Author: Andre Coleman

This assignment is going to discuss the roles and purpose of British welfare state. This assignment will look at what welfare state is and the problems which society faced in the past century about the poor people. Also, the first administrative unit of Britain alongside with how poor law passed and the beverage report.

This assignment is based on roles and purpose of welfare state. The United Kingdom welfare state was established in 1942 by William Beverage due to the Second World War which caused social problems to the British citizens. The Government stepped forward as to provide for its people by introducing Welfare State as a way of controlling these problems. Welfare state is a response to social problems whereby government undertakes the responsible to safeguard the health and well-being of its people, particularly those in financial or social need, by means of grants, pensions, and other benefits (Leistering & Walker, 1998). It is based on the principals of equal opportunity, equitable distribution of wealth and public responsibilities of people that lack provision for a good life.

The origin of the welfare state was from the 16th century. Britain expected the worst when the Second World War broke up in 1939. Due to war many people were affected by social problems such as poverty and many lost their jobs which resulted in high unemployment. The majority of the people were living in overcrowded poor housing facilities such as (slums) because council houses were not enough. Diseases were spreading because of lack of clean water, and sick people could not have money to seek treatment and this resulted in many people dying. Due to these events the government policy brought a change towards the care that was provided for the people. Welfare legislation was developed to make sure that everyone had access to quality of life due to the world war (Spicker, 2012).

The idea of the Elizabeth law was based on the plan that the government was in charge on administration and control of poor relief. Elizabeth government realised that they would create some system to support people. Parish was the first basic administrative unit in Britain to take responsibility for the people who were poor and also had control to force people to pay a local tax to assist the poor. People who could not work such as old people and disabled were provided with accommodation in parish houses and also given money called the ‘outdoor relief’. However, this caused an impact on the increase of the cost of poor relief. The outdoor relief pay which was given to assist the poor in tough times and by doing this it was regarded as encouraging workers to remain inactive undermining the 19th century principles of thrift and hard work (Frohman, 2008). It was also argued that that the poor law encouraged the growth of poverty (Spicker, 2012).

In 1834 a new Poor Law was introduced. People assumed that it was a good idea and they welcomed it thinking that it would lessen the cost of looking after the poor. People thought that beggars were going to be taken off the streets and for those people who were poor they were going to be encouraged to look after themselves. This poor law encouraged people to be independent and to help themselves by making ends meet. The new Poor Law ensured that those poor people who were housed in workhouses were getting some assistants in terms of clothing, food and money .Children were offered schooling when they entered the workhouse. In return for this care, all workhouse paupers would have to work for several hours each day. However, these workhouses were a system of encouraging poor people to work. The new poor law also help children who entered the work house to be educated it also ensure that the less privilege to get house in return.

In reaction, the poor law of 1834 introduced a poor relief which imposed the principle of’ less eligibility’. This new system act took a much harsher line towards help for the poor people whereby strict rules and regulations were put in place for people to follow (Harris, 2004). Families were separated and were not allowed to see each other. The Law stated that no healthy person was to be given money or other help from the Poor Law authorities except for people in a workhouse, and the unemployed benefits was to be provided as a last resort. Conditions in the workhouse were deliberately made harsh, in the hope that the poor would move out and seek work elsewhere (Hothersall & Bolger, 2010).

The new welfare state gradually replaced the 20th century the poor law. During 1906 a liberal government was elected and introduce some reforms.1n 1908 an old age pension came to existence which allow pension to be given to people over 70’s, from 1925 pension were paid to men that is over 65 and to women over 60.

The national insurance act was passed in 1911 and all employees were made to contribute from their wage and the aim was to build and also for every worker who felt sick was entitled to free treatment were given to every worker that feel sick. The contributions were to help the workers in future in situations when they become ill or out of work. In 1920 the scheme was extended to most people but not all work houses became unnecessary and then poor law was abolished.

Top of Form

Bottom of Form

In 1941 an enquiry was established to plan how best it can be to shape up the welfare state. Beveridge held the opportunity as to start again the script, and then redesigned the contours of British welfare. By accident the report of the publication of his report was delayed and was produced in November 1942. Although largely a creation of ideas including Beveridge’s which had been around for some it was a successful to tackle social problems such as the five giants.

In 1942 William beverage prepared a report called the Beveridge regarding the welfare of the individuals on how the government could help people in poverty and also to reduce inequality. This report focused on how the government should find ways of fighting the five ‘Giant Evils’ of ‘Want, Disease, Ignorance, Squalor and Idleness which was caused by world war. The government was committed to provide care for the people of Britain to ensure that everyone had quality of life. The 1942 Beveridge report started in the introduction of welfare state, and involved the main changes and these included the national insurance based on 3 assumptions such as family allowance, National Health Service and full employment. The welfare state was produced to promote the provision of services for the public not only a response to poverty. Implementing Beveridge was immediately seen as part of winning the peace and also served as the blue print for the British welfare state (Hothersall & Bolger, 2010).

In 1945 when labour government was elected new services were introduced by the labour government and these included family allowances (Laybourn, 1995) and this created debates regarding the welfare state within current governments. The government introduced the Education Act 1944 which tackled lack of schooling. The 1946 National Health Act was concerned with improving the quality of health among the population. The 1946 National Insurance Act was created to cover all personal risks such as unemployment and illness. The NHS started operating and it provided a service to the population at a low cost. The 1945 Housing 1948 labour government extended the social security and a program of free medical care, Housing, Education and the Welfare of the Children. The National Assistance Act 1948 means- tested for people in lower income below a standard set by government and for unemployed people. The 1948 Children Act was also another important element. After 1948 the key elements of the welfare state was understood as social security, Health, Housing, Education and welfare of children (Lowe, 2005).

In the 1950 the government took over and slashed the help which was given to the poor and the sick. This created the provision of welfare state services to become more problematic and the interventions of the government caused further problems on that time. This then made the distribution of income more imbalanced and although they attempted to make the poor more hardworking and self sufficient it didn’t work.

The rolling back the state was revolved around the need to cut public spending as a way of reducing impact on public affair. Thatcher (1979-97) promised to reduce taxes and to lower the level of public spending and less state intervention. Thatcher opposed a welfare system and the welfare state began to break down resulted in retreat for housing and pension. The conservative government discouraged individuals and families from relying on the welfare state and promoted business and private enterprise. The Conservative changed the balance of welfare expenditure towards health and social security at the expense of education and housing. Thatcher revolution was less radical and the welfare spending remained stationary between the late (1970).

Thatcher stated that welfare spending was weighing down the international competitiveness and also creating a ‘dependency culture’ which also was supported by the government and acted to cut back the welfare state (Clasen, 2003). They were some cut back in Housing such as in building, maintenance and subsidization, as a way of driving up local authority rent levels (Maclennan & Gibb, 1990). In Social Security welfare bills were introduced by cutting entitlements such as Unemployment Benefit and people were pushed on to means-tested support (Clasen, 2003). Under Child Support Scheme absent parents were required to contribute towards the child maintenance as a way of serving some of the welfare state money. The conservative government regarded NHS as a burden on the economy despite being popular since 1980 and was named as the ‘internal market’. As a result the NHS and Community Act were created in (1990) and introduced so many changes. This act recommended the introduction of a split for those who purchase the service and those who provide the services. The aim for that was to control costs and make the system more open to patients (Propper, et al. 2008).

