number of hour’s women spend on housework is calculated at around 50-60 hours per week compared to men who do an average of 1.6 hours (newspaper article, sociology review, ‘Back to the Future’ by Madeline Leonard). Feminists believe that this is a dual burden and there is a role conflict for women. Anne Oakley believes this, she is a feminist she also believes that we live in a patriarchal society. Feminists say that men may appear to be the ‘New Man’, however they usually perform the more enjoyable side of the domestic work, like playing with the children, instead of the more routine jobs like cooking and cleaning which are performed mainly by the women.

In simple terms feminism can be defined as the belief in equality between the sexes, based on the idea that gender should not affect a persons social identity, or socio-political or economic rights, and complete equality regardless of actual or perceived sexual orientation or identity. (Wikipedia, 2006) Complete equality between the men and women can be further broken down into three main categories; social, economic and political equality. In my essay I will assess the extent that the goals of each individual category have been accomplished.

However as feminism is a very broad doctrine, and some feminists are much more hard line than others, deciding to what extent goals have been achieved is dependent on whose definition of the goals you use. The first area I would like to discuss is that of social equality between men and women. One of feminists’ main social aims is to eliminate the double standards that occur between men and women in all aspects of life, varying from women being expected to take maternity leave instead of men, to sexual equality between intimate partners. Ward Crowe 1981)

This idea is at the heart of the whole feminist ideology and so is very important, however like almost all-feminist goals, the extent to which it is complete depends on which feminist you speak to. Although this is the case there is little argument between feminists that double standards between the sexes have been reduced dramatically in the last one hundred years, and most would say that this goal has almost been achieved. Another major social goal for the feminist movement is the equal treatment of women in the media, including an end to media and advertising exploitation of women’s bodies.

This has always been seen as a crucial area by feminists, as sex-role theory states that men and women will mirror the characters they see in the media, meaning that they will continue with sexist stereotypes that are being shown to them. (Craig 1994) As the media is an area that has traditionally been totally dominated by males, they stereotypes used often to be prejudice against women, and even when they weren’t, the mere fact that no women read news or did any other presenting jobs left its own sub-conscious message in the populous.

Although the feminist movement has been successful in wrestling some of the power away from the predominantly male industry, the media is an area where there is still plenty of work to be done before there goals are complete. Although in the modern world female presenters are considered the norm, and women are not just portrayed as doting mothers, the issue of the media, especially advertising exploiting women’s bodies is still huge. In my opinion feminists will find it very hard to change this fact simply because there will always be women willing to do it and it will always increase sales.

As I said, I think the feminist movement has managed to improve the treatment of women in the media, but will never be able to find complete equality with men in this arena. Getting rid of the acceptance of misogynist language and derogatory terms for women is another of the feminists’ main social goals. This is a difficult area for the feminist movement to make progress because terms that are considered derogatory for women such as, ‘the missus’ to refer to ones wife are massively widespread and not considered to be sexist by most of those who use them.

Therefore the only way that feminists can try and prevent these terms remaining in everyday language forever is through educational policies. As many of the people who accept this misogynistic language are not interested in being educated against it, it becomes very hard to find a way to change the situation. Having said this, slowly as time goes on and people become more understanding, the situation has been slowly improving although I think only the most liberal feminist would claim that linguistic equality has been anywhere near achieved.

The last important social goal that I want to look at is the acceptance of women in history. This is an interesting area, as some feminists don’t see it as a major issue, while others reckon it is crucial to establishing total equality between the sexes. As historically the world was based on a much more patriarchal system and men controlled almost all the power, there are few examples of women playing significant roles in history. Whether this is because they didn’t have the chance to or because their deeds weren’t recorded is the focus of much debate, but most feminists would say it was the second.

However even if this is the case it is very hard to give women credit for un-recorded deeds and so feminists have been fighting an up-hill battle to try and get these ladies their recognition. The second main aspect of the feminist ideology is the economic equality of men and women in all areas of their lives, this is crucial to feminism as economic equality moves women away from being stereotyped as house-wives. The first economic goal that I want to look at is the idea of equal pay for equal work.

