A Woman's Place Is In The Home - People who agree with this statement - Lionel Tiger & Rob Fox The Imperial Animal 1972

Authors Avatar

        Chirag Patel

-  -

A Woman’s Place Is In The Home

People who agree with this statement:

Lionel Tiger & Rob Fox → The Imperial Animal 1972

These two anthropologists say that to see behaviour simply in terms of culture ignores biogrammar e.g. A genetically based program, which predisposes human beings to behave in certain ways. Since 99.9% of mans existence has been spent as a hunter and gatherer it is reasonable to assume that he has become genetically adapted to this way of life. Men are more aggressive and dominant because of male hormones (testosterone) which create behaviour appropriate for their role. Women are programmed (oestrogen) for reproduction and care of children. “The mother is totally essential for the well being of the child. Attempts to abolish gender roles will go against nature”.

What Tiger and Fox are saying that from day one men have been the person of the family who goes out to work and the woman stays at home and takes care of the children. They also say that biological hormones have programmed men to be like men and women to be like women so it would go against nature to make changes to these gender roles.

George Murdock → Social Structure 1949

This functionalist suggests that it is not genetic differences but differences in reproductive biology which create the sexual division of labour e.g. The greater physical strength of men and the fact that women bare and nurse children leads to separate gender roles because it is practicle and efficient to do so. Murdock surveyed the literature on two hundred and twenty four societies and claims to have detected a sexual division of labour in all of them. Men did lumbering, mining, quarrying, land clearance, house building and hunting. Women did cooking, gathering vegetables, water carrying, making and repairing clothes. “The advantages inhernt in a division of labour by sex persumeably accounted for its universality”.

Talcote Parsons → Functionalist Sociologist

Gives a biological explanation of womens socialisation role he agrees with Murdock that the basis of the sexual division of labour lies in the fact that women bare and nurse chidren and establish a strong relationship (bonding) with the baby, But he says that women stay at home and men go out to work in modern society.

Parsons says that a mans role when working is an instrumental role and a womans role when at home is an expressive role. Instrumental role is treating something as a means to an end. e.g. life begins after you finish work because you hate work, the rewards are extrensic as in money. Both the employer and employee use each other for what they are capable of. Expressive role is when satisfactions come when working. Intrensic rewards like self fulfillment are achieved.

John Bowlby → Childcare & the growth of love 1953

This Psychologist concludes that a mothers place is at home caring for the children. He studied psychologically disturbed children and found that many of them had experienced seperation from their mother at an early age. Deprivation from maternal love in childhood results in being unable to give or receive love later as an adult and being doomed to a career of distructive and anti-social relationships. “ The infant and growing child should experience a warm intermate and continuous relationship with his mothers”.  

Join now!

People who disagree with the statement:

Ann Oakley → Housewife 1974

She argues:

What Murdock says is that it is not because of genetics that they have separate gender roles it is because it is efficient to do so. His survey outlined all the possible jobs men would do which women would not be seen doing. Basically it was down to strength and men were the most likely people to have it.

Tiger & Foxes position is based on false chain of reasoning because they start with a doubtful generalisation about human society ...

This is a preview of the whole essay