Monday, February 26, 2007

Family and Work

1. Briefly explain the egalitarian myth that Hochschild documents in her chapter. What is emotion work and how is it related to this myth? Compare Holts' situation with your observations on the division of labor in your family or those of your friends.
Hothschild embarks on the egalitarian myth that both the husband and wife in a marriage can work and take care of the household equally. Although this may be true in some cases, often times the woman is found to take on a 'second shift' at home, where she cooks, cleans, does the laundry, and takes care of the children. As a result, egalitarianism disappears and the husband only helps when asked. Housework is seen as a task that should be performed by the woman due to roots in history. In today's society, the 'upstairs-downstairs' myth has been seen a solution where the husband or wife take care of either the upstairs or downstairs, or inside or outside to split up tasks and workload. The couple saw it as a fair division of labor, not because it actually was, but because they needed to believe that it was in order to survive their marriage and avoid conflict.
Emotion work is balancing acceptable emotions between "child, spouse, home, and outside job (Hothschild, 37). It is seen as work and related to the egalitarian myth because it is stressful enough to manage a career, family, and housework and often impossible to provide each with equal positive emotions. In fact, the belief that each should be equal causes more stress making it more difficult to achieve.
The Holts' situation is different than mine at home, however, I have witnessed similiar situations in friends' homes and have learned that it is very stressful. In my family, my father runs a business and my mother would stay home and take care of me, my three siblings(until we moved to Boston), and my grandmother. She does all of the housework, bills, and would have dinner ready for my father. In her mind, and also mine, being a housewife is a job in itself. She is extremely happy with her life, as if my father, and all of my sisters and brother. When I am older and I marry I hope to do the same.
2. Explain the concept of the “ideology of domesticity” described by Williams. What are the three constraints that domesticity places on the organization of work in our society? Based on what you learned from lectures and movies, did ideology of domesticity exist in hunters and gatherers societies? In colonial America? Use specific examples to support your answers.
Williams describes the ideology of domesticity as a belief that "men 'naturally' belong in the market because they are competetive and aggressive; women belong in the home because of their 'natural' focus on relationships, children, and an ethic of care" (Williams, 1). It focuses on the male breadwinner and housewife roles and claims that for the most part, this system still exists despite the fact that women are unhappy sacrificing their careers and staying at home. Unfortunately, those mothers that do work outside the home, whether single or married, face marginalization in the workface refuting the myth of equality.
Domesticity places constraints on the organization of work in our society by affecting women, men, children, emotional life, and employers. The first constraint is that "employers are entitled to ideal workers with immunity from family work," (20). Secondly, domesticity "minimizes family involvement" (Williams, 3) because the mother spends the most time with the child while the father is at work. This is dangerous because it equally important for both the mother and father to raise the child. Domesticity also places extreme stress on the father to be a breadwinner and raise enough money to support the family. Often times the father is working long hours or working multiple jobs to make ends meet. Domesticity aslo affects politics in a negative way because it makes childrearing a private act instead of a public act causing children to develop private virtues instead of public virtues. Lastly, domesticity proposes that women have an emotional obligation to provide enough love and time as possible. This places immense strain on the mother and develops "a symbolic separation of home and work, the material conditions of motherhood, and the linkage of class formation and gender roles," (31).
The ideology of domesticity was present in the hunter and gatherer society and also in Colonial America. In both societies, the male would go out and hunt for food to feed the family and the female would stay around the house and garden, cook, clean, and take care of the children. However, in the movie we watched in class the woman was a midwife, nurse, and mother taking care of a large portion of society. She was highly valued in her career and also in her society. She taught her children at an early age how to take care of the household so that she would be able to continue with her career.
3. Explain Williams’s argument about sex discrimination and the “free choice.” Do you agree with her?
In her article, "Is Domesticity Dead?" Williams argues that "sex differences in labor force participation patterns are not themselves caused by discrimination, sex differences in occupations and wages are thus the result of free choices made by men and women," (14). Employers report that women's work may be affected by their family life, which would in turn, affect their performance at work causing them to be less desirable to hire. On the other hand, women report taking jobs that they do not have to perform ideally but do not necessarily perform worse than men. Williams argues that "free choice" is defined as making choices within certain constraints and that women are discriminated against by making the choice to work and be marginalized.
I am undecided whether or not I agree with Williams in her argument about sex discrimination and "free choice." I do not believe that women should be discriminated against because they choose to work instead of staying home and taking care of the house and the children and in turn, should not be paid less money than a man working the same job.

