Some sociologists therefore, assert that gender and sexuality are interrelated. Although, it is common knowledge that within society we are born with a particular set of sex organs, therefore determining one as a male/female. We will therefore be gendered as feminine and masculine.
Moreover, gender identity is a permanent human characteristic and is a basic organiser of experience. The attainment of gender identity establishes an enduring ‘schema’ around which a n individual from child to adult can elaborate knowledge of sex and gender. According to Bem (1981), “A schema is a cognitive structure or network of associations that organizes and guides an individual’s perception of the world” (Furnham & Stacey, 1981. p92). This is a basic organizing principle for all cultures. The processing of gender schema and Bem believes that in the course of development children learn the network of associations linked with being male or female (ibid). One will then traditionally enter into sexual relations. However this is not always the case.
The most influential and controversial theory of sexuality is that of Sigmund Freud. Freud suggested that,
”Sexuality is conceptualised as a drive, as an instinct possessed by all human beings by virtue of their biology. It exists, shaping behaviour, even when people are unaware of it, and it is present from birth” (cited in walby, 1990:111).
Freud asserts that we are all born bisexual and that we only become heterosexual through our body’s development. Girls are differentiated from boys in a manner of ways. Freud was originally of the view that boys were attracted to their mothers and girls to their fathers. However, he later developed the theory that both infants are primarily attracted to the mother. Freud’s interpretation is that, a son loves his mother and sees his father as a rival for her, whereas a daughter loves her father and experiences her mother as a rival. Therefore Freud implicates that, male rivalry is buried rather than resolved whereas the female rivalry tends to settle down. The difference according to Freud is that the young male feels his penis to be minimised by his fathers, so will therefore choose to opt out of the contest. The young female however compares herself more equally with her mother who has not got a penis at all (penis envy). In puberty the young male asserts himself, this appears to leave the female in a passive role. Freud expresses that the division between the sexes is due to anatomy (Payne, 2000).
Conversely, Chodorow suggests that girls play a more active role. She argues that initially both females and males identify with their mother and that it is fairly straightforward for the female to continue to do so. Males therefore, have the specific and emotionally painful problem of detaching themselves from the identification and learn to develop a male identity. Male anger and aggression can be sometimes related to this process. The young female will draw her attention to the male when she wants them for mating. Chodorow asserts that,
“Mothering is a rich experience, but simultaneously traps women in a different adult role from that of men, one which is not as well rewarded in contemporary society” (cited in Walby, 1990:94).
Heterosexuality, has therefore been institutionalised as the ‘norm’ and any other forms of sexuality are stereotyped and judged by. Therefore heterosexuality is not just about sex; it consists of marriage that is the oppression of women (Walby.1990).
Historically, a women was owned by her husband and before marriage owned by her father. The role of a wife is to service her husbands needs and wants this was and still is maintained through patriarchal society Payne identified that,
”A married woman cannot be sterilised without her husband’s consent, but the converse is not the case”(Payne, 2000:180).
Moreover, institutionalised heterosexuality dominates sex education within schools (Clause 28 of the Local Government Act 1988 outlawed the promotion of homosexuality within schools). Priority is therefore based on reproduction and little emphasis is placed on pleasure, thus implying that our next generations will grow up to be heterosexual (Payne, 2000).
Through historical context this assumption has been so taken for granted. For example it has been the theory of essentialists way of thinking that it is
“The Transgression of God’s law”(Payne, 2000:171) to procreate.
Institutionalised heterosexuality accounts for much in the biases of homosexuality. It suggests that homosexuality is ‘unnatural’ in its actions and therefore cannot procreate. It held many restraints historically with the imprisonment of those participating. Today however, although it has been legalised, restriction still applies. Heterosexual sex for example, is legal at the age of sixteen and eighteen for those in relations with homosexuals. Thus proving to provide inequalities within the governing of society. Thereby demonstrating ones sexual orientation is socially and culturally constructed through peers, education and the media.
