Summary Of Seeing Straight
Seeing Straight: An Introduction to Gender and Sexual Privilege, offers great insight into the varying arguments of traditional marriage, marriage equality, those who are against marriage, sexual relationships, gender, and domestic divisions of labor. These topics are relative in nature and, in most cases, overlap one another. To provide a thorough answer to Essay Questions No’s 1 and 3, I have taken the liberty to answer both questions in this one single paper; to illustrate the arguments pertaining to [traditional] marriage and how it segway’s into the relationships, gender and domestic roles associated with it.
Strong evidence against the biological definition of gender reminds us that “gender”, in and of itself, is a social construction …show more content…
and not just a biological element. If culture does affect gender roles, “socialization” can be defined as the process through which it has this effect on. What we experience as little girls and boys strongly influences how we develop as adult women and men in terms of behavior and attitudes towards marriage. In Seeing Straight, traditional marriage can be described as [what society would consider and accept as a normal] civil union between a heterosexual man and heterosexual woman (Halley & Eshleman, 2017). This underlying theme of heteronormativity is constant throughout the reading; for if it were not for heteronormativity, there would be no question about the institution of marriage, the definition of the composition of a family, or the associated roles each member of the family has.
Conservative theorists believe that the family is not only an important support system for society, but marriage is the sole institution through which the law recognizes a “real family” (Halley & Eshleman, 2017). According to the authors, liberal thought differs from conservatives regarding the role and function of families. Liberalists see gender roles as “flexible, nonheteronormative, queer family-oriented and pro-marriage equality”, (Halley & Eshleman, 2017). They often compare historically institutionalized marriage against the landmark case- DOMA (laws permitting states to refuse same-sex marriages performed in other states), which were as deeply prejudiced as Loving v. Virginia. For pro-marriage liberals, families need social supports like subsidized healthcare, childcare, maternity and paternity leave, and other welfare benefits. The pro-marriage equality movement seeks to be an active part in the traditional institution of marriage such that it expands to not only the heterosexual dyad, but also to single-family households, matriarch-led families and other diverse forms that are not socially considered “real” families, (Halley & Eshleman, 2017). Conversely, Seeing Straight describes the anti-marriage movement as a challenge to the underlying notion that in order to be a family, “one must have such a dyad” (2017). Most radical feminists part of this movement call for the government to recognize, support and define a family as a caregiver/care-receiving pair. This pair would comprise the definition of “a family”, and the government would offer the same benefits, legal aid and social supports to them.
Author Arlie Hochschild provides greater insight and examples into the three marital/gender ideologies: traditional, transitional and egalitarian. He classifies the traditional belief as the husband’s role as sole breadwinner and the wife’s role as sole homemaker and child-caregiver. “The traditional person believes that, even if the woman works for pay, she ‘wants to identify with her activities at home (as a wife, a mother, a neighborhood mom)…and have less power’ than her husband and that, even if his wife also works for pay and even if he does do housework and childcare, the man has his base at work and wants his wife’s base in the home”, (Hochschild, 2012). Hochschild goes on to identify a person holding a purely egalitarian ideology to expect men and women to identify in the same scopes [of work, of family, or some combination of the two] and share power within their marriage equally (2012). However, between the traditional and egalitarian ideologies, there exists the transitional ideology in which the husband is the primary breadwinner who supports his wife’s desire to work as long as she also identifies primarily with the home. Hochschild’s position is that society will expect and accept these transitional women to balance work and family for themselves simultaneously wanting their husbands to identify with work. And vice versa, transitional men identifying with work and expecting their wage-earning wives to balance the demands of work and family (Hochschild, 2012).
In contrast, George Gilder, in his formative Men and Marriage, argues that in order for men to become more economically productive and establish a household, the marriage has to be “civilizing” and this is only accomplished when sex is only permitted in the marriage (1992). Gilder states, “the crucial process of civilization is the subordination of male sexual impulses and male biology to the long term horizons of female sexuality”, (1992). He further argues that females are the basis of civilization and that they are the ones responsible for the future that men usually try to escape from. “Once the man marries he can change,” writes Gilder, “…He has to change, for his wife will not long have him if he remains in spirit a single man. He must settle his life, and commit it to the needs of raising a family…He must submit…to the values of maternal morality and futurity” (1992). Gilder also argues that women are more confident in their identity than men because of their physical processes; therefore, men’s masculine identity is only learned – not naturally given (1992).
Audre Lorde, a self- identifying forty-nine-year-old black lesbian feminist mother of two, and a member of an interracial couple, provides a unique perspective on [marriage] equality, sexual relationships, and gender.
Several themes are prominent in her essays, one of which is a deeply-held distrust for the prevailing American system of values, which she believes promotes sexism. According to Lorde, the American society values profit over human interests, thus exacerbating the problems created by racism, sexism, and other prejudices (2007). Groups that are marginalized by prejudice are further marginalized because they have little economic power. White, heterosexual, patriarchal society discourages the expression of traits that do not fall into its norms. This alienates anyone who dares not to conform at the same time that it indoctrinates. Even minorities internalize the skewed system of values that teaches that any deviation from the norm is dangerous, which leads to infighting among minority groups. Lorde illustrates a gender ideology behind a sexual division of labor; for it is not “matriarchy” that paved a way for female power, it is simply a result from women being suppressed under the man's rule of thumb. However, Lorde offers a solution of empowerment that should be recognized and used for creating
change.
