Words: 647
In the family, feminists argue that during primary solicitation boys and girls are forced in to gender role stereotypes, for example, girls playing with toy jokers and baby dolls and boys playing with toy cars. Another way feminists argue that girls and boys are socialized in to gender roles is that typically girls are dressed in pink and boys are dressed in blue. This therefore prepares them girls for future life as a mother, who has responsibility of child care and housework while the man is the breadwinner. Feminists also argue society as being oppressive to women as childcare almost always falls on them.
This is apparent in many family types and supported by the fact that almost all single parent families are run by the mother of the child and not the father, Hereford restricting them to what they can do outside of the family. However functionalists would argue that feminists focus too much on the conflict within the family and not the positive functions that the family, nuclear in particular, produce. Feminists have also argued that the family is oppressive to women as it enables them to be subject to domestic violence.
They argue that women are less likely to report any domestic abuse while in a marriage or cohabiting therefore enabling men to get away with it. In education, feminists argue that subject choice encourage suppression of omen, in the past it was not unusual for girls to choose subjects such as home economics sand cookery which is argued would mould them in to their position as a mother later in life and it was therefore unlikely for them to choose a subject such as science or math making them more able to achieve in later life.
This is linked back to gender solicitation in the family. However conflicting evidence suggests that girls are achieving above boys in their Geese’s in a more varied range of subjects, therefore leading to them achieving higher paid jobs etc. Later in life. This point argues that this view on education can be seen as outdated for today’s society. Marxist feminists would argue that the curriculum is more suited to boys, therefore causing them to achieve more than girls in education, causing them to have higher paid jobs with more status.
Supporting this view would be that historically men have been in higher paid positions and better jobs than women, it is also argued that the division of labor in the home housework and childcare is more likely to fall on women, therefore not allowing them to have a job. This also links back to gender solicitation that first happens in the family and then is supported by secondary solicitation in education.
Radical feminists also argue that patriarchal society starts in the playground as girls are subject to emotional and physical abuse inflicted by boys and is then apparent in married life also, they believe the only way for patriarchy to stop is for women to be freed from the male gender. This may also been seen as outdated as there are now laws to stop abuse within and out of marriage. In religion, In conclusion, it is clear that the debate is not completely one sided.
Liberal, Marxist and radical feminists would support the view that feminism has a strong contribution to our understanding of society today as they use a patriarchal society history to defend their arguments, but there is much evidence to suggest that these views aren’t completely coherent to the society we live in and is completely closed to any external evidence that challenges . It is perhaps reasonable to suggest that feminism contributes some, not all, to the understanding we have of society today as some of these views are seen as outdated.