Theories of the family - 2 | Sociology Optional for UPSC (Notes) PDF Download

Christine Delphy and Diana Leonard – Familial Exploitation

Delphy and Leonard (1992) differ from most radical feminists as they place significant emphasis on material factors as the cause of women's oppression, making their approach somewhat similar to Marxist feminist theories. They particularly focus on the role of work and claim that their methodology is influenced by Marxism. However, they identify as radical feminists because they argue that men, rather than capitalists or capitalism, primarily benefit from the exploitation of women's labor.
According to Delphy and Leonard, the family plays a crucial role in maintaining patriarchal structures, with men exerting dominance over women and children. They believe that the family-based organization of domestic groups is a key factor in perpetuating this male dominance within society. In this context, their analysis highlights the significance of understanding the material and familial aspects of women's oppression as an essential component of addressing and dismantling patriarchal systems.

The family as an economic system

• Delphy and Leonard view the family as an economic system characterized by specific labor relations, where men benefit from and exploit women's work. They emphasize that family members, particularly women, work for the head of the household, which leads to their oppression. The main reason for women's oppression lies in the appropriation of their work within the family.
• According to Delphy and Leonard, family-based households have a social structure comprising two roles: the head of the household and the dependents. Family members are connected through kinship or marriage, and female heads of households are rare. When a male adult relative is present, he usually assumes the role of the head of the household, holding ultimate authority and decision-making power.
• The type and amount of work that family members perform depend on their sex and marital status. Female relatives are responsible for unpaid domestic work, while wives must also perform "sexual and reproductive work." Though task allocation may differ across households, domestic work remains a female responsibility. Payment for such work is often made in kind (e.g., a new coat or holiday) rather than in cash.
• Delphy and Leonard argue that the family is a patriarchal and hierarchical institution where men dominate and exploit women. Men typically serve as the head of the household, benefiting from the work performed within the family. Women provide various unpaid services to men, including sexual partnership and bearing children if desired. Although wives may resist their husbands' dominance, economic and social constraints make it difficult for them to escape the patriarchal family.
• While Delphy and Leonard acknowledge that there are no easy solutions to the problems posed by the family, they encourage women to continue fighting for improvements in their lives both within and outside the family. They recognize that individual men may genuinely love their wives, but this does not prevent them from exploiting them. Single mothers and lesbians also face challenges in escaping patriarchy, as they often struggle with poverty, social stigma, and even physical attacks. Despite these challenges, Delphy and Leonard believe that women should persist in their struggle to change the family and improve their lives.

Laura M. Purdy – ‘Babystrike !’

Feminism and motherhood
Laura M. Purdy, a feminist scholar, argues that women are often disadvantaged and exploited within family relationships, primarily due to childcare responsibilities. She believes that recent feminist movements have shifted their focus from critiquing marriage and family structures to issues like pornography and sexual harassment. 

• Purdy notes that contemporary society assumes that all women, including lesbians, will eventually form couples and have children, with popular media often depicting women as capable of balancing successful careers and fulfilling family lives.
• However, Purdy questions the notion that family life and child-rearing are the ultimate paths to self-fulfillment for women. She suggests that the assumption that all women should want to form couples and have children should be challenged by feminism. Couples who choose not to have children are often considered eccentric or selfish, while young women rarely hear that some people should not have children due to personal preferences, inability to care for them, or having other life goals that may not align with good child-rearing. 
• Purdy believes that feminism should work to dispel the assumption that having children is inherently desirable for all women.

The Disadvantages of Motherhood

• Purdy highlights several disadvantages of motherhood for women, including the high costs associated with raising children and the lifelong commitment it entails. This can particularly impact women who are already struggling with poverty. Additionally, the responsibility of childcare and domestic work often falls disproportionately on women, with an American study cited by Purdy showing that men only contribute to 20% of domestic work. This unequal distribution of responsibilities hinders women's ability to compete in the labor market and fight for greater equality.
• Purdy argues that society takes for granted that women will bear children and fulfill the role of reproducing the species. She suggests that in order to emphasize the sacrifices associated with child-rearing and push for greater equality within families, women should consider going on a "babystrike." This would force men to take women's demands for equality more seriously, potentially leading to changes in social structures that would enable women to balance successful careers with raising children.

