Perspective of Social Inequality - Term Paper Example

Running Head: Social Inequality Life A Perspective of Social Inequality Organization: Word Count 2962Introduction The general aspect in social inequality is due to synchronic and diachronic distributions of individuals into social positions according to their social class regarding birth and wealth, physical appearance, education level, occupational prestige, race, ethnicity and gender. However, according in the introduction of Karl Ulrich Mayer (2008) in the book Analyzing inequality: Life Chances and Social Mobility in Comparative Perspective, the above mentioned aspects affect the individuals differently in various countries and areas. In the above context, Mayer quotes Arthur Stinchcombe (1987) about demographic explanations and emphasizes the importance of historical changes. However, there is no dispute that the society in which one is born is the basic reason for the inequality an individual faces in his lifetime. The next aspect is regarding demographical differences that decide the formations in society. In addition to that the internal temporal ordering of individuals guided by race, class, social status, age and gender also play an important role in deciding the social inequality. Regarding life course and social inequality it is important to consider the institutional configurations in a society. In the above context it is important to observe the personality development and social conditions that affect social inequality and its affect on course of life. Hence, one can understand that the close link between psychological and socio-psychological, social and historical perspectives need focus while analyzing and discussing the affect of social inequality in an individual's life. The affect of social inequality in making one gaining advantage or disadvantage due to the allocation of power due to the different aspects mentioned above is important in the analysis of this paper (Karl Ulrich Mayer, 2008). Identification of inequality Social Class and Family Structure The social class and family structure are interconnected as the last fifty years witnessed the changes in household and family structure. The structure of the family also decides the class of a person in the society. In this context Annemette Sorenson, (2008) quotes Lestaeghe (1995) about profound changes in economic foundations of marriage and gender relations that pave the way for inequality between contemporary individuals. As a family members share resources intra-generationally as well as across the generations, the influence of family on the members is decides their behavior in the society and the inequality in life course. In this context, the class position can be estimated by the position of male head of the household and when the single parent families began to rise, the family head definition itself has been changed. However, when married women's employment has been common, the financial status of the family decided the status and class of an individual. In the above mentioned situation, the social mobility of women decided the class of children in society. However, the experiences of children state that the class position also depends on designation and financial status of parents. However, in the above context, if the parents take divorce, the resultant life affects the class of the child and it is a major challenge to face social inequality thus arises. After that the economic and social conditions arise from the point of fact that the family being and economic and social unit. Hence, class boundaries decide the economic and social status of an individual. However, if the family's class position depends on designation of husband and wife, the social mobility decides the classification. Hence, social mobility as well as the designations of working husband and wife and the financial status irrespective of work status of women decides the class of a person in the society. Though the social mobility due to women empowerment decides the class of a family, the class of family that is financially good irrespective of women's work status is a bit high (Annemette Sorenson, 2008). Educational Level After the class of an individual or a family is decided, it in turn will decide the education level of the individual. The level of education will be a reason for the inequalities faced in later life by an individual. The higher the level of education, the higher paid employment the individual can get. Hence, while talking about the social inequalities in later life, it is important to analyze the differences in education levels in different classes and in the same class. In this context, Sara Arber, (2008) quotes Phillipson (1982) about structural dependency theory that emphasizes the social mechanisms and decides the standard of education an individual gets. However, the continuity theory that details about the working individuals states that the drivers of inequality in later life are decided by working life. Before that the inequality in working life is decided by level of education, which in turn decided by class that is a result of financial position as well as the family structure. Hence, in most of the cases, the education level decides the working status and in turn it decides the inequality in older age. Though there are some theories that state that in later period in life the inequalities are leveled majority of the people cannot identify them with that leveling and the inequalities do exist. Hence, it can be understood that the level of education can give a cumulative advantage/disadvantage that results in decreased/increased inequality in later life. However, the inequalities do depend on economic advantages, it is emphasized here that the level of education has the power of deciding the economic status after completion of education. Hence, the economic advantage that is a result of education Hence education is a life course approach for the people to minimize the social inequality. Hence, the education level is the one that decides the accumulation of advantage/disadvantage offered to individuals that enables them to capture the aspects of inequalities in later life. For the above purpose to be guaranteed, one has to ensure that the level of education is continuity in various stages of life and class decides that continuity. In addition to the above aspect, the education level also decides the marital and social disadvantages that matter other aspects of well-being in later life. As the education level in most of the cases decided the social connectivity, the life chances thus increase in the course of job (Sara Arber, 2008). Occupational Prestige, Race, Ethnicity and Gender After certain educational level attained it is linked to the occupational prestige. However, there is chance of having different levels of occupational prestige even with the individuals of same levels of education. In this