Have you seen...?

Revision for Family can be found in the following places.

Please download, read, make notes - whatever works for you!

Thank you to Bideford School for this revision material!

A slideshare revision here.  Please find out about theorists mentioned.

Thank you to Louisa Shenton for this revision and mindmaps!

Coffee-making Task!

Read the follow text (which is from here) and answer the following questions in full sentences.  Bring the answers to Miss Smith or Ms Dent-Cowan and we will sign your cards!


It is easy to forget how woeful the legal and economic position of married women and cohabitees was in the 1970s, and Mary’s work, both political and academic, was a powerful force for change at that time. In particular her book The Anti-Social Family (Verso, 1982), written with Michele Barrett, was a cornerstone of modern socialist feminist thinking on the family. In that text, Mary and Michele argued against the hallowed status of the concept of ‘the family’ because of its overburdened ideological content. ‘The family’, they argued, was not a simple description of how people organized their personal lives, but an ideological form which justified the dominant status of men and the submission of women and children. The rosy view of ‘the family’ that dominated both popular culture and sociological writings at that time was seen as almost a confidence trick, which hid women’s economic vulnerability, domestic violence and women’s lack of welfare, pension and employment rights. In preference, they argued for the use of the term ‘households’ as this freed thinking from the gender bias inherent in the concept of the family. But this book also took issue with radical feminist thinking of the time and rejected the increasingly prevalent concept of patriarchy. Patriarchy, Barrett and Mcintosh argued, was a transhistorical concept based on biological determinism. In its stead, they argued for a historically contextualized understanding of social relations which combined analysis of class difference with that of gender difference. In this argument, Mary’s socialist, and specifically Marxist, background was central to the development of a highly significant branch of feminist thinking.














(Sorry - fought the technology - lost - gap stays!)


Also, from here:


Barrett and McIntosh acknowledge that the family satisfies ‘real needs’. On the other hand they argue, in The Anti-social Family, that the institution is ‘deeply unequal’ (to the disadvantage of women) and is an ‘antisocial’ force that promotes selfishness and private interest at the expense of wider community values and equality. In their view, the family monopolises ‘caring, sharing and loving’ and prevents these qualities finding an outlet in the wider social world.

Q1:  Explain how Barrett and Mcintosh agree with many Feminist theorists.


Q2: Explain how Barrett and Mcintosh disagree with many Feminist theorists.


For a second signature:


Q3: (AO2) How does this argument compare to a Functionalist understanding of the Family?


For a third signature:


Define the highlighted terms.






Revision material - Family - Diversity - Childhood - sooooo much more can be found here

For Your Benefit

Questions for Coffee Signatures

Given that:

AO1: Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of: sociological theories, concepts and evidence

AO2: Apply sociological theories, concepts, evidence and research methods to a range of issues

AO3: Analyse and evaluate sociological theories, concepts, evidence and research methods in order to:

• present arguments
• make judgements
• draw conclusions.
• 
  

(also, check out this information at the blue links...)

Slideshare        Have a look inside AQA AS Sociology Student Unit Guide

                               New Edition: Unit 1 Families and Households

Identify AO1 and AO2 in the following.  Copy and paste the text and highlight AO1 and AO2.


The functionalist approach to studying families was the dominant theoretical perspective for much of the twentieth century. Functionalism suggests that the family can be seen as one essential part of society that contributes to the overall wellbeing of the whole, rather as different organs of the body work together to keep a person healthy (the ‘organic analogy’). Different functionalist writers have suggested different functions; for example Talcott Parsons argued that the nuclear family in modern industrial society has two essential functions, primary socialisation of children and stabilisation of adult personalities. Each society in this view will have the type of family best suited to it; in the medieval period, extended families were more common because they could fulfil functions such as caring for the sick and elderly which the state had not then taken on.

One advantage of this approach is that it draws attention to the many positive aspects of family life, fitting in with many people’s experience and expectation of the family as a haven, where they are safe and cared for. There are, however, several problems with this approach. One is that it is very much focused on the conventional nuclear family, with its associated gender roles, as essential in modern industrial society. Sociology has since moved on, adapting to changes in society by focusing on families (a diverse range of families) rather than ‘the family’. The functionalist approach is also one that is based on structure — people seem to have to fit into a set role in a set type of family. More recently, interactionist and other approaches have been more interested in the ways in which people actively create and negotiate their own roles and identities within families.

Thank you to Hodder Sociology Workbook: Families and Households for this example.

Theories and Research

Elisabeth Roberts

The Oral History of Working-class Women.

Elisabeth Roberts interviewed 160 mothers and grandmothers in Lancashire in 1996.  She detailed the lives of ordinary working women between 1890 and 1940, from these interviews. (what sort of perspective would encourage interviews as research?) She does not support the feminist analysis that working-class families were patriarchal institutions run by, and being benefited by, men. She concludes that women blame poverty rather than men for their situation.  The women felt that they had power of a sort - in the household and family.  The mother/daughter bond was the foundation of the family and women gained a sense of achievement from household management like the family budget, education of children and upholding family (and local) traditions. (What perspective might argue that the women had an important role in socialising the next generation?)


How do you think Feminists and Functionalists would respond to this study?

What are the strengths and weaknesses of oral histories?