The main thrust of this agenda is the removal off the gap in wages that occurs between men and women doing the same jobs. The removal of this difference, known as the ‘wage-gap’ has been one of the major rallying points for the feminist movements as since women entered the work-place they have been paid significantly less than men for the same work. Although the wage gap still occurs today it has been reduced by up to 15% since 1970 according to some estimates (Wellington 1993) and other say it may well disappear entirely within the next ten to fifteen years.

Although feminists have not at this point in time eliminated the wage gap, they have managed to reduce it massively and it looks to keep getting smaller, so most feminists would say that this goal is on it way to being completed. Coupled with this idea of equal pay for equal work is another of feminism’s main economic goals; equality between the sexes in the hiring promotion and treatment of employees. There are employees who are less willing to hire women as they risk losing them after they have children, and will have to pay for maternity leave.

The feminist movement had tried to address this through a series of legislation, which to a certain extent has helped although the problem definitely still occurs. They have encountered similar problems with promotions as although at lower levels promotions of men and women have become a lot less bias than they were in the past at higher levels a ‘glass ceiling’ still seems to remain in place. This term refers mainly to the business world where although women can gain promotion up through the company they still seem to find it very hard to reach the very highest levels, and men still massively dominate the boardroom.

Although this problem has started being addressed by companies in recent times, removing it further is still one of feminism’s main goals. The goal of equal treatment of employees ties in with the idea of lookism, once again especially in the business world. Lookism is the discrimination against people based on the way they look or dress, and although it does occur to men in is mostly a female problem. Although the situation has improved it is still the case that it is much easier for a woman to find employment in the business sector if she is comely.

Feminists have been working hard to try and stop this discrimination for example, by eliminating dress codes which could exploit women’s bodies. However it is very hard as there are many other factors which could effect employees decision on who to hire, making it almost impossible for feminists to confirm when it has taken place. The third area that feminists have focused on trying to obtain equality is politically, as without this equality in the other two sectors will not make the difference it should.

One of the main things that they strive to achieve in this area is that men and women should have equal rights under the law. Although it seems amazing now up until 1918 women were not allowed to vote in Britain, and not until 1928 was the voting age lowered to twenty-one in line with men. (Holten 1986, p134) Since then many more improvements have been made in making the sexes more politically equal, with women allowed to represent in the House of Commons, however hard-line feminists would say that even now we are not politically equal in Britain, as men still dominate the House of Lords.

Although in Britain women have succeeded in gaining almost equal political rights, in other parts of the world women are still much more oppressed. In Kuwait for example, the parliament just rejected a bill that would have given women the right to vote and stand in parliament, and so the feminists’ have not nearly achieved their worldwide goals. Another major political goal for the feminist movement is that abortions should be legal, accessible and affordable, without parental or spousal consent laws. Feminists feel this is important as they feel all women should have the right to their individual choice whatever the circumstances.

In Britain feminists have come some way to achieving these goals, although abortion is still not technically legal, the abortions act of 1967 has made it legally defensible to have an abortion in certain circumstances, and there is much less stigma against abortions than there used to be. However feminists would say much more should be done, feeling that re-cooperation services should be available and that more open law should be put in place. Feminists also believe that women should be allowed to serve in the military as well as men, and that men should not be drafted ahead of women in times of war.

Once again in Britain they have come some way to achieving these aims with women now allowed to work in all sectors of the military except the front line. Although feminists try to campaign for this to furthered to include women being allowed to serve in the front-line I do not think this will occur for some time, if ever, as women and men cannot serve in the same units. In other parts of the world, again the political system is less relaxed on this issue, and women are not allowed o hold any positions in the military establishment, so as a goal of feminism it has not come close to being achieved.

Overall I think that socially and politically many of the goals of feminism have been achieved, at least to a large extent, whereas economically women are still disadvantaged compared to men, especially in the business sector where many things work against them. However I feel that in Britain, all three areas that feminists are fighting for equality in are improving, and there is no area where the levels of inequality are rising.

On a global scale on the other hand the scene is not nearly so positive, with many nations still giving their women no political or economic power and forcing them through social customs to leave education early and follow their mothers into early marriages and house-keeping. In my opinion the feminist movement would be well advised to stop worrying so much about supposed inequality in the West and instead focus their attention on the very real problems faced by women in the third world.

