Family Roles - Cultures And Role Restriction, Personal Identity And Roles, Role Expectations And Demands
People throughout history depended on families and the kinship system for their survival. This dependence permitted and required that they conform to expected family roles depending on their living circumstances. This gave a family strong control over its members, a circumstance that is changing in the modern world because people no longer always need families for economic survival.
Intentional and unintentional forces worldwide continue to introduce important changes in family roles, in expectation and practice. For example, recent research in a variety of settings reinterprets women's historical roles in Egypt (Watterson 1998), among the Vikings ( Jesch 1996), in medieval Europe (Lewis et al. 1999), and among Native Americans (Klein and Ackerman 1995). Industrialization, urbanization, and the global economy, along with their communication systems, reach into a nation's families, changing where and how men and women live, how often and when they have children, and how they work. World citizenship, global cosmopolitan culture, and international conferences change gender roles. But role change is not unidirectional and may become either narrower or more diverse.
Social roles pivot on assigned and attained places in various social settings, including work, politics, religion, and family activities. Across cultures, gender is an important assigned social location among these (Goody 1996). In the past, sex role was the common designation for activities based on being male or female. Gender role is more frequently used now because it seems less restrictive than sex role. Both terms continue to be used interchangeably.
Social role applies to family in multiple ways, but examining adult roles is complicated by a family's living arrangement. Family roles vary importantly among one-parent, two-parent, and multiple-parent families depending on the combination of persons by gender. Nations variously prescribe what constitutes the family unit through their laws. Preindustrial cultures more commonly prescribed, or permitted, a marital unit with one male and more than one female (polygyny), and less frequently a unit with one female and more than one male (polyandry). The status of a male or female reflected, in part, how many spouses one would have (Cassidy and Lee 1989). Higher status males tended to have more wives. The social context of these different family living arrangements dictates different rights and responsibilities based on gender (Dodoo 1998). Modernizing societies tend toward equalizing gender status and power.
Several terms identify basic social role dimensions, and an extensive body of literature discusses these dimensions (Farmer 1992). One dimension is role location. Common titles identify family role location such as mother, father, daughter, son, uncle, or aunt. These titles identify the general status and gender of the people within the family. Hence, these titles reflect family rights and responsibilities, duties and privileges, power and authority. Gender is important in making social distinctions because families often transmit wealth and property by gender, making a person's sex a factor in determining family status. Role status and the precision of these terms vary widely among the world's cultures. Increased family mobility and modernization blur traditional kinship statuses, particularly in countries based on traditional agricultural economies.
done by:
Pong Sze You
Tanmanjit Singh
Jason Yazuardi
Ason Koh
Benjamin Cao
10S22
Showing posts with label Society. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Society. Show all posts
Changing roles of women in the workplace/family in Japan.
The traditional role of women underscores the deeply-rooted nature of inequality in the gender roles and relationships in Japan. However, in today’s Japan, such traditional attitudes are changing, as illustrated by the emergence of a class of young, educated and professional women, who prefer to remain single, in order to preserve their freedom. Traditional gender roles in Japan are characterized by a strong sense of patriarchy in society, which account for the bifurcation of the productive and reproductive spheres, with a distinct separation of gender roles. In the family, this refers to the idea of the man as the primary breadwinner of the family, and the woman as the primary caregiver in the family. Women are also marrying later, with the average age of first marriage at 26.3 years in 1995, compared to 25.4 in 1983.
With the rising problems faced by the Japanese economy, there have been changes in the structured patterns of gender in both the family and the workplace. Economic recessions in the country have forced many women to enter the workforce in order to increase the level of income earned for the family. With an increasing number of women in the workforce, the existing gender ratios have been altered favoring increased gender equality in that women now have a greater say in the family, and also participate more in the workforce.
Gender inequality, however, continues in family life, the workplace, and popular values. The notion expressed in the proverbial phrase "good wife, wise mother," continues to influence beliefs about gender roles. Most women may not be able to realize that ideal, but many believe that it is in their own, their children's, and society's best interests that they stay home to devote themselves to their children, at least while the children were young. Many women find satisfaction in family life and in the accomplishments of their children, gaining a sense of fulfillment from doing good jobs as household managers and mothers. In most households, women are responsible for their family budgets and make independent decisions about the education, careers, and life-styles of their families. Women also take the social blame for problems of family members. Gender roles in the family bear a close relationship to the situation in the workforce, where there is a strong male dominance in the company hierarchy. Resultantly, males possess increased career opportunities, unlike females, who are marginalized in the workforce and are considered to be temporary labour, expected to resign upon marriage or childbirth. As can be seen, there is an intimate family-work relationship in Japanese society and this hinges on the traditional gender roles within society.
Women's educational opportunities have increased in the twentieth century. Among new workers in 1989, 37 % of women had received education beyond upper-secondary school, compared with 43 % of men, but most women had received their postsecondary education in junior colleges and technical schools rather than in universities and graduate schools.
After World War II, the fixed image of the Japanese woman has been that of the office lady, who becomes a housewife after marriage. But a new generation of educated women is emerging, that is seeking a career as a working woman. Japanese women are joining the labour force in unprecedented numbers. In 1987 there were 24.3 million working women (40% of the labor force), and they accounted for 59% of the increase in employment from 1975 to 1987. The participation rate for women in the labour force rose from 45.7% in 1975 to 50.6% in 1991.
In 1990 approximately 50 % of all women over fifteen years of age participated in the paid labor force. At that time, two major changes in the female work force were under way. The first was a move away from household-based employment. Peasant women and those from merchant and artisan families had always worked. With self-employment becoming less common, though, the more usual pattern was separation of home and workplace, creating new problems of child care, care of the elderly, and housekeeping responsibilities. The second major change was the increased participation of married women in the labor force. In the 1950s, most women employees were young and single; 62 % of the female labor force in 1960 had never been married. In 1987 about 66 % of the female labor force was married, and only 23 % was made up women who had never married. Some women continued working after marriage, most often in professional and government jobs, but their numbers were small. Others started their own businesses or took over family businesses. More commonly, women left paid labor after marriage, and then returned after their youngest children were in school. These middle-age recruits generally took low-paying, part-time service or factory jobs. They continued to have nearly total responsibility for home and children and often justified their employment as an extension of their responsibilities for the care of their families. Despite legal support for equality and some improvement in their status, married women understood that their husbands' jobs demanded long hours and extreme commitment. Because women earned an average of only 60 % as much as men, most did not find it advantageous to take full-time, responsible jobs after marriage, if doing so left no one to manage the household and care for children.
Yet women's status in the labor force was changing in the late 1980s, most likely as a result of changes brought about by the aging of the population. Longer life expectancies, smaller families and bunched births, and lowered expectations of being cared for in old age by their children have all led women to participate more fully in the labor force. At the same time, service job opportunities in the postindustrial economy expanded, and there were fewer new male graduates to fill them.
The American Society
GROUP MEMBERS: Melisa Yeo, Joleen Goh, Lee Puay Ling, Nur Amirah
Chosen country: United States Of America
A) CHANGING ROLES OF MEN AND WOMEN IN WORKPLACE/FAMILY
Despite being a democratic society, it is undeniable that there are and always have been very distinct divisions in the roles of men and women in America. These divisions are deep-rooted in economic, social and religious beliefs throughout history. Women have played many roles in societies throughout history. Throughout the centuries, almost every society has developed very distinct ideas of what activities are proper for women. In some societies, there is no greater honor than to be a woman and in turn a mother. Yet, as in some Asian cultures, the lives of women are of such less value than those of men that the practice of female infanticide has become a widely used device for population control. Over time, many reasons have been given for the gender inequality that exists in society. Women are supposed to be weaker, less aggressive and more caring and nurturing than men. However, the most applied barrier of equality, especially in the workplace, has been woman's ability to bear children. Because only women have the ability to bear children, it has often been viewed that it is thus a woman's ultimate obligation to do so. There has been no scientific evidence though that women have what is called maternal instinct, that is, a natural desire to bear and care for children. From the earliest of times, motherhood has helped to divide men and women in terms of career and family role. However, it is certain that the role of women in workplace and family did experience a clear change, especially after the American Revolution. The change in the role of women throughout these years results in the change in the role of men.
The American Revolution had a deep effect on the philosophical underpinnings of American society. One aspect that was drastically changed by the democratic ideals of the Revolution was the roles of women. Women in the era of the Revolution were responsible for managing the domain of the household. Connected to these activities, women worked in the Homespun Movement. Instead of wearing or purchasing clothing made of imported British materials, Patriot women continued a long tradition of weaving, and spun their own cloth to make into clothing for their families. The context of the years preceding the American Revolution charged this action politically. Just as the spinning and weaving of American cloth became a mechanism of resistance, so did many acts of consumption. Non-importation and non-consumption became major weapons in the arsenal of the American resistance movement against British taxation without representation. Women played a major role in this method of defiance by denouncing silks, satins, and other luxuries in favor of homespun clothing generally made in spinning and quilting bees, sending a strong message of unity against supposed British oppression. As a result of non-importation, many rural communities who were previously unincorporated in the political movements of the day were brought "into the growing community of resistance" because of the appeal "to the traditional values" of rural life. While male suppliers of such services were exempted from military service in exchange for their goods, there was no such recompense for women who did the same thing. Spinning, weaving, and sewing were seen as part of the female province; as patriots they utilized their skills to assist the revolutionary cause. Hence, the idea of republican motherhood was born in this period. The mainstream political philosophy of the day assumed that a republic rested upon the virtue of its citizens. Thus, women had the essential role of instilling their children with values conducive to a healthy republic. During this period, the wife's relationship with her husband also became more liberal, as love and affection instead of obedience and subservience began to characterize the ideal marital relationship. In addition, many women contributed to the war effort through fundraising and running family businesses in the absence of husbands.Whatever gains they had made, women still found themselves subordinated, legally and socially, to their husbands, disenfranchised and with only the role of mother open to them. However, The Declaration of Independence still remained indifferent, stating, "all men are created equal". Nevertheless there was little interest in suffrage, for the most common call for 'women’s rights' involved claims of women’s intellectual equality with men and their right to an adequate education.
After the revolution, women's employment status was not guaranteed, and much of the industrial economy rushed to rehire men. However, in many white collar sectors, such as banking and clerical work, the glass ceiling was moved significantly upward. Both during and after the war, women rarely earned as much in the occupations that became female-dominated (such as cashiers, tellers, and low-level loan officers) as their male colleagues had before. Government investments, such as the GI Bill, fueled suburbanization, and the reuniting of separated spouses fostered the baby boom. With radical political activity suppressed by McCarthyism, consumerism being fostered by the retooling of wartime factories for domestic use, and the nuclear family at one of its historic peaks, women were home bound, as wives and mothers. Eventually a major backlash and reconsideration of women's roles occurred, in Betty Friedan's 1963 exposé The Feminine Mystique, which critiqued contemporary educated American women's socialization and restrictions and judged them to be intolerable. In addition, the Great Depression occurred and highlighted the change in the role of men and women in workplace and family. In 1934, the American Woman’s Association declared that working women were “the employment casualties of the Depression.” Many working women had come from a generation of women that “stressed and exulted in the importance of jobs for women.” They had aspired to better jobs for better wages. The Association reported that “during the Depression years they have had to meet doubt and distrust and fear, loss of morale and disturbance of established ways of living.” As employment opportunities dwindled, everyone seemed to agree that men should hold the few remaining jobs. Men gladly stepped into occupations that women had increasingly held—as social workers, teachers, bookkeepers, and insurance agents. The Economy Act, passed by Congress in 1932, prohibited more than one family member from working for the government. This caused many women to lose their office positions. Most school districts refused to hire married women and fired those who got married. Unemployed men, however, shunned the more menial jobs that were considered “women’s work” and showed little interest in becoming laundresses, domestics, telephone operators, store clerks, typists, or secretaries. As one commentator put it, “Approximately 3,100,000 women are employed as domestics. Which men want to take their places?” Men’s disinterest in the lowest rungs of female employment allowed at least some women to retain their jobs. It was no longer popular for a woman to aspire to independence and a career. Striving for a career was condemned as an antisocial act that deprived another family of income. In 1936, 82 percent of those polled opposed women working. Working women became easy targets for public disdain. Public officials referred to married working women as “undeserving parasites.” One man wrote to his congressman, “Woman’s true place is her home . . . and I do not believe we are again going to have normal and prosperous times until women do return to their homes.” This hostility put women into a double bind, because their labors were often necessary for their family’s survival.
Today, however, Americans have made great strides in accepting and adjusting to new definitions of gender roles. Part of the cause is the increased number of women in the workplace. With the increased presence of women in the workplace, old attitudes and behaviors have had to change. Men and women are more aware of sexual harassment than previously; whereas 20 years ago a woman who refused to have an affair with her boss may have had to quit, she now has other options. Companies are now experimenting with policies that are family-friendly, such as flex time, job sharing, and on-site child care-policies that benefit both men and women. In the egalitarian workplace, some men are concerned about being accused of sexual harassment, and they feel they must be extremely cautious in their everyday dealings with the women they work with; this caution may stifle creativity, some experts say. In addition, women still earn far less money than men do for the same work, even though their salaries are vital to maintaining their families' economic health. Just as women's gender roles have changed, men's gender roles have changed in the last few years. The old model of the "macho man" is less acceptable in today's world than it was even three decades ago, and men are struggling to reinvent themselves. Some men are so dependent on the old roles for their identity that they find themselves at a loss when confronted with new expectations. For example, some men cannot adjust when they discover that their wives or girlfriends earn more money than they do, and end the relationship. It may seem silly but for such men the new options they have regarding gender roles are limited and limiting. Despite great changes in the workplace, life at home is still much the same as it was in past generations. Women do most of the work. Men earn most of the money. And this is not sitting well with women: researchers report that 38 percent have a problem with how much their husbands do. It's a dilemma for women to feel they have the right to choose their own career paths, an opportunity few of their mothers and grandmothers had, and then realize that they are still ruled by many of the same old gender role expectations.