 

 

 



Young & Wilmott

Empirical research of family in Bethnal Green

Young & Wilmott studied working-class families in the 1950s in the East End of London.  The evidence was collected by observation and interview. Young & Wilmott argue that the move from extended family to nuclear family was not as fast as Parsons suggests.  Rather, they posit that extended families were in evidence in the 1950s - a late stage of Industrialisation.  The extended kinship network - based on emotional attachment and obligation - offered working-class families assistance with childcare, money, jobs and advice. Young & Wilmott argued that the extended family started to disappear in the 1960s when working-class families were rehoused in new towns and on Council estates after slum clearance. 

 

 

You can find out more about this study here.

 

Read this article and follow the links to find a whole treasure trove of information!

 

 

Marcuse

False needs

 

Marxists might argue that the working-class are not aware that they are being exploited by the ruling class (false class consciousness).  People believe they are keeping up with their neighbours, purchasing the latest model of something and living the life everyone else is when, in fact, they are being manipulated and 'sold to' by the capitalist-friendly values of consumerism and materialism.  Marcuse (1964) asserts that the nuclear (working-class) family is encouraged to fulfil 'false needs'; having the lastest consumer goods and judging themselves and others on the basis of what they can buy and what they own.  He argued that this serves capita;lism very well. People are buying the goods which are being produced (making a nice profit for whom?) and they are distracted from the struggle to gain equality and justice.

 

 

This blog post is a very nice description of consumerism and false needs.

 

A little post with lots of links - The Frankfurt School and Commodity Fetishism

 

And - if you're interested... The first video of five of Marcuse talking about The Frankfurt school.  



Stuff to watch - Family

Useful Things for a boring Saturday!

 

 

 

Some youtube videos which might be useful for you to see.

 

 

 

Keywords and definitions

 

Families and households

 

 

 

This video - Sociology of the family - is a good starting point but you will need to google the theorists and find out which school they come from. 'FD' stands for 'Family Diversity'

 

A video which raises a question.  What do you notice about the families when they are identifying the different stages? You do not need to watch 'Top Tips to have a happy family' :-s

 

 

Enjoy!!!

 



Marxism and Feminisms

Marxism

 

 

 

The most basic message of Marxism is that family is a tool used by the ruling class -the Bourgeoisie - to control the working class - the Prolertariat. 

Capitalist society is interested in the control of money and money making resources.  If you know who fathered the children in your family (by having monogamous, legally bound relationships) you can keep your wealth in your bloodline.

Some Marxists have suggested that the family socialises the next generation so that citizens know how to think and behave.  This is all to support what Capitalism needs.

Zaretsky has argued that women's (free) domestic labour supports Capitalism by nurturing and producing the next workforce.  He has also suggested that the family provide support fro Capitalism by consuming (buying) the things society produces.

Find out more about the ideas above on the webpage Sociology at Twynham

For an outline of Marxist theories and a short critique by others see the sociogeeks blog.

 

Feminisms

 

 

 The common belief  between different Feminist theorists is that women are oppressed in society and men are advantaged.  Feminists call a society which operates like this a Patriarchal society.  Find out more about Feminisms at the History Learning Site.

 

Sociology at Twynham provides several pages about Family and Radical Feminists and Marxist Feminists.  

 

A Liberal Feminist, Marxist Feminist and Radical Feminist have a conversation. Please be warned the language is rather impolite!

 

Feminisms and Functionalism on revision cards at sociology .org

 

For a little bit of several things have a look at tutor2u



Family and Functionalism. Homework.

Welcome to your first 'Family' homework!  You will often be directed to this blog to revise concepts, answer questions or be given group work to complete before your next lesson. A lot of the responsibility for investigating will be given to you.  You are A Level students now - your next step is University - you must be ready to be responsible for your own success! You might want to see if you can work out, over the coming weeks, which Sociological school might argue that point!

This post will offer very basic outlines of what Functionalists might argue about the family.  You will find links to information about studies and theorists.  It is here because it is all useful to you. The more you read, the more you know!




General 'Family' and Household' background
The City of Norwich School has some great background information here.

Functionalists    

Durkheim. The Father of Sociology.  A Functionalist.  This picture comes from this page.  A study which is more interesting than useful to you at this time!

Broadly speaking, the functionalist perspective has focused on the functions of the family in society and for its members. In other words, it looks at how the family, as an institution, helps in maintaining order and stability in society, and the significance of the family for its individual members. Two well-known functionalists who have written about the family are George. P. Murdock and Talcott Parsons...
This is an introduction to Functionalist theories from this webpage. You should also look at this site.  Have a closer  look at the theorists and studies mentioned.

Talcott Parsons A very brief overview

Talcot Parsons.  Functionalist.  American.  This picture comes from this site which will give you an insight in Parsons' contributions to Sociology. Don't click the link for 'Read More' - they will want to sell you access to the site!

A much more in depth analysis can be found here.

This photo taken from a Science website noting
the births and deaths of notable Scientists.
Sociologists still have problems with the
Scientific community viewing them
as credible peers.

A brief description of George Murdock's Four Functions of the Family can be found here. The article goes on to discuss other theories and studies.

Your Task

Read all the information on this page.  Follow links and follow up on anything interesting to you on those pages. Make notes. You might want to make revision cards for Functionalism.

                                Answer the following questions 

 (please answer these questions on a sheet of lined paper to hand in at your next lesson)

1. What is 'socialisation'?
2. What are Murdock's Four Functions of the Family?
3. What is the difference between 'Primary socialisation' and 'Secondary socialisation'?
4. Why does Parsons think Family is important for adults?
5. What do you think about Functionalist theories of The Family?  Give reasons and examples where you can.