5 replies to this topic

[Insathius]

Using examples, explain how power might operate with the contemporary family

The exercise of power within both institutional and family structures involves a relationship of power where an individual does not act in a normal manner regardless of choice (free from influence?). There are many different types of power that could be at work in a variety of family forms which have been theorised by social scientists. Two particular contrasting theories explaining the ways in which power operates were formulated by Max Weber and Michael Foucault, these theories if evaluated and compared will provide suggestions of how power is exercised within the family.

Max Weber was a German sociologist who theorised about the way in which power is exercised in the contemporary family. Looking at the traditional family setting of the 1950's golden age, Weber's suggestion of the patriarchal dominance is quite relevant. Weber suggested that power within these forms of family is held by the male of the household, traditionally speaking he is seen to be the 'bread-winner' and uses domination to secure the obedience of those within the family. Weber's theory on power within the family is clearly visible, bureaucratic rules such as state legislation and institutional practices can often be seen to be backing up Weber's theory through matters such as benefit rights and the control of authority which in turn perpetuates female financial dependency.

Weber's theory of Patriarchal domination has been supported by many strands of the Feminist argument, who generally speaking see an inequality of power between men and women in all forms of society. Marxist Feminists see women's unpaid work as a reserve army of labour, they see the reproduction of the workforce as serving the economic capitalist needs; Liberal feminism recognise the inequality in the power distribution within the contemporary family and see this more of a lack of equal opportunities. Where there are many different forms of feminism, they all recognise the patriarchal dominance in the family as central to their theory.

In contrast to Weber's theory, Foucault's theory of power within the family looks at the domination of the father figure in a different manner. For Foucault, the patriarchal domination is seen more of a internalized matter where agents within the family see the bread-winning father figure as natural, the individual agents in turn use self-discipline and constraint. Foucault, like Weber sees domination as central to institutionalised power however within the family Foucault sees the distribution of power as something that gets circulated through negotiation and contesting. Foucault's suggestion allows for the contemporary family to reorganise itself to more diverse arrangements of family lives.

One supporting theory is Conservatism that supports Foucault's theory regarding the deep rooted values of the traditional family unit. Conservatism's main goals are to conserve the traditional or natural way of ordering our lives, the internal state and stability of the family, as for Conservatives this is seen to be integral to the general stability of society. They suggest that the changes to the economic labour market giving rise to women's employment and the interventions of the welfare state are the core reasons behind the decay of the traditional hierarchical system which the family uses for the wider society.

Both theories from Weber and Foucault have evidence to support their claims, Weber from a strong rational bureaucratic theory where there is a strong sense of who holds the power is supported by the evidence of the type of expertise used by the institution. In addition, the institutional rules that support Weber's ideas by using legislation that keeps the male patriarchy in authority such as benefit rights. In contrast, Foucault's theory of how people within all institutions bring themselves into order through self-restraint. Power, in Foucault's view closes down opportunities and possibilities rather than opening them up. Foucault's evidence is more elusive rather than Weber's rather visible claims, Foucault looks to the everyday techniques which routinely indirectly govern our behaviour.

Theories such as Weber's and Foucault's both present conflicting yet interesting views on the way power is exercised not only in the contemporary family but in a wider institutional society. Where Weber's theory is rather evidencing and visual, post war society has changed drastically with the increase in the diversification of the family itself, whilst widely debated Weber's views on bureaucratic domination could not be entirely valid to all family structures. Foucault's views on the family however can be applied to more situations where there is diversity, both theories have valid arguments however and cannot be disregarded.

[Insathius]

DarkReaver - could you do the normal adjustments please dooode?

It's my fourth essay for my OU course, didn't even bother reading the book on this one, lol

[Darkademic]

Tried to amend it best I can, but I'm way tired so I probably missed some bits. Hope it helps.

[Insathius]

That's legendary dude, put another favour down on slate.

Thanks so much!!

[Sugar]

I'm only doing A Level Sociology, but would Foucalt be taking on a somewhat functionalist perspective? Or rather, Marxist? I'm not sure, I get confused yet I have it drilled into me every lesson that each perspective does this and that...

Absolutely amazing essay though, you wanna come do my A2 exam next year?

[Insathius]

Haha we can have like a walkie talkie senario! 1337!