The shifting of gender roles in the past 30 years has been huge. It has happened so quickly that men and women are still trying to sort out what the new roles and rules mean to them. Although women are no longer expected to be the keepers of the house, in reality, they are in most families. Although men are generally open to the successes enjoyed by the women they share their lives with, some still find it hard to celebrate a woman's triumphs because they feel it diminishes their own. However, rather than blaming each other for the situation, men and women are increasingly willing to work together to learn about their new roles. Successful marriage partners learn to negotiate and share tasks. Managers take employees aside and tell them when comments are inappropriate. It will take time to sort out all the implications of the changing gender roles of Americans, but new expectations should result in better workplaces, better relationships,better schools, and better lives.
B) CHANGING ROLES OF MEN AND WOMEN IN OTHER AREAS
In early America, all of a woman’s work comes under the general heading of housewife and it varied from region to region. Despite variations, the activities were much the same throughout the different regions. First came supervision of the house. Women swept, scrubbed, polished, made their own brooms, soap and polish. They carried water, made starch, ironed, carried firewood, built fires, and made candles. They sewed and made everything and they were usually in charge of the family bookkeeping. Politics were out of women's reach and voting rights were also not granted to women.
However in 1756, Lydia Taftwas was the first woman legally allowed to vote in colonial America. She was granted this right by the town meeting of Uxbridge, Massachusetts because of the death of her wealthy husband and eldest son left the family without an adult heir.
Following the American Revolution, women were allowed to vote in New Jersey, but no other state, from 1790 until 1807, provided they met property requirements then in place. In 1807, women were again forbidden from voting in the state.
In June 1848, Gerrit Smith was nominated as the Liberty Party's presidential candidate. At the National Liberty Convention held during June, Smith gave a major address, including in his speech a demand for "universal suffrage in its broadest sense, females as well as males being entitled to vote." The delegates approved a passage in their party platform addressing votes for women: "Neither here, nor in any other part of th world, is the right of suffrage allowed to extend beyond one of the sexes. This universal exclusion of woman... argues, conclusively, that, not as yet, is there one nation so far emerged from barbarism, and so far practically Christian, as to permit woman to rise up to the one level of the human family." At this convention, five votes were placed calling for Lucretia Mott, an activist, to be Smith's vice-president. For the first time in the United States, a woman was nominated for federal executive office. In July, at the Seneca Falls Convention in Upstate New York, activists including Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Lucretia Mott began a seventy-year struggle by women to secure the right to vote. In 1850, Lucy Stone organized a larger assembly with a wider focus, the National Women's Rights Convention in Worcester, Massachusetts. Susan B. Anthony, a native of Rochester, New York, joined the cause in 1852 after reading Stone's 1850 speech. Women's suffrage activists pointed out that blacks had been granted the franchise and had not been included in the language of the United States Constitution's Fourteenth and Fifteenth amendments (which gave people equal protection under the law and the right to vote regardless of their race, respectively). This, they contended, had been unjust. Early victories were won in the territories of Wyoming (1869) and Utah (1870), although Utah women were disenfranchised by provisions of the federal Edmunds–Tucker Act enacted by the U.S. Congress in 1887. The push to grant Utah women's suffrage was at least partially fueled by the belief that, given the right to vote, Utah women would dispose of polygamy. It was only after Utah women exercised their suffrage rights in favor of polygamy that the U.S. Congress disenfranchised Utah women. By the end of the nineteenth century, Idaho, Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming had enfranchised women after effort by the suffrage associations at the state level. During the beginning of the twentieth century, as women's suffrage gained in popularity, suffragists were subject to arrests and many were jailed. Finally, President Woodrow Wilson urged Congress to pass what became, when it was ratified in 1920, the Nineteenth Amendment which prohibited state and federal agencies from gender-based restrictions on voting. But by the end of the first decade after suffrage,the anticipated “women’s vote” had not appeared, nor had a transformation in women’s political roles emerged. By 1930, only 13 women had gained seats in Congress, seven of them filling mid-term vacancies. In the state legislatures, the showing waslittle better: In 1925, women won almost 150 seats out of approximately 7,500. Democratic national committee woman, Emily Newell Blair, observed, “I know of no politician who is afraid of the woman vote on any question under the sun.” The women’s reform community in the 1920s had not united around a common agenda after suffrage. Post-war conservatism and a split over the question of whether women most needed legal equality or legal protection thwarted unified action. During the 1930s, the economic emergency worked against a renewed interest in women’s rights — unemployment and poverty took precedence over any other problem.
In the 1960s and 1970s, a new wave of feminism arrived. With ties to the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s, the new women's movement took on a wider agenda than the women's suffrage movement had focused on. All these have led to increasing concern over the voting rights of women. Thus over the years, women whose life tended to center around farm and family changed to center around politics.
C) Treatment of the Aged and Disabled
Treatment of the Aged:
Reinforced by the image that is being portrayed by the mass media, present-day Americans hold little respect for the old people. Movies and television have greatly influenced the teenagers and from 1950 onwards, a great culture of youth, influenced by teen heroes like James Dean, emerged and strengthened. This left the old people out of the entire picture and they are no longer seen as a productive member of the family but rather as a burden that drain on the family’s resources. This is evident in the break-up of large extended families after the World War Two period.
This move of breaking up the family into smaller units has led to the shrinking of families and this has affected the older people as they lose their support. Previously, the older people in the family depended on the younger working ones to support them after their retirement or during their “declining years”. However, now that the family has shrunk, they are not enough people to work and support these elderly. Although the government have been coming up with programs to provide the older people with more incentives but it is never enough. For instance, the U.S government spends an average of US$100 a day on an elderly and this sum up 10 percent of the country’s annual budget. Even so, providing elderly healthcare is insufficient to replace for a caring, loving family. Hence, living pass seventy has become a rather bleak prospect, a time of loneliness, poverty and illness to many of the Americans nowadays.
The old people are the U.S are also stereotype as chronically ill, unable to work and provide for themselves, behind the times, slow-thinking and useless financial burdens on the society, by the younger Americans. The idea that old people are engaging in sexual activities or even fall in love are being seen as embarrassing and inappropriate.
However, the above stereotypes are not true and certainly not the poverty notion. Americans over 50 own 75 percent of all American assets and spend half the money. Out of these, a full 70 percent of them actually own their own homes and they are also given the rights to vote and are active in the community to a greater extent than young people.
To assist the ageing population, there are several organization which aims to provide the elderly with a better environment to live in, help them maintain their independence and also to maintain their social status. A good example of such organization is the Administration of Aging (AoA). AoA has been providing for older people through the funding by the Older Americans Act. They provides home and community long-term care, protection of the elder rights and also the health and wellness of the elderly.
Chosen country: United States Of America
A) CHANGING ROLES OF MEN AND WOMEN IN WORKPLACE/FAMILY
Despite being a democratic society, it is undeniable that there are and always have been very distinct divisions in the roles of men and women in America. These divisions are deep-rooted in economic, social and religious beliefs throughout history. Women have played many roles in societies throughout history. Throughout the centuries, almost every society has developed very distinct ideas of what activities are proper for women. In some societies, there is no greater honor than to be a woman and in turn a mother. Yet, as in some Asian cultures, the lives of women are of such less value than those of men that the practice of female infanticide has become a widely used device for population control. Over time, many reasons have been given for the gender inequality that exists in society. Women are supposed to be weaker, less aggressive and more caring and nurturing than men. However, the most applied barrier of equality, especially in the workplace, has been woman's ability to bear children. Because only women have the ability to bear children, it has often been viewed that it is thus a woman's ultimate obligation to do so. There has been no scientific evidence though that women have what is called maternal instinct, that is, a natural desire to bear and care for children. From the earliest of times, motherhood has helped to divide men and women in terms of career and family role. However, it is certain that the role of women in workplace and family did experience a clear change, especially after the American Revolution. The change in the role of women throughout these years results in the change in the role of men.
The American Revolution had a deep effect on the philosophical underpinnings of American society. One aspect that was drastically changed by the democratic ideals of the Revolution was the roles of women. Women in the era of the Revolution were responsible for managing the domain of the household. Connected to these activities, women worked in the Homespun Movement. Instead of wearing or purchasing clothing made of imported British materials, Patriot women continued a long tradition of weaving, and spun their own cloth to make into clothing for their families. The context of the years preceding the American Revolution charged this action politically. Just as the spinning and weaving of American cloth became a mechanism of resistance, so did many acts of consumption. Non-importation and non-consumption became major weapons in the arsenal of the American resistance movement against British taxation without representation. Women played a major role in this method of defiance by denouncing silks, satins, and other luxuries in favor of homespun clothing generally made in spinning and quilting bees, sending a strong message of unity against supposed British oppression. As a result of non-importation, many rural communities who were previously unincorporated in the political movements of the day were brought "into the growing community of resistance" because of the appeal "to the traditional values" of rural life. While male suppliers of such services were exempted from military service in exchange for their goods, there was no such recompense for women who did the same thing. Spinning, weaving, and sewing were seen as part of the female province; as patriots they utilized their skills to assist the revolutionary cause. Hence, the idea of republican motherhood was born in this period. The mainstream political philosophy of the day assumed that a republic rested upon the virtue of its citizens. Thus, women had the essential role of instilling their children with values conducive to a healthy republic. During this period, the wife's relationship with her husband also became more liberal, as love and affection instead of obedience and subservience began to characterize the ideal marital relationship. In addition, many women contributed to the war effort through fundraising and running family businesses in the absence of husbands.Whatever gains they had made, women still found themselves subordinated, legally and socially, to their husbands, disenfranchised and with only the role of mother open to them. However, The Declaration of Independence still remained indifferent, stating, "all men are created equal". Nevertheless there was little interest in suffrage, for the most common call for 'women’s rights' involved claims of women’s intellectual equality with men and their right to an adequate education.
After the revolution, women's employment status was not guaranteed, and much of the industrial economy rushed to rehire men. However, in many white collar sectors, such as banking and clerical work, the glass ceiling was moved significantly upward. Both during and after the war, women rarely earned as much in the occupations that became female-dominated (such as cashiers, tellers, and low-level loan officers) as their male colleagues had before. Government investments, such as the GI Bill, fueled suburbanization, and the reuniting of separated spouses fostered the baby boom. With radical political activity suppressed by McCarthyism, consumerism being fostered by the retooling of wartime factories for domestic use, and the nuclear family at one of its historic peaks, women were home bound, as wives and mothers. Eventually a major backlash and reconsideration of women's roles occurred, in Betty Friedan's 1963 exposé The Feminine Mystique, which critiqued contemporary educated American women's socialization and restrictions and judged them to be intolerable. In addition, the Great Depression occurred and highlighted the change in the role of men and women in workplace and family. In 1934, the American Woman’s Association declared that working women were “the employment casualties of the Depression.” Many working women had come from a generation of women that “stressed and exulted in the importance of jobs for women.” They had aspired to better jobs for better wages. The Association reported that “during the Depression years they have had to meet doubt and distrust and fear, loss of morale and disturbance of established ways of living.” As employment opportunities dwindled, everyone seemed to agree that men should hold the few remaining jobs. Men gladly stepped into occupations that women had increasingly held—as social workers, teachers, bookkeepers, and insurance agents. The Economy Act, passed by Congress in 1932, prohibited more than one family member from working for the government. This caused many women to lose their office positions. Most school districts refused to hire married women and fired those who got married. Unemployed men, however, shunned the more menial jobs that were considered “women’s work” and showed little interest in becoming laundresses, domestics, telephone operators, store clerks, typists, or secretaries. As one commentator put it, “Approximately 3,100,000 women are employed as domestics. Which men want to take their places?” Men’s disinterest in the lowest rungs of female employment allowed at least some women to retain their jobs. It was no longer popular for a woman to aspire to independence and a career. Striving for a career was condemned as an antisocial act that deprived another family of income. In 1936, 82 percent of those polled opposed women working. Working women became easy targets for public disdain. Public officials referred to married working women as “undeserving parasites.” One man wrote to his congressman, “Woman’s true place is her home . . . and I do not believe we are again going to have normal and prosperous times until women do return to their homes.” This hostility put women into a double bind, because their labors were often necessary for their family’s survival.
Today, however, Americans have made great strides in accepting and adjusting to new definitions of gender roles. Part of the cause is the increased number of women in the workplace. With the increased presence of women in the workplace, old attitudes and behaviors have had to change. Men and women are more aware of sexual harassment than previously; whereas 20 years ago a woman who refused to have an affair with her boss may have had to quit, she now has other options. Companies are now experimenting with policies that are family-friendly, such as flex time, job sharing, and on-site child care-policies that benefit both men and women. In the egalitarian workplace, some men are concerned about being accused of sexual harassment, and they feel they must be extremely cautious in their everyday dealings with the women they work with; this caution may stifle creativity, some experts say. In addition, women still earn far less money than men do for the same work, even though their salaries are vital to maintaining their families' economic health. Just as women's gender roles have changed, men's gender roles have changed in the last few years. The old model of the "macho man" is less acceptable in today's world than it was even three decades ago, and men are struggling to reinvent themselves. Some men are so dependent on the old roles for their identity that they find themselves at a loss when confronted with new expectations. For example, some men cannot adjust when they discover that their wives or girlfriends earn more money than they do, and end the relationship. It may seem silly but for such men the new options they have regarding gender roles are limited and limiting. Despite great changes in the workplace, life at home is still much the same as it was in past generations. Women do most of the work. Men earn most of the money. And this is not sitting well with women: researchers report that 38 percent have a problem with how much their husbands do. It's a dilemma for women to feel they have the right to choose their own career paths, an opportunity few of their mothers and grandmothers had, and then realize that they are still ruled by many of the same old gender role expectations.
The shifting of gender roles in the past 30 years has been huge. It has happened so quickly that men and women are still trying to sort out what the new roles and rules mean to them. Although women are no longer expected to be the keepers of the house, in reality, they are in most families. Although men are generally open to the successes enjoyed by the women they share their lives with, some still find it hard to celebrate a woman's triumphs because they feel it diminishes their own. However, rather than blaming each other for the situation, men and women are increasingly willing to work together to learn about their new roles. Successful marriage partners learn to negotiate and share tasks. Managers take employees aside and tell them when comments are inappropriate. It will take time to sort out all the implications of the changing gender roles of Americans, but new expectations should result in better workplaces, better relationships,better schools, and better lives.