Difference Feminism

Difference feminism focuses on the diversity of women's experiences in various family structures, rather than generalizing the effects of family life on all women. Unlike Marxist and radical feminism, which assume that families disadvantage women and benefit men, difference feminists emphasize the variety of domestic arrangements and their effects on different groups of women.

This perspective acknowledges that women in single-parent families face different challenges than those in two-parent families, and that women in lesbian families have distinct experiences compared to those in heterosexual families. It also recognizes that race and social class play a role in women's family situations, with black women and poor women experiencing unique family dynamics compared to their white and middle-class counterparts.

• Influenced by various feminist theories such as liberal feminism, Marxist feminism, and radical feminism, difference feminists also draw upon postmodern theories of family and ideas related to family diversity. Their approach offers a more nuanced and inclusive perspective on the family, taking into account the different experiences of women based on their individual circumstances.

Michelle Barrett and Mary McIntosh – The Anti-social Family

Michelle Barrett and Mary McIntosh's work on the family, heavily influenced by Marxist feminism, challenges the notion of a singular, typical family type that consistently performs specific functions for men or capitalism. 

• They argue that the concept of "the family" is misleading due to the vast array of household types and family life variations that exist. They contend that the strong ideology supporting family life is not only detrimental to women and beneficial to capitalists but also destroys life outside the family, making it seem unsatisfactory and isolating those not part of a family unit. The authors also highlight the prevalence of violent and sexual crimes within families, questioning the image of the family as a loving and caring environment.
• Barrett and McIntosh believe that caring, sharing, and loving relationships could be more widespread if the family did not exclusively claim these qualities. They argue that the ideology of the family devalues life in other institutions, such as children's homes, old people's homes, and student residences, and makes it difficult for people outside families to form relationships of security and trust. 
• In essence, the authors challenge the traditional view of the family as the primary source of care and support, asserting that alternative forms of relationships and living arrangements can also provide these essential elements for individuals.

Linda Nicholson – ‘The myth of the traditional family’

Linda Nicholson (1997), like Barrett and McIntosh, argues that a powerful ideology supports a positive image of family life, specifically the nuclear family, while devaluing other types of families. The nuclear family, defined as a unit of parents with children living together, is considered a relatively recent phenomenon, becoming popular among the middle class in the 19th century and the working class in the 1950s. 

• Nicholson contends that this conventional family is a recent phenomenon for most people; however, some groups, such as those with outdated skills or facing racial discrimination, could not form nuclear families even in the 1950s.
• The ideology supporting the nuclear family often overlooks alternative families, and conservative social commentators tend to be more concerned with the decline of nuclear families rather than wider kinship links. The development of nuclear families in the 18th and 19th centuries was largely limited to the upper and middle classes, with working-class families unable to form nuclear households due to low income and shared accommodation. 
• It is essential to recognize the diversity of family structures and the historical context in which the so-called "traditional" family emerged, in order to better understand and appreciate the variety of familial relationships in contemporary society.

Alternative Families

• Alternative family structures have been evolving even before the traditional family reached its peak. According to Nicholson, as the ideal family concept was becoming synonymous with the American way of life, trends like increasing divorce rates, growing participation of married women in the workforce, and the rise of female-headed households were already making this lifestyle less typical. These trends can be traced back to before the 1950s.
• Some of these changes actually redefined the perception of a traditional family. For instance, it became accepted as normal for married women to work, even with young children at home. However, other changes led to the emergence of alternative family types. These alternatives to conventional families encompassed not just gay and lesbian individuals, but also heterosexuals living alone, married couples with stay-at-home fathers, stepfamilies, single parents, heterosexual couples cohabiting without marriage, and gay or lesbian couples with or without children.

The Family, Industrialization and Modernization

The study of the family in sociology often explores the connection between family structures and the processes of industrialization and modernization. Industrialization involves the mass production of goods using mechanized technology, while modernization encompasses the evolution of social, cultural, economic, and political practices and institutions characteristic of modern societies, such as the shift from religious to scientific belief systems, the growth of bureaucratic institutions, and the transition from monarchies to representative democracies. Although industrialization is sometimes considered the primary driver of changes in Western societies since the eighteenth century, others emphasize the broader processes of modernization.

