Murdock argues that the nuclear family because of its sheer practicality is a way of meeting the four needs of society and that this can be found universally. However, some sociologists would argue that these four needs can be met in ways other than the nuclear family, for example by institutions or different family types. Marxists and Feminists have criticised Murdock’s view and say that functionalism rejects conflict and exploitation. Feminists see the family as being patriarchal and serving the needs of men. Marxists argue that the family meets the needs of capitalism, not family members or society as a whole.
Parson’s argues that the particular structure and functions of a family type will ‘fit’ the needs of society in which it is found. According to Parsons’ there are two types of society; industrial and pre-industrial society. He argues that the nuclear family fits the needs of the industrial society and therefore this is the most dominant type of family in this society, while the extended family fits the pre-industrial society. In traditional pre-industrial societies people had ascribed or fixed status in modern society they have achieved status. Through hard work people can achieve their status and earn top jobs such as a lawyer. For this reason Parsons argues that the nuclear family is better as in an extended family.
The pre-industrial family had many functions; it was a unit of production where the family worked together perhaps on a farm and a unit of consumption, feeding and clothing for its members. It was more self-sufficient than the modern nuclear family. However according to Parsons when the family changed from an extended to a nuclear family in industrial Britain it lost many of its functions. For example the family ceases to become a unit of production. The family had just two irreducible functions these were the primary socialisation of children and the stabilisation of adult personalities. However, not everyone accepts the functionalist view of the family and its role. Marxists and feminists reject its consensus assumptions about who benefits from the family. Marxists see capitalist society as being based upon conflict between the capitalist class and the working class. They see the function of the family therefore benefitting the capitalist system. This strongly contrasts with the view of functionalists who believe that the family benefits the family members and society. Marxists argue that the family is shaped by who owns the mode of production, for example tools machinery raw materials etc. In modern society it is the capitalist class who owns and controls the mode of production. The family has evolved from this.
The patriarchal monogamous family came about as the forces of production developed. In Engel’s view, monogamy became essential because of the inheritance of private property, men had to be certain of the paternity of their children to ensure that their children only inherited their wealth and property. In Engel’s view the rise of the monogamous nuclear family represented a “world historical defeat of the female sex” as the nuclear family brought woman’s sexuality under male control and turned her to into an instrument to produce children.
Today Marxists argue that the family performs ideological functions or a set of ideas or beliefs that reinforce inequality between the classes and persuades people that the capitalist system is a fair one. The family socialises children into thinking that inequality and hierarchy are fair. For example children are dominated and controlled by adults; this gets them used to the idea that there will always be someone in control in the workplace. Marxists tend to assume that the nuclear family is the most dominant type in society and they ignore other family types. Feminists argue that Marxists place too much emphasis on class conflict and not enough on the gender inequalities that exist between men and women. Also, Functionalists ignore the real benefits that the family can provide such as mutual support and intimacy.
Feminists also take a critical view of the family. They argue that the family oppresses women. They see gender inequality as something that is created by society. Ansley describes women as ‘takers of shit’ who soak up the frustration of their husbands that they feel because of their exploitation and alienation in the workplace. Marxists feminists see the exploitation of women in the family as linked to the exploitation of the working class. They argue that the family must be abolished at the same time as a socialist revolution replaces capitalism with a classless society. Radical feminists argue that the family and marriage are key institutions in patriarchal society. Men benefit from women’s unpaid domestic labour and from their sexual services, and they dominate women through domestic and sexual violence of the threat of it.
by
vantielcke (student)