In sum, you can clearly see how modern day marriages are and continuing to be deeply rooted in patriarchal and gender inequality. For as we see, our culture demonstrates that a woman will marry at the cost of losing her rights, independence, and identity. However the traditional tide is slowly changing with the legitimization of [gay] marriage laws, and the acknowledgment and acceptance of trans- and non-gender conforming people; and in order for us to continue in this momentum, it is only up to us to stand together and effectively discover solutions that are just, fair and collective for all people.
Strong evidence against the biological definition of gender reminds us that “gender”, in and of itself, is a social construction …show more content…
and not just a biological element. If culture does affect gender roles, “socialization” can be defined as the process through which it has this effect on. What we experience as little girls and boys strongly influences how we develop as adult women and men in terms of behavior and attitudes towards marriage. In Seeing Straight, traditional marriage can be described as [what society would consider and accept as a normal] civil union between a heterosexual man and heterosexual woman (Halley & Eshleman, 2017). This underlying theme of heteronormativity is constant throughout the reading; for if it were not for heteronormativity, there would be no question about the institution of marriage, the definition of the composition of a family, or the associated roles each member of the family has.
Conservative theorists believe that the family is not only an important support system for society, but marriage is the sole institution through which the law recognizes a “real family” (Halley & Eshleman, 2017). According to the authors, liberal thought differs from conservatives regarding the role and function of families. Liberalists see gender roles as “flexible, nonheteronormative, queer family-oriented and pro-marriage equality”, (Halley & Eshleman, 2017). They often compare historically institutionalized marriage against the landmark case- DOMA (laws permitting states to refuse same-sex marriages performed in other states), which were as deeply prejudiced as Loving v. Virginia. For pro-marriage liberals, families need social supports like subsidized healthcare, childcare, maternity and paternity leave, and other welfare benefits. The pro-marriage equality movement seeks to be an active part in the traditional institution of marriage such that it expands to not only the heterosexual dyad, but also to single-family households, matriarch-led families and other diverse forms that are not socially considered “real” families, (Halley & Eshleman, 2017). Conversely, Seeing Straight describes the anti-marriage movement as a challenge to the underlying notion that in order to be a family, “one must have such a dyad” (2017). Most radical feminists part of this movement call for the government to recognize, support and define a family as a caregiver/care-receiving pair. This pair would comprise the definition of “a family”, and the government would offer the same benefits, legal aid and social supports to them.
Author Arlie Hochschild provides greater insight and examples into the three marital/gender ideologies: traditional, transitional and egalitarian. He classifies the traditional belief as the husband’s role as sole breadwinner and the wife’s role as sole homemaker and child-caregiver. “The traditional person believes that, even if the woman works for pay, she ‘wants to identify with her activities at home (as a wife, a mother, a neighborhood mom)…and have less power’ than her husband and that, even if his wife also works for pay and even if he does do housework and childcare, the man has his base at work and wants his wife’s base in the home”, (Hochschild, 2012). Hochschild goes on to identify a person holding a purely egalitarian ideology to expect men and women to identify in the same scopes [of work, of family, or some combination of the two] and share power within their marriage equally (2012). However, between the traditional and egalitarian ideologies, there exists the transitional ideology in which the husband is the primary breadwinner who supports his wife’s desire to work as long as she also identifies primarily with the home. Hochschild’s position is that society will expect and accept these transitional women to balance work and family for themselves simultaneously wanting their husbands to identify with work. And vice versa, transitional men identifying with work and expecting their wage-earning wives to balance the demands of work and family (Hochschild, 2012).
In contrast, George Gilder, in his formative Men and Marriage, argues that in order for men to become more economically productive and establish a household, the marriage has to be “civilizing” and this is only accomplished when sex is only permitted in the marriage (1992). Gilder states, “the crucial process of civilization is the subordination of male sexual impulses and male biology to the long term horizons of female sexuality”, (1992). He further argues that females are the basis of civilization and that they are the ones responsible for the future that men usually try to escape from. “Once the man marries he can change,” writes Gilder, “…He has to change, for his wife will not long have him if he remains in spirit a single man. He must settle his life, and commit it to the needs of raising a family…He must submit…to the values of maternal morality and futurity” (1992). Gilder also argues that women are more confident in their identity than men because of their physical processes; therefore, men’s masculine identity is only learned – not naturally given (1992).
Audre Lorde, a self- identifying forty-nine-year-old black lesbian feminist mother of two, and a member of an interracial couple, provides a unique perspective on [marriage] equality, sexual relationships, and gender.
Several themes are prominent in her essays, one of which is a deeply-held distrust for the prevailing American system of values, which she believes promotes sexism. According to Lorde, the American society values profit over human interests, thus exacerbating the problems created by racism, sexism, and other prejudices (2007). Groups that are marginalized by prejudice are further marginalized because they have little economic power. White, heterosexual, patriarchal society discourages the expression of traits that do not fall into its norms. This alienates anyone who dares not to conform at the same time that it indoctrinates. Even minorities internalize the skewed system of values that teaches that any deviation from the norm is dangerous, which leads to infighting among minority groups. Lorde illustrates a gender ideology behind a sexual division of labor; for it is not “matriarchy” that paved a way for female power, it is simply a result from women being suppressed under the man's rule of thumb. However, Lorde offers a solution of empowerment that should be recognized and used for creating
change.
In sum, you can clearly see how modern day marriages are and continuing to be deeply rooted in patriarchal and gender inequality. For as we see, our culture demonstrates that a woman will marry at the cost of losing her rights, independence, and identity. However the traditional tide is slowly changing with the legitimization of [gay] marriage laws, and the acknowledgment and acceptance of trans- and non-gender conforming people; and in order for us to continue in this momentum, it is only up to us to stand together and effectively discover solutions that are just, fair and collective for all people.