When new labour came into office in 1997 and welfare remained in the top priority. Welfare reform was a new labour agenda which led to a change on the welfare state. Regardless of Conservative critics of the welfare, new labour argued that new welfare policies were needed to improve poverty, inequality, health and education. The main aim of labour was to develop the NHS by rebuilding it and also promote choice for the patients and also free of charge. However, the white paper was published and health reforms were discussed which led to the Health Act (1999). This new policy brought change and encouraged cooperation and partnership between NHS and other care providers and it abolished the internal markets which were introduced by the Conservative government. Labour introduced the’ Welfare -to-work’ a policy for employment aiming at helping people to work and support themselves especially young people, single parents and those out of work. Another issue was to tackle the social exclusion of underprivileged people who had no access income and also to social institution. Those people from poorer families in work were to get benefits increase through Tax Credits. Labours approach was to try to cut down the amount of child and pensioner poverty (Baldock, Mitton, Manning & Vickerstaff, 2012).

After 2010 the welfare state was identified by the incoming of the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition there was change in the areas such as: healthcare, schools and social security.

In conclusion the welfare state was developed due to the number of factors contributed by world war such as unemployment, sickness and poverty.

Top of Form

Many theorists state that the development of 19th century sociology was the response to the dramatic social change of the time. The social upheaval caused by Enlightenment, and the Industrial and French revolutions caused social theorists to develop sociology as a method of explaining, analysing and understanding the social upheaval following these events. Sociology could explain the reasons behind increasing public discontent with traditional values, aristocracy and religion, and also sought to understand and rationalize new societies that subsequently emerged. The nineteenth century was also the century in which sociology would become recognised as an academic discipline.

Sociology is defined as ‘The study of human social life, groups and societies (Giddens, 1989).’ French philosopher Auguste Comte (Waters and Crook, 1993) coined the term; he considered sociology the ‘final stage in the historical development of ideas (Babbie, 2002).’ Sociology involves describing and analysing how forces, such as social, political, economic and cultural arrangements shape and, influence behaviour and, the impact they have on individual identity construction (van Krieken et al. 2000). Sociology then, has society as its subject matter (Najman and Western, 2000).

The assertion that sociological theory arose in the 19th century as an attempt to explain social change can be examined by assessing the influence of historical events, occurring immediately before, during and following briefly that century, had on the development of sociology. The Enlightenment, and the French and Industrial revolutions prompted sociologist to query or challenge the social, economic and political composition of the time. Berger (1970) stated that sociology evolved through the need for understanding the confusion that followed these events.

The French revolution began in 1789 as the result of political and social unrest. The underlying factors that influenced the revolution were the corruption of the ruling government regime that led to worker impoverishment. Additionally, to the extortion of taxes from the peasantry and, the hierarchies insistence that they and, the religious sectors remain the owners of political power. This insistence prompted the public to revolt against the ruling regime and the clergy (Giddens, 1997:6-7), the result was the expulsion of the Bourbon monarchy and the establishment of the first republic. The religious sector also suffered with the overthrow of the Divine Rights of Kings, which previously formed the crux of religious belief during this period (van Krieken et al, 2000:23). The sweeping changes that resulted from the French revolution impacted upon the emergence of sociology because there became a sudden need for intellectual awareness in order to cope with the ramifications of the changes that had taken place (Berger, 1970:55).

The second transformation to occur during the period was the Industrial revolution in the late eighteenth century. This revolution began in Britain and subsequently ‘spread throughout Western Europe and the United States in the nineteenth century (Giddens, 1997:7).’ The Industrial revolution was a time of massive technological change, before this people had simply produced their own forms of sustenance by way of the barter system or living off of the land (Bilton et al, 1996:33). They were now faced with rapid movement from traditional rural areas to urban areas due to a need to obtain employment and earn a wage to survive. Sustaining their previous lifestyles was no longer possible (van Krieken et al, 2000:23).

Sudden urbanisation brought on by the revolution lead to changes in living and working conditions. There was a decline in the number of workers and a reduction in adequate living conditions. Unequal income distribution followed, due to the mass production of goods required to obtain a surplus that could support the lagging economies. The social and political upheaval created by the industrial revolution heavily influenced the work of earlier sociological thinker Karl Marx. Marx believed that under capitalism society would be divided into two classes, the ruling class who owned the means of production (bourgeoisie) and the workers or the oppressed who would be forced to sell their labour (proletariat) (Grabb. 1984:20-21). The result according to Marx is the exploitation of the workforce by the bourgeoisie through the modes of production (Crompton, 1998:27). In turn Marx believed this would lead to what he called the ‘alienation’ of the workforce, where workers would become disenchanted and no longer be able to derive any pride or satisfaction from their work (Grabb, 1984:24). This revolution spawned some of the most influential sociological work in history. The impact of sociology’s emergence in the nineteenth century because of social change is no more evident than in Marx’s class analysis.

The social forces that lead to the two revolutions provided the context in which sociology would emerge and prosper during the nineteenth century, as a means for understanding the new societies that were being created (Waters and Crook, 1993:7). A further social movement that influenced sociology’s emergence was Enlightenment.

Enlightenment not only helped to influence the French and Industrial revolutions it was simultaneously influenced by them. Enlightenment was a period during the eighteenth century that was committed to the rise of human knowledge and rationality in evaluating society (Waters and Crook, 1993). During this period, there was an increase in the belief in science that sought to challenge traditions and more specifically religion. The objective was to replace them with rational and scientific principles (van Krieken et al, 2000:23). Sociologists such as Marx, Weber, and Durkheim believed that the changes, which heralded modernity, would make religion obsolete (Giddens, 1997:349). This belief in secularisation made it possible for people to pursue a belief in science and to seek the solution to societies perils through the application and progress of human knowledge (Bilton et al, 1996:37). The idea that sociology was a science based on the same principles as the natural sciences led to the appearance of positivism. Positivism brought with it a way to apply the methodology used in the natural sciences to the study of society (Haralambos et al, 1996: 17). The two revolutions and Enlightenment signaled the arrival of modernity and with this newfound existence came a need to understand these events and the impact they would have in the future (Giddens, 1997:7). Thus, sociology was finally gaining academic legitimacy.

Sociology was not recognised as an academic discipline until the late nineteenth, early twentieth century (van Kneken et al. 2000:24). Two of the founding fathers Emile Durkheim and Max Weber are credited with transforming the study into an academic discipline. Before being recognised as a legitimate field of study, sociology was practiced outside of the academic realm (van Krieken et al. 2000:24). In part, sociology was made an academic discipline because people expected that this newly discovered insight could help explain why society changed during the great transformation and could advise on how to improve it (van Krieken et al, 2000:24). The late inception of sociology as an academic discipline may be one of the reasons that sociologists argue that its appearance in the nineteenth century was the result of social forces prevailing at the time. The assertion that sociology appeared in the nineteenth century due to the social forces prevailing at the time is also evident when comparing structuralism favoured during modernity to post modernism.

Although sociology is already an established academic discipline in contemporary societies, current social forces are still transforming it in the same way that it was created to explain and understand them. The structuralist perspective that developed during sociology’s initial stages presumed that individuals were the product of their social world, with fixed identities and a universal set of norms and values (van Krieken et al. 2000:22). Structuralism seeks to explain human actions as being produced by social structures.

