Introduction to Sociological Theory - Coursework Example

Introduction to Sociological Theory by The of the The of the School The and where it is located The Date Introduction to Sociological Theory Introduction It is beyond any doubt that living in society should be regarded as an essential prerequisite for the development of the inner potential of a person. Indeed, if it had not been for this particular platform, a considerable number of activities which are thought to be characteristic to human beings could not have developed. Nevertheless, there are people who argue that a particular part of the population is being oppressed in the society, namely women. That is why there is a movement which strives to empower women all over the world and ensure that they are able to enjoy equal amount of respect and social abilities. This paper will analyze the contribution which was made by Christine Delphy in the debates within feminism and analyze some of the key claims that she made. General of overview of Christine Delphy legacy Christine Delphy is a notable sociologist, feminist and theorist who was born in the middle of the previous century. There was a widely spread civil unrest in the end of 1960s in France and Delphy was one of the people who took part of liberation movement for women. This shaped her future career as a feminist. Several years later she together with her friend Simone de Beauvoir presented the public with their renewed view in feminist issue, suggesting that the contemporary activists from liberation of women should follow a different path and perform re-evaluation of the way a women should position herself in the society. Delphy is extremely charismatic, her writings are moving. Material feminism By far, one of the main contributions that were made by the feminist in question is the concept of material feminism. This is an approach towards analysis of the social life which engages a lot of ideas from Marxism (Otani, 2013, p. 88). Thus, according to this sociologist capitalistic system as it is should be viewed as one of the major sources of oppression of women. Within this framework, earning money, making a profit and maximizing a profit are considered to be essential parts of social life; however, women who suffer from the so called glass ceiling in various companies can hardly occupy high rank position which does not allow them to take active part in capitalistic social life. As a result, they become less important than men. In addition to that, Delphy argues that along with capitalism, the structure of the society, namely patriarchy that can easily be witnessed in it should be regarded as a framework which makes oppression of women the basis of social life. Indeed, sociologist in question argues that the state of affairs where men are thought to be dominant force in the society is never question by the population; that is why women have little or no chance to enjoy fair treatment. According to Delphy the hierarchy which is promoted in patriarchy is corrupted and inevitably leads to an inferior state of a woman and results in disproportional distribution of social capital. This means that if feminists really want to succeed they should introduce changes into the existing state of social affairs. Finally, Delphy is quite notable for the fact that she often analyzes the notion of gender from the Marxism point of view. Thus, while the latter puts emphasis on the idea of class, making place in the mode of production its characteristic feature, the sociologist in question perceives gender is a place in the mode of production as well. According to Delphy, women are primarily seen as domestic workers which contributes to their oppression and gives a rise to a dichotomy of domestic (women) versus outside (men) workers which is similar to the conflict between the working class and the capitalists. As one can easily see, Delphy was able to contribute basic Marxism concepts in the debate about feminism. Sex versus gender The next important part of the contribution that is made by the sociologist in question is a close analysis of two seemingly equal categories of sex and gender. Thus, Delphy argues that the idea of sex is primarily rooted in the anatomic nature. In other words, this is the notion that can be easily backed up by biological distinction between men and women. She suggests that it is useless to erase the distinction between male and female since this line was drawn by nature itself and there is no use to reject this dichotomy. In order to make the discussion easier, the author in question often reduces the anatomic differences to two reproducing organs, pointing out that they are the primary difference between the two sexes. On the other hand, the concept of gender is purely sociological for Delphy. She suggests that it was created by the society and is used as an instrument to maintain the hierarchy in the social environment. Indeed, it is quite obvious that in the course of thousand of years numerous gender roles for biological men and women were created and all were expected to follow these paths. In other words, the connection between sex and gender is artificial and exists only within the society. That is why movements of people who belong to different sexual orientations (just like Delphy herself, who was openly lesbian) are seen as destructive for the society since they undermine the basic principles upon which the social environment is based. However, Delphy points out a