SOCI 3991
Assignment 3
Thompson Rivers University
Date 2018. 01. 16
Question 2: Rigid Gender Expectations from Society
The human society is usually a complex, complicated, and unique place, defined by standards, norms, perceptions, principles, and cultural beliefs that differ from one region or country to another (Brym & Lie, 2010). Amid all issues, one thing that is very slow to change is the society’s rigid gender expectations, which have been in place from the beginning of history, and seem amplified in the 21stcentury. There appears to be a clash of sorts between the traditional social norms and today’s. Either way, these expectations are not positive most of the time since these are just some of the ways through which the oppression of both men and women takes place. In the Canadian society, one can find numerous instances that show how women and men are repressed by these rigid expectations including …?.
In such a backdrop, gender oppression begins to manifest itself based on what is referred to as gender patterns. Boys and girls when growing up will undergo different experiences in the sense that for those that get a daughter, she is more likely than a boy to earn less, live in poverty, live longer and become widowed, or be a single parent, marry younger (Butler, 2012). On the other hand, getting a son means that he is most likely to remarry if divorced, commit suicide, get cancer or AIDS, become a victim of violence, and lose custody of his children in case of a divorce. These are realities that face the society due to the way expectations are constructed. In Canada, it is expected that a woman will live to be 82 years and a man 80 years (Butler, 2012). At the workplace, women earn 71 percent of what their male counterparts earn full-time. Also, out of every five single-parent households, four are headed by women.
Towards that end, the expectations of men and women are to a great extent influenced by gender spheres in the society. These spheres are the masculinity and femininity notions that exist in the mind of people and perceptions about the roles supposed to be played by men and women in the society. For example, in occupational spheres, men will be seen dominating in technology, administration, and engineering, which are essentially physically demanding jobs. On the contrary, women dominate “caring” professions such as nursing, teaching, and social work, that are less demanding physically but need more empathy (Butler, 2012). The same applies to the education sphere that has young men taking physically demanding courses such as engineering compared to their female counterparts that enroll into “light” courses.
The argument here is that such constructions and perceptions are at best oppressive for both genders since it means men and women can only live their lives as per the prescribed and perceived gender spheres (Zawilski & Levine-Rasky, 2005). They are denied the opportunity to choose paths that they feel suit them best. The reality of these expectations manifests themselves also when it comes to matters such as laws and hiring of employees at the workplace. For example, in some countries in the Middle East, the participation of women in the military is prohibited. That means women willing and having the capability of entering the ‘male’ sphere are not given that opportunity. In Canada, it is only recently that some level of equality became evident in some laws. For example, in the early 20th century, women could not hold political office since the law did not recognize them as persons (Butler, 2012).
The hiring of employees in various workplaces is another area where gender discrimination and even an element of oppression seem to take place. Some employees will prioritize one gender for various roles while leaving out other qualified persons of the other gender. For example, just recently in Ontario, an experienced male primary teacher interested in a kindergarten job was informed by the principal of the school that there was no need for applying since he was not going to get the job. The reason given was that the parents of the children were not ready and willing to see a man in such a role. Such forms of discrimination are oppressive and unfortunate since it only means someone’s gender can stop one from securing their preferred jobs.
Such incidents happen to women frequently. A case in point is the screening procedures that take place in police academies during hiring. Here, the emphasis is normally placed on physical strength and height that automatically means many women are locked out of such positions (Butler, 2012). Interestingly, it is all about gender expectations as opposed to qualification since the bulk of the work for these persons require skills in communication, mediation, and conciliation. Essentially, it is an unfortunate occurrence that is also influenced psychologically. Women and men grow up imbibing information about their roles and expectations that make it challenging for them to deviate from the received wisdom and choose paths that suit them. Over the years, many people have been prevented from achieving their potential or pursuing preferred careers just because of these expectations. In the end, they become avenues of oppression dictating how people in society should live.
Question 4: The Transformation of Family Life in Canada
Over the years, family life in Canada has experienced a significant shift and diversification in both family forms and household arrangements. In the 20th and 21st centuries, a standard family is perceived as a social unit that comprises a mother, father, and their children. It is the traditional definition that has lived on even though things have changed in terms of the value that a family derives in the society. In Canada, the family, according to the census definition includes “families with married couples and common-law couples with or without never-married children living at home, as well as lone-parent families” (Ondercin-Bourne, 2012, p. 279). The characteristics of most families are defined by five key dimensions that are: procreative, socialization, residential, economic, and emotional. …
As such, the Canadian family has appeared to have recorded a transformation in its form and household arrangement over the years. At first, in procreative dimension, the average Canadian family has changed considerably. Here, since the 1950s, there has been a considerable decline in birth rates (ref.?). In the middle of the 20th century, the birth rates were at a peak level, but since then, they have declined by 53 percent, and have been on a downward spiral since then. The explanation for this is that women are choosing to give birth much later in life compared to earlier when they started to bear children at a very young age young. More emphasis and priority has been placed on their careers as opposed to motherhood. This also means families are becoming smaller, and few of them are even willing to have many children. Also, some families have chosen to abandon the concept of children altogether; this development can be attributed to the rising change in women’s role in society, economic pressures, and change in attitudes.
