Commercialization of Human Feeling - Essay Example

Reflection Essay Response Hochschild and Oransky argue that ‘feeling rules’ – normative s about how emotion should be expressed and not expressed– are deeply gendered. Indeed, Hochschild asserts that social conditions make emotion management more prevalent in different ways for women who seemingly occupy the least gender. On the other hand, Oransky and Marecek confirm that it is the duty of men to address masculinity demands. More so, the study by Oransky and Marecek derives that feeling rules and emotion management as the foundation for addressing masculinity. This follows from an examination of peer interactions and emotion management with respect to adolescent boys and their duty and assumptions about masculinity. Anger management is one feeling that the studies address. It is clear that the importance of ‘feeling rules’ differs across gender and manifest in different ways subject to gender, emotional labor, and power in the society. Hochschild and Oransky present assumptions and argument that each makes about the relationship between gender, emotional labor, power, and anger. Oransky and Marecek investigate the peer relations and emotion practices of adolescent boys with respect to masculinity (Oransky and Marecek 218). In doing this, they used semi-structured interviews with middle-class and upper-middle-class boys from an independent high school (Oransky and Marecek 218). This study shows that unlike women, adolescent boys do not express their emotions or physical suffering and disparage such expressions in other boys (Oransky and Marecek 218). This manifests how gender influences the management and expression of emotions. This argument depicts the ‘feeling rules’ about how emotion management relies on gender. This study argues that the tough nature that men possess prevents them from expressing their feelings of physical suffering. However, the study argues that adolescent boys express their feelings of hurt and worry and of care and concern for others as “gay” or “girly” (Oransky and Marecek 234-237). In addition, the study held that adolescent boys expressed emotions in a hurtful manner as a way of bolstering one anothers masculinity (Oransky and Marecek 236). Such expressions involve mockery and physical squabbles. According to the study, physical and emotional efforts will define masculinity among boys and their peers. Oransky and Marecek asserts that feeling rules and emotion practices form the basis for young White masculinities (Oransky and Marecek 241). On the other hand, Hochschild presents his assumptions and argument about the relationship between gender, emotional labor, power, and anger. Hochschild reckons that emotions affect women more easily as disturbance upset them easily. In this context, Hochschild argues that social conditions make emotional management more prevalent and in different ways for women (Hochschild 162). The study establishes that “both men and women do emotional work, in private life and at work” (Hochschild 162). However, Hochschild argues that the importance of emotion work in emotional management differs with gender. This derives from the fact that women are a subordinate social stratum where they have limitations to access money, power, authority, and social status (Hochschild 163). Subject to these limitations, women offer feelings as a resource to men for accessing the material things that the society denies them. Hochschild argues that the importance of emotion work varies in different ways for men and for women because “each gender tends to be called on to do different kinds of this work” (Hochschild 163). Ideally, women participate in duties that require them to be nice to men and fellow women, which force them to perfect the art of mastering anger and aggression (Hochschild 163). On the other hand, men participate in duties where they assume the role of aggressing against those that break rules that develop the private task of mastering fear and vulnerability (Hochschild 163). Indeed, the general subordination of women exposes them to the hard feelings of others where they react by making defensive use of sex. Men can wield anger and threaten people because they cannot manage their expressions. Unlike men, women have the capacity to manage their expressions and derive good feelings since they depend on men for money and perform extra emotional duties as compensation. Hochschild argues that women do emotional work that prepares them to manage anger and other emotions. Such emotional labor may relate to nurturing, managing, and befriending children and even adults (Hochschild 170). This emotional labor exposes women to rude or surly speech than men due to their lower gender status that does not shield women from abuse (Hochschild 163). The study asserts that the "doctrine of feelings" varies across gender (Hochschild 173). Indeed, when men express anger, the society deems it rational but when women express the same anger, the society deems it as a sign of personal instability since they are seemingly more emotional (Hochschild 173). This defines the gender and power difference that invalidates women feelings (Hochschild 168). Indeed, the society regards men to have more authority than women and women assume that the society is less likely to honor women authority that forces them to adopt more tactful and deferential means of addressing any emotional differences (Hochschild 177). It is thus clear that Hochschild and Omarsky argue that ‘feeling rules’ depend on gender. Hochschild establishes that both men and women participate in emotional work but the importance of such work differs with gender. Indeed, social conditions make emotion management more prevalent in different ways for women. On the other hand, it is clear that feeling rules and emotion management form the foundation for addressing masculinity especially in young White masculinities (Oransky and Marecek 241). Indeed, unlike women, men rarely express their emotions or physical suffering (Oransky and Marecek 218). Women encounter various limitations in accessing resources and hence offer feelings as a resource to men for accessing the material things that the society denies them. In fact, women participate in duties that adopt ‘feeling rules’ and require them to be nice and master anger and aggression management (Hochschild 163). On the contrary, men perform jobs that involve aggression and hence they rarely rely on ‘feeling rules.’ It is thus eminent that the importance of ‘feeling rules’ differs across gender and manifest in different ways subject to gender, emotional labor, and power in the society. Response 2 Hakim argues that women’s “erotic” appeal is a form of capital that they can use for upward social mobility and personal empowerment. Indeed, Hakim notes that erotic capital is another form of human capital that complements economic, cultural, and social capital (Hakim 499). In this context, erotic capital relates to a mixture of artificial, visual, physical, social, and sexual attractiveness to men (Hakim 499). According to the study, erotic capital is very fundamental and more valorized for both genders in a sexualized individualized modern society (Hakim 499). Hakim argues that erotic capital has significant effects on marriage, labor markets, the media, politics, advertising, sports, the arts, and social interactions (Hakim 501). However, Hakim asserts that women manifest more erotic capital than men do because they utilize it (Hakim 499). Hakim argues that women’s “erotic” appeal is a form of capital that they can use for upward social mobility and personal empowerment. Indeed, she notes that erotic capital is another form of capital that complements economic, cultural, and social capital in the society especially in women in the leisure and entertainment industry. Ideally, erotic capital fosters an understanding of sexual relationships and social processes in the sexualized individualized modern society (Hakim 499). Hakim establishes six distinct elements that characterize ‘emotional labor.’ They include beauty, sexual attractiveness, social, liveliness, social presentation, and sexuality (Hakim 500-501). As such, she argues that erotic capital combines aesthetic, visual, physical, social, and sexual attractiveness to members of the opposite sex in the society. Hakim asserts that the significance of erotic capital in social and economic front is increasing thus offering women a greater advantage over men. Subject to erotic capital women, derive the capacity to change their status in society and the economy (Hakim 512). According to Hakim, erotic capital influences marriage markets, labor markets, the media, politics, advertising, sports, the arts, and social interaction (Hakim 509-511). Erotic capital is an important force for both men and women though women develop and exploit this resource more than men do (Hakim 509). However, many sociologists and economists dispute the erotic capital theory despite its eminent significance. Indeed, Hakim notes that men deny the existence and value of erotic appeal and hence adopt measures that limit women from exploiting the advantage derived from using erotic capital (Hakim 506). Women utilize erotic capital by committing to individual presentation and social skills (Hakim 511). Just like human capital, Hakim argues that women and men require some basic level of talent and ability to utilize erotic capital (Hakim 512). Women have more erotic capital than men do, which gives them fundamental bargaining advantage (Hakim 508). Hakim argues that the gender difference in sexual interest over the life course enables women to utilize erotic capital (Hakim 512). For instance, there is a permanent male sex deficit since the men’s demand for sexual activity supersedes women’s interest in sex (Hakim 512). This allows beautiful women to use their sexual attractiveness and sexuality to coerce men into agreements that favor women interests. Moreover, Hakim argues that this is also true in the case of women who ate not beautiful, sexually attractive, lively, and social since they rarely get married or get married to low earning men that leads such women to become low-income earners. She notes that beautiful and attractive women get happily married to wealthy Americans who are ready to provide everything for them. As a result, we have more female than male millionaires do in the modern society. However, Green criticizes Hakim’s argument that women’s “erotic” appeal is a form of capital that they can use for upward social mobility and personal empowerment. In his article, he criticizes Catherine Hakim’s theory concerning the relationship of sexual desirability to power and gender inequality (Green 137). In his argument, Green notes that Hakim’s argument on the significance of erotic capital on women requires a detailed review and improvement since it seems to rely on a general cultural sentiment concerning women’s sexuality and power (Green 138-140). He argues that Hakim’s view on erotic capital is inconsistent, overstretched, and a sociological with the structures of race, class and age that mediate women’s access to erotic capital (Green 137). In fact, Hakim’s argument did not address variables like age, class, and race that define how different women develop and exploit erotic capital. Ideally, Green’s argument reckons that women of different ages, class, and race develop and utilize their erotic capital in different ways since there is no universal application of erotic capital or any other resource in the modern society that entails equalities based on gender, class, and race (Green 139). Nevertheless, Green recognizes some aspects of erotic capital and Hakim’s argument that sexual desirability defines power (Green 157-158). To counter Hakim’s argument, Green introduces the sexual fields’ framework that develops a concept of erotic/sexual capital that defines a productive stream of sociological theory (Green 142-144). He argues that Hakim’s work is ancient and does not address the dynamics in the modern society. According to Green, the sexual fields’ framework provides a more sociologically grounded analysis of power and desirability, which is more realistic than the erotic capital presented by Hakim (Green 147). I think Catherine Hakim’s argument that women’s “erotic” appeal is a form of capital that they can use for upward social mobility and personal empowerment is more persuasive than Green’s counterargument. This follows from the fact that Green accepts that the proposed remedies for Hakim’s theory are indefensible. The definition of erotic capital in Catherine Hakim’s argument is equally relevant and applicable in the modern society (Hakim 506). Moreover, Catherine Hakim’s argument is more applicable in the modern society where most women are using their “erotic” appeal to secure jobs, get promotions, marry financially stable men, or pull crowds on television, which enables them to gain upward social mobility and personal empowerment. Catherine Hakim’s theory explains how many women are using erotic capital as a substitute to economic, cultural, and social capital especially in the leisure and entertainment industry (Hakim 499). The explanation of a permanent male sex deficit in the society reinforces the erotic capital theory it is true that the men’s demand for sexual activity supersedes women’s interest in sex, which allows beautiful women to use their sexual attractiveness and sexuality to coerce men into agreements that favor women interests (Hakim 506-512). Works Cited Green, Adam. “Erotic capital and the power of desirability: Why ‘honey money’ is a bad strategy for remedying gender inequality.” Sexualities 16.2 (2013): 137-158. Print. Hakim, Catherine. “Erotic capital.” European Sociological Review 26.5 (2010): 499–518. Hochschild, Arlie. The Managed Heart: Commercialization of Human Feeling. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2012. Print. Oransky, Matthew, and Marecek, Jeanne. “I’m not going to be a Girl: Masculinity and Emotions in Boys’ Friendship and Peer Groups.” Journal of Adolescent Research 24.2 (2009): 218-241. Print. Read More