This is in stark contrast to post modern theorists who believe that people shape their own lives and whilst social structures do play a part in an individuals life chances they are by-no means the sole determinant. Post modernists believe that people are able to create and control their own lives (by way of free will and alternative lifestyle choices) more extensively than their earlier counterparts (van Krieken et al, 2000:22).

The notion of positivism that was so widely advocated during Enlightenment has fallen by the way in contemporary sociology. Academics in the discipline now believe that human beings cannot be studied in the same way as the natural sciences because the complexities of sociological framework and findings cannot be understood in comparison with the natural sciences (Giddens, 1989:17). Durkheim’s idea that sociology should not be concerned with an individuals subjective interpretation of society (van Krieken et al, 2000:24) has given way to an avid interest in how people perceive their social world. Moreover, the meanings they attach to that world. A concept known as interpretivism (Bilton et al, 1996:494).

Traditionally, structuralist sociology addressed economic issues and how they affected society; this has changed in the post-modern era because of other movements that have formed. For example, the feminist movement, which led to a shift in sociological thought from the economic aspects to analysing how cultural aspects impact on society (van Krieken et al, 2000:28). Postmodern sociological thought has also had to contend with prevailing social forces. Increasing globalisation has produced a need for understanding how and why various forms of consumerism and, consumption have influenced not only society but also, how they create and affect popular culture. Additionally to understand how the growing interaction between the markets and ideals of other countries, influence our own society (van Krieken et al, 2000:28-29).

A further aspect of the change from structuralism to postmodernism is the fact that contemporary sociology does not focus purely on social forces. Rather it is also concerned with how individuals construct their identities. Post modernism does not assume that identities are fixed. Nor does it assume that there is a single set of norms or values present in contemporary society. Social factors are no longer considered the only issues that shape, an individuals life chances, there are broader issues of a biological and psychological nature that are central to a persons identity construction (Bilton et al, 1996:7-17). The agency or free will aspect of an individuals life facilitates greater choice in life direction. Traditional notions of marriage, sex roles, religiosity, conceptions of gender and family have changed and are specific to the individual (van Krieken et al, 2000:22).

The comparison between structuralist sociology and postmodern sociology illustrates that sociology as a discipline has evolved from its initial form because of contemporary social forces that have materialised. The comparison attempts to demonstrate not only how social forces have changed sociology over time but. It allso shows how social forces prevailing in the centuries leading up to the nineteenth century could account for the emergence of sociology during this period.

Anthony Giddens (1989:25) suggests ‘that sociology emerged as a distinct intellectual endeavour with the early development of modern industrialized societies, and the study of such societies remains its principle concern.’ Thus, sociology continues to survive for the same reasons it emerged, to analyse and explain social phenomena.

In summary, there are numerous reasons that sociologists argue that the appearance of sociology in the nineteenth century was itself a result of social forces prevailing at the time. The majority of which can be traced back to the French and Industrial revolutions, Enlightenment, and sociology’s acceptance as an academic discipline. Sociology gained momentum during this period as an intellectual alternative to explain the struggles that were taking place in the French revolution. To explain how and why the changes during the Industrial revolution occurred and the affect they would have. These revolutions along with Enlightenment hit society with such force and resulting turmoil that even today they remain firmly entrenched in discussions about the origins of sociology. Sociology found its place among this turmoil by way of the awareness it could provide in analysing and evaluating the new societies that were being formed.

The argument that sociology appeared in the nineteenth century because of social forces prevailing at the time gains further legitimacy when considering that it was not accepted into the academic sphere until this period. The social, political and economic upheaval generated between the 17th and 19th centuries accounts for the appearance of sociology largely because it was thrust into prominence during this time and subsequently gained notoriety as an academic discipline.

Feminists fight for the equality of women and argue that women should share equally in society’s opportunities and scare resources. Through the ages woman were seen as the production of children, mothers and wives, they do the cooking, cleaning, sewing and washing, they take care of their husbands and are largely excluded from high-status occupations and from position of power.

Patriarchy is a society in which the oldest male is the leader of the family, or a society controlled by men in whom they use their power to their own advantage and is the inequality the women experience within the family and background.

It is important to outline that not all feminists believe in the same concepts, that is some feminists come from different branches and they have their own ideal concept and ideologies.

The development of feminism has led to attention being focused on the subordinate position of women in many societies. Most Feminists tend to see society as divided into different social groups which are:

Marxist Feminist

Marxist feminist focus on social institutions of private property and capitalism. Marxist see the male domination as the one who provides capitalism to the family while the woman will eventually stay at home to raise the children and supply of labour. Inequality does not stand from the economic system but in the patriarchy. Some argue that there is inequality, but it’s not man who is causing it or those women are weak but we analyse inequality with a boarder social system.

Example: Margaret Benston (1970s) argues that women’s labour power in family is unpaid and so they are seen as the secondary breadwinners of the family which result into cheap and easily exploitable labour. To pay woman for their work, even at minimum scale, would result into a massive redistribution of wealth. Men’s/ Labourer’s work must compensate for two people: their own wage and that of the wife. According to Fran Ansley she sees the emotional support given by the wife when her own husband absorbs his own frustration and anger with her.

Radical Feminist

There are many varieties of radical families, in fact this is a theory of or by woman. The patriarchal or the male domination is the most universal form of domination and society which eventually forms the widest, suffering and deepest female oppression in society, regardless of your economic background, colour, and class. Women’s oppression provides a conceptual model for understanding all other forms of oppression. E.g. the focus of Radical Feminists is largely on the violence that women suffer, and their social subjugation through violent behavior inflicted by men. They believe that this is what keeps women oppressed whether they are rich or poor, black or white, educated or illiterate. The focus of Radical feminism is therefore on fighting gender related violence. Separatist Radical Feminist state that there is no point in changing men’s behaviour or attitude, woman must be separated from men to lead non-exploitative lives.

Example: Delphy and Leonard (1992) see the family as an economic system and it revolves around labour relations in which men will benefit from. Feminists see the family as a way for men to dominate women, men are usually the head of the house hold and benefit from the work that gets done e.g. making dinner, cleaning, bringing up kids and so on.

Liberal Feminist

Liberal Feminism is based on gender equality which means that both genders should have equal pay, better working jobs condition, education, individual achievement etc. All people are created equal and should not be denied equality of opportunity because of gender. Liberal Feminists focus their efforts on social change through the construction of legislation and regulation of employment practices which should be set by society for girls and boys, and men and women. Gaining job opportunities and being paid and promoted equally in traditionally male-dominated occupations is an important goal to liberal feminist. Someone might ask ‘but what do woman want?’ Liberal feminism answers: mostly, what men want: to get an education, to make a decent living, to provide for one’s family. So, the primary obstacle to equality is sexism which means that there is a belief that the members of one sex are less intelligent, able, skilful, etc. than the members of the other sex, especially that women are less able than men.

In the above paragraph I described liberal feminism in theory of work that focuses more on issues like equality of workplace, in education, in political rights but it is important to outline that liberal feminism looks at situations which are more private. Example liberal feminists tend to support marriage as an equal partnership, and more male involvement when it comes to child care. Another example is that of domestic violence. Ending domestic violence and sexual harassment have to do with removing obstacles to women achieving on an equal level with men. Nowadays liberal feminist see that both genders are becoming equal and that it improved.