4. According to Carrington, how does the household division of labor in lesbigay families compare to that in heterosexual families? In his view, what are the reasons for these differences or similarities?
The household division of labor in lesbigay families are similar to that in heterosexual families because the same egalitarian myth still exists. However, instead of defining actual tasks that a husband and wife would take in a heterosexual family those of a lesbigay family would instead describes the workload as '50-50.' They would argue that the workload was equal and in the same breath call it fair. In fact, the two words are used interchangably when describing the househould division of labor.
Carrington explains this difference based on the fact that lesbigay families try "to avoid the stigma associated with violating gender expecations" and to avoid conflict.

Monday, February 19, 2007

Marriage, Cohabitation, & Partnership

1. What does it mean when sociologists say, "marriage is an institution?" According to Coontz, what are the main indicators of the "deinsitutionalization" of marriage? Explain what problem Coontz finds in the proposals to "reinstitutionalize" marriage?
Marriage as an institution implies that it is a legal organization controlled and modified by set rules, law, customs, rituals, and social expectations. In the past, marriage was the primary means of organization. It helped to determine gender roles both in the home and in public and served to regulate work based upon age and sex.
However, according to Coontz marriage has become deinstitutionalized gradually over time. Divorce, cohabitation, remarriage, and single motherhood have worked to make marriage more of an option rather than a necessity. In additon, longer life spans and the increase of young adults living on their own before marriage have also been factors.
Coontz finds many problems in the proposals to "reinstitutionalize" marriage, including lowering the age of marriage, forcing people to live at home before marriage, and enforcing the reproductive revolution only in marriage.
2. According to the articles by Harris & by Gerstel & Sarkisian, what are the benefits & disadvantages of marriage for men & women?
Married men and women are found to have better health, happiness, sex life, more property, and higher incomes and wealth. Married couples have sex more often than unmarried couples. It has been found that marriage keeps men out of crime and violence and has profound physical and mental health benefits for men.
For women, housework increases as career work and income decreases. This comes with childbearing and childrearing. Women also face domestic violence and it been reported that poor women seek fewer benefits to marriage.
While both men and women have decreased involvement with friends, neighbors, and family members, women have been found to keep better contact via telephone calls and visitations. On the other hand, men are more likely to rely on their wives to contact relatives and friends.

3. According to Brown, what are the different reasons people cohabit & what are the effects of cohabitation on well- being?
People cohabit for various reasons including, "a stepping stone to marriage, a substitute for marriage, or an alternative to singlehood." Young adults who have never married and who are childless cohabit as an alternative to living alone. Some of these couples have the mindset that they will marry, while others are less committed. In fact, half of all people who live together will marry. Often, when these couples break up they will move in with their next boyfriend or girlfriend. This is called "serial cohabitation." Those who have been married and do have children cohabit instead of getting remarried. They are more likely to live together long- term. In addition, "there is also mounting evidence that the purpose of cohabitation may vary by racial- ethnic group." Whites are more likely to cohabit as a stepping stone to marriage while Hispanics and blacks cohabit as an alternative to marriage.
The well- being of cohabitors has been found to be lower than that of married couples. Married couples report more happiness with their sex lives even though cohabitors report engaging in more sex. Cohabitors are less economically stable than married couples and also are not as psychologically well- adjusted. They are less happy and have reported more fighting.

4. The findings of the research on benefits and disadvantages of marriage & cohabitation can be affected by selection effects. Explain what this means.
The selection effect refers to the sampling proccess and the gap in data between the wealthy, poor, sick, and healthy.

