The Future of the Institution of Family - Essay Example

The Future of the of Family Outline Paragraph Introduction: Situating the Transformation of the Family Structure Paragraph 2: Same-sexMarriage in America Paragraph 3: Same-sex Marriage and the Church Paragraph 4: On Gay Adoption Paragraph 5: On Gender Roles Paragraph 6: Functional Structuralist View on Homosexuality Paragraph 7: Dualisms between Man and Woman Paragraph 8: Bloch’s View on Same-sex Marriage Paragraph 9: Feminist’s Point of View on Same-sex Marriage Paragraph 10: Conclusion According to Macionis and Plummer (580), family as an institution is structured by the relationship through blood or even adoption, and by tradition, is built around marriage. In the context of the American society, the union between opposite sexes, that is between male and female, is the definition of marriage in the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996. This definition of family serves as a challenge to the observed changes in the structure of the family in the current situation in the United States of America. As the traditional set-up of having nuclear family, which consists of father and mother united by marriage and child or children, is witnessed to be declining, the formation of family is noted with the following transformations such as increase in marriages ending up with divorce, rise of couples living in together without marriage or cohabitation, growth of out-of-wedlock pregnancies, and even single parenthood. Along with the breaking down of the long-established family structure in United States, the homosexuals, belonging to the marginalized group, are engaged in such continuous efforts on gender equality. One among their feminist struggles is pushing their right to marriage. Though most Americans who are against same-sex unions regarded homosexuality as immoral (Peplau and Fingerhut 413), some homosexuals have turned out to be more recognized and more accepted at the social level even at the face of discrimination. Because of this, same-sex partnerships also have thrived in the society. Marriage between same sexes is possible to take place in a few states. As such, this also imposes a threat on the conventional family arrangement for it may be the case that the future of the institution of family is something no longer solely operating at the patriarchal axis of power. Yet to come is a family which is more open to the shifts in its structure for the normative and cultural standards should not be only heterosexist. According to Kimmel (144), lesbian mothers are approximated to be between 1.5 million to 5 million while gay fathers are roughly estimated to be around 1 million to 3 million. In those countries where same-sex unions are more acknowledged, homosexual couples are permitted to adopt children and be their own. Indeed, the right to adoption is included in the liberal advocacy of lesbians and gays (Rogers; Marcionis and Plummer 580-585). However, it is important to note that even with the few successful outcomes towards gender equality of these homosexuals’ advocates, like that of marriage and adoption, it is not unrestricted from negative criticisms. Coming from the conservative view of Christian, Rogers (2) findings have stated that gay couples are not suitable for adoption on the basis of the following grounds: first is that gays are significantly found to be promiscuous; second is because gays directionally have more tendencies of committing suicide; third is that domestic violence is rated significantly higher among gays; and lastly, relationships are found out to be directionally unstable among gays. There also are indications and literatures which support that pedophilia is being practiced by gays and that it is even an essential element of being gay (3). Roger (4) has claimed that the traditional nuclear structure of father and mother support arrangement is still the most suitable for children. Gender serves as a domineering structure that influences the family (Allen and Walker 4). The contrasting behaviors of both father and mother cause a very stimulating atmosphere for the infant (Biller 4). This is for the reason that gender is just a term invented which is undergoing a project of re-invention (Risman 157) and is just constructed which is undergoing a project of reconstruction everyday (Allen and Walker 4). With the tumultuous and unconventional modifications in the family set-up, the most affected and troubled institution is considered to be the church. Since religion has imparted to individuals its conservative ways, the revolutionary transformation of the occurrence of same-sex marriage is definitely threatening the church in a lot of ways. Coming from the point of view of the Catholic Church which is greatly influenced by Thomas Aquinas’s philosophy, marriage is only an exclusive union between man and woman while sex is only done by married couples with the ultimate aim of procreation to create a unit in the society. Not only that, it is important to note that homosexuality is not promoted by the church for the scripture tells us, people, that God has made man and woman through Adam and Eve. That may be explains why homosexuality is perceived as morally wrong (Peplau and Fingerhut 413). In this way, same-sex marriage is clearly a violation of the Catholic Church’s teachings. In this regards, the institution of church is put at great conflict for what is currently happening in the United States is opposing the teachings of the church. Same-sex marriage is a sign of a weakened institution of the church. As a foundation promoting morality, it is now facing the challenge contradiction entailed by the homosexuality and the union of same sexes. From the structural functionalist (Parsons) point of view, the course of action executed by the church is just right like that of supporting the view that homosexuality is promiscuous which should not be tolerated but discriminated. This is because of the fact that they are exercising its power and influence to control and protect their institution. So whatever stigma put over the homosexuals and those who engage in its union, it is because the church has to maintain its power and to function in stability. The church must resist the changes in the structure of the family. Same-sex marriage is clearly a dysfunction in this case. It is important to note that the obsession of modern society in dualisms like that of man and woman closes its door of possibilities to include the homosexuals. This dualism between man and woman is because anatomy has always been the basis even though the social and political aspects of the body should be considered as a site of struggle. Gender is not just about man and woman for the intersex and homosexual do exist. Gender is no longer polarized. Striving for gender emancipation requires the struggle for the inclusion of the lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transexuals in the discourse. In Ernst Bloch’s terms, it’s all or nothing. The problem why homosexuals are not included is because of the problem of ideology. This dilemma is brought up from the predicament of inheriting the problem culturally because of the on-going