In terms of gender differentiation and work, historically the industrial revolution brought about a change in the production of goods, this in turn had an effect on the structure of the family. At the onset of the industrial revolution the shift in production of primary to manufactured goods led the population to migrate from rural to urban areas. The increase in production resulted in new factories to manufacture goods and the expansion of towns. Thus implicating a gradual separation that became apparent between the home and work.
Furthermore, men, women and children worked alongside one another in the cotton spinning industry. Initially, women tended to operate the jenny frames however, with the introduction of the more efficient Mule, men became the operators. The justification for this was that women were seen to be physically and intellectually weaker (Hudson, 1992). In addition, the concept of women entering into paid employment-introduced differentiation in pay rolls, leaving men secure in what was considered the more skilled jobs (ibid).
With the introduction of trade unions, according to Abbott and Wallace (1997), men were able to restrict women’s paid employment and exclude them from higher paid skilled work. The assumption being, that woman should remain within the home and care for the family (homemaker). Walby (1997) for example asserts that, the household and household production as being a key site of women’s subordination (Walby, 1990).
Moreover, the two world wars were a contradiction in terms of women’s employment. For example, with the outbreak of the First World War,
“Almost three quarters of a million women were employed as salary earners and took on roles such as drivers, munitions and government department workers”(Oakley, A.1980: 57). Along side this work, women also nurtured the family while the men folk were at war.
However, when the war concluded, despite women’s efforts during the war, they were therefore encouraged to revert back to their original role of wife and carer within the home. Women’s status within society had changed; they were no longer valued as much as men were, so their wages were at a much lower level. Women were slowly excluded from a range of paidwork. Hunt (1988), revealed in the census of 1901, that a mere 13% of married women was in paid employment compared to 52% of single mothers.
However, the Second World War saw history repeat itself whereby women were
encouraged and obligated, at a later stage to enter into paid employment. Women
once again took over what was seen to be men’s work. Moreover, to enable the men to return to their jobs at the end of the war, women were encouraged to return to the home to waver any hostility that could occur (Pilcher, 2000).
Thus, on a variety of levels it could be argued that the industrial age benefited men more than women. Whereby men acquired the majority of human capital as they established themselves as a more skilled and experienced workforce Human capital theorists, maintain women acquire less human capital due to their position in the family (Walby 1990). Women are therefore seen as the homemaker and men the breadwinner.
Economists and some feminists have indicated that women could be seen as a ‘reserve army’ of labour. For example, when men went to war, women would replace them in the work force. Therefore, while figures on the changes in women’s employment during and after the two world wars fit this theory. When Britain was in periods of recession, women’s employment did not decline more than men’s did (Abercrombie 1994).
According to census data less than one third of the workforce were women from the twentieth century up until the 1960’s (Hakim, 1979). Women have fought for equality within the labour market against men and in doing so they were 47% of employers in 1997(Labour Market Trends January 1998).
A legal framework had brought about these changes for equal opportunities introduced in the nineteen seventies and eighties. The equal pay legislation passed in nineteen-seventy and implemented in nineteen seventy-five, was influential in narrowing the wages gap between men and women.
The table below reveals that the five-year implementation period saw a narrowing of wage differentials of eleven percent. However, from 1977 to 1995 there was only a narrowing of a mere six percent.
Women’s and men’s hourly earnings (full- time only), 1970-95
- 1974 1977 1981 1986 1991 1995
Full-time men 13.3 108 181 332 489 755 891
Full-time women 8.4 71 134 242 363 591 715
Full-time women as %
Of Full-time men 63 66 74 73 74 78 80
Source: calculated from New Earnings Survey, 1970,1974, 1977,1986,1991.1995.
Figures for adult workers including over-time, for those who pay was not affected by absence. Decimalization of the currency occurred between1970 and 1974 (Walby, 1997:31).