B) CHANGING ROLES OF MEN AND WOMEN IN OTHER AREAS
In early America, all of a woman’s work comes under the general heading of housewife and it varied from region to region. Despite variations, the activities were much the same throughout the different regions. First came supervision of the house. Women swept, scrubbed, polished, made their own brooms, soap and polish. They carried water, made starch, ironed, carried firewood, built fires, and made candles. They sewed and made everything and they were usually in charge of the family bookkeeping. Politics were out of women's reach and voting rights were also not granted to women.
However in 1756, Lydia Taftwas was the first woman legally allowed to vote in colonial America. She was granted this right by the town meeting of Uxbridge, Massachusetts because of the death of her wealthy husband and eldest son left the family without an adult heir.
Following the American Revolution, women were allowed to vote in New Jersey, but no other state, from 1790 until 1807, provided they met property requirements then in place. In 1807, women were again forbidden from voting in the state.
In June 1848, Gerrit Smith was nominated as the Liberty Party's presidential candidate. At the National Liberty Convention held during June, Smith gave a major address, including in his speech a demand for "universal suffrage in its broadest sense, females as well as males being entitled to vote." The delegates approved a passage in their party platform addressing votes for women: "Neither here, nor in any other part of th world, is the right of suffrage allowed to extend beyond one of the sexes. This universal exclusion of woman... argues, conclusively, that, not as yet, is there one nation so far emerged from barbarism, and so far practically Christian, as to permit woman to rise up to the one level of the human family." At this convention, five votes were placed calling for Lucretia Mott, an activist, to be Smith's vice-president. For the first time in the United States, a woman was nominated for federal executive office. In July, at the Seneca Falls Convention in Upstate New York, activists including Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Lucretia Mott began a seventy-year struggle by women to secure the right to vote. In 1850, Lucy Stone organized a larger assembly with a wider focus, the National Women's Rights Convention in Worcester, Massachusetts. Susan B. Anthony, a native of Rochester, New York, joined the cause in 1852 after reading Stone's 1850 speech. Women's suffrage activists pointed out that blacks had been granted the franchise and had not been included in the language of the United States Constitution's Fourteenth and Fifteenth amendments (which gave people equal protection under the law and the right to vote regardless of their race, respectively). This, they contended, had been unjust. Early victories were won in the territories of Wyoming (1869) and Utah (1870), although Utah women were disenfranchised by provisions of the federal Edmunds–Tucker Act enacted by the U.S. Congress in 1887. The push to grant Utah women's suffrage was at least partially fueled by the belief that, given the right to vote, Utah women would dispose of polygamy. It was only after Utah women exercised their suffrage rights in favor of polygamy that the U.S. Congress disenfranchised Utah women. By the end of the nineteenth century, Idaho, Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming had enfranchised women after effort by the suffrage associations at the state level. During the beginning of the twentieth century, as women's suffrage gained in popularity, suffragists were subject to arrests and many were jailed. Finally, President Woodrow Wilson urged Congress to pass what became, when it was ratified in 1920, the Nineteenth Amendment which prohibited state and federal agencies from gender-based restrictions on voting. But by the end of the first decade after suffrage,the anticipated “women’s vote” had not appeared, nor had a transformation in women’s political roles emerged. By 1930, only 13 women had gained seats in Congress, seven of them filling mid-term vacancies. In the state legislatures, the showing waslittle better: In 1925, women won almost 150 seats out of approximately 7,500. Democratic national committee woman, Emily Newell Blair, observed, “I know of no politician who is afraid of the woman vote on any question under the sun.” The women’s reform community in the 1920s had not united around a common agenda after suffrage. Post-war conservatism and a split over the question of whether women most needed legal equality or legal protection thwarted unified action. During the 1930s, the economic emergency worked against a renewed interest in women’s rights — unemployment and poverty took precedence over any other problem.
In the 1960s and 1970s, a new wave of feminism arrived. With ties to the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s, the new women's movement took on a wider agenda than the women's suffrage movement had focused on. All these have led to increasing concern over the voting rights of women. Thus over the years, women whose life tended to center around farm and family changed to center around politics.
C) Treatment of the Aged and Disabled
Treatment of the Aged:
Reinforced by the image that is being portrayed by the mass media, present-day Americans hold little respect for the old people. Movies and television have greatly influenced the teenagers and from 1950 onwards, a great culture of youth, influenced by teen heroes like James Dean, emerged and strengthened. This left the old people out of the entire picture and they are no longer seen as a productive member of the family but rather as a burden that drain on the family’s resources. This is evident in the break-up of large extended families after the World War Two period.
This move of breaking up the family into smaller units has led to the shrinking of families and this has affected the older people as they lose their support. Previously, the older people in the family depended on the younger working ones to support them after their retirement or during their “declining years”. However, now that the family has shrunk, they are not enough people to work and support these elderly. Although the government have been coming up with programs to provide the older people with more incentives but it is never enough. For instance, the U.S government spends an average of US$100 a day on an elderly and this sum up 10 percent of the country’s annual budget. Even so, providing elderly healthcare is insufficient to replace for a caring, loving family. Hence, living pass seventy has become a rather bleak prospect, a time of loneliness, poverty and illness to many of the Americans nowadays.
The old people are the U.S are also stereotype as chronically ill, unable to work and provide for themselves, behind the times, slow-thinking and useless financial burdens on the society, by the younger Americans. The idea that old people are engaging in sexual activities or even fall in love are being seen as embarrassing and inappropriate.
However, the above stereotypes are not true and certainly not the poverty notion. Americans over 50 own 75 percent of all American assets and spend half the money. Out of these, a full 70 percent of them actually own their own homes and they are also given the rights to vote and are active in the community to a greater extent than young people.
To assist the ageing population, there are several organization which aims to provide the elderly with a better environment to live in, help them maintain their independence and also to maintain their social status. A good example of such organization is the Administration of Aging (AoA). AoA has been providing for older people through the funding by the Older Americans Act. They provides home and community long-term care, protection of the elder rights and also the health and wellness of the elderly.
Treatment of the Disabled:
Discrimination in employment
In the US, there is a Rehabilitation Act which was established in 1973 that requires every single organizations that receive government’s funding to provide the disabled with accessibility programs and services. In 1990, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) have been established but it only came into effect in 1992. This law prohibits private employers, state and local governments, employment agencies and labor unions from discriminating against employees with disabilities in job application procedures, hiring, firing, advancement, compensation, job training, or in the terms, conditions and privileges of employment. This is also applicable to organizations like retail businesses, movie theatres and restaurants. These organizations are to make “reasonable accommodation” to individuals with different needs. This policy is used to protect anyone with either a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits him/her to one or more of the major life activites, a record of such an impairment or those regarded having such an impairment.
African Americans and disability
As reflected by the 2000 U.S. Census, African Americans have the highest rate of disability of 20.8 percent and that is slightly higher than the overall disability rate of 19.4 percent. Despite the fact that people have come to understand and accept different types of disability, there still remains a mark attached to the disabled community. For instance, disabled African American women have to face “triple jeopardy” syndrome, a term used by Doctor Eddie Glenn of Howard University to describe the situation. They have to face tremendous discrimination due to their disability, their race and their gender.
Social administration
The US Social Security Administration defines disability in terms of inability to perform substantial gainful activity (SGA), by which it means “work paying minimum wage or better”. The agency pairs SGA with a "listing" of medical conditions that qualify individuals for benefits.The Social Security Administration provides monthly incentives to the disabled and retired, their spouse and children, and also to the survivors of insured workers. In the year 2004, more than 47 million Americans have received approximately US$492 billion in Social Security benefit. These programs are being financed by mandatory contributions paid by the employers, employees and self-insured individuals. These revenues are placed into a trust fund which is also known as the Retirement, Survivors, Disability Insurance (RSDI). Another program, the Social Security Income (SSI) helps to meet the needs of the elderly, blind and disabled americans. Recipients of this program are being paid out of the general revenue of the U.S and an estimated figure of 7 million people benefit from this program.
Education
The American government has come up with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, which aims to address the educational needs of the children who have disabilities in learning from birth to age 21. However, not all children with disabilities are qualified to benefit under this program. Only children with mental retardation, hearing impairments, speech or language impairments, visual impairments, serious emotional disturbance, orthopedic impairments, autism, traumatic brain injury or other specific learning disabilities are entitled to benefit. Under this act, public schools are to provide disabled children with an Individualized Education Program (IEP) they meets the needs of the child. It specifies the services to be provided and how often, describes the student's present levels of performance in school and how the student's disabilities affect his or her academic progression, and specifies accommodations and modifications to be provided for the student. However, if the parents are not satisfied with the IEP provided by the school, they have all rights to come up with their own IEP, should it be unfair to the child.
Insurance
To ensure that there is no discrimination against disabled drivers, there is a law in California which states that it is illegal for insurers to refuse an individual of a car insurance if he or she is a properly licensed driver. It is also illegal to refuse insuring a car driver even if he is blind. However, the insurance company is allowed to exclude coverages for injuries or damages which are incurred while a blind driver is operating behind the wheels of the vehicle. This law is actually set up to allow blind people to buy and insure a car which allows their family members, caretakers or friends to drive them around and not to allow them to drive the car.
D) ROLE OF FAMILY AND PARENTS
In the year 2006, it is said that 12.9 million families in the U.S were headed by a single parents, 80% of which were headed by a female. Since 1994, single parenthood in US REMAIND AT 9% ALTHOUGH IT NEARLY DOUBLED IN 1970.
Single parent families are said to have a higher risk of facing poverty than coupled families, and on average single mothers have poorer health than couple mothers. The main provlem that single mothers and their children in the US today face is Poverty and female-geaded single parent families comprise comprise 50% of families living in poverty in US. Statistics show in the U.S. Census Bureau that children raised by both parents grow up with more financial and educational advantages.
There are usually both parents and two children in a typical British family. In most British families both parents work. Very young children go to nursery schools or stay at home with a childminder. Old people usually live in their own homes or a nursing home if they cannot look after themselves. British parents try to spend their free time with their children going to the cinema, museums or parks. During the week they usually have dinner together
For most Americans, family means the infrastructure shaping their life’s journey in one way or another from the cradle to the
grave. Whatever form it takes, family provides the earliest experiences of nurturing, security, and socialization. It provides a
platform, a foundation for entry into the broader community and a roadmap for navigating the vast network of interpersonal and institutional relations comprising society. If a trend is observed in families, it will most likely surface at some other level of the social order.
How parenting skills will have an effect on their children
Parents who communicated and were involved with their children at ages 10 and 11 would set clear expectations for their children’s behavior, practiced good supervision towards them, consistent discipline, and minimized conflict in the family. Their children were more likely to see alcohol use as harmful and less likely to initiate alcohol use early. They were also less likely to misuse alcohol at ages 17 to 18. The lack of parental support, monitoring, and communication and lack of feeling close to their parents have been significantly related to frequency of drinking, heavy drinking, and drunkenness among adolescents. The harshness or any hostility or recjection the parents have towards children have also been found to significantly predict adolescent drinking and alcohol-related problems. Research have been made and it showed that poor parenting practices are associated with early childhood deficits in social skills and self-regulation, particularly with regard to aggressive behavior, which result in early minor delinquency and rejection from mainstream peer groups. Children who feel rejected then affiliate with deviant peers; in turn, participation in deviant peer networks increases the risk for drinking and other forms of substance use.
The Social Influences families have towards teens
Family and peers can influence drinking behavior of teens actively by explicitly discouraging alcohol use or by providing models of drinking behavior. A Columbia University study reports that adolescents whose fathers have more than two drinks a day have a 71 percent greater risk of substance abuse. As adolescents develop, drinking behavior becomes less influenced by parents and more influenced by peers hence parents should play a guiding role to prevent them from taking the wrong path. Perceptions of how much peers drink may exert a stronger influence on an individual’s drinking behavior than the actual level of peer drinking. Parents can exert a moderating influence on the drinking behavior of their adolescent children by actively monitoring their alcohol use. They can be a role model and kick of the drinking habit if they have one.
Importance of families
Dr. Vern Bengtson, professor of gerontology and sociology at the University of Southern California in Los Angeles once said that "Families through time have changed, but they have not declined in importance to Americans. Multi-generational bonds represent a valuable resource for families in the 21st century and are becoming more important than nuclear family ties for well-being and support over the course of our lives."
Modern Woodmen of America, a fraternal life insurance organization dedicated to helping people achieve quality family life, sponsored a survey based on 1,001 random telephone interviews and poll results indicated that most Americans aged 25 to 65 believe it is good for children to know their relatives and family history. Americans connect with their families through a variety of gathering activities, such as holiday meals, weddings, birthday parties, reunions, family vacations and less formal get-togethers. The reasons are simple on which why do Americans see the importance of their family is that Americans cite everything from the noble desire to provide their children with the opportunity to know their relatives and to learn about their family heritage to participating just because family events are fun. Historically, family relationships have played the most basic role of all -- ensuring survival. Today, most people rely on family interactions to provide an affirming, positive experience. They provide a sense of support and an identity of who we are and what's unique about us."
"Intergenerational and extended family relationships not only create a sense of identity but, even today, are a valuable resource for exchanging information, services and goods," says Dr. Bengtson. Close extended family relationships can have educational, economic and professional implications. People with extended family contacts tend to be more literate and reach out to get more education and better jobs. People who cultivate extended family relationships are at an advantage emotionally and are often more successful in their personal lives. Both children and adults benefit from these relationships during times of great stress, such as tragedy, death or divorce. They also reap the rewards when joyous events enter their lives, whether it is a new job, a new child or a milestone birthday. It is even suspected that interaction with extended family can have a positive effect on your lifespan and physical health. Even though technology allows families to keep in touch and share personal milestones more easily, nothing replaces the experience of actually gathering in the same room with family.
