Feminism in general must be respected for all that the group has done, helping females progress together as a gender and addressing issues which females have faced. As time has gone on, females have gained equal rights in society. Women can work and women can vote, both important things that women in the past did not get to do and that women today take for granted.
However, as much as I am all for both genders having equal rights, I am opposed to the feminist view that all men have power over women in society. I believe this to be a generalisation and take this as proof that people still believe in the stereotype that all men are physically superior to women and that they should be macho. This is an annoyance as it takes away all individualism and implies that all men are the same when we are not. Feminism also says that men use marriage as a way to dominate women. Although this may be correct in some cases, it is again a generalisation. Many people are in marriages where both partners enjoy equal rights and in some cases, the female in a marriage may have more power. Feminists also argue that if women fulfill the role of a housewife then they are providing stability for men. This may be true in the sense that the man's home life is stable, but if the man is going out to work then he is providing financial stability for the relationship. In this sense, they are almost a prop for each other and so provide stability for each other.
Marxist-feminists believe that working class men take out their frustrations of powerlessness within the capitalist system on their wives in forms such as domestic abuse. I believe that this could be true and that the power they crave can only be satisfied by having power over someone else, in this case their wives whom they can have complete control over behind closed doors. In whatever way you look at it, this is wrong and should not be tolerated and feminists should be applauded for tackling the issue.
Radical feminists believe that the family is a social institution that sustains patriarchy within the family. This goes back to the feminist opinion that men hold control over women in every aspect of society and that they do this through fear of domestic violence, rape or murder. I believe that in some families, the father figure will still be the head of the family and have a higher position of power than his wife. However, times are changing and we find ourselves in a society where most people appreciate that regardless of our gender, we should be treated as equals and have equal rights. I believe that the female role in the household is changing and that now that women are allowed to work and gain a wage of their own as opposed to previous times when women were expected to be housewives for there husbands and their was no negotiation. The man was to be the person to make the wage and the woman was to ensure that the man's life was comfortable when he returned from working and that everything was as it should be within the home. As it is now acceptable for both sexes to work, I believe that responsibility is now shared for the most part in the home and that men do not rule the home as predominantly as they used to.
In conclusion, I feel that the Feminist group mean to do well and have done so massively in the past. They have addressed the role of women in society and looked to address and solve problems, have highlighted issues such as domestic abuse in the family which has seen this sort of behaviour branded as socially unacceptable and radical feminists have been linked to solid progress in areas such as job-sharing, better childcare facilities, paternity leave and longer maternity. However, I feel that Feminists over-emphasise the negative aspects of family life in order to get what they want, when in reality many women are perfectly happy fulfilling roles such as child rearing. I think for Feminists to be more widely accepted and rejected, they need to be more open to negotiation and realise that not all men are the same and that we are all individual people who make our own choices up and whom make part of a group, rather than being a cult of likeminded animals.
Monday, 27 September 2010
Monday, 30 August 2010
"He Stands Like A Statue, Becomes Part Of The Machine, Feeling All The Bumpers, Always Playing Clean."
Structural theories try to explain societies behaviour through two main structural theories. Functionalist theories such as Durkheim and Talcott Parsons and Conflict Theories such as Marx and Feminism.
Functionalist theories try to see society as an organic thing. We are all part of it and grow within it, which is down to social structures such as church, education and family. Individuals integrate, seek harmony, stability and continuity. As individuals, we need to feel as if we have a purpose and a function in society. After all, if you don't have a purpose then what is the point of living? You're just wasting time until you meet your end.
I believe that structures such as church and school only exist to help those in power, hold control over the people. I believe this as school forces us to live by the ringing of a bell and the command of someone in higher authority than us. Church and religion distracts us from problems in society and in our lives, and as humans we want to feel that we understand life and that there is someone in control who is watching over us. Is it not comforting to believe that we are all part of a greater plan and that we all have a purpose?
I think that it is pretty much widely accepted that there is inequality in society. I like to think of society as a pyramid, with the highly rich and priviledged at the top and the working class and oppressed at the bottom. As wrong as it seems that there is such inequality in society, I believe that it is something that is never going to change. After all, someone needs to do the manual labour in order for society to work. It is idealistic to think that everyone should be equal, that we should all earn the same amount of money and be treated the same. In theory it is a wonderful idea, but in practise it will just never work. The rich will always be at the top of the pyramid due to the priviledges that they were born with such as better education and family owned production, whereas the working class will always be oppressed and forced to do manual labour in order to provide for themselves and there families. The idea has been said that the people who do the manual labour should be paid as much as the higher classes, but the higher classes will never allow this to happen. If this were to happen, the working class would have a better standard of life and would eventually have the same priviledges as the higher class including the same level of education. The higher class are scared that the working class would realise that they are not needed and that they would be swept aside in favour of a new and fairer regime. Therefore, the higher class will continue to oppress in order to stay in charge. I see it as a vicious circle which is not going to change anytime soon.
