The Postmordern family is diverse, meaning that roles Essay Example

to their children during periods of discomfort, sorrow or discontent.

The argument delineated above underscores the critical role of fathers in shaping their children's emotional growth. However, it also illuminates a paradox considering the high incidence of single-mother households where women predominantly assume the caregiving duties. The text probes into why fathers would opt to abandon their offspring and initiate new families if they genuinely cherished their kids. This casts skepticism on how dads can positively influence their children emotionally when not cohabitating with them.

Additionally, postmodernists not only dismiss the notion of mass culture but further contend that the class supremacy instrumental in its genesis has vanished. In our current postmodern civilization, individuals possess the capacity to select and enjoy cultural commodities based on personal preference, provided they have financial means for it. While tuning into FM radio may require minimal expenditure, movie-going is comparatively costly. Moreover, technological progress has empowered people to consume as well as generate cultural artifacts like football and music.

Beck (1992), a postmodernist, posited that the traditional dependence of fathers on their jobs for identity and fulfillment has lessened in the postmodern era. He proposed that nowadays, fathers are more likely to derive a sense of purpose and self from their children.

According to Beck, a postmodernist, fathers seek support from their children. However, Burghes, another postmodernist, contradicts this by claiming that fathers are becoming more involved in their children's emotional development. Burghes argues that children look up to their fathers for support and sincerity. This discrepancy between the two postmodernists' views challenges the arguments made by proponents of postmodernism.

Feminists contest postmodernist perspectives, advocating that women are unjustly subjugated by men. They insist

on the pivotal role that women execute in their children's upbringing, offering maternal affection, childcare and necessary security. Feminists also maintain that women have a higher vulnerability to domestic abuse than men. A considerable number of women refrain from reporting such incidents due to fear of not being given due weight or apprehension about potential repercussions. Furthermore, some women live in fear of their spouses or fret over insufficient support for them and their offspring should they decide to sever ties with their husbands. Feminists provide proof suggesting that many working women face a double challenge: despite having full-time employment, most household duties still fall on them.

According to Dryden's (1999) qualitative study of 17 couples, he supports the feminist argument that women continue to bear the main responsibility for housework and childcare. Likewise, studies of unemployed men show that, although they contribute more around the house, their wives still carry the majority of the load in terms of domestic tasks and caring for children, even when the wives work full-time. The presence of quantifiable evidence indicates that women still face the dual burden of household and professional responsibilities. Dryden's findings also reveal that this inequality consistently leads to tension within couples. This issue has been extensively studied in the context of marriage, with Hart (1976) and others arguing that it is a significant factor contributing to marital breakdown.

I contest the findings of the previously mentioned study because I believe that a research sample size of only seventeen couples is inadequate. It's possible that numerous other couples might have entirely different opinions from Dryden. Even though this was qualitative research, additional aspects should also be given

due consideration. There's a possibility that Dryden might have concentrated on a particular demographic, such as acquaintances or locals.

Advocates of feminism argue that women are burdened with the task of providing emotional, social, and physical care for their children and spouses. They claim that husbands frequently appear unaware of what goes on at home, anticipating women to have chores finished and meals like tea and dinner ready when they come back from work.

Duncombe and Marsden (1995) advocate for feminist perspectives, asserting that men often fall short in emotional involvement. They struggle to articulate their feelings and establish an emotional connection with their partners and offspring. This assertion suggests women bear the brunt of this difficulty, feeling compelled to balance out these deficiencies by catering to everyone's needs at home. Consequently, women end up investing a significant portion of time soothing the emotional states of their spouses and children at the cost of neglecting their own mental well-being, potentially jeopardizing both their physical and psychological health.

The debate mentioned earlier focuses on the psychological subjugation of women by their spouses and offspring. As per Duncombe and Marsden (1995), a significant amount of a woman's time is spent managing her partner's emotional needs, leading to issues for herself. These concerns influence both her mental and physical health. The exclusive assignment of domestic tasks and obligations such as child care and shopping to women clearly threatens their psychological and physiological wellness.

Feminists emphasize that society has until recently tolerated domestic violence perpetrated by men. They argue that both the state and the criminal justice system have not adequately dealt with this issue. From a feminist perspective, genuine equality within households

cannot be realized as long as men can resort to such violent behavior.

Research conducted by Bernard (1982) revealed that the male participants were more content with their marital life compared to their spouses. A significant number of wives reported feeling emotionally lonely, and it was found out that these men did not realize their partners' discontentment.

Bernad contends that men appeared happier and contented compared to women. Yet, the question remains - if men derived their satisfaction and joy from the love they received from their wives and time spent together, why did these same wives feel lonely while their husbands were in a state of complete contentment? It seems Bernad's research doesn't genuinely corroborate his secondary claim or assertion.