Discrimination in employment
In the US, there is a Rehabilitation Act which was established in 1973 that requires every single organizations that receive government’s funding to provide the disabled with accessibility programs and services. In 1990, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) have been established but it only came into effect in 1992. This law prohibits private employers, state and local governments, employment agencies and labor unions from discriminating against employees with disabilities in job application procedures, hiring, firing, advancement, compensation, job training, or in the terms, conditions and privileges of employment. This is also applicable to organizations like retail businesses, movie theatres and restaurants. These organizations are to make “reasonable accommodation” to individuals with different needs. This policy is used to protect anyone with either a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits him/her to one or more of the major life activites, a record of such an impairment or those regarded having such an impairment.
African Americans and disability
As reflected by the 2000 U.S. Census, African Americans have the highest rate of disability of 20.8 percent and that is slightly higher than the overall disability rate of 19.4 percent. Despite the fact that people have come to understand and accept different types of disability, there still remains a mark attached to the disabled community. For instance, disabled African American women have to face “triple jeopardy” syndrome, a term used by Doctor Eddie Glenn of Howard University to describe the situation. They have to face tremendous discrimination due to their disability, their race and their gender.
Social administration
The US Social Security Administration defines disability in terms of inability to perform substantial gainful activity (SGA), by which it means “work paying minimum wage or better”. The agency pairs SGA with a "listing" of medical conditions that qualify individuals for benefits.The Social Security Administration provides monthly incentives to the disabled and retired, their spouse and children, and also to the survivors of insured workers. In the year 2004, more than 47 million Americans have received approximately US$492 billion in Social Security benefit. These programs are being financed by mandatory contributions paid by the employers, employees and self-insured individuals. These revenues are placed into a trust fund which is also known as the Retirement, Survivors, Disability Insurance (RSDI). Another program, the Social Security Income (SSI) helps to meet the needs of the elderly, blind and disabled americans. Recipients of this program are being paid out of the general revenue of the U.S and an estimated figure of 7 million people benefit from this program.
Education
The American government has come up with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, which aims to address the educational needs of the children who have disabilities in learning from birth to age 21. However, not all children with disabilities are qualified to benefit under this program. Only children with mental retardation, hearing impairments, speech or language impairments, visual impairments, serious emotional disturbance, orthopedic impairments, autism, traumatic brain injury or other specific learning disabilities are entitled to benefit. Under this act, public schools are to provide disabled children with an Individualized Education Program (IEP) they meets the needs of the child. It specifies the services to be provided and how often, describes the student's present levels of performance in school and how the student's disabilities affect his or her academic progression, and specifies accommodations and modifications to be provided for the student. However, if the parents are not satisfied with the IEP provided by the school, they have all rights to come up with their own IEP, should it be unfair to the child.
Insurance
To ensure that there is no discrimination against disabled drivers, there is a law in California which states that it is illegal for insurers to refuse an individual of a car insurance if he or she is a properly licensed driver. It is also illegal to refuse insuring a car driver even if he is blind. However, the insurance company is allowed to exclude coverages for injuries or damages which are incurred while a blind driver is operating behind the wheels of the vehicle. This law is actually set up to allow blind people to buy and insure a car which allows their family members, caretakers or friends to drive them around and not to allow them to drive the car.
D) ROLE OF FAMILY AND PARENTS
In the year 2006, it is said that 12.9 million families in the U.S were headed by a single parents, 80% of which were headed by a female. Since 1994, single parenthood in US REMAIND AT 9% ALTHOUGH IT NEARLY DOUBLED IN 1970.
Single parent families are said to have a higher risk of facing poverty than coupled families, and on average single mothers have poorer health than couple mothers. The main provlem that single mothers and their children in the US today face is Poverty and female-geaded single parent families comprise comprise 50% of families living in poverty in US. Statistics show in the U.S. Census Bureau that children raised by both parents grow up with more financial and educational advantages.
There are usually both parents and two children in a typical British family. In most British families both parents work. Very young children go to nursery schools or stay at home with a childminder. Old people usually live in their own homes or a nursing home if they cannot look after themselves. British parents try to spend their free time with their children going to the cinema, museums or parks. During the week they usually have dinner together
For most Americans, family means the infrastructure shaping their life’s journey in one way or another from the cradle to the
grave. Whatever form it takes, family provides the earliest experiences of nurturing, security, and socialization. It provides a
platform, a foundation for entry into the broader community and a roadmap for navigating the vast network of interpersonal and institutional relations comprising society. If a trend is observed in families, it will most likely surface at some other level of the social order.
How parenting skills will have an effect on their children
Parents who communicated and were involved with their children at ages 10 and 11 would set clear expectations for their children’s behavior, practiced good supervision towards them, consistent discipline, and minimized conflict in the family. Their children were more likely to see alcohol use as harmful and less likely to initiate alcohol use early. They were also less likely to misuse alcohol at ages 17 to 18. The lack of parental support, monitoring, and communication and lack of feeling close to their parents have been significantly related to frequency of drinking, heavy drinking, and drunkenness among adolescents. The harshness or any hostility or recjection the parents have towards children have also been found to significantly predict adolescent drinking and alcohol-related problems. Research have been made and it showed that poor parenting practices are associated with early childhood deficits in social skills and self-regulation, particularly with regard to aggressive behavior, which result in early minor delinquency and rejection from mainstream peer groups. Children who feel rejected then affiliate with deviant peers; in turn, participation in deviant peer networks increases the risk for drinking and other forms of substance use.
The Social Influences families have towards teens
Family and peers can influence drinking behavior of teens actively by explicitly discouraging alcohol use or by providing models of drinking behavior. A Columbia University study reports that adolescents whose fathers have more than two drinks a day have a 71 percent greater risk of substance abuse. As adolescents develop, drinking behavior becomes less influenced by parents and more influenced by peers hence parents should play a guiding role to prevent them from taking the wrong path. Perceptions of how much peers drink may exert a stronger influence on an individual’s drinking behavior than the actual level of peer drinking. Parents can exert a moderating influence on the drinking behavior of their adolescent children by actively monitoring their alcohol use. They can be a role model and kick of the drinking habit if they have one.
Importance of families
Dr. Vern Bengtson, professor of gerontology and sociology at the University of Southern California in Los Angeles once said that "Families through time have changed, but they have not declined in importance to Americans. Multi-generational bonds represent a valuable resource for families in the 21st century and are becoming more important than nuclear family ties for well-being and support over the course of our lives."
Modern Woodmen of America, a fraternal life insurance organization dedicated to helping people achieve quality family life, sponsored a survey based on 1,001 random telephone interviews and poll results indicated that most Americans aged 25 to 65 believe it is good for children to know their relatives and family history. Americans connect with their families through a variety of gathering activities, such as holiday meals, weddings, birthday parties, reunions, family vacations and less formal get-togethers. The reasons are simple on which why do Americans see the importance of their family is that Americans cite everything from the noble desire to provide their children with the opportunity to know their relatives and to learn about their family heritage to participating just because family events are fun. Historically, family relationships have played the most basic role of all -- ensuring survival. Today, most people rely on family interactions to provide an affirming, positive experience. They provide a sense of support and an identity of who we are and what's unique about us."
"Intergenerational and extended family relationships not only create a sense of identity but, even today, are a valuable resource for exchanging information, services and goods," says Dr. Bengtson. Close extended family relationships can have educational, economic and professional implications. People with extended family contacts tend to be more literate and reach out to get more education and better jobs. People who cultivate extended family relationships are at an advantage emotionally and are often more successful in their personal lives. Both children and adults benefit from these relationships during times of great stress, such as tragedy, death or divorce. They also reap the rewards when joyous events enter their lives, whether it is a new job, a new child or a milestone birthday. It is even suspected that interaction with extended family can have a positive effect on your lifespan and physical health. Even though technology allows families to keep in touch and share personal milestones more easily, nothing replaces the experience of actually gathering in the same room with family.
Parents As Role Models
While television and other media have made it a practice to anoint well-known celebrities as positive role models for kids, the great majority of people still believe that parents should be the foremost role models of their children. The following is a compilation of various ways that can help parents become better role models for their kids.
In terms of nurturing children, the most common comment is to show your love and concern. Tell them you love them every day and show affection daily through hugs, kisses and touches. In spite of busy schedules, make time for special family fun activities. Also make the effort to meet your child's friends to build stronger rapport with them and to gauge the influence they exert on your kids.
Understanding is another key in becoming an effective role model for your child.
As the saying goes, "Understand - don't take a stand." Communication is vital and should always be a two-way street. Listen to your kids and find out what's going on in their lives and if anything is bothering them. Let them know that they can talk to you about anything under the sun. It is important to remember that children who have good communication with their parents are more likely to ask for their advice than turn to their peers.
Parents constantly demand respect from their children, but remember that is it is not something that can be taken for granted. Like most things of real value, respect has to be earned. And oftentimes, the best way to earn respect is to give respect. This also means that you have to learn to empathize, to put yourself in your kid's shoes and understand what it means to be him. And always try to avoid putting your children in situations where they feel disregarded, disrespected, humiliated or embarrassed. Such situations can sometimes leave deep emotional scars.
Remember that you have to teach your children to respect themselves as well. Teach them to stand up for themselves without putting their safety at risk. Discuss ways to solve problems without fighting. Make them aware that fighting never solves a problem. Most importantly, advise them that physical force or intimidation does not win respect, rather, it is the quality of one's character that wins respect.
In terms of nurturing children, the most common comment is to show your love and concern. Tell them you love them every day and show affection daily through hugs, kisses and touches. In spite of busy schedules, make time for special family fun activities. Also make the effort to meet your child's friends to build stronger rapport with them and to gauge the influence they exert on your kids.
Understanding is another key in becoming an effective role model for your child.
As the saying goes, "Understand - don't take a stand." Communication is vital and should always be a two-way street. Listen to your kids and find out what's going on in their lives and if anything is bothering them. Let them know that they can talk to you about anything under the sun. It is important to remember that children who have good communication with their parents are more likely to ask for their advice than turn to their peers.
Parents constantly demand respect from their children, but remember that is it is not something that can be taken for granted. Like most things of real value, respect has to be earned. And oftentimes, the best way to earn respect is to give respect. This also means that you have to learn to empathize, to put yourself in your kid's shoes and understand what it means to be him. And always try to avoid putting your children in situations where they feel disregarded, disrespected, humiliated or embarrassed. Such situations can sometimes leave deep emotional scars.
Remember that you have to teach your children to respect themselves as well. Teach them to stand up for themselves without putting their safety at risk. Discuss ways to solve problems without fighting. Make them aware that fighting never solves a problem. Most importantly, advise them that physical force or intimidation does not win respect, rather, it is the quality of one's character that wins respect.
Keith Shepherdson 10S16
Bringing Up Kids The Right Way
Mothers face an uphill task bringing up their kids in today’s materialistic world. They face a greater responsibility and challenge today than ever before,in bringing up the kids as responsible and worthy citizens of the world.
Children are the future of the world and it is of utmost importance that they be taught the right values and correct thinking. Given the present scenario, where our world has shrunk and boundaries have been erased by advancing information technology, tolerance levels have hit an all time low the world over. It is high time we gear up to impart training for our kids which focuses mainly on positive emotions, all encompassing views, with the sole aim of creating responsible world citizens.
The family as a close knit unit is the right place for the child to start learning these important lessons of life. The mother being the key figure in the child’s life during the formative years plays the most important role in molding the thought processes and emotions of the little one. A calm and composed mother makes her child feel secure and sends out the message to the little one that she is in charge and that there is nothing to fear. As the child grows, confidence in the abilities of the mother increases and the child will form easy relationships with the dad and other siblings and anyone who the mother interacts with. There is an important point that moms have to bear in mind; that she should in no way exhibit any negative emotions or feelings in the presence of her child, at least till the child is about 6-7 years of age. Raising children with good values and moral behavior should be the all important duty of parents. By the time the child is about 6-7 years of age, the child should be able to respect adults, what belongs to others, should exhibit good behavior outside their homes and interact amicably and cheerfully with their peers.
Children are given to irrational behavior at times and mothers should relate to them at their level to bring them around to her point of view, at the same time make allowances once in a while. The ability of a child to understand and grasp good moral behavior would be different during the various developmental stages and as they journey through life as toddlers, adolescents and young adults. Each stage requires a different mode of handling and the extent to which allowances can be made in their favor. As teenagers, the children should be given more freedom to do the things they would like to do, but they should be taught to do so responsibly and also learn to accept the consequences of their actions and set it right if the need arises. This would teach them to shoulder responsibility and recognize right from wrong and by the time they are young adults, they would have enough experiences and would be ready to start their life on their own.
Mothers are intuitive to the emotions, feelings and actions of their kids because they are closely involved in bringing them up and she is the best person to inculcate and instill in them good habits, moral behavior and values. An intelligent mother would teach by example, communicates with her kids at all times, keep track of the kind of friends they interact with, especially when the kids reach their teens. Mothers with teenagers know only too well how tough parenting at that stage is and would do well to invite their friends over once in way and mingle with them. It would make the children proud to have a mom who cares for the friends as well, because children in their teens tend to attach a great deal of importance to their friendships. This is also an excellent way to keep track of your teenager’s lifestyle.
Parenting is a tough commitment, a long arduous journey; but when you look at the fine young adults you have reared, you know you have done your duty well and have made a great contribution towards a better world.
Children are the future of the world and it is of utmost importance that they be taught the right values and correct thinking. Given the present scenario, where our world has shrunk and boundaries have been erased by advancing information technology, tolerance levels have hit an all time low the world over. It is high time we gear up to impart training for our kids which focuses mainly on positive emotions, all encompassing views, with the sole aim of creating responsible world citizens.