Monday, February 12, 2007

Sexual Trends Among Teens

According to Risman and Schwartz' article, what are the main trends in sexual activity among teens?
The authors work to describe the fact that teenagers are continuing to be sexually active. However, it is more conservative and the accusation that teenage sexually activity is a social problem is refuted. Statistics prove that a lower percentage of teenagers between the ages of 15 and 17 are engaging in sexual activity and in correlation there has been a decrease in the recorded number of teen pregnancies, teenage mothers, and abortions.

How do the authors explain these trends?
In an effort to explain the decline in sexual activity and the correlating problems associated with teenage sex, the authors speculated that "the success of abstinence education, the cultural backlash against the sexual revolution, or the fear of disease (or some combination of these factors)" can be accounted for. Teenagers are engaging in more responsible sex rather than postponing sex until marriage. They are more aware of the negative outcomes of irresponsible sex and have learned this through the "carnage of their parents' generation- divorce, disease, and a loss of status for the women's choice to say no- and decided to reestablish their power through less, not more, sexuality.

According to England and Thomas, what are the main trends in romantic and sexual behaviors among college students?
England and Thomas argue that "dating" is declining and the college "hook up" is increasing. Hooking up is defined as any sexual behavior- whether it be kissing, nongenital touching, genital touching, oral sex, and intercourse and is very often linked with drinking. College students are more likely to hook up rather than go on a date and often do not go out on dates until after they have been hooking up for a while. Therefore, hooking up can lead to a relationship or just for instant gratification. Often, a girl and boy will hook up continuously and only consider themselves "friends with benefits." In addition, a girl and boy will consider themselves to be "dating" when they are in fact in an exclusive relationship.
More students are engaging in sexual activity but are being more responsible about their actions. For example, the majority of women use birth control and men are using condoms.


What gender differences are documented in both of these articles?
Both articles embark on the fact that both men and women are waiting longer to have sex and are being more responsible to do so. In addition, women are more likely to not have sex until they are in an exclusive relationship. This can be attributed to the double- standard and negative stigma of being labeled a slut. Men are not as emotionally attached and are more likely to have sex outside of a relationship.

Compare these authors' observations to your own high school and college experiences?
The authors observations are exactly true. I have noticed that the dating scene has dramatically decreased and is basically non- existant. Women are more likely to have sex only in a relationship and are being more responsible with their sexual activity. I feel as though this study could have been conducted at Boston College because it describes the sexual trends on campus to a tee.

Monday, February 5, 2007

Puritans and Gay Identity

1. Describe the Puritan approach to sexual desire. What was the ideal of sexuality in Colonial America? How did people learn about sexuality? How did Colonial society deal with sexual "deviance" and what were the two main goals of regulating it?

The Puritans viewed sexual activity as a joy and duty within marriage with the purpose of procreation. They did not believe sexual activity was for physical gratification and, as a result, were opposed to masturbation and premarital sex. In fact, these acts were considered great crimes. Children learned that sexual activity was restricted to married couples at an early age and was strictly to take place in the family between the mother and father. Their parents instilled moral values that they would carry on into adulthood and take with them into their future relationships. In addition, they learned through observation and through hearing noises within the household.
When citizens were found to be having sex or indulging in activities that might lead to sexual activity they faced extreme consequences regulated by the judicial system in the town. Activities such as premarital sex, masturbation, etc. held great physical punishment and public humiliation. At times, these citizens were fined great sums of money and were ordered to repent for their sins. In extreme cases, capital punishment was seen as the only solution.

2. D'Emilio argues that the relationship between capitalism and the family is contradictory. Explain this argument and then summarize his argument about gay identity and capitalism. Do you agree? Why or why not?

D'Emilio argues that the homosexuality did not always exist and that gay men and lesbians are rooted in history as a result of capitalism. However, he argues that the relationship between capitalism and family is contradictory. First, capitalism pushes for the independence of the individual and advocates for gender identity and autonomy. On the other hand, in order for capitalism to work, workers are needed and in order to support this homophobia and heterosexuality is enforced. In addition, gay men and lesbians are pushed into families in order to procreate but capitalism allows them enough independence to live outside the family. This, in turn, allows for the continuous decline of the family which parralels the decline in birthrate. The family as an institution has changed and evolved from procreation to harvesting affection and love to their family members.