context, it is important to consider status consistency that can be understood from the anomalies or the gaps between income and prestige in certain job categories. The above concept needs focus on social groups as they too can be decided by occupation of an individual and are decided by social positions of individuals. It can be observed that differently educated persons with same levels may differ in occupations and social positions due to the prestige of the occupation they choose. However, the occupational prestige is decided by the social status of the actors and their behavior patterns decided by the value they get in society and their financial status. Moreover, the occupational prestige may not have same levels in all the jobs all the time. Depending the needs and demands of the society, the demand for the occupations change as well as the prestige associated with them. Hence, it can be termed that the occupational prestige is inconsistent and the consistent aspect is the education level that decides the minimum level of occupational prestige. In addition to that, the race may decide the occupation of an individual. However, the above aspect has different affects in different societies. This depends on level of complexity in the society as well as functional and structural differentiation. If the structural differentiation is according to race, the inequality in choosing the occupation may depend on it and race or ethnicity of a person has large probability to decide the occupation. In the above mentioned structural differentiation, the division of labor depends on race or ethnicity may increase complexity in it (Louis Chauvel, 2005). Opportunity Structure and Comparison As per the discussion till now, one can understand that the class decides the financial as well as education level and in turn it shapes the designation and occupational prestige. In turn the class, educational level, occupational prestige decides the level of inequality in later life. However, the perceptions of different individuals may differ in the era of international migration. The perceptions of white male may differ from white female. There may be difference in perceptions of black male and white male and vice versa. The perceptions depend on source and destination of immigrants and the technological capabilities they possess as they decide the occupational prestige and the inequality in later life. The economic opportunity, political freedom or environmental constraints results in change in perceptions. The change in perceptions may be due to difference in cultural and economic divisions. However, perspective citizenship is the one to structure different types of inequalities. The differences in perceptions of opportunity structure between individuals are due to the deep seated tendencies toward divergence. Consequently, all the persons may not feel the same as the result that is stated in the beginning of this chapter as a consequence of the discussion in the previous chapter. If the above perception is of an upper middle class white male and females, the perceptions of a black male business man in the same society may be different though he is not an immigrant. And they may differ if he is an immigrant. When the efforts of a nation to restrict immigration arose, the white male and females think that their educational level may get a good job with a reasonable level of occupational prestige. However, the black business man may think that he may not recruit the workers for lesser salaries and feel that he is facing inequality when compared to the competitors in other sector who are permitted to recruit immigrants. Hence, in the above example, the perceptions change due to the change in class as well as race. However, in the above mentioned context, race is not a factor that decides the perceptions and the financial gain and occupational prestige decide the views of the people mentioned (Howard M. Bahr et al, 2005). Differences in Perceptions due to Labor Market Inequalities When coming to labor market inequalities, the differences in the perceptions are due to income, class and socioeconomic status. In addition to that, homeownership is a universal factor that decides the inequality a person faces in the society. In this context, the perceptions of people are above class, economic and social status as homeownership almost dominates all the above factors, though they also contribute for the inequality. Hence, if we consider a white male and female as well as a black male, all the three have the same perceptions of home ownership as it decides the social status in the community as well as the society. However, in the contemporary society of developed countries like Britain, majority individuals own houses and the class position linked with homeownership lost its position. However, one can find the difference in this opinion as persons from developing countries still see the class position that comes with homeownership. Hence, a job that gives a home loan will give them occupational prestige. Hence, a white male from a developed country and black male from a developing country may differ in their view regarding class position that can be attained by homeownership. Hence, in this case the housing study or analysis cannot tell about stratification issues of social inequality. However, if the study of income elasticity of housing demand and consumption tells that it has effect on probability of owning versus renting and thus makes difference in class position of individuals. In the above context it can be termed that the labor market is the central institution to decide about the class of an individual according to homeownership. Hence, the class of the individual if it is irrespective of homeownership will be decided by the position of the individual in the labor market as it decides the living standards of the individual. The class position affects the individual more if there is mobility between generations. However, this aspect is not accepted by all the individuals if it is the case between white male, white female and black female. The white males and females may use the mobility between generations for class position, while the black females have to act against the social mobility for the same achievement (Karin Kurz and Hans-Peter Blossfeld. 