In chapter 2 the author discusses eight different ways to view the family. In each of these different ways he asks and answers questions and looks at them from different angles as he does so. He breaks down the eight different views, which include structural functionalism (macro), conflict (macro), feminist (macro/micro), (macro/micro), ecological (macro/micro), developmental (macro/micro), symbolic interactionist (micro), social exchange (micro), and family systems (micro). All of these different views have many different perspectives and ways to look at and engage in the study of families. The author introduces these eight different views to show how modern day sociologists look at the family and what we can learn from each different view that we use.
Things that I Learned/ Found Interesting:
The main point that the author touched on that I was very interested in was when he spoke about how unhappy couples stayed together rather than separating because they see it as an easier option. I believe that I found this so interesting because I have seen this situation many times coming from a neighborhood where divorce happened frequently for some families, but for others there were miserable married parents that tried to hold the relationship together for the kids and the financial situations that were at hand. Seeing that the author touched on a topic that hit so close to home, I feel as though I had no choice but to be drawn into this particular part and give it my undivided attention. When he speaks of how some people in these situations don't even realize that they are unhappy is just amazing and it really made me wonder how some of the people I know lives would have changed if the parents were conscious of their sorrow and chose to act on the problem before it was too late.
Discussion:
I had a major problem with the "Family Cycle" that the author proposed. Coming from a place where it is a rare occasion when two people are actually married by the time they have children, I would have to say that I disagree with the cycle beginning at marriage and continuing through child birth. I am biased on the subject, however, seeing how I was the ring bearer in my parents wedding and have two older siblings, and I would like to think that my family was a close unit for the better part of my young life so far. For the author to believe that a family must begin with a marriage is naive and ignorant in my mind.
Marcus Jordan
I don't think the theory does account for families that started before marriage. I don't think it was the author who came up with the theory either. The author of our textbook just presented this theory for their readers to be aware of. Most of these theories don't account for the entire picture of the sociology of family. But I also agree that no one can definitely mark the beginning or end of the cycle of the family. The theory seems to solely focus on the so called "traditional family" and like most of these theories do no account for non-traditional families.
ReplyDeleteI really like that you provide a personal anecdote as evidence that this theory does not make much sense outside of the "traditional" family unit. As I was reading this theory, I had similar thoughts as well. It's very narrow-minded to assume that all families have the same needs/function in the same way.
ReplyDeleteI wonder why more attention isn't spent on the "non-traditional" family? Because there are far more "non-traditional" families that I know personally (including my own) than "traditional".