On the other hand, Marxists as well as feminists both disagree with the functionalists view on the family life. Marxists are very critical of the process of primary socialization in the nuclear family because they argue that it reproduces and maintains class inequality. They argue that the main function of a nuclear family is to distract the working class from the fact they are being exploited by capitalism. This is done by; the hierarchal way in which nuclear families are traditionally organized i.e., the male being the head of the household which discourages workers from questioning the hierarchical nature of capitalism and the inequalities in wealth and power that result from it as well are the parents being encouraged to teach their children that the main route to happiness and status lies in consumerism and acquisition of material possessions.
From the feminists point of view they feel the head male dominates the nuclear family. They also believe that the nuclear family functions to benefit capitalism and, therefore, the wealthy rather than the whole of society. As it states in Item B ‘they argue that there exists a domestic division of labour in which men exploit women. Some feminists see this as a product of capitalism, while others claim that families were characterized by patriarchy well before industrialization came along.’ Patriarchy ideology is a term used by feminists, which means male-dominated ideas. Barrett and McIntosh’s ‘The Anti-Social Family’: the anti-social family of the title is the conventional nuclear family. They argue that the nuclear family is anti-social not only because women are oppressed within it but also because it is promoted as the only right way to live; all alternatives are seen as inadequate or even deviant. The many people who find that the Nuclear families do not work for them are then made to feel that they have failed in some way. Barrett and McIntosh describe the effects of this promotion of a familial ideology as familialism, analogous to racism and sexism.
The radical – feminists also argue that the nuclear family mainly functions to benefit men because gender-role socialization results in males and females subscribing to a set of ideas that largely confirm male power and superiority. They argue that the nuclear family is the main arena in which patriarchal ideology is transmitted to children. This ideology encourages the notion that the sexual division of labour is ‘natural’ and unchangeable. It also results in the exploitation of women because patriarchal ideology mainly views women as sexual objects when single, and mother/housewives when married. Therefore, to sum up the Marxist and Feminists views each perspective fully disagree with the question does the nuclear family benefit all its members and society as a whole, because they believe that not only is it gender biased, but as it quotes in item B ‘feminists have drawn attention to the unequal power relationships that exist in many families that they see as responsible for domestic violence.’
Another argument against the Nuclear family is the general criticisms. The criticisms of the functionalist view of the family are the following:
Functionalists tend to see the family as very harmonious, however this view has been challenged by accounts of child abuse, domestic violence and the fallout from divorce.
As Cheal notes, functional relationships can easily slip into dysfunctional relationships, and love can often turn into hate in moments of intense emotion.
Functionalists analyse of the nuclear family tend to be based on middle-class and American versions of family life, and they consequently neglect other influences, such as ethnicity, social class or religion.
As it explains in Item C, ‘the failure by functionalists to question the idea of ‘the family’ has allowed all sorts of mistaken ideas to persist, such as the naturalness of monogamy, the inevitability of female inferiorly, the right of men to control and abuse women’.
George Murdock’s also has his own criticisms, which go against the nuclear family benefiting individuals and society. He fails to acknowledge that families are the product of culture rather than biology, and that; consequently family relationships and roles will take different forms even within the same society. Also, Marxists and Feminists reject his ‘rose-tinted’ harmonious consensus view that the family meet the needs of both wider society and all members of the family. They argue that functionalism neglects conflict and exploitation. This again agrees with the contents of Item B.
Evaluating Marxism and feminist theories of the family. Feminist theories of the family have dated fairly badly, because they fail to account for recent economic and social changes, such as the feminisation of the economy, the educational success of young females, women’s use of divorce, and many women’s rejections of domestic labour as their unique responsibility. Also, feminists theories portray women as passively accepting their lot – the reality, however, is that women can adopt a range of active social identities today, may of which do not involve playing a secondary role to men. In other words, many young women are resisting traditional male definitions of what their role should be. As well as, all three theories are guilt of overemphasising the nuclear family and neglecting the rich diversity of family types in modern society. Finally, Marxism and feminism are also very critical of the nuclear family but fail to offer any practical alternatives to it.
To conclude, I believe that the ‘nuclear family’ used to be a very suitable family structure, however times have changed and its now very un-acceptable for domestic violence and abusive partners to be allowed to continue their violence. Therefore I believe nowadays people don’t have the choice to live as a nuclear family, and even if they did I disagree that it benefits all its members and society because I agree with the Marxists point of view that the nuclear family reproduces and maintains inequality.