Example: Jennifer Somerville (2000) encourages realistic policies which results into gender equality. Some modern men are voluntarily committed to sharing in those routines necessities of the family survival, even though men do not take full share of responsibilities.

Difference Feminist

Some feminist writers might disagree with the above aspects. Instead, they believe that one’s experience might be different than that of another individual. For example: they do not believe that all husbands treat there wife badly or are equally disadvantaged in all types of work, or that looking after her children is a stressful thing. They only emphasis on the experience of womanhood by taking into consideration one’s variables e.g. beliefs, employment, race, religion etc. still they do believe that woman are oppressed but they do not see it as affecting all women. Example a white rich woman lives in a more comfortable setting than that of a black poor woman.

History shows agriculture as a male domination area due to its physically demanding characteristics. Even until the start 20th century, roles in a society were divided among genders with women playing the central, main role in home as a primary caregiver in the form of a wife and mother; whereas the man has a more public role of the bread winner of the family. Legally men had power over there family and make can decisions, while beating of a wife was never strictly legalized in the U.S, however men involved in domestic violence rarely got punished.

However, critics of this concept had emerged by the end of the 18th century. The concept itself is commonly known as patriarchy i.e. role of men as the head of family and hence dominant over women and children. By the end of the 19th century a movement emerged, which strived to give women the right of voting. Even so, up to the start of the 20th century, the concept of patriarchy was prevalent, and received wide support from religious elements as well.

Ideas suggested as an alternative to patriarchy gained wide support in the 21st century and only a small number of people think that women are subordinated to men. All kinds of gender disparity still continue to exist. Domination of male has not disappeared yet, but it is on the defensive and its foundations are crumbling. (Gornick & Meyers, 2009)

Definition

Inequality can be defined as “lack of evenness or social disparity”. It can also be defined as treating individuals unequally on the basis of their gender. It occurs from different socially assigned gender roles. (Inequality, 2012)

Meaning

Discrimination is due to gender roles assigned by the society to specific genders for example it is considered that women’s are not good in the tasks which demands physical strength like Armed forces, body building, weight lifting etc, and also which requires mental calculations such as mathematics, business and engineering etc.

Discrimination In the workplace

Discrimination is also present at work places, where equally qualified and skilled group of workers are paid more than the other group.

Human capital

This theory suggests that qualification, knowledge, experience, or skill of a person adds to his value as a potential employee. This was the reason in the past because there was a difference in the qualifications of both the genders. But today education, knowledge, experience and skills are similar, so this is no longer the main issue.

Pollution theory

This theory says that jobs where women are in majority offer low income than do jobs where men are present. When a large number of women enter in a job men go for other options. Women are considered not much skillful and competent person. So when they are hired to any occupation people started to dislike it. Men hesitate to enter in female dominated jobs, so they don’t like women to enter in male dominated jobs. (Goldin, 2002)

Income disparity is a part of occupational segregation, where occupations are distributed among groups of people according to their characteristics; in this case, gender.

Horizontal segregation

Occupational gender segregation occurs because men and women are thought to have different physical, emotional, and mental strengths. These strengths make them different from each other. According to these characteristics their jobs vary. Because of that manual work is given to males and non manual tasks are given to females. (Meulders, Plasman, Rigo, & O’Dorchai, 2010)

Vertical segregation

This segregation occurs because jobs which are considered to be prestigious, powerful, authoritative and offering high income are given to men where as women are excluded from holding such jobs. (Meulders, Plasman, Rigo, & O’Dorchai, 2010)

Since 1960’s women are entering in different occupations in large numbers because of that each is associated with femininity or masculinity. Certain jobs have become more inclined towards or against either gender. Occupations like teaching, nursing, and librarians have become female-dominated and jobs such as architects, electrical engineers, and airplane pilots are male dominant.

Continued existence of gender income disparity cannot be fully understood through occupational segregation and human capital theories.

A possible contributor of gender wage gap is Glass ceiling effect. This effect suggests that it is difficult for women to achieve a higher position or ranking in different corporations and organizations because men are preferred to have those positions.

The term glass ceiling implies those unseen barriers which exist in the society and with hold women from advancing. If the qualification, experience and abilities of the women are same these barriers exist even then. These glass ceiling effects are more in higher powered or higher income occupations, where very few women are holding these kinds of occupations. This also indicates the limited chances of women for becoming a successful person. Because of these reasons inequality of the glass ceiling is increasing day by day. (Lewis, 2012)

Statistical discrimination

This discrimination is also present in the workplaces. Statistical discrimination indicates that employers like to hire men more than women because females are more likely than males to leave their jobs when they become married or pregnant. So they are assigned with jobs which have low mobility.

In foreign countries like Dominican Republic, female entrepreneurs are numerically more vulnerable to fail in business. If they fail they often return to their home life. On the other hand, if men failed in business they search for more jobs rather than quit finding any and sit home.

There are always some exceptions:

According to a survey on gender pay inequality by the International Trade Union Confederation, female employees in the Gulf state of Bahrain earns 40% more than male employees. (Iversen & Rosenbluth, 2011)

Professional education and careers

In mid 1960’s gender disparity appeared to narrow. In 1965 5% of students in professional programs were female. In 1985 this number increased to 40% in law and medicine, above 30% in dentistry and business school. There are few women in boards of directors and in senior positions in the private sectors.

Customer preference studies

In 2009 a study was conducted by David R. Hekman and colleagues. They studied the reactions of customers to videos in which a service center was depicted with a black male, a white female, or a white male actor was helping a customer. More than 19% people were satisfied with the white male performance, suggesting that one of the disparity reasons is customer bias. That is why white men continue to earn 25% more than equally-well performing women and minorities. This was especially interesting since almost half of the customers were women and a similar number of customers belonged to non-white group of people, indicating that even women and minority customers prefer white men.

The results of another study indicate that people prefer white male doctors even if they are only as qualified and well performing as other women or minority doctors present. White male doctors are therefore paid more than the others because customers are happy and satisfied with them. It is suggested that to solve this wage inequality issue we should try to change customer thinking or biases. It cannot necessarily be solved by paying women more. (Hekman, Aquino, Owens, Mitchell, Schilpzand, & Leavitt, 2009)

Discrimination At home
Gender roles in parenting and marriage

According to Sigmund Freud gender identity is determined by biology. Some people agree with Freud, others argue that the development of the gender is not completely determined by biology, but rather the interactions of the young one with the primary caregiver(s) that is the mother and the father.

According to Freud’s contemporaries, gender roles are developed through internalization and identification during childhood. From the start, parents interact and treat children differently on the basis of their gender, and due to this treatment parents can instill different values or traits in their children on the basis of what is normal for their gender. This can be seen through the example of toys which parents give to their children to play. For girls toys such as dolls are used to give them the feeling of nurturing, and closeness. For males toys such as cars or fake guns are used to give them the feeling of independence, competitiveness, and aggression. (Scarlett, 2010)

Attempts in equalizing household work

Women are usually associated with house hold so they are expected to quit their jobs and look after their family. While men do the work (job). However, there are some women who choose to do work as well as to take care of their gender role for example cleaning the house and taking care of the family.

