Sociology The Family

Family structures and how they have developed over time, as the result of the social changes brought about by industrialisation is of particular interest to those studying the sociology of the family. Three key sociological theories in the study of the family are functionalism, Marxism and feminism. It is the intention of this essay to discuss and evaluate these theories using sociological studies which support these schools of thought.

Functionalism describes the family as having its role or function within society. Functionalists normally assume that if a social institution is evident then it must have a role or function. The family is looked at in terms of its functions being beneficial for society and the individual. When a child is born it must be looked after and cared for by, in most societies, the parents of the child. Therefore the function of the family is to look after the next generation and aid them through childhood. The role the family has effectively allows the child to learn many different things for example, language, society, values and norms. Not only does the family support the individual through childhood but for most of adult life. However it is the first few years of life that are important as sociologists argue that this is when an individual’s personality is developed. Although the family has the role of passing on social skills and knowledge in childhood, specialist social institutions outside the family, such as schools and colleges, provide an individual with the necessary skills to co-ordinate their adult roles.

We can say that the family performs important basic functions. The functionalist theory is supported by studies such as Parson’s “Social Structure of the Family” in which Parson’s describes the family becoming increasingly specialized in industrial societies and concentrating on a few important functions. For example in many small societies, caring for the elderly is undertaken by their family but in industrial societies this is becoming the role of specialized agencies such as care homes and hospitals. According to Parson’s the family has two basic and irreducible functions: the primary socialization of children and the stabilization of adult personalities. Primary socialization looks at the socialization during the early years of childhood which takes place within the family. There are two processes involved with primary socialization. These are the internalization of society’s culture and the structuring of the personality. Parson’s states that unless culture is internalized or absorbed and accepted then society would not exist. As without shared norms and values, social life would not be possible.

“However, culture is not simply learned, it is ‘internalized as part of the personality structure’ ”

Harolambos and Holborn (2004: 469).

This is a preview of the whole essay

“However, culture is not simply learned, it is ‘internalized as part of the personality structure’ ”

Harolambos and Holborn (2004: 469).

A childs personality is shaped and moulded to the point where the values of a particular society become a part of them. Parsons saw the family as being important in creating personality and saw no other social institution that could achieve this. Once the personality has been produced it must then be kept stable. This is the second basic function of the family according to Parsons. By having a source of release from the stresses of everyday life and having emotional security this keeps the personality stable. The relationship of marriage and the opportunity for adults to indulge in childish behaviour with their children helps to prevent overwhelming the individual. ASCHNCSociologyBSK/Family(11.8.07:6)

Strengths and weaknesses exist within the functionalist framework. Functionalist theories seem to look at the positive functions of the family and give little look into negative aspects of family life. Parson’s has been said to idealize the image of the family (Harolambos and Holborn 2004:470). For example, feminists look at the male dominated nature of the traditional family structure and the existence of violence within the private sphere. Functionalists do not tend to consider alternatives to the family. For example an Israeli kibbutz carries out the functions of the family but it does not fit the ‘typical’ or ‘nuclear’ definition of a family. Also there are many varying family types, even in one society, which have differences based on class, religion and ethnicity.

In contrast the Marxist theory looks at the interests of powerful groups determining the way society is organized. The family is seen as part of the structure of society and is one of a number of social institutions which help maintain this structure or the economic system. Marxists state that it is the requirements of the capitalist system that have come to shape the family in industrial societies (ASCHNCSociologyBSK/Family 11.8.07:9).The work of Friedrich Engels “The Origin of the Family” provides a basis for the Marxist view of society. Engels had an evolutionary view of society and attempted to trace its origin through time. Engels combined Marxist theory and his evolutionary approach arguing that as the mode of production changed then so did the family. Engels approved of monogamy and argues that the monogamous nuclear family developed with the emergence of private property or private ownership of the means of production. Engels argued that because of the ownership of private property came about, the state needed to initiate laws in which to solve the problem of inheritance of private property (property was owned by men and if the heirs of men were to inherit property then legitimacy of those heirs needed to be secure). Men therefore needed greater control over women so that there would be no doubt of the paternity of their offspring. The monogamous family provided for this purpose. (Harolambos and Holborn 2004:471)

The Marxist approach to the family also has strengths and weaknesses. Unfortunately Engels theory was based upon early unreliable anthropological evidence and his view upon early society no longer seems to stand ground within society today. Although his theory on the origins of sexual equality have led to the Marxist approach of the monogamous family.