However, several challenges emerge when examining the family in relation to industrialization and modernization. Firstly, these processes do not follow a uniform path in every society. Secondly, both industrialization and modernization are constantly developing, leading to differences in the industrial systems and cultural, social, and political aspects of societies over time. Lastly, some argue that contemporary societies have moved beyond modern industrial societies into a postmodern phase. Furthermore, there is no single form of pre-industrial or pre-modern family, and variations in family structure exist even within modern industrial societies. Therefore, comparing the family in industrial societies to pre-industrial or pre-modern families can lead to confusion and a lack of clarity in research.

The Family in Non-Literate Societies

• The study of family in sociology often investigates the relationship between family structures and the processes of industrialization and modernization. Industrialization refers to the large-scale production of goods using mechanized technology, while modernization involves the transformation of social, cultural, economic, and political practices and institutions that are characteristic of modern societies. This includes the shift from religious to scientific beliefs, the expansion of bureaucratic institutions, and the transition from monarchies to representative democracies. While some scholars argue that industrialization is the main factor behind changes in Western societies since the 18th century, others emphasize the broader processes of modernization.
• However, analyzing the family in the context of industrialization and modernization presents several challenges. First, these processes do not occur uniformly across all societies. Second, industrialization and modernization are continually evolving, resulting in variations in industrial systems and cultural, social, and political aspects of societies over time. 
• Third, some argue that contemporary societies have transitioned from modern industrial societies to a postmodern phase. Additionally, there is no single form of pre-industrial or pre-modern family, and family structures differ even within modern industrial societies. Thus, comparing families in industrial societies to those in pre-industrial or pre-modern societies can create confusion and lack of clarity in research.

The ‘classic’ Extended Family

• The classic extended family, a second form of pre-industrial and pre-modern family structure, is commonly seen in traditional peasant societies. This type of family has gained recognition through C.M. Arensberg and S.T. Kimball's study, Family and Community in Ireland (1968), which primarily focused on Irish farmers.
• In this family structure, kinship ties play a central role in shaping people's lives, with the extended family serving as the fundamental unit, rather than a wider kinship group. The traditional Irish farming family exemplifies a patriarchal extended family, characterized by the significant authority held by the male head of the family. Additionally, the family follows a patrilineal system, where property inheritance occurs through the male lineage.
• Within this family structure, social and economic roles are closely intertwined, and family membership determines an individual's status.

Talcott Parsons – the ‘isolated nuclear family’

Talcott Parsons contends that the 'isolated nuclear family' is the predominant family structure in modern industrial societies. It is structurally isolated because it is not an integral part of a broader kinship system, with relationships between nuclear family members and their extended kin being more voluntary than obligatory. This shift towards nuclear families is a result of structural differentiation in society, where specialized institutions like businesses, schools, hospitals, and churches take over many functions previously performed by family and kinship groups. In an industrial society, the family ceases to be an economic unit of production.

• Parsons argues that there is a functional relationship between the isolated nuclear family and the economic system in industrial societies, with the former being shaped to meet the latter's requirements. The isolated nuclear family is better suited for the need for geographical mobility and an achievement-based status system in industrial societies, as it is not tied down by binding obligations to a wide range of kin and is a smaller, streamlined unit. Furthermore, this family structure avoids potential conflicts arising from differing achieved statuses among family members, ensuring the stability and harmony of the family.
• The isolated nuclear family's structural isolation strengthens the conjugal bond between husband and wife, increasing their dependence on each other for emotional support. According to Parsons, this is crucial for the stabilization of adult personalities, a major function of the family in industrial societies. In conclusion, Parsons posits that the isolated nuclear family is the most suitable family structure in modern industrial societies, as it aligns with the universalistic, achievement-oriented values of these societies and promotes harmony and stability within the family unit.

Michael Young and Peter Willmott – Four Stages of family life

Michael Young and Peter Willmott have conducted extensive studies on family life in London for over twenty years. In their book, The Symmetrical Family, they trace the development of the family from pre-industrial England to the present day. They suggest that the family is moving through four main stages using historical research and social surveys.