Women are considered as primary care givers to their family even if they are doing a job. Studies show that working women give an 18 extra hours a week to do her household or childcare related activities. On the other hand men give only an average of 12 minutes a day in childcare chores. (Ellen G. Friedman, 2004)

Gender inequalities in relation to technology

Although new generation knows a lot about technology, men are considered more skillful in technology. One survey shows that when men are asked to rate their technological skills like basic computer functions and online participatory communication they rate themselves higher than women.

Structural marginalization

This occurs on an individual basis when they feel as if they are not a [part of their society. Policies can affect people. For example, media also defines gender roles displaying young girls with easy bake ovens promoting them as housewife as well as with dolls that they can feed and change the diaper promoting being a mother. Today women are not the stereotypical a housewife and a mother when they go for a job they have to face the consequences with that. (Cleveland G. Shields, 2007)

Gender stereotypes

Cultural stereotypes are a possible explanation for gender disparity and also gender wage disparity. Women are associated with caring; loving and nurturing so they are given jobs which require such skills. These skills are valued culturally and are typically associated with domesticity, so occupations with these skills are not valued economically.

Men are considered as workers means they are expected to do the work outside home. So jobs held by them are valued economically and hence pay higher wages. (Smith & Cook, 2008)

Recommendations/Suggestions

Gender discrimination can be eliminated by the following ways (inequality, 2012)

Educating women equally as men.

We should include women in the mainstream of the society that is we should not isolate her from the society.

Employment should be increased for women.

Women should actively participate in politics and social activities.

We should arrange programs which condemn violence against women and promote social protection programs.

Parents should not discriminate among their sons and daughters. We should aware parents in this regard.

Scholarships should be given equally to girls as well.

We should aware people to stop child abuse and violence.

Activities like abortions should be stopped.

Politicians should do something about the development of Social welfare for women.

NGOs should try to eradicate Gender Inequality.

Educating women about technology.

Women rights should be given to them.

Giving those good positions and pays who work well, without any gender bias.

Conclusion

People should change their perceptions about this issue and make society more fair and just for all. All sorts of discrimination should be discouraged and training should be given to young children to change their attitudes by showing examples at home. There is no gender disparity in Islam. In fact Islam is the religion which condemns gender inequality. So by following the path of Islam we can eliminate this problem.

The conflict perspective is one of two major sociological theories. Also known as the “conflict model,” it gives sociologists explanations for happenings in history and in society.The conflict perspective was planned by Karl Marx (classical founders of social science) in the middle 1800s. It is totally based upon the work of Karl Marx even though there are many scholars who have contribute in developing this perspective. Marx believed that conflict defined the happenings of society. His conflict perspective believed that the class conflict and class exploitation as the major moving forces in history.

This view was revived by C Wright Mills, Lewis Coser, Raymond Aron, Dahrendorf and others. They see a society as held together through the power of dominant groups or classes. C. Wright Mills’s views, (the founder of modern conflict theory) in social structures are created through conflict between people with differing interests and resources.

Conflict Theory:

Conflict theory generally surrounds the idea that most struggles in society happen because of conflicts between different social classes or groups.

Each group struggles to achieve more resources and because resources are limited, they must struggle with other groups.

Groups try to protect their own interests, therefore blocking the progress of other groups.

Individuals have aggressive impulses and these impulses are expressed in all relationships.

Litarature review
Marxism:

Karl Marx (1818-1883): as a humanist, Marx wanted all individuals to reach their full human potiential. He belived that capatilism was economic system design to keep power in the hands of the few ,the owner of the means of the production, while the masses were forced to abide by a social system created by the privileged.Marx believed that all of history is characterized by an economics struggle between the haves and the have-nots. Marx was attempting to combine material and ideal factors or structural and cultural factors, and to illustrate their mutual relationship. The importance that Marx placed on using the historical method reflects his evolutionary ideas about human society. He explained how humans separated themselves from animals once they consciously realized that they could produce their own means of subsistence, rather than depending on what nature provided.

According to Marx, Class struggle became the next to be expected step in the historical process of human development. Marx stated that class distinctions are heavily influenced by the ownership of personal property. Marx believed that once the exploited became conscious of their plight and misery, they would unite in revolution. The new society would be characterized by communism which was to be the economic and philosophical force that would remove class struggle. Marx’s primary ideas of communism are described in the communist manifesto (1848), co written by Marx and Engels. In brief, Marx and Engels believed that the world would be a better place under communism. They believed that class inequality would end with the collective control of property and with the growth in size and power of the working class. The governmental abuse of workers would end with the take apart of government. [i]

Max Weber (1864-1920): Weber agreed with Marx that ecnomics was an important variable in determining power differential among individuals in society. However, he believed that social divisions were based on two other factors as well: social status and political influence. Weber believed that someone how possesses a great deal of social status and yet is economically poor can still hold power in society. Additionally, Weber argued that “social group would identify themselves not merely according to wealth, but more deeply by ethnic and cultural backgrounds, and by shared ‘styles of life’”. Weber belived that conflict underlies all social relations and determines power. The control of power is a critical element in conflict theory and power is a central aspect in Weber’s work on the types of athurity. According to weber, the distribution of power and athority is the basis of social conflict. [ii]

Elite Conflict Theory (C. Wright Mills): (1916-1962)

Like other cflict theoritists, Mills were deeply influenced by the idea of Karl Marx. Political power and class differences were the focus of Mill’s publications. Mill’s wrote that the working class is not a revolutionary class capeable of overthrowing capitalism. He did not believe that the rank-and-file workers were a militant force, and that they were more concerned with basic daily issues then with seeking loftier goals. Furthermore, Mills concluded that labor leader did not work in the best intrest of worker and were instead coopted by business and government. He believed that the lack of leadership, the working class could never become a revoluntary force.

Power:

Power is the critical element of analysis for all conflict theorists. Mills (1958b) described three types of power:

Authority: Power that is justified by the beliefs of the voluntarily obedient.

Manipulation: Power that is wielded unbeknownst to the powerless.

Coercion: The final form of power is where the powerless are forced to obey the powerful.

Mills acknowledge that in the modern era, power is more likely to be authoritarian. And yet, the reality remains that most people will always be relatively powerless.

The power elite:

Mills says about the power elite that the power elite is composed of men whose position enable them to transcend the ordinary environments of ordinary men and women; they are in position to make decision having major consequences.

Mills (1958b) explain the unity of the power of elite in psychological and economic terms. The members of the elite generally share a similar origin, education and life style, and because of their similar social type, they easily mix together. Additionally, they are the society elite so they share economic goals. Mills acknowledge that the power elite were not solitary rulers. From the Marxist perspective, Mills felt that the people were subjected to, “the will of the bourgeoisie”. History has shown that when extreme conservatism is meet with a dramatically change society, conflict is inevitable. [iii]

Parsonian Conflict Theory (Dahrendorf): (1929)

Dahrendorf 1959 believed that sociological theories should be divided into two parts: those that concentrate on issues of consensus and those that concentrate on issues of conflict. Dahrendorf believed that conflict and consensus are both evident in any society. In fact, there cannot be conflict unless some degree of consensus has already been established. When a consensus has been reached, conflict disappears, temporarily.

Dahrendrof 1959:162 refer his conflict theory as the “coercion theory of society” which can be reduced to a small number of basic tents:

Every society is at every point subject to processes of change, social change is ever-present.

Every society displays at every point dissensus and conflict; conflict is ubiquitous.