First-Wave feminists fought for the rights of women to provide equality within the work force. Moreover, many women’s unions coupled with the backing of governmental departments, were all in support of equality. As a result, The Sex Discrimination Act of 1975 and the 1984 Equal Value Amendment Act, which provided equal pay for work of equal value (walby, 1997) resulted in the strengthening of equalities.
Further inequalities have been identified to hinder women’s participation in employment, i.e. paid employment is only maintained with regard to the ‘family life course’. Thus, establishing whether or not they have offspring and the age of the children. Women with children are therefore more than likely to enter into part time work. Whereas women with no dependants are able to enter into employment on a full time basis.
Payne (2000) identified that after the pre-school age of a child, women’s involvement in the workforce increases. Full time work is increased by five percent and part time work sees an increase of ten percent. However, the family does not hinder men’s employment. Thus, establishing continuity with regard to employment.
Furthermore, women’s status within employment has been seen to be secondary in social and economic theory (Walby, 1997). However, “The ever increasing opportunities for women to work outside the home make her less and less dependent, economically, upon a husband” (Casler, 1974, p. 30).
Braverman (1974) claimed that women spent less time in the home due to the manufacturing of domestic appliances. For example, washing machines decreased the time spent on the old system of hand washing. He implicated that work was de-skilled by capitalism and women were brought in as a new unskilled labourforce.
Although women’s employment increased, Payne (2000) identified that it was predominantly in part-time work. Of all the women that were employed in 1997, forty-four percent were in part-time rather than full-time work. It could be argued that women predominantly occupy part time work as it fits in with their family responsibilities and what is institutionalised by society.
Atkinson’s (1986) theory of flexibility could be seen to account for this. He asserted that core workers (mainly men) were enhancing their skills to enable them to acquire the better-paid jobs. Whereas peripheral workers (mainly women) were subjected to flexibility.
Hakim (1987) implemented that the flexible workforce increased from thirty percent in 1981 to thirty-four percent in 1986. Women are one half of the flexible workforce and men one quarter. Establishing women as the largest single category of non-permanent employees.
Burchell, Dale and Joshi (1997) recognised that part-time work entails many disadvantages compared to full-time work;
- They are less likely to have access to overtime payment and premium payments related to working unsociable hours.
- They are less likely to enjoy benefits of subsidised meals and limited access to membership of sick pay schemes and occupational pensions.
- Part time workers have more limited prospects for training and promotion than full time workers.
- No rights to receive statutory redundancy pay or to maternity leave.
(Cited in Pilcher, 2000:39).
Smith, Fagan and Rubery (1998) argue that,
“The type of flexibility adopted by firms is gendered” (cited in Payne, 2000:40).
A part time strategy is maintained where women are concerned and in men’s work other strategies are used including overtime and shift work. Therefore flexibility work is seen as women’s work as it is low paid and low skilled. Flexibility is maintained through the part time route rather than other available strategies (ibid).
In addition McRae (1991) assets that, women returning to work after a break from having a family, experience downward occupational mobility. Professional women returning to employment on a part time basis experienced a nine- percent decline compared to twenty-six percent of women that were employed in secretarial and clerical jobs. Thus determining that the majority of part time work is carried out in the service sector.
In addition those women in part time work emphasised that they were satisfied with their employment status. Although it could be said that they have no choice, as state childcare in Britain is of the lowest in Europe (Crompton, 1997). Private childcare predominantly caters for a child’s parents, whom are either in full time employment or in receipt of family working tax credit, as it is extremely expensive.
Segregation is another factor of inequality between men and women. Hakim asserts,
“ The industries and occupations within which women and men work tend to be associated more with one gender than the other” (cited in Pilcher, 1999:35).
The majority of women’s employment is in the service industry i.e. health, education, caring and restaurants.
Furnham, A& Stacey, B. (1991). ‘Young Peoples Understanding of Society’ Routeledge
Casler, L. (1974). ‘Is Marriage Necessary?’
New York:Human Sciences Press.