peculiar fact: if one takes a look at the differences between two sexes one will be able to see that there is some kind of a biological support for division of labour. Indeed, the majority of women are physically weaker than men; that is why in the primitive society it made sense that the latter were responsible for fighting or killing animal while the former were preoccupied with activities which were less demanding in physical terms. However, in the contemporary society where physical strength no longer plays decisive role women should be able to occupy the same position as men due to their intellect and other abilities. So, she engages temporal aspect in the debate about feminism Peculiarities of Delphy’s feminism Finally, it may be extremely advantageous to analyze the peculiarities of Delphy’s vision and see how she was able to incorporate them into her struggle for women liberation. First of all, the sociologist in question argues that the movement of feminist should be self sufficient and must not be used as a pretext for other social issues. For example, Delphy opposed the policies of the government of France with prohibited using headscarf for Muslim women on its territory. According to her such approach uses feminist as a tool for racism. Indeed, the tradition of wearing a headscarf is peculiar to Muslims and forbidding it would be an attack on their cultural heritage which is superficially justified by the desire to liberate women. Another interesting contribution that Delphy was able to make is the rejection of essentialism when it comes to feminist movement. She points out that feminists all over the world put emphasis on concepts that can hardly be applied in the daily life; in addition to that, feminist should focus on what really matter in the struggle for equality and not put too big emphasis on philosophical matters. This means that the kind of feminist that is advocated by the sociologist in question might be seen as practical. That is why Delphy is in favour of actions rather than words and one can hardly object that her career involves more books that actions. Finally, it must be noted that this French feminist argues that the majority of people in the world have not still developed the proper kind of thinking when it comes to changing the existing state of affairs. It is suggested that the public approves of liberation of women, but it is not able to accept a social environment that will not be based on gender. Delphy argues that this does not allow steps that are taken within the society to be effective since people are not ready to accept the outcome of them. As a result, feminism is doomed to failure until the public is able to think about genderless society as a viable possibility. This means that if one wants to help feminism, one should change ones attitude towards the organisation of the society. Critical analysis of the contribution It would not be a mistake to suggest that the ideas which were expressed by Christine Delphy surely presented the issue of feminism from a new perspective. Thus, she was praised for being able to make a strong connection between concepts that used to be analyzed independently (Miller, 2001, p. 271). Indeed, for a considerable amount of time feminism used to be seen as some marginal social phenomenon which did not attract enough attention since it did not engage important notions what are widely recognized in the society. However, after Delphy’s works people could see that have the very organization of the social environment is responsible for emergence of feminism as a movement. However, there also were people who expressed criticism with regard to her work. For example, one can not omit the fact that Delphy was a representative of a radical wing of feminism (Oliver, 2000, 59). This means that the majority of her ideas urges the public to introduce changes that were rather dramatic or accepts notions that contradicted with the already establish manner of life. That is why many of the insightful suggestions were rejected due to the tone in which they were articulated. One might argue that Delphy could have accomplished even more in case she had chosen a more moderate tone. Nevertheless, it is important to point out that radicalism of her claims is something that should be regarded as characteristic feature. In other words, Delphy’s work is known partially due to her bold thinking and desire to push the limits. Conclusion As one can easily see, the contribution of Christine Delphy to the debates within feminism is tremendous. First of all, she engaged the elements of Marxist theory into the theoretical support of this movement, projecting some of the most fundamental concepts of it, such as the role of capitalism, social conflict and mode of production, to the feminist issues. Secondly, she examined in great details the meaning of sex and gender, comparing and contrasting these two concepts. Finally, she made other, less significant contributions such as claiming that feminist may not be used a tool in other social conflicts, rejecting the tenets of essentialism and advocating the need to change the thinking of the public if the latter wants to see liberation of women. References Miller, D 2001, Consumption: Critical concepts in the social sciences, Routledge, London. Oliver, K 2000, French feminism reader, Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham, MD. Otani, A 2013, Unification Ethics of True Love, Lulu, Raleigh, NC. Read More