Every element in a society cause to be contributions its disintegration and change.

Every society is based on the coercion of some of its members by other.

Dahrendorr believed that power implies the coercion of some by others but recognize that in organization and associations, the power held by certain persons is lawful authority. In making a distinctions from Marx, however, Dahrendrof suggest that authority is not bound by property rights and therefore believed that “class conflict is best seen as arising out of a dispute over the distribution of authority in a given authority structure”. [iv]

Conflict theory of Randall Collins: (1941)

Conflict theory generally emphasizes the role of power that one group, or person. Kemper and Collins (1990) argue “that power and status are fundamental relational dimensions at the micro level of social interaction and perhaps at the macro level as well”.

Collins (1975) assumed that there are certain “goods”, namely, wealth, power, and prestige that people in all societies will pursue. Furthuremore, all people dislike being ordered around and will therefore that what they can to avoid the subordinate role. Thus, conflict is inevitbale, for everyone is in pursuit of scarce resources and the roles related to these desired resources. Collins (1975b) concluded that coercion and the ability to “force”others to behave a certain way are the primary basis of conflict.

Collins developed five principles of conflict analyses (Ritzier, 2000c:130);

Conflict theory must focus on real life rather than abstract formulation.

Material arrangement effect interaction. .

In some situation of inequality between persons, those who possess the power position generally attempt to exploit those who back resources.

The role of culture phenomena, such as beliefs, values, and norms believe must be examined in term of their interest, resources and power.

There must a firm commitment to the scientific study of stratification and every other aspect of the social world.

In his conflict theory, it is clear that Collins focus on individuals and their inner struggles reveals a micro orientation.Collins believed that sociological research should be aimed at solving concrete problems in the world. [v]

Feminist conflict theory:

Conflict theory has been used by feminists to explain the position of women in society. Feminist conflict theorists argue that women have traditionally been demoralized so that men can benefit from positions of power, wealth, and status. These theorists would argue that the conflict over limited natural resources is what led men to relegate women to domesticity. This interpretation of conflict theory also leads to the idea that men cannot be trusted to give power to women because this gift would conflict with their inherent nature. [vi]

Conclusion:

So it concluded that man’s struggle for power, be it family or work place, play group or politics, man wants to achieve the higher and authoritative position. It starts from personal level to national level. There are various groups and communities of people in society belonging to different classes, religions, and ideologies. All of them have different perspectives and values. The clash between these various perspectives leads to conflict between these groups. This conflict can arise from the desire to own the means of production, to own the power or land, or to own the realm of political power, and can be revolutionary. Under the conflict perspective we can say that the basic form of interaction in society is not cooperation, but competition, and this leads to conflict. Because the individuals and groups of society compete for advantage, there is constantly conflict for change. When there are large groups competing the outcome are often major social change. So conflict perspective is all about the differences between social groups in the society. [vii]

The term community has various meaning. We can define community is a place where people living in the particular geographical area and they shares their common values, interests and they follows a particular way of living. The term community may refer to the national community or international community. In biology a community is a group of interacting people sharing a populated environment. Apart from a geographical area a community is a group or society, helping each other. In human communities belief, resources, needs, interest and a number of other conditions may be present in common, which also affects the identity of the participants and their degree of cohesiveness. In every society various types of communities may take place. Some categorizations are as follows:-

Geographic communities: It ranges from the local neighborhood, suburb, village, town or city, region, nation or even the planet as a whole. These refer to communities of location.

Communities of culture: It ranges from the local clique, sub-culture, ethnic group, religious, multicultural or pluralistic civilization, or the global community cultures of today. They may be included as communities of need or identity, such as disabled persons, or frail aged people.

Communities are nested; one community can contain another-for example a geographic community may contain a number of ethnic communities.

Identity is also one of the important factor to assess the type of community. For example if a group of people indicates the common identity other than location then it would be a community based on their common interest. Also a professional community can also exist in society where a group of people are with the same or related occupations.

There are different things that bind people together to their different communities or that they may have in common with the other people living around them, which includes beliefs and values, language, territory, religion, culture and occupations.

Community Mobilization:

A strong community feeling is also evident at times of crisis and change for families, such as marriage and death. In a community people shared their ‘we feeling’ with each other. As we know that proper management and utilization of resources is the best possible way for the development of the community. Therefore community mobilization is always prominent for the development and upliftment of any community. For mobilizing the community people make their plans and then do the things accordingly. They take charge, transforming, developing their community and their lives as well. Community mobilization is a process which allows people in the community to:

Identify needs and promote community interests.

Promote good leadership and democratic decision making.

Identify specific groups for undertaking specific problems.

Identify all the available resources in the community and mobilize or generate new resources.

Communities can mobilize to work for changes that will fulfill the social, emotional, financial and physical needs of people. Community mobilization is a process to create awareness among people regarding the present situation of the community in order to encourage positive change in the future

For community mobilization communication is one of the important tool to achieve it. Through proper and effective communication various methods of mobilizing the community can be implemented. Here we are discussing the various methods for community mobilization by given actors as per the fig 1.1.

Mobilizing the community

Political Parties

Social Movements

Individual groups

Political Parties

The use of social networking sites by political parties and other politically active groups has been increased. These groups have realized that using of social networking potentially increases people mobilization. The Internet has become a fast and low-cost communication tool and enables quick and easy aggregation of political information among potential voters. For instance Mr. Barack Obama successful used Twitter, Flicker, You Tube, Facebook among others to communicate and mobilize people. He also had a $2 million dollar custom campaigning and social networking site built called MyBarackobama.com. As political parties are now actively engaging with social networking sites as part of their strategies to mobilize the maximum people in the community. In the present scenario, the use of social media is really important to mobilize the people and communities for collective action. We know that today millions of people are connected in one way or another to the internet. People are easily accessible on internet. It is another way of reaching large numbers of people to mobilize them for a group effort. Facebook, Mixit, Twitter can also be effective for the above. To generate awareness among people and to mobilize them in large number to make a community independent.

Newspapers, radio stations and the TV have the authority to inform thousands more people about various campaigns for mobilizing any community.

By writing a press release, a political party can highlight the facts, people’s demands, and what people want the media to talk about regarding the development and continuous empowerment of their community. Parties can also organize a press conference. So they can invite the reporters to come to a meeting where spokespeople from the community organization speak out publicly about the problem and the solution of the problems of community. All these strategies political parties can apply to mobilize the community and people as well to generate awareness among them and to provide them a platform where people can discuss issues their community problems also mobilize the resources.

Apart from above, Political rallies and the use of local languages are instrumental in the mobilization of groups for social action.

Social Movements

Social movements are a type of group action. They are large informal groupings of individuals or organizations which focus on specific political or social issues for their development. In other words, they carry out, resist or undo a social change in the society. Social movement campaigns play a critical role in mobilizing and maintaining the submerged networks of social movement communities. We discuss the importance of such movement campaigns and their effects on movement communities, subsequent collective action, and cultural and political change. Our research contributes to an understanding of the shape of social movement communities and the connections between local and international campaigns.

Community mobilization is often used by grassroots-based social movements, which includes revolutionary movements. The process usually takes the form of large public gatherings such as mass meetings, marches, parades, processions and demonstrations. Those gatherings usually are part of a protest action. These are the different ways by which a community can be mobilized and can raise voice for the demand of development of the community. In other words, community mobilization seeks to facilitate change within the community for its development.