According to Ferminest, as soon as women began working, their roles changed and they were then burdened with all the expenses, such as bills and other financial responsibilities.

Gillian Leighton (1992) found that when men became unemployed, the power dynamics in decision-making shifted. In her research on professional couples, it was observed that working wives often took on the responsibility of paying bills and initiated spending reductions.

Well, in the case of men becoming unemployed, it is clear that women have to bear all the expenses, simply because the men are not earning. I don't understand why women should not bear these expenses since they work for the family and not for anyone else.

Feminists argue that women should be homemakers and should not pursue careers. They maintain that men should be responsible for financially supporting the family by going to work. They assert that no one can provide better parenting than mothers and that children require maternal love more

than paternal love.

According to Warin (1999), a study in Rochdale that involved 95 families discovered that fathers, mothers, and teenage children all strongly believed that men should be the primary earners, even though there have been changes in employment and family dynamics. Additionally, mothers were seen as the authority figures in parenting. The fathers in the study also faced significant pressure to financially support their families, with additional strain coming from their teenage children's demands for consumer goods and high-end fashion items.

Conducting a study on 95 families in Rochdale may not yield useful results for two reasons. Firstly, such a limited sample size may not provide a comprehensive understanding as it represents only a fraction of the global population, potentially having homogeneous backgrounds. Secondly, focusing solely on Rochdale would limit the perspectives gained, possibly reflecting the opinions of only those residing in that specific area rather than capturing the viewpoints of individuals from other towns, cities, and countries.

According to feminists, fathers are often too engrossed in work to spend quality time with their families. They argue that the demands of their jobs leave them with insufficient time to engage with their families.

Dex, another feminist, also pointed out that half of the fathers stated that 30% (as well as 6% of the mothers) regularly worked over 48 hours per week. It is improbable that fathers in such circumstances will be able to spend equal amounts of time engaging with their families.

Dex, a feminist advocate, insists on the necessity of fathers investing more quality time into their family relationships. In contrast, Warin, another proponent of feminism with differing views believes that the father should be responsible for

financial aspects and work outside while the mother remains at home caring for their offspring. Both these individuals identify as feminists yet uphold contrasting opinions. This indicates that there may not always be a definitive agreement among feminists.

Advocates for women's rights contend that instances of domestic abuse towards women are frequent, however, the victims often hesitate to report these incidents. This reluctance can be attributed to fear of their abusive partner or worry that exposing such violence might result in their partners abandoning them and their children.

In 2000, Stanko found out that every minute, a case of domestic violence is reported by women in the UK to the police. The hesitation many women have in revealing such incidents stems from uncertainty about their credibility and dread of potential repercussions. In certain instances, women feel excessively bullied by their spouses, whereas others worry that abandoning their husbands would leave them and their children devoid of support.

If women cherish their spouses and worry that revealing the abuse might drive their partners away, why voice objections rather than silently tolerating it?

The New Right emphasizes the importance of children receiving affection from both parents. They argue that women should deal with their husbands' actions, no matter what they are, in consideration of their children's welfare - which should be the primary focus. The New Right maintains that kids raised without both parents are more prone to fail in every aspect of life compared to those brought up by two parents. They underscore the value of a joyful childhood for a child, asserting it cannot be achieved with only one parent around. That is to say; they view single-parent homes

as detrimental and unsatisfactory examples for kids.

Erdos (2000) backs the New Right's viewpoint that children lacking paternal figures are less likely to assimilate into a culture of discipline and negotiation prevalent in nuclear families. Consequently, they face more difficulty becoming accomplished parents. Erdos suggests these children encounter a lack of an authoritative figure to depend on during challenging times, resulting in their peer group and mass media having greater sway over them. This increased influence is thought to be linked with escalating social issues like delinquency, sexual promiscuity, teenage pregnancy, and drug use.

Erdo suggests that kids without a paternal figure are less likely to become successful. He argues that these children often experience similar situations as their parents, usually growing up in single-parent homes. As a result, their chances of becoming accomplished parents themselves are diminished.

Functionalists view the sexual division of labor in the home as being biologically inevitable.

Parson (1955) postulates that society often views women as inherently suited for the emotional and caregiving position, also known as the 'expressive role'. Furthermore, he contends that it is a family's responsibility to facilitate steady and balanced development in society.

Parson asserts that the family's responsibility is to facilitate seamless operations and offer assistance to its constituents.

Those of liberal belief argue that family roles can differ and it's not necessary for everyone to take on a particular role within the family.

Advocates of liberal feminism assert that women have made substantial progress in areas such as family, education, and the economy. They contend that while men are gradually adapting to these shifts, their attitudes and behaviors still trail behind those of women. However, they remain optimistic about ongoing advancements

towards attaining equality in domestic and economic spheres in the future.

According to Marxist-Feminists, the role of a housewife serves the interests of capitalism by supporting the existing workforce and ensuring the production of future labor.