To answer the question which I have been set, I believe that I am a structuralist. I believe that structures impact on how we live, who we are and what our ancestors will be for years to come until the working class come across something revolutionary which will change society forever.
Functionalist theories try to see society as an organic thing. We are all part of it and grow within it, which is down to social structures such as church, education and family. Individuals integrate, seek harmony, stability and continuity. As individuals, we need to feel as if we have a purpose and a function in society. After all, if you don't have a purpose then what is the point of living? You're just wasting time until you meet your end.
I believe that structures such as church and school only exist to help those in power, hold control over the people. I believe this as school forces us to live by the ringing of a bell and the command of someone in higher authority than us. Church and religion distracts us from problems in society and in our lives, and as humans we want to feel that we understand life and that there is someone in control who is watching over us. Is it not comforting to believe that we are all part of a greater plan and that we all have a purpose?
I think that it is pretty much widely accepted that there is inequality in society. I like to think of society as a pyramid, with the highly rich and priviledged at the top and the working class and oppressed at the bottom. As wrong as it seems that there is such inequality in society, I believe that it is something that is never going to change. After all, someone needs to do the manual labour in order for society to work. It is idealistic to think that everyone should be equal, that we should all earn the same amount of money and be treated the same. In theory it is a wonderful idea, but in practise it will just never work. The rich will always be at the top of the pyramid due to the priviledges that they were born with such as better education and family owned production, whereas the working class will always be oppressed and forced to do manual labour in order to provide for themselves and there families. The idea has been said that the people who do the manual labour should be paid as much as the higher classes, but the higher classes will never allow this to happen. If this were to happen, the working class would have a better standard of life and would eventually have the same priviledges as the higher class including the same level of education. The higher class are scared that the working class would realise that they are not needed and that they would be swept aside in favour of a new and fairer regime. Therefore, the higher class will continue to oppress in order to stay in charge. I see it as a vicious circle which is not going to change anytime soon.
To answer the question which I have been set, I believe that I am a structuralist. I believe that structures impact on how we live, who we are and what our ancestors will be for years to come until the working class come across something revolutionary which will change society forever.
Sunday, 22 August 2010
"Are You Taking Over, Or Are You Taking Orders? Are You Going Backwards, Or Are You Going Forwards?"
I believe identity to be a massive thing in society today, and believe that it has been for years. Everyone is either trying to fit in, or trying to break the mould, and despite the fact that as a society, we are apparantly trying to make more of a collective effort to oust prejudice against physical appearance and personal beliefs, it seems that we are fighting a losing battle.
For years black people faced oppression and were forced to work as slaves, due only to there skin colour and the white mans feeling of superiority. The Jews were exiled from Britain due to there ways of life and there methods of money lending, which are now used by banks worldwide. I think it would be safe to assume that as a whole, people are scared of the unknown and do not like to change there ways. They crave normality and want to fit in.
We see this in school on a much smaller basis. You have your cliques who choose to accessorise there school uniform in different ways, wear different footwear and listen to different music. This is a way of standing out from the crowd, and distancing yourself from others whom you feel you are different from mentally, and so you choose to show this physically.
I, myself am a white British male and I am proud to be so. Physically, this is already a massive difference from people who may be foreign, of a different sex and have a different complexion from me. Should this mean however that we should not associate? We should not befriend one another? Of course not. My coommon sense tells me that we are all human and that we should focus on the mental aspects of our fellow man. This however, is just my opinion and it does not necessarily make it correct. Subconsciously however, although I am not a racist and feel no bad feelings towards people of different physical appearances from me, I would still care more about problems concerning white people than black people. I think this is more to do with it being my own identity however, than a dislike of others.
Personally, I don't feel like I fit into a clique. I don't like to be narrow minded and stick to one genre of music, and I don't wear the same clothes as others to fit in. If I like a piece of music, I'll listen to it, and if I'm being completely honest, my Mum has more fashion sense than me! This independance from cliques though could arguably make me just like one of the many others trying to break the mould and be an individual.
For years black people faced oppression and were forced to work as slaves, due only to there skin colour and the white mans feeling of superiority. The Jews were exiled from Britain due to there ways of life and there methods of money lending, which are now used by banks worldwide. I think it would be safe to assume that as a whole, people are scared of the unknown and do not like to change there ways. They crave normality and want to fit in.
We see this in school on a much smaller basis. You have your cliques who choose to accessorise there school uniform in different ways, wear different footwear and listen to different music. This is a way of standing out from the crowd, and distancing yourself from others whom you feel you are different from mentally, and so you choose to show this physically.