The third sociological theory (another conflict theory) is feminism. The feminist perspective focuses on a number of social, cultural and political movements and theories that are concerned with gender inequalities and prejudice against women. Feminism can also be seen to be an ideology based on the equality of both sexes. The feminist approach of the family tends to emphasise the negative effects of the family upon women. Anne Oakley’s studies “The Sociology of Housework” and the “Housewife” depicts the feminist tradition of viewing women in a subordinate social role to men. Anne Oakley looked at conjugal roles within the family and the divide of housework between men and women. Oakley analysed the research of Willmott and Young (1973) in which the researchers asked only one question to a husband, “Do you help with the housework?” If husbands answered ‘yes’ to this question it would include men who do the washing up once a week and men who help on a daily basis. Therefore the results would be unrepresentative of the actual demographics of this population. Anne Oakley’s research was based on in depth interviews with unemployed housewives, giving a difference in the perception of who does the housework between the two sexes. Anne Oakley’s findings brought her to the conclusion that men are not willing to carry out undesirable tasks but are more willing to help in those they enjoy. This had also shown that men were able to easily avoid chores they disliked. For example they would be willing to play with a child but not willing to change a dirty nappy. Oakley suggested that in a society where the women are seen to be the homemaker and these are tasks for her makes it easier for men to opt out of certain tasks within the home.

Conjugal roles are created by views in which people see how they should behave. These are influenced by the media and several agents of socialization and until these views are changed the roles of men and women will still be largely segregated. The running of the household is still separated in to men’s and women’s jobs, although there has been an increase in the willingness of the male to “help” around the home the jobs are still not distributed equally between the sexes which in my opinion is due to the view that men have of what men and women’s roles should be. Also with the increase of women finding better career opportunities, roles are still not divided equally. A woman may work hard and earn a good wage in her career but she still has to carry out the majority of household work. If the male also works he is more likely help but again the housework is not distributed equally. As women still tend to carry out the majority of household tasks this backs up the theories of feminists who see domestic labour as exploitation. (ASCHNCSociology/Oakley HW/SK 13.8.07:4)

There are strengths and weaknesses to the feminist perspective of the family. When the views on the family are analysed we seem to look at the ‘nuclear’ family, a married couple with children, where the husband provides and the wife stays at home to do the housework, as an ideal type of family structure. This type of family is becoming less common within society and therefore using the nuclear family to look at inequalities between males and females may be discrediting to actual differences between them. Aspects like practices of families of different religions and those of lone-parent families are also not often taken into account; because of this feminists may exaggerate the actual effects of the family on women when not taking other factors into account.

By evaluating and comparing these theories it is clear that they have similarities and differences. All three theories are structural (macro) theories as they see family in relation to the wider social context and describe the family as an institution which helps to maintain established social values. All three theories also show similarities in how the family has been developed over time from pre-industrial societies to modern industrial societies. They explain the roles and relationships the family is involved with throughout the sociology. Another similarity is that all three theories look at the family in terms of it being an ideology or in other words a set of ideas in how things should be. (ASCHNCSociologyBSK/Family 11.8.07:20)

The theories are different as functionalism emphasises stability, cohesion and consensus. The family is seen as functional and necessary. In comparison Marxism has shown that the interests of powerful groups have come to influence the way in which the family is structured today and argues that the economical needs of society have brought changes which have influenced how the family as a social institution now works. For example the early capitalist textile production of cloth took place in the home and involved all family members. (Harolambos and Holborn 2004:471). Also the Marxist perspective has shown us how the monogamous nuclear family has come to be through the advent of private property. The feminist perspective of the family is different from the functionalist and Marxist views as it specifically highlights the effects of the family upon women and looks at different parts of family, for example housework to examine issues women have within the family as a social institution. It also tells us that feminism is not gender specific and highlights the issues of both sexes. The feminist perspective shows the effects of male dominance within the home in relation to domestic labour.

In conclusion the contributions made by the functionalist, Marxist and feminist perspectives to sociology have brought us to an understanding in how the family works as a social institution today. They highlight the importance of several social factors which have come to create specific conditions within the family. For example the effect of the economy on the family. The studies of the family also shows us the family’s role within society and how it has come to effect both sexes. Important figures in sociology such as Talcott Parsons , Friedrich Engels and Anne Oakley have been important in how we understand the family in contemporary society and in pre-industrial society and the contributions to sociology they have

Reference List

Haralambos and Holborn (2004)
ASCHNCSociologyBSK/Family 11.8.07
ASCHNCSociology/Oakley HW/SK 13.8.07

made will be vital to us also in the future as to how we understand the family.