Kinship and marriage from a cross-cultural perspective - Essay Example

?Introduction Though the Kinship as a word has different meanings and mostly used in contextual manner however, from the perspective of anthropology,it represents a web of social relationships which are required by a person to live in a society. It also outlines the affinity between different entities based upon some or all of the characteristics which are focused and studied. From the perspective of Anthropology, it is also important to understand that it signifies the study of patterns of social relationships within different human cultures or the patterns of social relationships within themselves. The patterns of relationship defined in kinship are either related by descent or by marriage. Relationships which arise as a result of the marriages are called affinity and are viewed differently from the relationships emerging as a result of descent. There has been however different social changes which have relatively altered the kinship norms within the society. The modernization and urbanization combined with the industrialization has actually weakened the affinity especially in terms of extended kinship. The recent theory on Kinship has actually redefined the way the overall concept is being viewed. There has been a critical change in the basic assumptions of kinship theory and more focus has been on understanding as to how to view kinship along with other social theory. This paper will discuss as to how various authors have actually defined the social change in the kinship in specific settings with special reference to government laws and recent globalization changes which are taking place globally. Social Change in Kinship Norms There has been a tremendous change in the way the overall literature on the social change in the kinship norms have changed over the period of time,. Lewis Morgan defined kinship as a form of social organization and focused upon defining it from the perspective of structures and functions. This approach was mostly focused upon defining how the various relationship structures actually emerged during the kinship including residence patterns, mating strategies etc. There has been a consistent evolution of the kinship and it started to shift from paternal to maternal source of power and prestige. Since mother was actively involved in the rearing of the children therefore in certain societies, these trends started to change. In some societies, the transfer of property and its ownership was also dependent upon the mother-child link. (Levine, 2008) D. Schneider however provided a critique of the same and suggested that kinship differs from culture to culture and kinship actually encompass different other domains of social life also include economic and political. His critique was important in the sense that it attempted to identify and root kinship into the broader perspective of cultural and social norms. It is also critical to note that he critically associated the symbols and what meanings can be driven from these symbols. It is however important to understand that most of the Schneider’s work has been focused upon North America and Great Britain. For Schneider, America was a single system of kinship with symbols having same meanings to both the males as well as females. (Peletz, 1995) Carsten defined kinship from the perspective of culture of relatedness and suggested that the biological relationships are socially constructed. She argues about the social construction of the biological relationships and specially the intervention of State as one of the means through which biological relationships are defined. In countries like India, marriage and biological relationships are often based upon religious association of individuals and to which religious class they belong to. The biogenetic relatedness therefore may not be important as kinship can also be defined under the sexual preferences as well as the establishment of kinship based upon post-natal associations. Carsten therefore refutes the assumption of Schneider that there is a clear division between the biological and social aspects of kinship. (Carsten, 2000) In regions like North America and Europe there has been a consistent change in the social and political structures. This has made the family structures relatively unclear and therefore well-defined. As compared to this, in countries like China there have been rigid family structures which still dominate the kinship relationships among people. Movie, A Separation depicted how family structures are changing however in other countries such as Iran also. (Farhadi, 2011) Lewin outlines that there is a radical shift in the way people with different sexual preferences actually relate with each other. She is of the opinion that in Western countries, homosexuals and lesbian mothers tend to identify themselves as mothers first and then tend to focus on their sexual orientation. Their relationship with their children is that of the routine nature however, due to legal complications, lesbian mothers specially feel threated due to fear stigma and loss of custody. (Cholodenko, 2010). This therefore typically outlines that the modern Lesbian American mothers often tend to feel stress in maintaining their social relationships as well as by mainstream lesbian norms. Lewin’s arguments therefore are based upon understanding kinship from the perspective of how sexual preferences define them. Her approach is relatively different as she focuses upon defining kinship from the special perspective of sexual preferences rather than social and political associations. (Lewin, 1993) It has also been suggested that descent and alliances are actually related with the personal freedom and represent more of an attempt in the face of repressive State laws. However, during Cultural Revolution in China, State machinery actually destroyed the traditional patrilineal relationships however, despite this; it has not been able to replace certain rituals. (Yan, 2005) Conclusion There has been a consistent change in the way authors have viewed the impact of social changes on the kinship with relationship to the State laws. A quick review of the history suggests that initially focus was on defining structures and functions within the kinship however, the trends changed over the period of time. The social changes including the changes in the political as well as economic environment has redefined the overall structure of social relationships. Relationships based upon sexual preferences, role of State laws in defining those relationships as well as the role of culture in defining these relationships. These changes however are different as compared to North America and other countries like China. Bibliography Carsten, J. (2000). Cultures of Relatedness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Cholodenko, L. (Director). (2010). The Kids Are All Right [Motion Picture]. Farhadi, A. (Director). (2011). A Separation [Motion Picture]. Levine, N. E. (2008). Alternative Kinship, Marriage,and Reproduction. The Annual Review of Anthropology, 37, 375–389. Lewin, E. (1993). Lesbian Mothers: Accounts of Gender in American Culture. New York: Cornell University Press. Peletz, M. G. (1995). Kinship Studies in Late Twentieth-Century Anthropology. Annual Review of Anthropology, 24, 343-372. Yan, Y. (2005). THE INDIVIDUAL AND TRANSFORMATION OF BRIDEWEALTH IN RURAL NORTH CHINA. Journal of Royal Anthropology Institute, 11, 637-658. Read More