I, myself am a white British male and I am proud to be so. Physically, this is already a massive difference from people who may be foreign, of a different sex and have a different complexion from me. Should this mean however that we should not associate? We should not befriend one another? Of course not. My coommon sense tells me that we are all human and that we should focus on the mental aspects of our fellow man. This however, is just my opinion and it does not necessarily make it correct. Subconsciously however, although I am not a racist and feel no bad feelings towards people of different physical appearances from me, I would still care more about problems concerning white people than black people. I think this is more to do with it being my own identity however, than a dislike of others.
Personally, I don't feel like I fit into a clique. I don't like to be narrow minded and stick to one genre of music, and I don't wear the same clothes as others to fit in. If I like a piece of music, I'll listen to it, and if I'm being completely honest, my Mum has more fashion sense than me! This independance from cliques though could arguably make me just like one of the many others trying to break the mould and be an individual.
Monday, 21 June 2010
Monday, 14 June 2010
"Too much sanity may be madness and the maddest of all, to see life as it is and not as it should be."
"Schemes are full of pregnant teenagers and unemployed, semi-literate thugs on benefits. They are all a bunch of wasters!"
Above is a statement which is a stereotypical viewpoint of housing schemes. Housing schemes originated in the late nineteenth century and were built and operated to provide uncrowded, well built homes at below the market rent which working class people can afford. Taking this into consideration, it is unfair to brand everyone who lives in a housing scheme as being "unemployed, semi-literate thugs" as we have just come out of a recession and for many people, this may be all that they can afford. This stereotypical viewpoint may have started for many reasons. The media could have played a part in creating this assumption as hit drama 'Shameless' and documentary 'The Scheme' both show schemes full of violent, unemployed criminals who depend on criminal activity for income and who are accustomed to a lifestyle vastly different to many of us. Another reason could be that some people may know other people who live in a housing scheme and do not make an honest living, and so assume that everyone living around these people are also not making an honest living. As mentioned beforehand, we have just come out of a recession, and as a result many people have been made redundant and find themselves unemployed, so I do not feel that this is specific to just people who live on housing schemes. I think stereotypically, people feel that people who live in housing schemes are not as clever as others. This is shown with the "semi literate" comment at the top of the page. This is not always the case however as people may simply be living there as they are trying to make there first step onto the housing market ladder, or they may wish to live close to friends or family. As for the comment regarding schemes being full of pregnant teenagers, it is unfair to assume this as their may be an equal amount of teenagers in another area with the same amount of teenage pregnancies. If studies did show that there were a very large amount of teenage pregnancies on housing schemes, then you would need to ask why that is instead of just assuming that it is because they are "wasters". It could be down to not being educated enough about safe sex and the dangers of participating in unprotected sex. It could also be down to peer pressure and young males and females being made to feel that if they don't have sex, then they are missing out and are not part of the group. Family life may also play a factor as if they are having a hard time at home, then they may wish to get pregnant in order to be given free housing by the council in order to get out of there homes. We need to work together in order to find out what is the cause of our problems rather than labelling people and allowing the same vicious cycle to continue.
Above is a statement which is a stereotypical viewpoint of housing schemes. Housing schemes originated in the late nineteenth century and were built and operated to provide uncrowded, well built homes at below the market rent which working class people can afford. Taking this into consideration, it is unfair to brand everyone who lives in a housing scheme as being "unemployed, semi-literate thugs" as we have just come out of a recession and for many people, this may be all that they can afford. This stereotypical viewpoint may have started for many reasons. The media could have played a part in creating this assumption as hit drama 'Shameless' and documentary 'The Scheme' both show schemes full of violent, unemployed criminals who depend on criminal activity for income and who are accustomed to a lifestyle vastly different to many of us. Another reason could be that some people may know other people who live in a housing scheme and do not make an honest living, and so assume that everyone living around these people are also not making an honest living. As mentioned beforehand, we have just come out of a recession, and as a result many people have been made redundant and find themselves unemployed, so I do not feel that this is specific to just people who live on housing schemes. I think stereotypically, people feel that people who live in housing schemes are not as clever as others. This is shown with the "semi literate" comment at the top of the page. This is not always the case however as people may simply be living there as they are trying to make there first step onto the housing market ladder, or they may wish to live close to friends or family. As for the comment regarding schemes being full of pregnant teenagers, it is unfair to assume this as their may be an equal amount of teenagers in another area with the same amount of teenage pregnancies. If studies did show that there were a very large amount of teenage pregnancies on housing schemes, then you would need to ask why that is instead of just assuming that it is because they are "wasters". It could be down to not being educated enough about safe sex and the dangers of participating in unprotected sex. It could also be down to peer pressure and young males and females being made to feel that if they don't have sex, then they are missing out and are not part of the group. Family life may also play a factor as if they are having a hard time at home, then they may wish to get pregnant in order to be given free housing by the council in order to get out of there homes. We need to work together in order to find out what is the cause of our problems rather than labelling people and allowing the same vicious cycle to continue.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)