Instead traditional feminism has always focused on white middle-class needs. Traditional values fall to recognize how women’s different identities such as race, class, and sexuality shape our views and beliefs about family and motherhood. Many believe that shared social issues such as women rights bring women together, but what many do not see are the different Identities such as class, race, and sexuality within gender, that can cause conflicting views. The quote above by Joan Williams Is a testament In understanding how these deferent identities within women can become a delving factor In their beliefs.

Specifically women’s beliefs and roles In the family are Influenced by their Individual Identities. These Intersections of identities play an important role in women’s beliefs on motherhood. Through the course readings I will show how the notions of motherhood changes through these different identities. Women’s participation in the labor, education, domestic duties as well as views on marital status and child rearing will show the division within women’s notions of motherhood. America underwent a change in 1945 that had never been seen before.

Despite representation there was a conflict from WI in the ass’. There was a shift from reduction to consumption, where America was seen as ‘living the good life’. By 1960 America’s Income had Increased, and by the end of the decade Americans were moving up In prosperity. What history falls to acknowledge are the women who feel disorientated and discontent. The ass’s and ass’s was also a time filled with anxiety and alienation. As Betty Friedman puts it there was a vague uneasiness’ that is the mark of this period. The sass’s was an odd period of time, where many social issues were taking place.

Nevertheless women continued to enter the labor force, which suggested the growing antinomy for women after the war. In the 1 ass’s as Friedman suggest people were politically and culturally conservative, particularly regarding gender and family issues, which made exploring new opportunities difficult for women due to restrictive gender norms. Through the lives of middle-class white women Friedman uses labor force participation to show their beliefs of motherhood. The role of a housewife to some may seem simple, as If they have nothing to do but to take care of the children and domestic duties.

But what many fall to see are that these women are well educated and hold traditional ideologies of the family in which women sacrifice ones fulfillment ender role expectations. Women’s behaviors and beliefs were in relation to men, which created a lack of fulfillment amongst women. Friedman argues these housewives needed competition and should make contributions to society. Friedman’s argues that middle-class white women needed to find something fulfilling in society to feel a since of purpose. To get away of what society tells them to do, and start living for what they would want to do.

Surprisingly women’s actions did not reflect their beliefs. Though these women were educated enough to have careers but, many found it best eatable to become a housewife because it was the gender norm for women to stay at home and be the caregivers while men should become the breadwinners outside the home. These beliefs countered women’s fulfillment as a woman but filled their beliefs on motherhood. Friedman titles masculine ideologies of motherhood that creates feelings of emptiness as ‘The Feminine Mystique’. Its overpowering, hegemonic dynamic in the work place and in the homes, where men carry the power enforce gender roles.

These women adopt the Feminine Mystique, for the purposes of appeasing to societies expectations, but Friedman clearly shows how the traditional views of others are not holding strong in these women’s beliefs. Women were becoming board and tired of being a housewife. This shows the view of motherhood for these women would be to have a more active part in the community, take care of the domestic duties and fulfill the husbands needs but their fear of going against men’s ideologies of motherhood keeps them confined.

The intersecting identities of class, education status and gender played a role in how these women view their roles in the family. Becoming a stay at home mom may have not always been by choice but by sacrifice. Gender roles have proven to be influential on women’s beliefs on others. Despite Friedman pushing for women to become contributing factors in society, Bart Laundry in “Black Working Wives” offers a counterpoint to the norms of white middle- class families. Black women are usually excluded from white framework of motherhood.

He incorporates race unlike Friedman as a contributing identity that shapes black middle-class women’s notions of motherhood. Participants were black middle-class two parent families. The black women in these families took care of domestic duties, cared for the children and had an active part in the community, which allowed black women more freedom. Black women in most cases did not have the option of staying home. They pursued careers outside the home because they believed a true woman’ could do both. The notion of mother hood was achievement in both public and private spears.

The black community held a different standard then their white counterparts. The black community appreciated women’s intelligence and their independence. Women’s in Friedman’s book looked to their husbands for the decision making rather then formatting and expressing their own views. There is a big divide in how women in Friedman’s reading and Landers book viewed womanhood partially due to the racial preference and also because of class. For white families you could be middle-class solely on the husband’s income.