• Stage 1 represents the pre-industrial family, where the family is a unit of production, with the husband, wife, and unmarried children working together. This type of family was gradually replaced by the industrial revolution but continued well into the nineteenth century and is still found in a small minority of families today.
• The Stage 2 family began with the industrial revolution, developed throughout the nineteenth century, and reached its peak in the early years of the twentieth century. The family was no longer a unit of production since individual members were employed as wage earners. In response to widespread working-class poverty, the family extended its network to include relatives beyond the nuclear family for support. The extension was largely conducted by women, who created an 'informal trade union' that largely excluded men.
• The Stage 2 family began to decline in the early years of the twentieth century but is still found in many low-income, long-established working-class areas. Its survival was documented in Young and Willmott's study, Family and Kinship in East London.
• The Stage 3 family predominates for all social classes, particularly the working class. This stage is characterized by the separation of the immediate or nuclear family from the extended family. The trade union of women is disbanded, and the husband returns to the family circle. Life for the Stage 3 nuclear family is largely home-centered, with strong relationships between husband and wife. The nuclear family has become a self-contained, self-reliant unit.
• Young and Willmott use the term 'symmetrical family' to describe the nuclear family of Stage 3. Symmetry refers to an arrangement where the opposite parts are similar in shape and size. In the symmetrical family, conjugal roles, while not the same, are similar in terms of the contribution made by each spouse to the household.
• Several factors have reduced the need for kinship-based mutual aid groups. These include an increase in the real wages of the male breadwinner, a decrease in unemployment and male mortality rate, increased employment opportunities for women, and provisions of the welfare state. Increasing geographical mobility also severed kinship ties.
• Young and Willmott argue that the nature of work is a major influence on family life. They devise a general theory called the 'Principle of Stratified Diffusion,' which states that what the top of the stratification system does today, the bottom will do tomorrow. However, this theory has some problems, as it largely ignores the possibility that working-class subculture can direct behavior.
• Looking into the future, Young and Willmott postulate a possible Stage 4 family, which may become more prevalent as changes in production technology provide new opportunities. This stage's family may be more work-centered and asymmetrical than the Stage 3 family. However, they admit that their predictions are based on limited evidence and cannot be fully representative.

Conclusion

Various feminist and sociological perspectives have sought to analyze and understand the role of family in society and its impact on women's lives. These perspectives have explored the family's connection to industrialization, modernization, and patriarchal structures, as well as the emergence of alternative family forms. Some scholars emphasize the persistence of traditional, nuclear family structures, while others highlight the ongoing diversification of family types and relationships. By examining these differing viewpoints, we can gain a more comprehensive understanding of the complex dynamics of family life and the implications for women's experiences and gender equality in contemporary society.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) of Theories of the family

What is the main focus of Delphy and Leonard's radical feminist approach to understanding women's oppression?

Delphy and Leonard focus on the role of work and material factors as the cause of women's oppression, specifically the exploitation of women's labor within the family. They argue that men, rather than capitalists or capitalism, are the primary beneficiaries of this exploitation.

What is Laura M. Purdy's concept of "babystrike," and how does it relate to feminism and motherhood?

Purdy's "babystrike" is a hypothetical scenario in which women refuse to bear children to emphasize the sacrifices associated with child-rearing and push for greater equality within families. Purdy believes that feminism should challenge the assumption that having children is inherently desirable for all women and work to dispel the notion that family life and child-rearing are the ultimate paths to self-fulfillment for women.

How does difference feminism differ from Marxist and radical feminism in its approach to understanding the family?

Difference feminism focuses on the diversity of women's experiences in various family structures, rather than generalizing the effects of family life on all women. It emphasizes the variety of domestic arrangements and their effects on different groups of women, taking into account factors such as race, social class, and family type.

What is Talcott Parsons' concept of the "isolated nuclear family," and why does he argue that it is the predominant family structure in modern industrial societies?

Parsons' "isolated nuclear family" is a family structure in which relationships between nuclear family members and their extended kin are more voluntary than obligatory, and the family is not an integral part of a broader kinship system. He argues that this family structure is better suited for the need for geographical mobility and an achievement-based status system in industrial societies, and that it promotes harmony and stability within the family unit.

How do Young and Willmott's four stages of family life relate to the historical development of the family in the context of industrialization and modernization?

Young and Willmott's four stages of family life trace the development of the family from pre-industrial England to the present day, highlighting the influence of industrialization and modernization on family structures. The stages include the pre-industrial family as a unit of production (Stage 1), the extended family in response to working-class poverty (Stage 2), the isolated nuclear family or symmetrical family (Stage 3), and a potential future family type that may emerge as new opportunities arise (Stage 4).