The family as a close knit unit is the right place for the child to start learning these important lessons of life. The mother being the key figure in the child’s life during the formative years plays the most important role in molding the thought processes and emotions of the little one. A calm and composed mother makes her child feel secure and sends out the message to the little one that she is in charge and that there is nothing to fear. As the child grows, confidence in the abilities of the mother increases and the child will form easy relationships with the dad and other siblings and anyone who the mother interacts with. There is an important point that moms have to bear in mind; that she should in no way exhibit any negative emotions or feelings in the presence of her child, at least till the child is about 6-7 years of age. Raising children with good values and moral behavior should be the all important duty of parents. By the time the child is about 6-7 years of age, the child should be able to respect adults, what belongs to others, should exhibit good behavior outside their homes and interact amicably and cheerfully with their peers.
Children are given to irrational behavior at times and mothers should relate to them at their level to bring them around to her point of view, at the same time make allowances once in a while. The ability of a child to understand and grasp good moral behavior would be different during the various developmental stages and as they journey through life as toddlers, adolescents and young adults. Each stage requires a different mode of handling and the extent to which allowances can be made in their favor. As teenagers, the children should be given more freedom to do the things they would like to do, but they should be taught to do so responsibly and also learn to accept the consequences of their actions and set it right if the need arises. This would teach them to shoulder responsibility and recognize right from wrong and by the time they are young adults, they would have enough experiences and would be ready to start their life on their own.
Mothers are intuitive to the emotions, feelings and actions of their kids because they are closely involved in bringing them up and she is the best person to inculcate and instill in them good habits, moral behavior and values. An intelligent mother would teach by example, communicates with her kids at all times, keep track of the kind of friends they interact with, especially when the kids reach their teens. Mothers with teenagers know only too well how tough parenting at that stage is and would do well to invite their friends over once in way and mingle with them. It would make the children proud to have a mom who cares for the friends as well, because children in their teens tend to attach a great deal of importance to their friendships. This is also an excellent way to keep track of your teenager’s lifestyle.
Parenting is a tough commitment, a long arduous journey; but when you look at the fine young adults you have reared, you know you have done your duty well and have made a great contribution towards a better world.
The Glass Mehitzah:
Women Breaking Through the Barriers
by Deborah Resnick (jdresnick@earthlink.net)
Throughout the ages, the Jewish tradition has survived, and often has thrived. This is due to many factors, not the least of which is the Jewish woman. And through all those centuries, Jewish women have maintained Jewish homes, raised Jewish children, and verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serifted Jewish values and beliefs, often in cultural atmospheres of hostility and persecution. In order to ensure the transmission of Jewish beliefs and customs to the generations to come, they have needed an extensive knowledge of Jewish practice and theology. Unfortunately, while they were responsible for the care and nurturing of future Jews, they were usually disenfranchised from mainstream Jewish communal worship and study.
The Traditional Jewish Woman
Jewish women have been saluted and slurred, revered and reviled. On the Sabbath, at the Sabbath meal, many Jewish husbands rise and praise their wives with verses from a prayer based Proverbs, A Woman of Valor. This prayer honors women with the words of an ancient prophet who compared a valorous woman to precious gems. Yet, that same woman who is so praised, in a traditional home will not be allowed to sing zemirot, Shabbat songs, at her own table if there are un-related men present. That same woman who tends children while her husband hurries off to shul, is not counted in the minyan, the required ten adult Jews (men) required to recite certain communal prayers.
The traditional Jewish woman are exempted from many time-bound mitzvot (commandments) because, according to the rabbinic courts that have established these laws and interpret them, women are not able to perform these time-bound mitzvot because of their child-rearing and household duties. It is true that traditional women have many more familial responsibilities than the men do. They are much more restricted in movement, particularly on Shabbat. In addition, traditional women are often not only raising their children, but also working to support husbands who are still studying, an occupation which brings the highest honor upon a man. This places additional demands upon a woman whose day is already too short.
Jewish women, however, have always found ways to gain the spiritual experiences they sought. Charles Silberman, in his book A Certain People: American Jews and Their Lives Today, states that Orthodox women have always created opportunities to learn and to practice their religion. Many women, both Orthodox and non-Orthodox, have had intense spiritual experiences when participating in rituals they were formerly denied. They have created prayer groups, where they recited the daily services (without the communal prayers, they don't consider themselves to be a minyan), read from the Torah (the first five books of Moses, part of the Christian Old Testament), and given each other aliyahs (opportunities to recite the blessings over the Torah before the reading).
Orthodox and many non-Orthodox men were, and still are, uncomfortable with this, but have not been able to stop these practices, because they do not violate halacha (Jewish law). Among Jewish women, Orthodox women have the highest Jewish literacy rate, followed closely by Conservative women, but they have been the slowest to demand full partnership in all aspects of Jewish life. In this, Reform and Reconstructionist women have led the way.
The Changing Role of Women
Until the 1950's, Jewish women took a back seat (literally) in communal worship. The synagogue was frequently divided with a mehitzah, a partition, separating the men from the women. The reason given for this separation was that mixing the men and women would make it hard for the men to concentrate on their prayers. They would be more prone to less-than-prayerful thoughts, and would not concentrate on God.
The first groups to do away with the mehitzah were the Reform congregations. The Reform movement began in the middle of the 19th century in Germany. It was based upon the idea that it was not necessary to set us as Jews apart from the general population. Many Jews had already accepted many of the customs and practices of the goyim (non-Jews), and felt that their places of worship should be more in keeping with modern society. This led to a change in both the service and the synagogue. The service, previously in Hebrew, was rewritten to be read in English. The synagogue itself became modeled after the Protestant churches of the time, and the mehitzah was one of the first features to go. With the tearing down of one wall, was it so hard to know that others would soon follow? Reform Jewish women soon began to express their interest in more formal study and participation in the service. This met with great resistance. Already so much had changed, how could they possible retain their Jewish identity if all the barriers came down at once? So, the status of Jewish women remained virtually the same for another hundred years.
Late in the 19th century, and on into the 20th century, all women, including Jewish women, began to question their limited roles. They demanded the vote, they insisted upon equal employment laws; they demanded respect as women and as contributing members of society. And Jewish women demanded their place in the hierarchy of Jewish theological thought. Jewish religious life would never be the same as it was. Women had become empowered by feminism and an increasing self-confidence. They had begun to truly understand what they had been denied.
Although many men felt that feminism would have a weakening affect on Jewish life, exactly the opposite has happened. Sylvia Fishman Barach looked at the impact of feminism has had on the American Jewish community in her book, A Breath of Life: Feminism in the American Jewish Community, and found that there has actually been a very beneficial impact. Surprisingly, she found that Orthodoxy, potentially very limiting on Jewish women, has actually made the greatest strides in education of women. Orthodox women have been leaders in the quest for Jewish knowledge, and were among the first Jewish women to organize prayer groups and Talmud study for women. Ultimately, however, it was the Reconstructionist and Reform movements, which made the first forays into uncharted Jewish male territory - the rabbinate.
Women began taking for themselves the rituals and outward symbols of Judaism, including the tallit and the kipah, the headcovering traditionally worn by men as a sign of respect for God. Even these simple acts invited controversy. Many men felt that women were taking on these articles in a trivial manner, and not in a prayerful spirit. As April Witt reported in her article, "Yarmulkes for women meet growing acceptance", Congregation Samu-El Or Olom, a Conservative synagogue in Miami experienced an outcry when women began wearing tallit and kipot. Harry Milder, a congregant, expressed his indignation saying, "There are women in this synagogue who have taken over and want everything to be equal, that's not the way it is in the Torah.... Something significant is being trivialized. They are using it for show, and that's not what it is for." The implication in Mr. Milder's statement is that women are not interested in the spiritual and ritual attached to the wearing of ritual garments, they are only interested in making a fashion statement. For centuries, the tallit has been used to close one's self off from outside disturbances, in an attempt to achieve a one-ness with God in prayer.
Feminism and the Woman Rabbi
As Jewish women became aware of their ability to succeed in the male business world, they began to cast their eyes in the direction of religious vocations. The first female rabbi to be ordained was Rabbi Sally Priesand, in 1973, at Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion, in Cincinnati, Ohio. She was followed closely by Rabbi Sandy Eisenberg Sasso, a Reconstructionist rabbi ordained by The Reconstructionist Seminary in Philadelphia. These and other women found prejudice and apathy, sometimes even outright hostility in their pursuit of their vocations.
Objections to female rabbis and religious professionals included questions concerning their ability to raise families and cope with the often-impossible demands of the clergy. Their ability to "correctly" interpret texts was questioned, and their legitimacy as Jews suspect. Dr. Rachel Adler, in an essay published in The Jewish Condition: Essays on Contemporary Judaism Honoring Rabbi Alexander Schindler, wrote, "Our revolution was to affirm that we had a perspective on Torah that the tradition did not know and needed to learn, and to refuse to be shamed into silence by the magnitude of what we did not know". She goes on to say that "gate crashing" will not go far in "talking our way in," and that joining a discussion that is framed in interests and topics outside of the experience of women is difficult, but not impossible.
The Future of Judaism with Women as Full Partners
In the new millennium, women will continue to demand and receive their portion of both the secular and religious worlds. Not only Judaism, but all religions will see an increase in women as full partners in the practice of their faiths. Eventually, a day will come when no one will comment on a young girl's decision to become a priest, rabbi, or minister; just as now the surprise at a young woman's vocation of doctor or lawyer rarely raises eyebrows. The synagogue will be a place of worship, not gender-based conflict, with the victors being all Jews, not just the women.
Men come to ritual and worship with a perspective born of thousands of years of history and tradition. They bring to Judaism the uniquely masculine sense of strength and vitality that is inherent in male-based worship. Women bring to faith the feeling, the intuitive perspective that questions differently the base of our beliefs. These two views, combined, can make a whole of what is now divided. In Judaism, God is seen as both male and female. In Genesis, in the story of creation, the creation of human beings is told as God created humans in God's own image, male and female, God created them. God is seen as a male, the avenging father, and as the Shechina, the female essence. Both are combined to be a complete being. We, as humans, can only strive to attain what God has always had, the complete integration of male and female.
source:http://judaism.about.com/library/2_feminism/bl_mehitzaglass.htm
Jacqueline Tan, Brenda Chin, Evelyn Teo
10A07
Women Breaking Through the Barriers
by Deborah Resnick (jdresnick@earthlink.net)
Throughout the ages, the Jewish tradition has survived, and often has thrived. This is due to many factors, not the least of which is the Jewish woman. And through all those centuries, Jewish women have maintained Jewish homes, raised Jewish children, and verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serifted Jewish values and beliefs, often in cultural atmospheres of hostility and persecution. In order to ensure the transmission of Jewish beliefs and customs to the generations to come, they have needed an extensive knowledge of Jewish practice and theology. Unfortunately, while they were responsible for the care and nurturing of future Jews, they were usually disenfranchised from mainstream Jewish communal worship and study.
The Traditional Jewish Woman
Jewish women have been saluted and slurred, revered and reviled. On the Sabbath, at the Sabbath meal, many Jewish husbands rise and praise their wives with verses from a prayer based Proverbs, A Woman of Valor. This prayer honors women with the words of an ancient prophet who compared a valorous woman to precious gems. Yet, that same woman who is so praised, in a traditional home will not be allowed to sing zemirot, Shabbat songs, at her own table if there are un-related men present. That same woman who tends children while her husband hurries off to shul, is not counted in the minyan, the required ten adult Jews (men) required to recite certain communal prayers.
The traditional Jewish woman are exempted from many time-bound mitzvot (commandments) because, according to the rabbinic courts that have established these laws and interpret them, women are not able to perform these time-bound mitzvot because of their child-rearing and household duties. It is true that traditional women have many more familial responsibilities than the men do. They are much more restricted in movement, particularly on Shabbat. In addition, traditional women are often not only raising their children, but also working to support husbands who are still studying, an occupation which brings the highest honor upon a man. This places additional demands upon a woman whose day is already too short.
Jewish women, however, have always found ways to gain the spiritual experiences they sought. Charles Silberman, in his book A Certain People: American Jews and Their Lives Today, states that Orthodox women have always created opportunities to learn and to practice their religion. Many women, both Orthodox and non-Orthodox, have had intense spiritual experiences when participating in rituals they were formerly denied. They have created prayer groups, where they recited the daily services (without the communal prayers, they don't consider themselves to be a minyan), read from the Torah (the first five books of Moses, part of the Christian Old Testament), and given each other aliyahs (opportunities to recite the blessings over the Torah before the reading).
Orthodox and many non-Orthodox men were, and still are, uncomfortable with this, but have not been able to stop these practices, because they do not violate halacha (Jewish law). Among Jewish women, Orthodox women have the highest Jewish literacy rate, followed closely by Conservative women, but they have been the slowest to demand full partnership in all aspects of Jewish life. In this, Reform and Reconstructionist women have led the way.
The Changing Role of Women
Until the 1950's, Jewish women took a back seat (literally) in communal worship. The synagogue was frequently divided with a mehitzah, a partition, separating the men from the women. The reason given for this separation was that mixing the men and women would make it hard for the men to concentrate on their prayers. They would be more prone to less-than-prayerful thoughts, and would not concentrate on God.
The first groups to do away with the mehitzah were the Reform congregations. The Reform movement began in the middle of the 19th century in Germany. It was based upon the idea that it was not necessary to set us as Jews apart from the general population. Many Jews had already accepted many of the customs and practices of the goyim (non-Jews), and felt that their places of worship should be more in keeping with modern society. This led to a change in both the service and the synagogue. The service, previously in Hebrew, was rewritten to be read in English. The synagogue itself became modeled after the Protestant churches of the time, and the mehitzah was one of the first features to go. With the tearing down of one wall, was it so hard to know that others would soon follow? Reform Jewish women soon began to express their interest in more formal study and participation in the service. This met with great resistance. Already so much had changed, how could they possible retain their Jewish identity if all the barriers came down at once? So, the status of Jewish women remained virtually the same for another hundred years.
Late in the 19th century, and on into the 20th century, all women, including Jewish women, began to question their limited roles. They demanded the vote, they insisted upon equal employment laws; they demanded respect as women and as contributing members of society. And Jewish women demanded their place in the hierarchy of Jewish theological thought. Jewish religious life would never be the same as it was. Women had become empowered by feminism and an increasing self-confidence. They had begun to truly understand what they had been denied.