Socialization dimensions have also recorded a fundamental level of transformation over the years. Evidently, the traditional roles of men that saw them as the sole “breadwinner” and woman taking up their roles as “nurturers” appear to have changed. There is a growing perception that both parents are equally capable of playing both these roles. However, in the Canadian context, women are still the ones playing the most critical roles of bringing up the children, especially where both parents are working outside home. The present economic conditions have necessitated this change of gender roles that have dual-income families defining most families. It no longer makes sense for families to continue abiding by societal expectations when they are the ones that suffer on the ground.
When it comes to the residential dimension, a lot has changed. Families are now defined by a diverse living arrangement compared to the past. Lone-parent families have appeared to increase dramatically over the years. It is attributed to high divorce rates and the fact that some women are choosing to have children without choosing to get married first. Higher divorces rates can be attributed to the liberalization of divorces laws from the Divorce Act of 1968 to the Divorce Act of 1985 (Ondercin-Bourne, 2012). …
The economic dimension has also brought forth key changes in Canada’s family structures. Today, more and more women are employed, and this has resulted in an increase in the number of dual-income families. In 1961, dual-income families stood at 20 percent, but today the same stands at 60 percent (Ondercin-Bourne, 2012). However, a critical development over this period has shown that there has been an increase in the gap between the rich and poor families, with single parents the most affected (Duffy& Mandell, 2011).
Emotional dimension has been another key factor behind the changing face of the Canadian family. Due to the patriarchal nature of most societies, incidences of domestic violence are still evident. Women continue to bear the brunt of domestic violence with fourth-fifths of the 38,000 reported cases of spousal violence affecting women (Ondercin-Bourne, 2012). This type of violence has a bearing on children and overall family relations, as it becomes difficult to bring up children in an environment that is not safe, protective, and caring. Another major change in the shape and nature of families has been the increasing phenomenon of same-sex marriage. Sometime in 2005, the same-sex marriage law came into force that allowed persons of the same gender to get married (Vanier Institute of the Family, 2010). Based on the last census, persons that identified themselves as same-sex couples were around 45,345, with 7,465 declaring themselves married (Ondercin-Bourne, 2012).
In essence, a sea change has happened with regard to family relationships in Canada, especially in terms of diversity, and many more are in the offing. In any society, change is inevitable and with change the concept of tradition can increasingly look like an abstract idea and the unusual may start looking normal.
References
Brym, R. J., & Lie, J. (2010). Sociology: Your compass for a new world, the brief edition. Belmont, California: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
Butler, L. (2012) Diversity and conformity: The role of gender. In Angelini, P. U. (Ed.) Our society: Human diversity in Canada, 4th Edition (pp. 217-240). Toronto: Nelson Education.
Duffy, A., & Mandell, N. (2011). Canadian families: Diversity, conflict and change. Toronto: Nelson Education.
Ondercin-Bourne, G. (2012). Diversity in Canadian families: Traditional values and beyond. In Angelini, P. U. (Ed.) Our society: Human diversity in Canada, 4th Edition (pp. 277-312). Toronto: Nelson Education.
Vanier Institute of the Family. (2010). Families count: Profiling Canada’s families IV. Ottawa, Ont: Vanier Institute of the Family.Ottawa, Ont.: Vanier Institute of the Family.
Zawilski, V. S.-E., & Levine-Rasky, C. (2005). Inequality in Canada: A reader on the intersections of gender, race, and class. Don Mills, Ont: Oxford University Press.
What Students Are Saying About Us
.......... Customer ID: 12*** | Rating: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐"Honestly, I was afraid to send my paper to you, but splendidwritings.com proved they are a trustworthy service. My essay was done in less than a day, and I received a brilliant piece. I didn’t even believe it was my essay at first 🙂 Great job, thank you!"
.......... Customer ID: 14***| Rating: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
"The company has some nice prices and good content. I ordered a term paper here and got a very good one. I'll keep ordering from this website."