Black families did not share the same experience, to Laundry challenges domesticity as she focuses on African American women. Looking at black families we can see a transition of the traditional family to a more radical modern family. The male ideologies of motherhood were also different as unlike there white counterparts black husbands had the expectation for their wife’s to work outside of the home, which allowed black women to become more active in the community. The egalitarian mindset of black families combined the public and irate spear.

Working outside of the home gave black women more respect inside of the home. Race has played a significant difference in expectations of working wives. Black women did more because there family needed both incomes to be middle class. They face more criticism in the work place and carry the burden of isolation from the male counterparts coming home from an oppressed workplace. On the other hand white women stayed at home because they had stronger beliefs in ideologies. Catering to the household and their husbands were put over their own needs.

Women in both readings lacked fulfillment. Men shared unequal responsibilities in doing housework, which is an issue that has been solved. The power dynamic of who is responsible for the domestic duties, stems from male ideologies. Men in both readings are the primary breadwinners therefore lack the obligating in helping with domestic duties. Friedman and Laundry take on two different perspectives on motherhood. While Friedman is pushing women to become active contributors in their communities Laundry is showing how black women have been working for year to support their families.

Here we can see how identities such as class and race can create a division amongst gender and also shape beliefs on motherhood. Women who participate in labor both inside and outside of the home have contradicting beliefs on motherhood. In Mary Blair-Loss book “Competing Devotions” she looks at how women in both spears view labor and family schemas. Work devoted women in the reading were well education and help high power position Jobs. They worked full time which became time demanding and had to sacrifice their extracurricular time for work. They felt their Job was important and more like dynamic work.

Women wanted to become more economically independent from men UT at the same time their high-end Jobs meant working long hours, which left them tired and facing discrimination from male dominance in the work place. Women felt that they were providing a better life for themselves and their children. Their beliefs of motherhood was not to fulfill domestic duties like cleaning and cooking every day but to provide the economic needs for their children so they would always have what they needed. The family devoted women sought marriage and child rearing as their primary devotion.

Some women worked part time but still took care of the domestic duties. Families believed their roles to be biologically destined, where men should work full time outside the home. Family devoted mother criticized work devoted mother for not spending more time with their family and work devoted women criticized stay at home mothers by saying they are lacking fulfillment and depended on men. Like the women in Friedman’s reading these women held a more traditional view of womanhood. Like all mothers both schemas came with their sacrifices, which they people for support and shunned the opposite schema.

The notions of motherhood aligned with the schema these women adopted. It is interesting to see the role education played in choosing which schema to adopt. Women’s views on motherhood relied not only schemas but also their beliefs on marriage. Kathleen Eden and Andrew Cheering search to find the problems as to why low income white and black single mothers are not getting married. The study finds five reasons to why women are reluctant to enter or reenter into a marriage. The same five reasons are also how they define womanhood.

Women sought having children before marriage fulfilling, but did not count on being single. Women saw affordability, respectability, control, trust and domestic violence as important measures when looking into marriage. These women felt if they were to be in another relationship it would be with a man that would uplift her status. These women wanted a man that they could trust and count on to support them and a child. Class, race and previous experiences shaped these low-income single women notion of motherhood. Due to their low social economic status they wanted a man that could take care of their family.

Because they claimed there was a scarcity of black decent men, they looked for affordability and respectability and because of their previous experience they wanted someone they could trust. These women had their own economic stability but anted to gain upward mobility and believed having a decent trustworthy man will fulfill their notion of motherhood. Lastly through Mignon Moor’s chapter “Lesbian Motherhood and Discourses of Respectability’ we can see the ways in which lesbian women form motherhood through women’s sexual autonomy, and an emphasis in strength and resilience.

The reading discusses a lesbian woman named Jackie who has adopted her sister’s child. Jackie overcame a massive struggle with social services in finalizing her adoptive rights to Andrew. Her refusal to hide her sexuality supports the notion of black womanhood that communicates a sense of sexual autonomy. Jackass’s beliefs of what it meant to be a good mother derived from her childhood past. What she never had as a child she gave to Andrew and she made it her personal responsibility to see that he was safe, and stayed out of trouble.

For women like Jackie challenges such as race, family structure and poverty influenced how she defined motherhood. Lesbian mothers have accepted a social responsibility based on family obligations, and have looked into their upbringing and personal experience for defining lesbian One woman named Athena had difficulty with telling her child from a previous heterosexual relationship that she was a lesbian. Athena did not feel comfortable identifying herself as a lesbian because she not only felt stigmatize from the community and family but she felt it was best to keep her sexuality unexposed to protect her child.