Although many men felt that feminism would have a weakening affect on Jewish life, exactly the opposite has happened. Sylvia Fishman Barach looked at the impact of feminism has had on the American Jewish community in her book, A Breath of Life: Feminism in the American Jewish Community, and found that there has actually been a very beneficial impact. Surprisingly, she found that Orthodoxy, potentially very limiting on Jewish women, has actually made the greatest strides in education of women. Orthodox women have been leaders in the quest for Jewish knowledge, and were among the first Jewish women to organize prayer groups and Talmud study for women. Ultimately, however, it was the Reconstructionist and Reform movements, which made the first forays into uncharted Jewish male territory - the rabbinate.
Women began taking for themselves the rituals and outward symbols of Judaism, including the tallit and the kipah, the headcovering traditionally worn by men as a sign of respect for God. Even these simple acts invited controversy. Many men felt that women were taking on these articles in a trivial manner, and not in a prayerful spirit. As April Witt reported in her article, "Yarmulkes for women meet growing acceptance", Congregation Samu-El Or Olom, a Conservative synagogue in Miami experienced an outcry when women began wearing tallit and kipot. Harry Milder, a congregant, expressed his indignation saying, "There are women in this synagogue who have taken over and want everything to be equal, that's not the way it is in the Torah.... Something significant is being trivialized. They are using it for show, and that's not what it is for." The implication in Mr. Milder's statement is that women are not interested in the spiritual and ritual attached to the wearing of ritual garments, they are only interested in making a fashion statement. For centuries, the tallit has been used to close one's self off from outside disturbances, in an attempt to achieve a one-ness with God in prayer.
Feminism and the Woman Rabbi
As Jewish women became aware of their ability to succeed in the male business world, they began to cast their eyes in the direction of religious vocations. The first female rabbi to be ordained was Rabbi Sally Priesand, in 1973, at Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion, in Cincinnati, Ohio. She was followed closely by Rabbi Sandy Eisenberg Sasso, a Reconstructionist rabbi ordained by The Reconstructionist Seminary in Philadelphia. These and other women found prejudice and apathy, sometimes even outright hostility in their pursuit of their vocations.
Objections to female rabbis and religious professionals included questions concerning their ability to raise families and cope with the often-impossible demands of the clergy. Their ability to "correctly" interpret texts was questioned, and their legitimacy as Jews suspect. Dr. Rachel Adler, in an essay published in The Jewish Condition: Essays on Contemporary Judaism Honoring Rabbi Alexander Schindler, wrote, "Our revolution was to affirm that we had a perspective on Torah that the tradition did not know and needed to learn, and to refuse to be shamed into silence by the magnitude of what we did not know". She goes on to say that "gate crashing" will not go far in "talking our way in," and that joining a discussion that is framed in interests and topics outside of the experience of women is difficult, but not impossible.
The Future of Judaism with Women as Full Partners
In the new millennium, women will continue to demand and receive their portion of both the secular and religious worlds. Not only Judaism, but all religions will see an increase in women as full partners in the practice of their faiths. Eventually, a day will come when no one will comment on a young girl's decision to become a priest, rabbi, or minister; just as now the surprise at a young woman's vocation of doctor or lawyer rarely raises eyebrows. The synagogue will be a place of worship, not gender-based conflict, with the victors being all Jews, not just the women.
Men come to ritual and worship with a perspective born of thousands of years of history and tradition. They bring to Judaism the uniquely masculine sense of strength and vitality that is inherent in male-based worship. Women bring to faith the feeling, the intuitive perspective that questions differently the base of our beliefs. These two views, combined, can make a whole of what is now divided. In Judaism, God is seen as both male and female. In Genesis, in the story of creation, the creation of human beings is told as God created humans in God's own image, male and female, God created them. God is seen as a male, the avenging father, and as the Shechina, the female essence. Both are combined to be a complete being. We, as humans, can only strive to attain what God has always had, the complete integration of male and female.
source:http://judaism.about.com/library/2_feminism/bl_mehitzaglass.htm
Jacqueline Tan, Brenda Chin, Evelyn Teo
10A07
In early Christianity there was no separate roles prescribed for men and women and women were not distinguished separately from men. This was despite the fact that the society in
Women in Christianity: The early Christian prophets
From West Asia, Christianity spread to ancient
Women in Christianity: Development of the patriarchal thought
But the initial belief of the immediate "second coming" of the Christ did not happen. From hereon Christianity slowly started to evolve as a systemized religion with the churches enjoying enormous clout and power. This led to the development of the patriarchal thought in Christianity which abolished and discarded the earlier view that men and women should not be distinguished separately. The havoc of the power of churches continued for the next two thousand years during which women were not only treated as inferior to men but great atrocities were committed against independent women who were branded as witches and hunted down mercilessly.
Women in Christianity: Wave of change in twentieth century
Only in the twentieth century things started changing in Christianity. With the churches loosing much of their clout and power in the twentieth century, with democratic governments firmly established in many countries in Europe as well as in America and with religion getting separated from politics things.It all started with the early feminist movements and peaked with the second wave of feminism from the period of 1960s. This period saw a profound change in the status of women in Christianity as a religion. Women's rights came in the forefront.
Women in Christianity: Feminist Theology
Feminist theology was established as a branch of feminism to study the role of women especially in Christianity. The feminist theological movement influenced the development of the Wisdom literature that expressed God through a feminine image.
Women in Christianity: Women's liberation movement
The period of 1960s and thereafter can be considered as the beginning of the "women's liberation movement" in history which advocated social, cultural, political and religious equality of the gender. Though the women's liberation movement went full throttle in this period the patriarchal set up did not vanish as such and the concept of sexual dualism still existed. This concept not only viewed the differences between men and women in mere biological terms but it also ranked and applied values to these differences. For instance, men were considered to be more idealistic, spiritual, and psychic than women. On the other hand, women were thought to be more emotional, instinctive, and physical than men. This was a senario of absolute "gender stereotyping" and it existed from last two thousand years. In fact this kind of sexual dualism originated from the Greek philosophers like Aristotle and Christianity had adopted it since then. It was only the women's movement in 1960s that challenged these kind of thinking to some affect.
Women in Christianity: Marian devotion
The patriarchal Christianity surprisingly also witnessed another phenomenon that is the Marian devotion. Catholics were highly influenced by this whereas the Protestants rejected this phenomenon. Marian devotion even affected the feminist movement in both ways. One school of thought believed that the Marian devotion helped to offer the feminine view on God where as the other school of thought believed that the Marian devotion in fact harmed the feminist movement. They said that proclaiming Mary as Virgin Mary and worshiping her in fact in this form is damaging to the cause of women as "women and womanhood" are elevated to the "high pedestal of morality" and they are inhibited or discouraged to express or explore the more humane side of their nature. The sexual and cultural revolution of the 1970s and 80s precisely wanted to break free from this high pedestals of morality attached to women and womanhood.
Women in Christianity: The two parallel movements
After 1960s the emergence of two parallel movements took place in Christianity as a religion and the society in general. These two movements were the liberal and conservative movements. These two parallel movements exist till date. The more liberal feminist theological movement is influenced by the goddess worship, wisdom literature, Jesus' movement and Marian devotion. On the other hand the religious right within Christianity works on the principal of sexual dualism. The religious right tries to find values only within an established tradition and they resist change of any kind to an established order. The religious right opposes the liberal reproductive rights of women especially the right to abortion, it rejects cloning technology, it rejects homosexuality and it seeks reestablishment of traditional family ideals based on the patriarchal system. Initially the religious right was only involved with the faith but after the 1970s they have increased their presence in the matters of politics so that they can influence mainstream culture and society in a more profound manner. This is especially true in
However, from the viewpoint of feminists, gender roles are never absolute or essential. They feel that these were formed within society, and that the concept of "gender" was established to analyze and distinguish the differences in the roles of men and women.
Women in Christianity: The religious right and the liberal feminist theological movement
It is quite natural that the Religious Right criticizes feminists, who challenge the superiority of men. They in fact resist everything about the feminist movement. For example they even dislike the liberal welfare policies for women because under such policies, single mothers who need to raise their children and the economically destitute are assisted financially. The Religious Right view such assistance as preventing the establishment of traditional families. They also reject the relativism of human existence and therefore they are intolerant to other views, cultures and religions. They believe in the absolutism and purity of Christian values and tradition. For the religious right "Patriarchal Christianity" is the central core of all existence. Anything outside this central core has to be resisted and absolutely rejected.
In relation to the role of "women in Christianity" we can see that now we have two parallel schools of thought that exits within the religion as well as in the society. These are the liberal feminist theological movement and the conservative religious right movement. Though this being the current scenario it is not a static situation and there is a continuous evolution that is taking place in regard to the "role of women in Christianity" as it had happened in the last two hundred years or so.
By: 10A07; Teo Wee Shiuan, Liu Li, Neoh Jia Xin
The Changing Role of the Family
by Dr Apolos Landa.
As we approach the third millennium, people all around the world show signs of being scared. They may be fearful about their safety, worried about their families or full of uncertainty about the future.
Our families give us an identity. They provide us with a moral, social and economic support. Today, however – even in rural areas in Peru – the idea of the family itself is changing and is sometimes being replaced by other groups whose links are based on confidence, mutual support and a sense of common destiny. Religious groups, office colleagues and homosexuals are now sometimes seen to operate as ‘family’. This new way of thinking about the family is radically different and is not based on correct biblical teaching.
Many forces shake our homes and can cause our families to crumble. What are the most important ones?
Change
Change in itself does not have to be bad. It can often be good. When it is expected and wanted, most of us handle it well and welcome the variations it brings – like the arrival of children, starting a new job or growing old. Though at the time we may struggle with these changes, we soon regain our balance and move on with life.
However there are other kinds of change that threaten to destroy our family life. These can come from the modern world of discoveries and technology – continuously updated televisions and computers. Good technology, designed to help us, can steal from our families their peace.
There are also changes in values, economics and government policies. These changes are making unfaithfulness and divorce more acceptable, homosexuality more ‘natural’, marriage more temporary, child rearing more confusing and stable relationships more difficult. These changes go against correct biblical teaching. We need to learn to control and cope with this rate of change. While not agreeing with such practices, we can still care for the people involved.
Pressures
War and disaster can bring great pressures. So can lack of money and financial instability. The precarious financial situation of many poor people in urban and rural areas of developing countries becomes a tremendous force of pressure as family members – both parents and children – are forced to work out how to survive. Everybody has to work, regardless of age, education or emotional maturity.
Lack of time for precious family life affects both the well-off in regular employment and the poorest alike. This forces the disintegration of family life. This can affect us all. As families try to run their lives and satisfy their desires, life may become emptier instead of fuller.
A major concern, I believe, is that the family is losing its ability to survive pressures. As a doctor, I can liken this to the AIDS epidemic. Just as HIV infection causes the body to lose its ability to fight infection, so the continuous change and pressures on the family act like a disease, causing it to lose its ability to fight off and survive these pressures. The family is becoming immunodeficient!
AIDS and the future
One of the greatest challenges is the HIV/AIDS pandemic. In vast regions of the world this disease has disrupted the basic family structure. AIDS has become the family disease. Wherever there is a member with AIDS, the whole family goes through the same individual conflicts: denial, rejection, anger and resignation.
A family member with AIDS increases the pressures on a family. Can that family respond adequately to the problems? There is both physical and emotional damage. Single women and elderly family members are overburdened with the painful duty of providing for AIDS orphans. Even the extended family disappears when compassion reaches the bottom. Women first and then children are becoming heads of families. AIDS is destroying those who produce and reproduce.
With such worry over the future, many people put their hope in angels, new religions or over-emotional religion – but an inner emptiness remains. There is an urgent need to understand what is happening and to take time to work out our responses – in education, in our values and beliefs, in our family life. We must face up to the changes and pressures on the family, both in Latin America and the wider world today. The prophet Jeremiah once wrote (Jeremiah 6:16), ‘Stand at the cross-roads and look; ask for the ancient paths, ask where the good way is and walk in it, and you will find rest for your souls’ and, I may add, ‘…and for your families.’
Dr Apolos Landa is Director of the Asociación San Lucas, Apdo 2, Moyobamba, San Martin, Peru.
Duong Thanh Ngoc Linh
Nuraishah Bte Mokhtar
S Mitra Dev
Sreyashi Dasgupta
10S22
Parental role
Reviewed by David Pang Auckland, New Zealand
February 2, 2006
Do not be mistaken, Family matters: The role of parents in Singapore education is not about failing schools or failing children in Singapore. Neither is it about dysfunctional families and their consequences. Rather, the thrust of the book concerns how parents in Singapore manage their children’s education and contribute to the national effort of capacity building in today’s competitive international economy. More specifically, it is about lived experiences of Singaporean parents responding to a uniquely local phenomenon called “Kiasu” (literally means ‘afraid to lose’) in a highly meritocratic and competitive society. Others have made similar observation of this preoccupation with succeeding in education: “A major concern of many parents in Singapore is how well their children will perform in school learning tasks, what marks or grades they will obtain in school and national examinations and consequently which secondary school or junior college their children get admitted to” (Quah et al., 1997, p.319). However, the active mainstreaming of parental involvement in schooling in Singapore is a relatively recent occurrence. Its marginal status was due to “a paternalistic and centrally-controlled education system in past decades” (p. 6). New policy initiatives to engage parents in a tripartite partnership of home-school-community began only in 1998 when the then educational Minister emphasized “the tapping of parental resources for schooling, and the sharing of the responsibility for the education of children with parents as well as other ‘stakeholders’” (p. 7).
As a country, Singapore is a ‘rags to riches’ story. It has evolved from a backward colony devoid of natural resources to an ultra-modern metropolis. Today, it is regarded as a nodal point of trade and commerce, particularly within the Asian region. Variously described as an ‘intelligent city’, a ‘creative destruction city’, or ‘Switzerland of Asia’, its much-admired achievement is nothing short of ‘self-made’. Not surprisingly, therefore, the author, Lana Khong Yiu Lan, an Assistant Professor at the National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, begins the first chapter of Family Matters with a captivating title, "Singapore schools today: survival of the fittest." In it, she encapsulates the complex and dynamic environment confronting families and writes, “education is such a high-stakes issue in Singapore” (p. 7).
