Changes in Family Life: Post Modernism - Coursework Example

Changes in Family Life – Post Modernism Postmodernism cannot be defined in definite terms. It tends towards elaboration and inclusiveness. It rejects the theory of absolute reality and is deeply doubtful about the idea of progress in human life. If the definition of post modern family is the present continuous effort to reform contemporary family, then this definition has the implication of new form of art and literature. It indicates the end of a predefined family activity and emergence of activities whose patterns and indications are not clearly comprehended. Postmodern families are burdened with multiples realities. The society has lost trust on any definition of truth and people have to make their own decisions regarding what to consider as reality (The Post-Modern Family, n.d.) Pre-modern families The most general feature of families before 1900 was that it was patriarchal which means the father or the husband used to be the head of any family. In the early 19th century families were mostly “stable and permanent, sexually monogamous, residentially immobile, and happy”. In the pre-industrial era the family was the economic unit and the men used to do the heavy work. But when industrial revolution began in Europe in the 19th century, factories and offices emerged where productive works were done. This led to many women working in offices alongside men. In the second half of 19th century, there was “growth in extended households” in UK. (Adams, 2010, pp.499-500) For both Greeks and Romans, religious laws and practices were the core of their family life. It built the authority of marriage and the male member. It also “fixed the order of relationships, and governed the right of property and the right of inheritance” (Pickering, 1984, pp.56-57). Postmodern family life The modern family is based on “domesticity, privacy and intimacy”. Some other characteristics of modern family are strong emotional bonding between different members of the family, focus on children and their well-being, labour divided based on gender with men working outdoors and women working indoors, less socializing, and surfacing of nuclear families (Notter, 2002, pp.89-90). In the post modern world it is apparent that the family life has changed. Marriages are no longer the first priority for women as source of economic security as they have entered the job market. This has led to rising number of children born outside wedlock. There is also an increase in the number of divorces which results in emergence of single parents. All these factors are leading towards an individualized society. Thus the trademark of modern society is the attempt of individual to build his or her own life (Wehner & Abrahamson, 2004, pp.2-4). Durkheim theory The 19th century French sociologist, Emile Durkheim’s first publication was based on family. He was heavily influenced by evolution theories and believed that society and family were evolving. He said that family was shaped by “industralisation and modernisation” (Lamanna, 2001, p.5). He supported the nuclear or conjugal family as a “source of personal regulation”. He regarded the concept of family as part of social culture (Whitaker, 2006, pp.122). Durkheim said that a person after getting married must start a separate family. He must maintain contact with his parents by caring for them and he will have right to the family wealth. In France a man cannot be disinherited (Durkhiem, 1978, p.1). Durkhiem said that a human individual is selfish and pursues innumerous desires thus causing social disintegration. According to Durkheim the individual needs to be “converted into a social being whose ambitions and needs are coincident with those of the group” (Jones, n.d.). In modern society because family is becoming nuclear it is no longer a unit of production. Therefore man is compelled to have a social life in his professional arena to meet his economic needs. Durkheim said it will benefit the society if there is “moral integration of the economic occupations”. This is possible if there is close relationship between different members of a professional group (Hamilton, 1990, p.72). Durkheim was essentially a supporter of patriarchal family where the male member will dominate. The family should be controlled with rigid morals and he was deeply concerned with the increase in divorce and illegitimacy (Pickering, 2003, p.14). Durkheim also analysed the interconnection of suicide with social phenomenon like family. He said that marriage can act as a “powerful counteragent against suicide” as he has observed that suicide rate is more among unmarried men and women. Family which is constituted of parents and children acts as immunity of married people. If a husband or wife dies, the other may resort to suicide as an after effect of shock (Durkheim & Simpson, 1951, p.198). Durkheim further said that women are less affected by family life because they can adjust to a life of loneliness more easily than men. A widow can tolerate her condition and so does not crave for marriage as passionately as a widower. Since a woman socializes less than a man, so for her society is not so necessary and she can be satisfied easily (Lemert, 2006, p.140). Durkheim observed that family is an “absolute unity” which diminishes the distance and differences between the members (Tiryakian, 2009, p.119). Feminism postmodernism Humanists of either gender must study the differences between men and women and also if there is inequality between the genders. It is a fact that the society is dominated by men and they use their power to subjugate women. Hence it is fair to conclude that the more admirable qualities are those than can be attributed to the male gender. This concept has been the history of Western humanism. There are very few, if any, “humanist female role models”. The thinkers of the era of Enlightenment inspired truth in humanity and therefore they need not be biased with any gender. This has been the common sentiment among the modernists. But the postmodernists say “experience of gender has and does affect traditional philosophic underpinnings”. Postmodernism has offered feminism and female humanists the ideas to go beyond the limitations of culture and region. Gender experience can alter people’s lives because one does not only belong to a specific gender, he or she can belong to different age groups, different health conditions and different marital status. He or she can also be classified according to class, wealth or color. The experience of any one of them can be essentially different based on whether one is