Modern Western social movements became possible through education (the wider dissemination of literature), and increased mobility of labor due to the industrialization and urbanization of 19th century societies. Social movements have been and continued to be closely connected with democratic political systems. Occasionally, social movements have been involved in democratizing nations, but more often they have developed after democratization. Modern movements often utilize technology and the internet to mobilize people globally. Adapting to communication trends is a common theme among successful movements. Research is beginning to explore how advocacy organizations linked to social movements use social media to facilitate civic engagement and collective action.

It is a type of political ‘organisation’ we need to think about is the social movement. A ‘movement’, by its very nature, is not something that can be easily pinned down since, as Glaser (2003) suggests, it represents a ‘loose community of like-minded people who share a broad range of ideas and opinions’. This type of definition, therefore, covers a range of behaviours, a good example of which might be something like the ‘environmentalist movement’ – a very broad category of people who, in a variety of ways, are concerned with protecting the physical environment. Della Porta and Diani (1999) refine this general idea by thinking about social movements in terms of Informal networks – the movement as a whole is loosely structured. People come together, at various times, on the basis of: Shared beliefs and support for a general set of ideas, usually based around: Conflictual issues, especially, although not necessarily, issues of national and global significance. Part of the reason for social movements is that issues of concern to movement adherents/members are either not being addressed by political parties or, if they are, the movement’s adherents are strongly opposed to the policies being proposed/ enacted. This is one reason why such movements often involve: Protest in a range of forms (such as civil disobedience, demonstrations or publicity stunts). In other words, as Schweingruber (2005) puts it, social movements involve:

‘Continuous, large-scale, organized collective action, motivated by the desire to enact, stop, or reverse change in some area of society.

Social movements are any broad social alliances of people who are connected through their shared interest in blocking or affecting social change. Although social movements do not have to be formally organized. Social movement is always an important tool to bring the change in society and as well as to mobilize the communities for their own development.

By arranging people in mass meetings, parades, marches, discussions on various issues, movements for stressing the education of people, bringing the concept of democratization in light communities can mobilize through theses social movements. Social movements are always a part of society, and people may compare their options and make rational choices about which movements to follow. As long as social movements wish to be success, they must find resources (such as money, people, and plans) for how to meet their goals. Social movements are competing for a piece of finite resources, and the field is growing more crowded all the time.McCarthy and Zald (1977) conceptualize resource mobilization theory as a way to explain movement success in terms of its ability to acquire resources and mobilize individuals. For example, PETA, a social movement organization, is in competition with Greenpeace and the Animal Liberation Front (ALF), two other social movement organizations. Taken together, along with all other social movement organizations working on animals rights issues, these similar organizations constitute a social movement industry. Multiple social movement industries in a society, though they may have widely different constituencies and goals, constitute a society’s social movement sector. Every social movement organization (a single social movement group) within the social movement sector is competing for your attention, your time, and your resources.

Individual groups

It is always easy to start a fire and involve a number of people. Community members need to choose certain people whose role will be to keep the fire of community mobilization burning. In this guide these people will be called ‘motivators’. People in the community know each other very well. Take time to carefully choose honest people who are respected by others, and who can encourage others to work well together. They need to have some time and energy available, have a desire to bring change and be willing to work free of charge. Each community should select two or three motivators. The people chosen will need equipping and support in their role.

Each local area has a number of different kinds of resources. People use these resources to keep alive and to cope with changing seasons, political change and cultural pressures. Helping people to understand and to value the different resources they have is very important. These are the main kinds of resources:

_ Natural resources include land, trees, forests and water.

_ Human resources include the skills, knowledge, understanding and labour of local people.

_ Financial resources include money, access to credit and loans, credit unions and government support.

_ Social resources include the culture, traditions, organizations, friends and extended family.

_ Physical resources include buildings, tools, roads, water pumps and transport.

_ Spiritual resources are the strength and encouragement that people gain from their faith.

Local people already know more than any outsider about their community and the people living there. Many people assume they know everything about their local area, but there is always more to learn and understand before making new plans. Take plenty of time to help people in the ‘community’ to tell their story together. One very effective way of doing this is to draw maps, either using clear ground with sticks, leaves and stones, or if available, large sheets of paper and pens. Encourage small groups to draw different maps to show:

– the natural and physical resources in the area (hills, forests, roads and rivers, for example)

-where people live, noting important people and organisations

-how the area looked 50 or 20 years ago (only for older people).

So for mobilizing communities, individual groups can do the social mapping of the community so that the people can aware about the present problems in the community.

Another helpful way to focus on key issues within the local area is to encourage people to prepare a role-play to express their concerns. As people discuss what subjects to use, they will often focus on important issues. However, they are also likely to share these in funny ways. Laughter has a way of taking the pressure out of a situation, helping people to discuss sensitive issues, sometimes for the first time. Again, encouraging people to work in small groups is another way to mobilize the communities.

Having chosen their first priority for action, local people need to decide whether they have enough information to take action. For example, if education is identified as the priority, people may need more information about the problems and whether they are at primary or secondary level. The problem may be poor attendance and, if so, there is a need to find out why.

Considering electing teams of local people to gather relevant information is another way to mobilize the communities. Choose people who can be trusted and who know their community well. Before sending teams out to gather information, take plenty of time to decide exactly what kind of information is needed. Apart from this, conducting role plays- street plays in the community is always a good strategy to mobilize the maximum number of people and to preparing them for a social action.

By Arranging a community meeting to share all the information gathered is showing information clearly to the people. A large number of people can mobilize for the collective action after getting all the facts and problems of the community.

Also, motivation plays an important role in this activity. As keep motivating the people in right direction is always worthy and will be fruitful for attaining maximum development of the community.

Initial contact with the community is another way to mobilize people. Understanding community practices and traditions prior to establishing contact can help identify the appropriate approach for engaging with different groups and members of the community. It is important to focus on learning from the community, especially during the initial contact. Taking every opportunity to meet informally with diverse members of the community (at the health post, during registration, at distribution points, in the queue for water). Also utilizing community leaders also increases the chances of reaching a cross-section of the population and not just a narrow representation. It is essential that all members of the community receive word about mobilization and how they can be involved. Outreaching to those who are isolated, vulnerable or considered. If they cannot personally attend a meeting, it is important that they be represented in some way. So as per the above discussion, motivating people, arranging meetings, initial contacting with the communities, utilizing the community leaders, conducting role-plays, street plays, community outreaching are different ways to mobilize the maximum people of community by individual groups.

Also, identifying an existing committee or a community-based organization which can give individual groups access to the community and facilitate distribution of messages. Meeting the host community and the authorities is important to reach out the goals for community development and mobilization. Messages might only reach certain groups, such as community leaders, and not all members of the community. Developing outreach strategies with the leaders and others to ensure that everyone is informed, including women, girls and boys, minority groups, and people with mental and physical challenges. Making sure that information is delivered in a language everyone can understand, is culturally sensitive and is correctly perceived and understood. As always communication should be effective and strong for the mobilization. Arranging meetings at mutually convenient times. As far the mobilization concern, for development of any community individual groups should make positive rapport building among the community with key people- like facilitator, leaders, service providers etc. and whole community as well. A good rapport building is effective strategy to mobilizing the people. Transparency, respect and consistency are essential for building trust, confidence and collaboration between organizations and partners, including members of the community. Also individual groups have to make ensure that after the first contact immediate follow-up action is taken or not.

