Radical Feminists believe that it has been built into the way society is structured that men are allowed to exploit and oppress women. They call this patriarchy. They believe that abuse in the family is down to men being psychologically warped by centuries of patriarchy into being unable to accept women as equals. Shulamith Firestone developed a theory in the 1960’s when Radical Feminists began seeking to overturn what at the time was seen as destructive bias towards male power in society. This theory was structural and based on long-term historical views beginning in prehistoric times. Women were left in charge of the domestic activities such as looking after the house and the children. Over thousands of years because of men’s aggressive and outgoing roles they became used to being dominant and women became use to being dependent on men for food and protection. As men began to like the power they had over women they tried to take power over men from other tribes for dominance and then the women were taken as slaves or sex objects. As time went on men also began taking control over their children. Men control children using physical and psychological abuse but in some case sexual dominance is used. Therefore Firestone believed that the sexual abuse of women and children was not about sexual deviance at all but about power. Over the centuries men have become adapted to the power held over women so find it difficult to accept them as equals. Firestone decided the only solution to this problem was for women and children to live totally separated from men, and to even do away with them completely. However today Firestones theories are not very fashionable, although they do have some truth in them. Violent male partners kill 100 women a year while only 4 men a year are killed by violent women partners, and most of all child abuse cases is committed by men. However, radical feminists fail to recognise that women's position has improved considerably - with better access to divorce, better job opportunities, control over their own fertility, and the ability to choose whether to marry or cohabit. Somerville also argues that separtism is unlikely to work, heterosexual attraction makes it unlikely that the conventional nuclear family will disappear. However, Somerville does recognis that women have yet to achieve full equality. She argues that there is a need for family friendly policies, such as more flexible working, to promote greater equality between the partners.
Marxist feminists argue that the main cause of women's oppression in the family is not men, but capitalism. Women's oppression performs several functions for capitalism; women reproduce the labour force through their unpaid domestic labour, by socialising the next generation of workers and maintaining the current one, women absorb anger that would otherwise be directed at capitalism, and women are a 'reserve army'of cheap labour that can be taken on when extra workers are needed, when no longer needed, employers can 'let them go' to return to their primary role as unpaid domestic labour. Margaret Benston, a Marxist feminist, states that the amount of unpaid labour performed by women is very profitable to those who own the means of production. To pay for women even at minimum wage scales, would involve a massive redistribution of wealth. At present the support of the family is a hidden tax on the wage earner, his wage buy the labour power of two people. In addition, the man is less likely to withdraw his labour power with a wife and children to support. Not only does the family produce and rear cheap labour, it also maintains it at no cost to the employer. The woman as housewife tends to her husbands needs keeping him in good working order to perform his role as wage labourer. Fran Ansley, another Marxist feminist, like Parsons, believes that the emotional support provided by the wife acts as a safety valve for the frustration produced in the husband by working in the capitalist system, for marxists this explains male domestic violence against women. However Marxist feminists see the oppression of women in the family as linked to the exploitation of the working class. They argue that the family must be abolished at the same time as a socialist revolution replaces capitalism with a classless society.
The last feminist approach is 'Difference' feminism. The feminist approaches that have been considered so far all tend to assume that most women live in a conventional nuclear family and that they share a similar experience of family life. However, difference feminists argue that one cannot generalise about women's experiences in this way. They argue for example that lesbian and heterosexual women, white and black women, middle-class and working-class women, have very different experiences of the family from one another. For example, black feminists argue that by regarding the family solely as a source of oppression, white feminists neglect black women's experience of racial oppression. Instead, black feminists view the black family positively as a source of support and resistance against racism. However, other feminists argue that this approach neglects the fact that, despite such differences, women do in fact share many of the same experiences. For example, compared with men, they face a greater risk of domestic violence and sexual assault, low pay and so on.
Although the feminists provide an alternative view of the family, there are still some criticisms to be made. The Liberal feminist approach does not uncover the wider structural factors leading to female oppression, and it also does not see that patriarchy is prevalent in all situations, not just in certain areas, such as the media. In Marxist feminism, it is believed that there is an over emphasis on the exploitation of capitalism, as women experience as much patriarchy in non capitalist societies as they do in capitalist ones, and also the target for women and for analysis should be patriarchy in whatever context. Radical feminism has been criticised as it over emphasises the extent to which women share common experiences of exploitation. Following from this, it down grades class and race relations. It also cannot account for the changes in the position of women over time and could only do this with a wider structural framework.
Feminists generally believe that the family has a key role to play in the relationship of the individual to the wider society. They believe that the family is the fundamental site of the exploitation and oppression of women, both within the family itself and in relation to society. Marxist feminists stress that the exploitation of women in the home serves the needs of Capitalism, whereas Radical feminists stress that this exploitation is based on patriarchy. Liberal feminists also believe that patriarchy is the main cause of gender inequality.
in conclusion, the feminist theory does not explain why the role of women varies across cultures. It also suggests that all women who are housewives and caregivers naturally hate what they do because they are stuck at home yet with many women this is simple not the case. Domestic labour may be more satisfying than work because it is based on ties of emotion and personal relationships. The role of housewife/caregiver has no contract, women can pick and choose when they want to work, there are no ‘rights at work’ and it is less mentally challenging. However there are still a lot of women that find domestic labour tedious and isolated. It is privatized and stuck in the same routine which limits their mental capacity suggesting that by doing this there will be less women at work and more women in the house. Because it is isolated there is less chance of ambition or wanting to get out because they acknowledge that they are still going to have the dual burden even if they did work. A positive point of being home is that psychological happiness of a tidy home, home cooked meals, and the husband goes out to work fresh everyday. However, the fact that your house may be the cleanest on the street or the lawn is mowed everyday serves no purpose because domestic labour gains no recognition from others.
In answer to the question, it can be seen that the feminist theory has provided a lot of insight to our understanding of the family, but because it holds such a narrow view of the family, it cannot be considered highly when talking about the family because their are many modern families that are not the traditional nuclear family, as suggested in difference feminism. Feminism have analysed the functions of the family in relation to the wider society. The feminist approach does not look at the family through rose-tinted glasses as it addresses problems such as domestic violence. It has helped to successfully deal with the apparant diversity of contemporary family structures.