Using the case study approach (Chapter Two), Khong’s study attempted to “capture the voices, emotions, and actions’ (p. 40) of seven modern middle-class mothers whose children studied in a prestigious all-girls primary school. The dominant discussion has excluded fathers because, according to the author, caring for children is still widely perceived as the mother’s domain. This effectively rules out the findings being reflective across demographic background in terms of ethnic and socioeconomic variations in parental involvement in education. Chapter Three provides some useful background information concerning those families who were surveyed as part of the study. Using the combined theoretical orientations of Pierre Bourdieu’s cultural capital (pp. 22-25) and James Coleman’s social capital (pp. 25-28), the study drew attention to the multiple social realities of parenting and investigated the different impacts these ‘capitals’ had on the case-study mothers. It sought “to understand and account for how resources in the home environment, including the relationships within it, are activated and transferred by parents to children in supporting children’s schooling” (p. 30).
Two patterns of parental management or parenting patterns have emerged in the study. Four mothers were identified as proactive parents (Chapter Four) and three as passive parents (Chapter Five). The ‘lives’ of the subjects are presented in the form of selected vignettes in four categories: mothers’ work – at home and outside, mothers and children’s schooling, mothers’ strategies, and mothers and material resources. Comparison of the characteristics of the two types of parenting show that they were uneven and easily distinguishable (Chapter Six). The key characteristics of proactive parenting included being informed, taking initiative and a parental readiness for self sacrifice (p. 115). The passive parents displayed clearly different set of parenting practices than the proactive parents. There was a lower level of personal parental involvement and participation in the children’s schooling experience. Passive parenting manifested indifference, inaction, and a focus on self-fulfilment (p. 121). The information gathered suggested that family strategies and family resources have a compelling influence in explaining the socially differentiated educational outcomes and experiences. Collectively, the parenting styles reflected the different choices and decisions made by parents in response to perceived threats and opportunities at a particular time and social location. In general, the practice of family involvement in education falls short of its promises, and the author describes the challenges this way:
These choices reflect the priorities and form a major response on the part of these modern women to the dilemma of balancing perceived opportunities and limitations. Faced with juggling real concerns for their children’s well-being in the educational contest, meeting cultural expectations for keeping family values intact, as well as being called upon to actively contribute to national GNP, most women will rarely be able to fulfil every one of these requirements equally successfully. (p. 127)
In Chapter Seven, the author offers an array of examples of what she calls “supportive webbing” (p. 194) as a means of promoting success for children’s education. She suggests that the different levels of social capital within the family and community – the development of social relationships, networks, and reciprocity between parents and children, between spouses, between home and school, and between agencies and community organizations – can account for the different educational outcomes for children. The critical role played by productive relationships is particularly important in a society where school work load is always very demanding
Khong’s concluding thoughts in Chapter 8 are by far the most interesting to read in the volume. In discussing the implications, she proposes a model where the family is at the intersection of a multiplicity of variables comprising “global, societal and familial component parts” (p. 196), with each presenting fresh challenges on parenting. However, the author cautions against focusing excessively on and overplaying the economic dimensions of families and the instrumental role of schools without seeking a balance between valuing “schools merely as machinery for the production of globally-competitive, skilled workers … [and]… as learning communities for the creation of citizens” (p. 205). Another Singapore educationist puts this delicate calibration of achieving educational and economic objectives succinctly, “[G]iven the examination-oriented culture where parents impose a lot of pressure on their children to excel in their studies, how much room are parents willing to give for their children to explore their talents and abilities?” (Tan, 2005, p.451). But one can stretch this argument still further to ask: Is this one way to moderate parents ‘kiasu’ attitude in always wanting their child to be the best? Or, do parents have a choice?
So where are parents in Singapore heading in a globalising world? Singapore, being a ‘price-taker’ rather than a ‘price-maker’ economy, can expect the pressure driving changes and raising expectations for the parents and other stakeholders to accelerate. They may find themselves increasingly guided by statements that assert the role of parents in supporting and responding to educational changes. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s first National Day speech in August 2004 is a case in point. In mapping out his vision of educating for Singapore’s future, he urged parents to “support the efforts of the schools: when the schools are trying new teaching methods or when they are trying to build character or just toughening them up a little” (Lee, 2004, p.H7). Similarly, insights provided by social commentators will be noted. For example, Thomas Friedman (2005), author of the much-talked about book, ‘The World is Flat’, suggests that “Helping individuals adapt to a flat world is not only the job of governments and companies. It is also the job of parents. They too need to know in what world their kids are growing up and what it will take them to thrive” (p. 303). Indeed, in Family matters, Khong calls for a response from all stakeholders that would reflect more adequately and accurately the impact of “external forces” (p. 197) on family and society. She seeks to stimulate this effort by highlighting, among other things, the need to give attention to the development of parenting skills, the democratization of parenting focusing on a shared role of husband and wife, and the development of family advocacy and family-friendly policy and expertise. The challenges ahead are formidable in terms of policy and practice, yet potentially achievable. It is inevitable that parenting in Singapore will be continuously revisited, rethought, and reframed. This book is not a call for celebration of success although the country has consistently come out top in the global ranking of mathematics and sciences.
This book is based on the author’s doctoral thesis. The style of writing is descriptive and discursive. And the tone is objective and straightforward. This book is suitable for generalists as well as specialists in education and related disciplines. However, readers with an interest in an interpretive analysis may find the book more appealing than would others with a more positivist inclination. For readers in Asia, they may be able to replicate their own experiences with the ethnographic content the author has assembled from the interviews with the participants (Chapters Four to Seven). And for readers in the west, the book can provide them with a comparative insight into the critical roles parents played in their children’s education in a country that has leap-frogged “From Third World to First” (Lee, 2000) within a short span of three decades. Taken as a whole, this book is an interesting study of parenting dynamics within the context of rapid social and economic change.
February 2, 2006
Do not be mistaken, Family matters: The role of parents in Singapore education is not about failing schools or failing children in Singapore. Neither is it about dysfunctional families and their consequences. Rather, the thrust of the book concerns how parents in Singapore manage their children’s education and contribute to the national effort of capacity building in today’s competitive international economy. More specifically, it is about lived experiences of Singaporean parents responding to a uniquely local phenomenon called “Kiasu” (literally means ‘afraid to lose’) in a highly meritocratic and competitive society. Others have made similar observation of this preoccupation with succeeding in education: “A major concern of many parents in Singapore is how well their children will perform in school learning tasks, what marks or grades they will obtain in school and national examinations and consequently which secondary school or junior college their children get admitted to” (Quah et al., 1997, p.319). However, the active mainstreaming of parental involvement in schooling in Singapore is a relatively recent occurrence. Its marginal status was due to “a paternalistic and centrally-controlled education system in past decades” (p. 6). New policy initiatives to engage parents in a tripartite partnership of home-school-community began only in 1998 when the then educational Minister emphasized “the tapping of parental resources for schooling, and the sharing of the responsibility for the education of children with parents as well as other ‘stakeholders’” (p. 7).
As a country, Singapore is a ‘rags to riches’ story. It has evolved from a backward colony devoid of natural resources to an ultra-modern metropolis. Today, it is regarded as a nodal point of trade and commerce, particularly within the Asian region. Variously described as an ‘intelligent city’, a ‘creative destruction city’, or ‘Switzerland of Asia’, its much-admired achievement is nothing short of ‘self-made’. Not surprisingly, therefore, the author, Lana Khong Yiu Lan, an Assistant Professor at the National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, begins the first chapter of Family Matters with a captivating title, "Singapore schools today: survival of the fittest." In it, she encapsulates the complex and dynamic environment confronting families and writes, “education is such a high-stakes issue in Singapore” (p. 7).
Using the case study approach (Chapter Two), Khong’s study attempted to “capture the voices, emotions, and actions’ (p. 40) of seven modern middle-class mothers whose children studied in a prestigious all-girls primary school. The dominant discussion has excluded fathers because, according to the author, caring for children is still widely perceived as the mother’s domain. This effectively rules out the findings being reflective across demographic background in terms of ethnic and socioeconomic variations in parental involvement in education. Chapter Three provides some useful background information concerning those families who were surveyed as part of the study. Using the combined theoretical orientations of Pierre Bourdieu’s cultural capital (pp. 22-25) and James Coleman’s social capital (pp. 25-28), the study drew attention to the multiple social realities of parenting and investigated the different impacts these ‘capitals’ had on the case-study mothers. It sought “to understand and account for how resources in the home environment, including the relationships within it, are activated and transferred by parents to children in supporting children’s schooling” (p. 30).
Two patterns of parental management or parenting patterns have emerged in the study. Four mothers were identified as proactive parents (Chapter Four) and three as passive parents (Chapter Five). The ‘lives’ of the subjects are presented in the form of selected vignettes in four categories: mothers’ work – at home and outside, mothers and children’s schooling, mothers’ strategies, and mothers and material resources. Comparison of the characteristics of the two types of parenting show that they were uneven and easily distinguishable (Chapter Six). The key characteristics of proactive parenting included being informed, taking initiative and a parental readiness for self sacrifice (p. 115). The passive parents displayed clearly different set of parenting practices than the proactive parents. There was a lower level of personal parental involvement and participation in the children’s schooling experience. Passive parenting manifested indifference, inaction, and a focus on self-fulfilment (p. 121). The information gathered suggested that family strategies and family resources have a compelling influence in explaining the socially differentiated educational outcomes and experiences. Collectively, the parenting styles reflected the different choices and decisions made by parents in response to perceived threats and opportunities at a particular time and social location. In general, the practice of family involvement in education falls short of its promises, and the author describes the challenges this way:
These choices reflect the priorities and form a major response on the part of these modern women to the dilemma of balancing perceived opportunities and limitations. Faced with juggling real concerns for their children’s well-being in the educational contest, meeting cultural expectations for keeping family values intact, as well as being called upon to actively contribute to national GNP, most women will rarely be able to fulfil every one of these requirements equally successfully. (p. 127)
In Chapter Seven, the author offers an array of examples of what she calls “supportive webbing” (p. 194) as a means of promoting success for children’s education. She suggests that the different levels of social capital within the family and community – the development of social relationships, networks, and reciprocity between parents and children, between spouses, between home and school, and between agencies and community organizations – can account for the different educational outcomes for children. The critical role played by productive relationships is particularly important in a society where school work load is always very demanding
Khong’s concluding thoughts in Chapter 8 are by far the most interesting to read in the volume. In discussing the implications, she proposes a model where the family is at the intersection of a multiplicity of variables comprising “global, societal and familial component parts” (p. 196), with each presenting fresh challenges on parenting. However, the author cautions against focusing excessively on and overplaying the economic dimensions of families and the instrumental role of schools without seeking a balance between valuing “schools merely as machinery for the production of globally-competitive, skilled workers … [and]… as learning communities for the creation of citizens” (p. 205). Another Singapore educationist puts this delicate calibration of achieving educational and economic objectives succinctly, “[G]iven the examination-oriented culture where parents impose a lot of pressure on their children to excel in their studies, how much room are parents willing to give for their children to explore their talents and abilities?” (Tan, 2005, p.451). But one can stretch this argument still further to ask: Is this one way to moderate parents ‘kiasu’ attitude in always wanting their child to be the best? Or, do parents have a choice?
So where are parents in Singapore heading in a globalising world? Singapore, being a ‘price-taker’ rather than a ‘price-maker’ economy, can expect the pressure driving changes and raising expectations for the parents and other stakeholders to accelerate. They may find themselves increasingly guided by statements that assert the role of parents in supporting and responding to educational changes. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s first National Day speech in August 2004 is a case in point. In mapping out his vision of educating for Singapore’s future, he urged parents to “support the efforts of the schools: when the schools are trying new teaching methods or when they are trying to build character or just toughening them up a little” (Lee, 2004, p.H7). Similarly, insights provided by social commentators will be noted. For example, Thomas Friedman (2005), author of the much-talked about book, ‘The World is Flat’, suggests that “Helping individuals adapt to a flat world is not only the job of governments and companies. It is also the job of parents. They too need to know in what world their kids are growing up and what it will take them to thrive” (p. 303). Indeed, in Family matters, Khong calls for a response from all stakeholders that would reflect more adequately and accurately the impact of “external forces” (p. 197) on family and society. She seeks to stimulate this effort by highlighting, among other things, the need to give attention to the development of parenting skills, the democratization of parenting focusing on a shared role of husband and wife, and the development of family advocacy and family-friendly policy and expertise. The challenges ahead are formidable in terms of policy and practice, yet potentially achievable. It is inevitable that parenting in Singapore will be continuously revisited, rethought, and reframed. This book is not a call for celebration of success although the country has consistently come out top in the global ranking of mathematics and sciences.
This book is based on the author’s doctoral thesis. The style of writing is descriptive and discursive. And the tone is objective and straightforward. This book is suitable for generalists as well as specialists in education and related disciplines. However, readers with an interest in an interpretive analysis may find the book more appealing than would others with a more positivist inclination. For readers in Asia, they may be able to replicate their own experiences with the ethnographic content the author has assembled from the interviews with the participants (Chapters Four to Seven). And for readers in the west, the book can provide them with a comparative insight into the critical roles parents played in their children’s education in a country that has leap-frogged “From Third World to First” (Lee, 2000) within a short span of three decades. Taken as a whole, this book is an interesting study of parenting dynamics within the context of rapid social and economic change.
More rights than one might think
Some Americans believe that Muslim women are oppressed by their religion, forced to cover themselves completely, denied education and other basic rights. It is true that Muslim women, like women all over the world, have struggled against inequality and restrictive practices in education, work force participation, and family roles. Many of these oppressive practices, however, do not come from Islam itself, but are part of local cultural traditions. (To think about the difference between religion and culture, ask yourself if the high rate of domestic violence in the United States is related to Christianity, the predominant religion.)