propagation of the superstructure in the cultural consciousness even as soon as the social bases has vanished (154). Bloch considers religion in the cultural superstructure as the main ideology. On the one hand, the repressed and unfulfilled desires and wishes are kept for an upright world. These wishes are not satisfied because of the relevance to a future society. Ideology holds indications on what kinds of desires and needs can individuals have in order to be used for the judgment on what is needed to satisfy the existing society. Moreover, his pre-conscious elements include the “not” and the “not-yet” where the concept of “not conscious” is what is lacking whereas the “not-yet conscious” is the real possibilities indispensible for the development in society. In relation to same-sex marriage, this “not-yet conscious” is the real possibility for liberation among human beings. This same-sex marriage is a possibility of unrestricted view on the family. Same is true for the feminist’s point of view since the feminists are advocates of equality in all aspects. Because the society we used to live in is working on a heterosexual world where patriarchy is highly considered, women are marginalized and so as the intersexes and homosexuals are not included in the dualisms. For the reason that the society in which people reside in is limiting its people on their full potentials and that all the benefits are given to men, women, intersexes and homosexuals are marginalized. Of course, intersexes and homosexuals are more excluded than the women. In this society, it is important to note that this is not just a world of men and women but homosexuals do exist too. In order to be equal with men, the leading among the sexes, homosexuals too, must achieve their right to marriage and build their own family. I understand and acknowledge that the church is the most troubled institution in this sense but definitely, there is a need for social change. Homosexuals could not just compel to the normative and cultural standards where they are not even considered. From all the struggles of the feminists, they have become successful at some points like that of making women empowered and of making women feel they have equal status like that of men. I know it is not really equal for there are still big gender differences in every part of the world but the advocates of gender emancipation have made it a little successful for women’s cases. I believe that little by little, the lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transexuals can have success as well in their struggles. Before, homosexuality is considered as a mental disorder. However, at current time, homosexuals are no longer considered to have psychiatric diseases. I believe gradually, the society, even with large opposition especially from the church, could not stop the transformation of the structure of the family. This society we live in should also address the needs of the homosexuals. To have the equal rights with men and women, they should also have the right to marry the one whom they prefer, and that is their same sex. Society is working at a constant flux. Changes in its institution can never be restricted. In the case of the family, the revolutionary changes in the set-up of the family should not be put on limitation. If only the institutions of society, especially the church, would be more accepting, more willing and be more open to the possible changes, life on earth would not be this hard, especially in the case of homosexuals. Though same-sex unions are tolerated in some states in United States, it is not enough for the goal of the marginalized homosexuals is be at equal status to that of men. This only means their ultimate aim is equality with a totalizing effect. I believe that the change in society for the benefit of homosexuals has just started. They are more empowered than ever. They would not stop from emancipation. All though, I do not know how long or when it will happen, but I am certain that the future of the family is no longer bound in the traditional family structure of just between married man and woman together with their children. The future of the family is something that makes up of different arrangements of that sort. Including in this family set-up is a family that is structured with individuals with same sexes and are married. However, I would not say that it is not just a simple process of making the same-sex marriage accepted in the institution of family especially in the society as a whole. This is for the reason that the church as well as the other institutions shapes the institution of the family. Stigma will always be set on them for the type of individuals they are, the type of marriage they want, and the type of family they like to achieve, because they would remain deviant in the society for I don’t know until when. It will be a long struggle before marriage among individuals with same sexes may be fully accepted. It will be a long fight since until the homosexuals are not completely accepted in United States, same-sex unions will not be totally accepted either. The process is a definitely hard for the same-sex marriage to be completely acknowledged. But despite this difficulty, I imagine the future of families with parents of the same sexes. It is indeed, revolutionary in this sense but the fact that the traditional nuclear family of a married father and mother together with their children is already a declining model of the said institution. Changes may seem daunting but the society must also cater for the needs of the people whom are suppressed for such a long time. No matter how the structures of society try to resist the transformations in the set-up of the family, no matter how the church opposes the marriage between the individuals with the same sexes, the transformation has already begun. There is no way to stop each change in the family arrangement for I believe it is unavoidable. They are pushing their right to marriage and pushing their right to adoption. Homosexuals have realized their full potentials as individuals. Now, they are already making these realizations into reality. This is my view on the future of the institution of family. Works Cited: Biller, H. Fathers and Families: Paternal Factors in Child Development. Cited in Rogers, G. “Suffer The Children: What’s Wrong With Gay Adoption?” Christian Research Institute 2005: 1-8. Web. 4 Dec. 2011. Bloch, E Natural Law and Human Dignity. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press, 1986. Print. Kimmel, M.S. The Gendered Society. London: Oxford University Press, 2000. Print. Macionis, J. and K. Plummer. Sociology: A Global Introduction. Essex: Pearson, 2008. Print. Parsons, T. Social Structure and Personality. London: Free Press, 1964. Print. Peplau, L. A., & Fingerhut, A. W. “The Close Relationships of Lesbians and Gay Men.” Annual Review of Psychology 58. 2007: 405 – 424. Web. Risman, B. J. Gender Vertigo: American Families in Transition. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1998. Print. 4 Dec. 2011 Rogers, G. “Suffer The Children: What’s Wrong With Gay Adoption?” Christian Research Institute 2005: 1-8. Web. 4 Dec. 2011. Read More