Analyzed Gender Roles

In this essay, I will demonstrate how unchallenged specialized gender roles ignored the limits of women in domestic roles, creating a high disproportion of workload on mothers. These gender roles continued into the modern era where women fulfilled these gender roles even after gaining working rights. Many families faced the challenge of finding their balance between taking care of their children, running the household and working full time jobs. This balance has only become more strenuous for families due to economic and social pressures. The economic conditions are not stable enough where a wife can finally depend on their husbands and the social conditions put pressure on mothers to take care of their children, housework and uphold their
husband’s masculinity. Due to these economic and social pressure mothers now work jobs and take on the second shift by take care of the household and children causing frustration and instable relationships.
These unchallenged gender norms derived from the 1850’s and adapted during industrialization. Early sociologist, Parsons and Bales’ alleged that industrialization forced families to adapt to new societal circumstances which split the family into two specialized gender roles (1955). These gender roles have continued to shape the way that society divides labor within families today. This is ideology is one of the main reason mothers are still fully taking on the second shift. The reason families developed gender role specialization was to enhance stability (Parsons and Bales 1955 [Kelsey excerpt]:20). In the ideal modern family men were known as the breadwinners and were responsible for economic stability for the family. Women were known to work internally doing domestic work such as; childcare and household work. Parsons and Bales’ believed that this specialization helped stabilize adult relations because each member could focus all their energy in one area and have interdependence (1995). Although Parsons and Bales’ argument seem logical in reality, they ignored many factors that affect families today.
In truth, specialization only created more dysfunctions within families because parson ignored the hardships that both women and men would face in their roles.
During the 1950’s Parsons and Bales’ study did not consider key external forces. For example, their study is based on a booming and stable labor market for men. This is one of assumption is what has affected women’s lives today because most households cannot rely on one job to support their family. Parsons also ignored the limitations of the domestic role such as; power imbalances, isolation, and depression (Parsons and Bales 1955 [Kelsey excerpt]:22). Many of their study is based off perfect family scenarios but, in reality women are working jobs and also picking up the second shift because of these gender specialization norms. This leaves women feeling overwhelmed causing them to feel depressed and isolated. This also made them feel overlooked causing instability within their adult relationships. Not only did Parsons and Bales’ ignore certain key external forces they also assumed that many of these factors would not
change.
Furthermore, one of the main factors that was assumed to remain unchanged were social conditions. Parsons and Bales’ believed that the nuclear family was going to be the dominant family type and that these American families were on undeviating family structure (1955). This belief is far from the American family known today because there are is a diverse amount of family structures from single parents, divorced parents, step-parents, and etc. According to lecture, 55% of homes in 2010 were made from diverse family structures that did not include marriage (Cohen [Kelsey excerpt]:5). These family structures completely displace their ideology because no longer are homes just a married man and women. Lastly, Parsons and Bales’ thought that modern families would be able to rely on uneducated mothers to stay at home and remain complacent with their roles. Many women disliked staying at home and being uneducated they were bored with completing the same tasks every day. This broke the stabilization in the adult relationships that Parsons and Bales’ thought would remain the same. Today, we can see this change because about 40% of women have attended college and received Bachelor’s Degree of higher (Cohen [Kelsey excerpt]:5). After reflecting on Parsons and Bales assumptions, we see that there have been external social forces since the 1950s.
Since the 1950’s there has been economic, social policy, and culture changes which has forced women to work and take on the second shift leading to instability within their adult relations. Firstly, since the 1950’s there has been major economic changes including the labor market, cost of living, and low-wages. According to lecture, 70% of households have mother are employed in the labor market (Bureau of Labor Statistics [Kelsey excerpt]:2). In order to have an economic stable household today both parents are working and this percentage is continuing to grow. This has created the norm of women going into the labor market but feeling forced to continue to accept the unchallenged gender norms. This has made women take responsibility and role for the internal affairs and the breadwinning for the family. This role has even become prominent with the more diverse family structures such as; single mothers. Due to these major economic changes like lower-wages has created a change in class differences compared to the 1950’s. Today, wealth is very unevenly distributed and the middle class has overwhelmingly declined. This has left an overwhelming amount of families at or below the poverty line.
Secondly, social policy has had a tremendous impact on the reason why specialization in gender norms have continued to be unchallenged. Women have had to become the do it all and cover it all up
Lastly, there has been a shift in cultural changes in the status of women in society. One of the most important cultural changes is that women gained more rights. This allowed women to have the power and right to decide that they wanted to have a life of their own. If a woman wants to get an education and go into the workforce she has the equal ability of a man to take these opportunities. Also, most families or women wanted to have a balanced household with an equal proportion of domestic work but, struggle with putting those principles to practice. This new cultural change is almost a way to cover up of women not being equal to men. For example, in the second shift a couple believed they were in an egalitarian relationship but, the husband was passive aggressive about his side if the work which led his wife to gives up on the idea of equality within their relationship and begins to resent her husband (1997). This inability to balance the housework created tensions between families and instability between adult relations. This instability would have led women feeling overworked and overwhelmed possibly leading to depression or divorce.
Although, there have been many been economic, social policy, and culture changes since the 1950’s there are still many lingering cultural ideologies that have affected women. Firstly, women have felt the need since the 1950’s to fix themselves around their husband’s masculine identity. For example, in the second shift a couple where the wife earns more finds herself picking up more of the domestic housework in order to compensate for earning more than her husband (1997). Today, it is not strange to find women doing the extra work around the house in order to make sure they are not compromising their husband’s masculinity. Secondly, women are still socially looked at to be the prime caretakers of their children. Mothers are constantly criticized by how they raise and take care of their children. While women who are in the labor force that have, children face judgements about not being good mothers because they have picked their career over being a parent. Thirdly, women are looked at as irrational and that their skill sets lie in within emotional labor. This prevents women from taking leadership jobs within their jobs and pushes them to focus on their households. Lastly, today women from a young age are still taught the marriage is the goal to their futures. They are also taught that this needs to be a man who they can economically depend on. This ideology makes some women feel dependent on their husbands making them accept the second shift believing it is their duty to sustain the marriage. In conclusion, the unchallenged gender specialization roles that were prominent in the 1950’s are still lingering in the everyday lives of families and especially women today.
The pieces of these roles from the modern families constructed a view of women that belittled them and forced them to be viewed as the domestic household workers. Today, due to this ideology women are no longer just fulfilling the domestic due to the economic, social policy, and culture changes since the 1950’s. Women are now taking part in the labor market and are having to juggle taking care of the household and family. Women continue to fulfill this second shift due to the lingering cultural ideologies that are prevent today. According to Hochschild, mom’s try to be “supermoms”, but they face consequences such as; lack of sleep, stress, loss in leisure and a reduction of their needs (1997). These has created instability within the adult relations causing many marriages to fail or be unhappy. In order to be successful in restoring marriages and family’s cultural ideologies must change. These gender specialization norms have only made things more unequal for women who are being overlooked and
overworked.