In fact, Islam gives women a number of rights, some of which were not enjoyed by Western women until the 19th century. For example, until 1882, the property of women in England was given to their husbands when they married, but Muslim women always retained their own assets. Muslim women could specify conditions in their marriage contracts, such as the right to divorce should their husband take another wife. Also, Muslim women in many countries keep their own last name after marriage.
The Quran explicitly states that men and women are equal in the eyes of God. Furthermore, the Quran:
forbids female infanticide (practiced in pre-Islamic Arabia and other parts of the world)
instructs Muslims to educate daughters as well as sons
insists that women have the right to refuse a prospective husband
gives women rights if they are divorced by their husband
gives women the right to divorce in certain cases
gives women the right to own and inherit property (though in Sunni Islam they get only half of what men inherit. Men are expected to care for their mothers and any unmarried female relatives, and would, it is reasoned, need greater resources for this purpose.)
While polygyny is permissible, it is discouraged and on the whole practiced less frequently than imagined by Westerners. It is more frequent in the Gulf, including Saudi Arabia. Many Muslims cite the Quranic phrase "But treat them equally... and if you cannot, then one [wife] is better" and argue that monogamy is preferable, or even mandatory.
The Quran and the role of women
As the Islamic state and religion expanded, interpretations of the gender roles laid out in the Quran varied with different cultures. For example, some religious scholars in ninth- and 10th-century Iraq were prescribing more restrictive roles for women, while elite women in Islamic Spain were sometimes able to bend these rules and mix quite freely with men (see Walladah bint Mustakfi below).
Some contemporary women -- and men as well -- reject the limitations put on women and are reinterpreting the Quran from this perspective.
Before the arrival of Islam in the seventh century, upper-class women in Byzantine society and Sassanian women of the royal harem wore the veil as a mark of their high status. This custom was adopted by elite women in early Islamic society in the same region. Many nomadic women, however, maintained their traditional freedom of movement and less restrictive dress codes even after conversion to Islam.
Quranic rights for women were not always followed, depending on the strength of local patriarchal customs. Women in 19th-century Ottoman Egypt, for example, were often not given the full inheritance due them by law. If they challenged the family members who withheld their money in an Islamic court, however, they could win. This is still the case in family law practices in some countries.
Female political leaders in Muslim societies
Some women in Muslim societies have been prominent political actors. Female relatives of the Prophet Muhammad were particularly important in the early Muslim community because they knew his practice and teachings so well. Other women came to power through fathers or husbands. Still others wielded power behind the scenes.
Aisha, the favored wife of Muhammad, had great political clout and even participated in battle (the Battle of Camel).
Razia was a Muslim woman ruler of 13th-century India.
Amina was a 16th-century queen of Zaria in present-day Nigeria.
Shajarat al-Durr was briefly sultan in Mamluk Egypt, but was the power behind the throne for even longer.
The so-called "sultanate of women" in the Ottoman Empire during the 17th century was a period when several strong women had enormous power over affairs of state.
Huda Shaarawi, who became famous for discarding her face veil, also established a women's political party and worked for Egyptian independence from Britain in the first half of the 20th century.
Today there is a small but growing number of women in the parliaments of Turkey, Egypt, Jordan, and Lebanon, and in the fall of 2002, the Moroccan parliament is hoping to bring women into 25 percent of its seats. Contemporary Muslim women heads of state have included Megawati Sukarnoputri of Indonesia, Benazir Bhutto of Pakistan, Tansu Ciller of Turkey, and Khaleda Zia and Sheik Hasina Wazed of Bangladesh.
Women as religious leaders
Sufism is an important branch of Islam emphasizing mysticism and one's personal relationship with God. The tenets of Sufism were first articulated by a woman named Rabia, a freed slave who became a prominent scholar in the eighth-century city of Basra in Iraq. She refused to marry because she did not want any earthly distractions from her love of God. Fatima, the Prophet Muhammad's daughter, and Zaynab, the Prophet's granddaughter, are also very important role models of piety for women in the Islamic world.
Contemporary women are also important religious leaders. Zaynab al-Ghazali led the women's wing of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. There are numerous women teachers, preachers, and Islamist leaders in contemporary Iran, one example being Zahra Rahnavard. In the United States, Riffat Hassan is a well-known American Muslim scholar.
The role of wealth and class
Wealthier women historically have had more economic and educational opportunities by virtue of their class. Many wealthy women were and continue to be highly educated, their money and intelligence giving them the power to ignore society's traditional expectations of women and to participate fully in the economic, political, and cultural life of their community.
Wealthy women, however, have often been more restricted in their clothing and movement in public, since keeping them covered and out of public life is a way to demonstrate status. Poorer and rural women have had relatively more freedom of movement but fewer educational opportunities. In addition, women in highly segregated Muslim societies sometimes created (and still do create) their own society set apart from the male world. Segregation does not necessarily mean isolation for women, though it obviously has many other effects.
Individual personality and abilities.
Whatever the cultural and economic background of a woman, her own abilities and personality greatly determine what she can achieve in her society.
Khadija, first wife of the Prophet, was a confident and shrewd businesswoman. She first hired the Prophet to lead her trading caravans, then proposed marriage to him although she was many years his senior. She was the first person to convert to Islam.
Walladah bint Mustakfi, a spirited noblewoman and noted poet of 11th-century Cordoba, gave parties with both men and women where she read her poetry. She declared, "I am by God fit for great things/And go my way armed with pride."
The contemporary singer Umm Kulthum, who came from a modest village background, was considered by many to be the voice and conscience of Egypt. Even today her memory and music have great appeal throughout the Arab world.
The "veil"
The veil is often seen in the West as a symbol of Muslim women's subordinate position in society, but its meaning and use vary enormously in Muslim societies.
The Quran directs both men and women to dress modestly, but the actual interpretation and implementation of this rule varies enormously.
Historically, the veil has been related to social class, not religion. The veil was first adopted from pre-Islamic Byzantine and Persian customs. In most areas, poor and rural women have covered themselves less than urban and elite women.
Within Islam, head coverings (hijab) vary by culture. They range from loose scarves to veils and full-length coverings, such as the burqa worn by many Afghan women. There is also a new style called "Islamic dress," in which a loose coat is worn with a scarf tied over the hair. Covering of the face was more common in the past than it is today, more so in some regions than others. Head covering is not solely a facet of Islam, however, and women of many cultures and religions cover their heads in different ways.
Veiling rules vary from country to country. In the modern period, strict laws about women's dress are often used to emphasize the religious orientation of a particular government, as in Iran or Saudi Arabia. On the other hand, Turkey does not allow women to wear the veil in public offices or universities because the Turkish state is committed to a more secular identity. The veil is also discouraged in Tunisia. In all cases, many citizens are dissatisfied with the law.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/globalconnections/mideast/questions/women/index.html
Robert, Wenjie, Deon and Yik ZhenSome Americans believe that Muslim women are oppressed by their religion, forced to cover themselves completely, denied education and other basic rights. It is true that Muslim women, like women all over the world, have struggled against inequality and restrictive practices in education, work force participation, and family roles. Many of these oppressive practices, however, do not come from Islam itself, but are part of local cultural traditions. (To think about the difference between religion and culture, ask yourself if the high rate of domestic violence in the United States is related to Christianity, the predominant religion.)
In fact, Islam gives women a number of rights, some of which were not enjoyed by Western women until the 19th century. For example, until 1882, the property of women in England was given to their husbands when they married, but Muslim women always retained their own assets. Muslim women could specify conditions in their marriage contracts, such as the right to divorce should their husband take another wife. Also, Muslim women in many countries keep their own last name after marriage.
The Quran explicitly states that men and women are equal in the eyes of God. Furthermore, the Quran:
forbids female infanticide (practiced in pre-Islamic Arabia and other parts of the world)
instructs Muslims to educate daughters as well as sons
insists that women have the right to refuse a prospective husband
gives women rights if they are divorced by their husband
gives women the right to divorce in certain cases
gives women the right to own and inherit property (though in Sunni Islam they get only half of what men inherit. Men are expected to care for their mothers and any unmarried female relatives, and would, it is reasoned, need greater resources for this purpose.)
While polygyny is permissible, it is discouraged and on the whole practiced less frequently than imagined by Westerners. It is more frequent in the Gulf, including Saudi Arabia. Many Muslims cite the Quranic phrase "But treat them equally... and if you cannot, then one [wife] is better" and argue that monogamy is preferable, or even mandatory.
The Quran and the role of women
As the Islamic state and religion expanded, interpretations of the gender roles laid out in the Quran varied with different cultures. For example, some religious scholars in ninth- and 10th-century Iraq were prescribing more restrictive roles for women, while elite women in Islamic Spain were sometimes able to bend these rules and mix quite freely with men (see Walladah bint Mustakfi below).
Some contemporary women -- and men as well -- reject the limitations put on women and are reinterpreting the Quran from this perspective.
Before the arrival of Islam in the seventh century, upper-class women in Byzantine society and Sassanian women of the royal harem wore the veil as a mark of their high status. This custom was adopted by elite women in early Islamic society in the same region. Many nomadic women, however, maintained their traditional freedom of movement and less restrictive dress codes even after conversion to Islam.
Quranic rights for women were not always followed, depending on the strength of local patriarchal customs. Women in 19th-century Ottoman Egypt, for example, were often not given the full inheritance due them by law. If they challenged the family members who withheld their money in an Islamic court, however, they could win. This is still the case in family law practices in some countries.
Female political leaders in Muslim societies
Some women in Muslim societies have been prominent political actors. Female relatives of the Prophet Muhammad were particularly important in the early Muslim community because they knew his practice and teachings so well. Other women came to power through fathers or husbands. Still others wielded power behind the scenes.
Aisha, the favored wife of Muhammad, had great political clout and even participated in battle (the Battle of Camel).
Razia was a Muslim woman ruler of 13th-century India.
Amina was a 16th-century queen of Zaria in present-day Nigeria.
Shajarat al-Durr was briefly sultan in Mamluk Egypt, but was the power behind the throne for even longer.
The so-called "sultanate of women" in the Ottoman Empire during the 17th century was a period when several strong women had enormous power over affairs of state.
Huda Shaarawi, who became famous for discarding her face veil, also established a women's political party and worked for Egyptian independence from Britain in the first half of the 20th century.
Today there is a small but growing number of women in the parliaments of Turkey, Egypt, Jordan, and Lebanon, and in the fall of 2002, the Moroccan parliament is hoping to bring women into 25 percent of its seats. Contemporary Muslim women heads of state have included Megawati Sukarnoputri of Indonesia, Benazir Bhutto of Pakistan, Tansu Ciller of Turkey, and Khaleda Zia and Sheik Hasina Wazed of Bangladesh.
Women as religious leaders
Sufism is an important branch of Islam emphasizing mysticism and one's personal relationship with God. The tenets of Sufism were first articulated by a woman named Rabia, a freed slave who became a prominent scholar in the eighth-century city of Basra in Iraq. She refused to marry because she did not want any earthly distractions from her love of God. Fatima, the Prophet Muhammad's daughter, and Zaynab, the Prophet's granddaughter, are also very important role models of piety for women in the Islamic world.
Contemporary women are also important religious leaders. Zaynab al-Ghazali led the women's wing of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. There are numerous women teachers, preachers, and Islamist leaders in contemporary Iran, one example being Zahra Rahnavard. In the United States, Riffat Hassan is a well-known American Muslim scholar.
The role of wealth and class
Wealthier women historically have had more economic and educational opportunities by virtue of their class. Many wealthy women were and continue to be highly educated, their money and intelligence giving them the power to ignore society's traditional expectations of women and to participate fully in the economic, political, and cultural life of their community.
Wealthy women, however, have often been more restricted in their clothing and movement in public, since keeping them covered and out of public life is a way to demonstrate status. Poorer and rural women have had relatively more freedom of movement but fewer educational opportunities. In addition, women in highly segregated Muslim societies sometimes created (and still do create) their own society set apart from the male world. Segregation does not necessarily mean isolation for women, though it obviously has many other effects.
Individual personality and abilities.
Whatever the cultural and economic background of a woman, her own abilities and personality greatly determine what she can achieve in her society.
Khadija, first wife of the Prophet, was a confident and shrewd businesswoman. She first hired the Prophet to lead her trading caravans, then proposed marriage to him although she was many years his senior. She was the first person to convert to Islam.
Walladah bint Mustakfi, a spirited noblewoman and noted poet of 11th-century Cordoba, gave parties with both men and women where she read her poetry. She declared, "I am by God fit for great things/And go my way armed with pride."
The contemporary singer Umm Kulthum, who came from a modest village background, was considered by many to be the voice and conscience of Egypt. Even today her memory and music have great appeal throughout the Arab world.
The "veil"
The veil is often seen in the West as a symbol of Muslim women's subordinate position in society, but its meaning and use vary enormously in Muslim societies.
The Quran directs both men and women to dress modestly, but the actual interpretation and implementation of this rule varies enormously.
Historically, the veil has been related to social class, not religion. The veil was first adopted from pre-Islamic Byzantine and Persian customs. In most areas, poor and rural women have covered themselves less than urban and elite women.
Within Islam, head coverings (hijab) vary by culture. They range from loose scarves to veils and full-length coverings, such as the burqa worn by many Afghan women. There is also a new style called "Islamic dress," in which a loose coat is worn with a scarf tied over the hair. Covering of the face was more common in the past than it is today, more so in some regions than others. Head covering is not solely a facet of Islam, however, and women of many cultures and religions cover their heads in different ways.
Veiling rules vary from country to country. In the modern period, strict laws about women's dress are often used to emphasize the religious orientation of a particular government, as in Iran or Saudi Arabia. On the other hand, Turkey does not allow women to wear the veil in public offices or universities because the Turkish state is committed to a more secular identity. The veil is also discouraged in Tunisia. In all cases, many citizens are dissatisfied with the law.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/globalconnections/mideast/questions/women/index.html
10A07
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)