a male or a female. (Paul, n.d., pp.107-108) Feminism and postmodernism have appeared as two unified currents in the modern society. Postmodernists place the male gender in “culturally variable social, linguistic, and discursive practices”. On the other hand feminists claim that the “universal subject of reason” can be placed within the framework of gender. Western philosophy rejects comparison between genders as this forms the shape of self experience (Benhabib, 1995). Women have always been a part of social contract. The structure of modern society includes “women in the political order in such a way that formal demands can be met without substantial changes”. The traditional values still exist and this shapes the role of men and women giving and different values to masculinity and femininity. The women are still dominated and exploited by men. Feminism is essentially concerned with the “differences in power and authority between men and women”. In Britain during the 1980s there was end of feminism as the political force. This was because of the tension that brewed within the Women’s Liberation Movement (KhosraviShakib, 2010, pp.29-32). Postmodern feminism can only be related to gender development if it can prove that it has the ability to perform well in the political arena. Postmodern feminism has brought to the fore the political action which discloses various activities in the political field by women which would otherwise have gone unnoticed. Postmodern feminism focuses more on academic development of women and this can give more advantages to the feminist academics than local women activists (Marchand & Parpart, 1995, pp.128-129). Feminism requires a steady challenge to the “traditional philosophical delimitation of spheres upon which such theoretical reflections of morality have rested”. It demands a formation of feminine power which will satisfy the feminine imaginary and oppose the limitations of established discourse (Benhabib et.al, 1995, p.148). Women have been treated as a specific type of cultural body. Postmodern feminists are trying to find out what social institutions have been the causes of this. Feminists find it important to take into consideration the experiences of past generations and also the experiences of women belonging to different regions and races. The feminisms of 1970s were essentially influenced by the middle class European women. It has to consider the experiences of women who are adapted to different lifestyles and women with different sexual orientations like the lesbians (Klimenkova, 1992, p.277). Conclusion Durkheim’s theory that all people can live happily within the boundaries of nuclear family just like pre-1960s is in many ways far from the truth. First, many women are still dependant on their men for economic and safety reasons. Such women can find it extremely difficult to survive outside a family unit based on marriage. Second, there have been vast advances in the fields of academic and professional sectors for women. These have created new opportunities and aspirations among the modern women. The advancement has been vast compared to the pre-1960s. Therefore the modern feminists will never sacrifice such liberties which have been a part of the modern world in the last few decades. References 1. Adams, B.N. (2010). Themes and Threads of Family Theories: A Brief History. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, Vol. 41, No. 4, 499-500, available at http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=3&hid=122&sid=6e18e36f-9666-4587-ac27-2ea57d615233%40sessionmgr104 (accessed on May 24, 2012) 2. Durkhiem, E. (1978) The Conjugal Family, Revue philosophique, available at: http://sociosite.net/topics/texts/durkheim.pdf (accessed on May 24, 2012) 3. Durkheim, E. & G. Simpson. (1951) Suicide: a study in sociology, USA: Simon and Schuster 4. Hamilton, P. (1990) Emile Durkheim: Critical Assessments: Vol 1, London: Routledge 5. Jones, P. (n.d.) Social Theory in practice, polity, available at: http://www.polity.co.uk/jones/article.htm (accessed on May 24, 2012) 6. KhosraviShakib, M. (2010). Marxist feminism and postmodernism, Journal of language and culture, Vol. 1, No. 3, 29-32 available at: http://www.academicjournals.org/jlc/PDF/Pdf2010/November/Mohammad%20KhosraviShakib.pdf (accessed on May 24, 2012) 7. Klimenkova, T.A. (1992). Feminism and Postmodernism. Philosophy East & West, Vol. 42, No. 2, 277, available at: http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?sid=d17fd501-7fde-4eff-b3ff-a55c341a55bd%40sessionmgr112&vid=2&hid=108&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=aph&AN=9609241126 (accessed on May 24, 2012) 8. Lamanna, M.A. (2001) Emily Durkheim on the family. USA: SAGE 9. Lemert, C. (2006) Durkheims Ghosts: Cultural Logics and Social Things, Cambridge University 10. Marchand, M.H. & J.L. Parpart. (1995) Feminism/Postmodernism/Development, USA: Routledge 11. Notter, D. (2002) Towards a Cultural Analysis of the Modern Family: Beyond the Revisionist Paradigm in Japanese Family Studies. International Journal of Japanese Sociology, 11(1), 89-90, available at: http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=6e18e36f-9666-4587-ac27-2ea57d615233%40sessionmgr104&vid=7&hid=122 (accessed on May 24, 2012) 12. Pickering, W.S.F. (1984) Durkheims Sociology of Religion: Themes and Theories, London; Routledge 13. Paul, S. (n.d.) Feminism Postmodernism, humanismtoday, available at: http://www.humanismtoday.org/vol8/paul.pdf 14. Pickering, W.S.F. (2003) Durkheim today, USA: Berghahn Books 15. Benhabib, S. (1995). Feminism and Postmodernism: An Uneasy Alliance, Marxists, available at: http://www.marxists.org/subject/women/authors/benhabib-seyla/uneasy-alliance.htm (accessed on May 24, 2012) 16. Benhabib, S. et.al. (1995) Feminist Contentions: A Philosophical Exchange, Great Britain: Routledge 17. The Post-Modern Family, (n.d.) UNU, available at: http://archive.unu.edu/unupress/unupbooks/uu13se/uu13se03.htm (accessed on May 24, 2012) 18. Tiryakian, E.A. (2009) For Durkheim: Essays in Historical and Cultural Sociology, Great Britain: Ashgate Publishing 19. Wehner, C. & P. Abrahamson. (2004), Individualisation of family life and family discourses, ESPAnet conference, available at: http://www.spsw.ox.ac.uk/fileadmin/static/Espanet/espanetconference/papers/ppr.10C.PA.pdf.pdf (accessed on May 24, 2012) 20. Whitaker, T. (2006) Emile Durkheim on the family. Irish Journal of Sociology, 15(2), 121-122, available at: http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=799fe236-cddf-40d8-aa4c-0b13a0c6a41f%40sessionmgr110&vid=3&hid=10 (accessed on May 24, 2012) Read More