Radical feminists believe that women do what men tell them to do and actually obey. They also believe that women do everything in the interest of men.

Delphy (1984) posits that radical feminists believe the first act of oppression is men's dominance over women, perceiving females as a disadvantaged group. Consequently, they contend that patriarchy fabricated the housewife role to suit male preferences and needs. Much like functionalism, Marxists and radical feminists share the view that women's subjugation and exploitation derive from their inherent biological duty as mothers.

Those who follow Marxism argue that the proletariat, or working class, is subjugated by the bourgeoisie, including economically disadvantaged women being dominated by affluent men and women. They maintain that individuals living in poverty lack both aid and role models to depend upon.

In 1973, Young and Wilmot suggested that established gender roles were undergoing a transformation. This shift saw men no longer being the sole earners in the family and women moving away from their conventional roles as homemakers and mothers. They noted an increasing equality in the marital relationship within middle-class families. Factors contributing to this change included a decrease in extended families, an increase in nuclear families, and expanding employment prospects for women.

Catherine Hakim (1996), an interactionist, proposes that feminists undervalue women's capacity to make rational decisions. According to Hakim, the position of women in families is not solely attributed to patriarchy or men; rather, it is a result of women actively choosing

to prioritize family and children, leading to less commitment towards work compared to men.

Muslim scholars and Interactionists suggest that women in Asian families experience oppression from men. This is mostly due to how these women are brought up during their early socialization stage by their parents. They are educated to stay devoted to their spouses throughout their lives, irrespective of the nature of their husband's persona. Women are also anticipated to stand with their husbands through both difficult and happy times.

Some people contend that fear prevents women from expressing their opinions in the presence of their husbands or his family, due to being compelled to live in enlarged families where they are restricted from leaving home or interacting with anyone outside the husband's family. Similarly, recent television portrayals of Asian men murdering their wives have instilled fear in some women. These representations can result in misconceptions, as certain men may assume their wives are involved with other men or failing to contribute sufficiently towards household costs such as narcotics and tobacco.

In general, there are contrasting views from feminists, radical feminists, liberals, marxists, marxist-feminists and the New Right when compared to postmodernists. They challenge the assertions made by postmodernists as they view them as excessively simplistic. Feminists contend that women suffer oppression at the hands of men and are victims of domestic abuse. Additionally, they maintain that men frequently disregard their familial obligations, assuming everything would be in place on their arrival home after work.

Dryden's qualitative research on 17 couples revealed that women, despite having full-time jobs, still bear a considerable amount of responsibility for housekeeping and childcare. This indicates that women generally undertake more domestic

tasks than men. However, from a postmodernist viewpoint, Burghes (1997) observed an increasing involvement of fathers in their children's emotional development. He asserted the critical role of fathers in boosting their children's self-confidence, self-esteem, and self-concept. According to Burghes, fathers consistently support their children during times of distress or unhappiness.

However, Catherine Hakim (1996), an interactionist, opposes the argument made by feminists. She asserts that men and patriarchy are not to blame for women's roles in families. According to Hakim, women actively choose to prioritize family and children over work, resulting in less commitment to their careers compared to men.

The New Right presents an alternative viewpoint concerning women, underscoring the significance of a woman staying with her husband, irrespective of the situation. Based on this conviction, it is advocated that women should put their responsibilities as caregivers for their offspring and future foremost. The New Right asserts that children lacking father figures are prone to encounter more hardships and obstacles in life compared to those raised by both parents. They emphasize the importance of kids receiving affection and support from both parents, contending that households with only one parent act as poor examples for their children. As an example, Erdos (2000) implies that kids raised without a paternal figure are less likely to be effectively taught values like discipline and compromise typical in nuclear families, ultimately diminishing their potential of becoming successful parents themselves.

A number of Islamic academics and interactionists are in alignment with the New Right's assertion that a woman is invariably better off with her first spouse, irrespective of his attributes. They advocate this viewpoint primarily because they believe children require both parents for

their overall development. Moreover, they suggest that if a woman chooses to remarry or part ways with her husband, it casts dishonor on not only the entire family but also on her own parents. In broader terms, there isn't a clear-cut determination as to who wields dominance and control within the family setting. The perspectives of functionalists and interactionists diverge significantly on this issue.

Overall, it is a matter of perspective whether women who specialize in home life are being oppressed. The amount of choice they have plays a crucial role. Postmodernists argue that if men and women have different roles, it may not necessarily be seen as oppression. However, when there is no choice, does the mother have any control? I align with interactionists and believe that the dynamics within each family need to be examined to determine if power is being shared. When men start working, they may desire power over family dynamics but they already have power over finances and expenses. What they lack power over is their children and household because they choose to work outside. Meanwhile, the mother takes charge of the household and children willingly. If they choose to relinquish that power, why then complain about it?