Omitting a potentially perfect theory, functionalism had to face some criticism coming from Marxist and feminist groups. Marxism is based on believe that society is based on class conflict, and all daily actions we make are capitalistic, which is not right. Unlike Marxism, feminism had its foundations in confidence that society is made up to serve all men’s needs within use of women. As we can see, the differentiation between these theories is huge but there are few aspects which we can bravely link together.
A famous functionalist, Talcott Parsons created theory about two basic types of society. Modern industrial society (where the model of nuclear family fits in) and pre-industrial society (extended family model representation). In Parson’s opinion, when Britain started to industrialise, from the 18th century onwards, the extended family model began to give way to the nuclear one. The explanation for those actions is simple – society had different needs. According to Talcott, industrial society had two essential needs: a geographically mobile workforce as well as a socially mobile workforce. While people used to grow up and live in the same small villages, in close proximity to a workplace in traditional pre-industrial society, individuals started to move around the world and seek jobs primarily for wealth. Obviously, it would be much difficult to move around and relocate within an extended family (three generations). That is why industrial society fits into nuclear model. A Socially mobile workforce is basically the ability to become a doctor even though your father is a builder. In other words, individuals can achieve success without support from their background, but through talent and effort. The pre-industrial family had many functions but due to the industrial revolution these functions have now changed into just two. The first is the primary socialisation of children, and the second function is stabilising adult personalities.
However not everyone agrees with functionalistic theory of a family. One of the criticisms came out from Young and Wilmot (1973); their idea was based on belief that extended family was not the dominant family type before the industrial revolution. According to them, the raise of nuclear family was due to several progresses in society like better standards of living, improved housing, the welfare state and the development of women’s rights. Laslett (1872) alleged that the change was caused by the modification of life expectancy before industrialization.
Finally, to fully understand the contribution of functionalism to our understating of family and household, we have to look at the reflecting theory – Marxism and feminism. Marxists argue that the family is shaped by those who own the means of production (bourgeoisie) and that the family performs ideological functions that reinforce inequality between the classes and persuades people to accept the capitalist system as a fair system. The family raises children into thinking that inequality and the hierarchy of society are fair. However, Marxists tend to assume that the nuclear family is the most dominant family type in society and they ignore other variations of family.
Feminists are critical of the Marxist view of the family, believing that they place too much emphasis on class conflict and ignore gender inequalities. Also Functionalists also claim that Marxists and Feminists ignore the functions that a family plays, such as support and intimacy.
by
saltyraddish (student)