By Athena not coming into terms with her lesbian identity it ruined her relationship and her chances to gain fulfillment in life. With the ending of her relationship with her partner we can see her understanding of motherhood. She defines motherhood as self-sacrificing for the good of the child. The move toward sexual autonomy is a struggle for women who are reluctant about their identity. Drawing a division between the two identities becomes difficult for women who are heterosexual lens and absorb cultural understandings of good motherhood in ways that make it difficult for them to view their lesbian sexuality in a positive light” (130).

There is a constant battle when one is forced to choose between who they are and what is best for their child. Unfortunately the one parallel between all women are the sacrifices they endure for their families. We can she a range of mothers living in traditional families to more radical contemporary families, and all define motherhood differently. Women re forced to navigate motherhood through tough circumstances, which can become difficult.

As seen in the reading women’s roles are stretched so thin it becomes inevitable to find a suitable balance for themselves within the family needs. We can see that motherhood can vary through the different identities such as class, race and sexuality. No women’s identities and experiences are the same, which make ‘motherhood’ hard to generalize and allows motherhood to also divide gender. It becomes a forced decision rather then a choice that women struggle with in their daily life. Motherhood has become an internal battle between selfish and selfless.

Lois Gould X: A Fabulous Child’s Story brings up the factor of raising a child gender-neutral within a society that categorized and stereotypes people by their gender and sex and how these gender roles are reinforced in society. Gould’s X: A Fabulous Child’s Story is about a child named X who is born for an experiment. The experiment is for two parents to raise a child where no one including the child knew whether it was a boy or girl in exchange, 23 billion dollars and 72 cents for the cost of raising baby X.

This experiment was to show whether or not male and female characteristics are developed genetically or external. Baby X was raised as a happy health child who was raised and allowed to do everything both boy and girl children do, it did not matter whether only boys where suppose to play football or girls where only suppose to bake cakes, X was raised to know no differences and did both. X was never categorized or stereotyped from it parents as to how X should look, act, feel, or dress base on its gender.

Because raising a gender-neutral child-like X would be difficult an unlike any other X’s parents were given an official instruction manual on how to raise an X. The instruction manual helped answers and solve most of the questions and problems X’s parents can across raising X in society designed for males and females. In today’s society from the moment parents find out they are expecting a child most people want to know whether they will be having a boy or girl, and once a mother gives birth to a baby the first thing that is announced is if the baby is a boy or a girl.

If you ask any expecting family what they wanted their baby to be most people the first thing they would most likely say is a healthy baby and, then they would say either a boy or girls; and for those who say the gender-sex of their child does not matter, in actuality it does. This is because we live in a society where society automatically characterizes people by their gender. Gender in today’s society predetermines what you should wear, how you should act, feel, and look.

Gould’s X: A Fabulous Child’s Story is an example of parents who tried to raise a gender-neutral child in a society that defines males and females from childhood by the way they dressed to the actives they participated in, an when a child like X was raised to ignore and defy all of societies gender classifications there’s an up roar from children’s parents. Although the children are at first confused and to curious as to if X is either a boy or girl, that later accept and embrace the factor that X is just X and does not need to be classified and defined.

The parents of the children are not as accepting; they demand to find out the sex of the child, pressuring the principal and the parents to have X examined by outside experts. In society where your gender seems to predetermine how you should act and behave it is difficult to cross the invisible line that is in places for roles of males and females. I agree with Gould on the factors of how society has put in place, invisible lines of what your gender allows you to do, and what is acceptable in society.

I also believe the school system does reinforce gender roles as to what society feels is acceptable, although there is a shift in society on the roles of women and men and what they can do. Today women are portrayed as heroes who hold the same positions as men and are, caring mothers, who take care of their families; because of this they line of what males and females are only supposed to do is crossed and is becoming acceptable.

Gould’s X: A Fabulous Child also proved that children are better accepting to change and differences from people, it is a child’s parents that changes the child’s perceptions of differences and what is acceptable. To live in a gender-neutral society would be ideal, but I feel society would just find another way to classify and define people.