2004). Projection Into Future After the above discussion about identification of an individual in a society and differences between them, the future of social inequality is important. The future of past is transition of rural society into industrial occupational structure. In this course of time, the individuals according to the social inequalities and educational levels attained their respective levels of status in society. However, it is clear that they might not have anticipated the present type of status 20 years back. In a similar manner, the present social inequalities may have a different shape after 20 years or can be minimized. The reasons for the change or minimization may be the transformation in occupational changes that are articulated by different classes and individuals of various educational levels and occupational prestige. In the past 50 years, industrial jobs exceeded agricultural jobs and had occupational prestige than agricultural ones particularly n developing countries. However, in the future, the occupational prestige of agricultural jobs also may increase and class differences between individuals present in both the sectors may decrease. The reason is that the increased security for agricultural production as well as the demand for the products due to the increased population. Consequently, the agricultural activities also can be conducted in an organized manner like industrial activities and there is a chance of making it as an industry. In that case the perspectives of occupational prestige will change and the levels of occupational prestige between different jobs may have fewer differences due to reasonable educational levels as well as financial outcome in all the sectors and jobs. As of now, the labor force is divided into three sectors; agricultural, industrial and services. However, in the future, the agricultural and industrial sectors can be unified and the single sector needs the division into subsectors. Hence, special sociological approach is necessary to understand the social inequalities that are minimized after 20 years. In the present society the types of families that hold a similar position in terms of three main dimensions of inequality are increasing and they might be common after 20 years (Chiesi, Antonio M, 1999). Consideration of Personal Presence For example, if we consider the white males and females or black males and females mentioned in the analysis are present in same society but in different sectors, one can expect that the differences in the levels of occupational prestige may be minimized due to the increased importance of each sector with the change of time. Moreover, there is a possibility to observe the decrease in the differences of educational levels between different individuals a there would be much lesser classes in the society when compared to the present number of classes. In the above context, the Max Weber's idea of 'class situation as market situation' can be understood by expecting market and labor conditions will improve to minimize the class differences in future. The future projection in this section is that the marginalized classes at present have opportunities to develop themselves in future and can be in an equal position with their privileged counterparts. However, there exists another situation, which needs new study to study the inequalities that are based on levels occupational prestige though they are minimized (Reinhard Kreckel, 1980). Conclusion According to the analysis and discussion in the paper, the inequalities depend on race, class, education level as well as occupational prestige and financial status. The social mobility also causes the social inequality between the individuals. Hence, one can come to conclusion that the types of social inequalities are different in different societies as the social conditions differ between societies. For example, the situation of blacks in white dominated society and whites in black dominated society may not be different if both of them are marginalized in the respective societies. That means a marginalize black in white dominated society as well as marginalized white in black dominated society may face the same situation. This is about the social inequality due to race but the inequality due to class also has been discussed in the paper. To understand about the inequalities of class, educational level and occupational prestige, the paper reviewed and analyzed the academic writings regarding social inequality and discussed the facts stated in them. Though the paper expresses the analysis of substantial content, it is clear that the analysis is regarding outcomes of other's research but the primary research is not adequate. The primary research is present up to the extent of self experiences of the writer or the researcher. While considering the social consequences of the persons in this essay, it is clear that the future projections result in decrease of class differences as well as social inequality related to it. Regarding individual consequences, one can find themselves in a better position than they expected in the past as the labor market decreases the differences of occupational prestige and also due to the increased access to the education and decrease of differences in education level. Hence, as for an overall view on social inequalities after 20 years, there exist new classes that arise from occupational prestige thought the classes in society decrease. Consequently, it is clear that the social inequality may change its way of expression, but still exists even after 20 years. References Annemette Sorenson, 2008, Family Structure, Gender Roles and Social Inequality, in Analyzing inequality: Life Chances and Social Mobility in Comparative Perspective, (Vol 1. Page 17), California, USA: Stanford University Press. Chiesi, Antonio M. (Author). (1999). Recent Social Trends in Italy, 1960-1995. Montreal, PQ, CAN: McGill-Queen's University Press. Howard M. Bahr et al, 2005, International Migration and Inequality, in Changing Structures of Inequality: A comparative Perspective, (Vol 1, page 284), Montreal, Canada: McGill-Queen's University Press. Karin Kurz and Hans-Peter Blossfeld. 2004, Introduction: Social Stratication, Welfare Regimes, and Access to Home Ownership, in Home Ownership and Social Inequality in comparative perspective, (Vol 1, page 21), California, USA: Stanford University Press. Karl Ulrich Mayer, 2008, Life Courses and Life Chances in a Comparative Perspective, in Analyzing inequality: Life Chances and Social Mobility in Comparative Perspective, (Vol 1. Page 17), California, USA: Stanford University Press. Louis Chauvel, 2005, Educational Inequalities: Distribution of Knowledge, Social Origin and Social Outcomes, in Changing Structures of Inequality: A comparative Perspective, (Vol 1, page 219), Montreal, Canada: McGill-Queen's University Press Michel Force and Yannick Lemel, 2005, Status Consistency Trends of Occupational, Educational and Economic Position in France, Germany and United States, in Changing Structures of Inequality: A comparative Perspective, (Vol 1, page 251), Montreal, Canada: McGill-Queen's University Press. Reinhard Kreckel, 1980, Unequal Opportunity Structure and Labor Market Segmentation, Sociology, Vol. 14, No.4, 525-550 Sara Arber, 2008, Inequalities in Later Life: Gender, Marital Life and Health Behaviors, in Analyzing inequality: Life Chances and Social Mobility in Comparative Perspective, (Vol 1. Page 17), California, USA: Stanford University Press. Read More