Orienting the Community is another way to mobilize the people. The first step in mobilizing the community is to orient them to the process. This can be done in a number of ways, including written communication, television, radio, or an organized meeting. Meetings are more personal and conducive to building relationships. They also facilitate two-way communication where questions can be answered efficiently. As groups can motivate community people for their maximum participation in every discussion as they should feel that they are the key part of it. Also to start these meetings as soon as possible, so that trust and a positive working relationship can be built between parties. Having the meeting sponsored or hosted by a respected individual or group within the community can add credibility to its agenda. This may happen through a church, school, tribe, or other local group. Utilizing community leaders also increases the chances of reaching a cross-section of the population and not just a narrow representation. It is essential that all members of the community receive word about mobilization and how they can be involved. Outreach is prominent to those who are isolated, vulnerable or considered marginal is critical. If they cannot personally attend a meeting, it is important that they be represented in some way. Individual groups should take care of these things before conducting any activity as part of the community or within the community. An only arranging meeting is not as sufficient. The goals of the meeting must be carefully considered and reflected in the agenda. Community leaders can provide assistance presenting the information in a culturally appropriate manner. Some of the community leaders may be chosen to convey topics with which they are familiar. During this meeting, it is important to invoke the input of the community. Identify their needs and begin to priorities how those needs will be met. Individual groups should know that this meeting will be an opportunity to develop an awareness of what the contributing organizations can provide, and also an opportunity to learn about the strengths and resources of the community. It will be important to define mutual goals and develop a plan as to how to reach these goals. This will include organizing individuals to work together and coordinate services. Proper organization of every resources and management is necessary to mobilize the people. Also individual groups should develop ongoing ways to communicate for mobilizing the people. Once goals have been defined and a plan has been developed, it will be important to identify ongoing ways to communicate. Rather than having large meetings, cluster meetings of project staff, community leaders and community members working on similar tasks are more manageable and efficient. The groups should begin team building with all team members (international and national staff, community leaders and community members). It is vital that marginalized and vulnerable people are included in these teams. Intervention with the community may be required for them to ‘allow’ marginalized or isolated members of their community to participate in a team. Working in small teams that include affected people as well as outside helpers. Team leaders should meet daily for sharing of information, planning and coordination. Not all teams will be required for all emergency response projects. Some people may be a member of more than one team.

Conclusion: – It is to be concluded that for continuous community development mass awareness, people mobilization is very important. In our society there are different resources which can perform to mobilize the community. But one should only need to generate these resources within the community or outside the community. Maximum resource utilization and mobilization of people are key things for developing any community.

Community development emphasizes participation, initiative and self-help by local communities but should be sponsored by national governments as part of a national plan.

Pierre Bourdieu was born in France in 1930 and died in 2002. He is well known for his works in the field of Sociology, Anthropology and Philosophy. He is best known for his theory of class distinction, which he theorised in his book “Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste”. Another theory he worked on was the theory of power and practice, where he dealt with subjects such as “Symbolic power” and “habitus”. [1]

In Bourdieu’s view, agency and structure constantly sustain power, which is created within a culture and can become symbolic. This happens due to what he refers to as “habitus”. Habitus represents the norms and rules of society which are used to control people’s behaviour and way of thinking. Habitus is ‘the way society becomes deposited in persons in the form of lasting dispositions, or trained capacities and structured propensities to think, feel and act in determinant ways, which then guide them’ (Navarro, 2006).

Society is the one that creates habitus. The patterns developed can be transferred from a context to another and they change given different circumstances or a different period of time. Habitus ‘is not fixed or permanent, and can be changed under unexpected situations or over a long historical period’ (Navarro, 2006).

Free will and structures interact and give rise to habitus. There is no need for conscious thought or “deliberate pursuit of coherence”.

In addition to “habitus”, Bourdieu talked about the concept of “fields”. These refer to several social or institutional networks where people can interact with others, thus showing their different kinds of capital and expressing their dispositions. Networks can be represented by relationships formed among people, relationships based on similarities such as: religion, education, culture. Power is not experienced in the same way in all environments; this means that the context a person is in has a big influence on habitus. Different contexts have an influence on the way people react to power. While a person could not be affected by power in one field, the same person could see it as a challenge in a different one.

Bourdieu also talked about a concept he called “capital”. He elaborated on three types of capital, which go beyond material assets: cultural capital, symbolic capital and social capital.

These concepts were presented in Bourdieu’s book “Distinction” where he argued that society maintains its order by following the rules of language, values, education, thinking or activities. These norms that people follow lead them to accept without thinking the differences present in society, the hierarchies made and the social inequality surrounding them.

The three elements: habitus, capital and field play a central role in Bourdieu’s theory of Practice. These interact with each other forming the actions of people. A person’s dispositions, or habitus, her capital and the fields in which she operates form her action repertoire.

Social capital is one of the forms of capital mentioned by Bourdieu in his theories. It can refer to the networks of friends a person has, to the networks of the family or acquaintances or even of contacts. Social capital brings befits to a person by exerting preferential treatment towards in group members.

Bourdieu’s economic capital refers to the material possessions of a person, for instance money and property. Having a low economic capital implies not having as many possessions or chances to afford high priced affairs. A high economic capital means a person owns more material possessions and is able to afford luxurious things. However, having a high economic capital does not mean a person is considered from a higher class. What Bourdieu suggests is that economic capital only combined with cultural capital forms the hierarchy of classes.

Cultural capital plays an important role in the hierarchy of society. It is used by higher classes as a way to distinguish themselves from lower classes. It is a form of domination that is not based on economic domination. Instead, taste is the primary weapon of differentiation. Focusing on taste preferences instead of material assets became a method to hide inequality while still maintaining a well-defined line between lower and higher classes.

Cultural capital is formed by the cultural knowledge and goods a person possesses. This form of capital includes artistic preferences and taste, educational background, aesthetic taste in fashion or furniture, as well as many others. Bourdieu’s theory of distinction states that cultural capital is represented by: cultivated disposition, which can be verbal facility, the way in which a person expresses herself in a conversation, but it can also be body posture, manners and general behaviour. Other representatives of cultural capital can be material objects that require specialised knowledge to appreciate, such as sculptures or old pieces of art which are not well-known by the general population. In addition to these, he argues that cultural capital is institutionalised, which refers to the educational background of a person. Attending a high ranked University is usually evidence of a higher level of cultural knowledge.

Symbolic capital is closely related to cultural capital and symbolic forms and it refers to recognised legitimation by the society. The place a person occupies in society and the way society responds to that becomes symbolic capital. Being recognised as an influential or knowledgeable person offers one a high symbolic capital. It becomes a source of power which can be used by its holder. When this power is utilised by someone, that person exercised symbolic violence. Symbolic violence represents the imposition of a certain way of thinking upon another person. It imposes social order because it is embedded in people’s unconscious, making them follow the dominant or superior person’s way of thinking.

Bourdieu argues that social origin and cultural capital are the most important. He claims that although social and economic capital are indeed acquired as time passes, both of them depend on the social origins and cultural knowledge of a person.

Another topic Bourdieu elaborated on was Social Illusion. He saw reality as being constituted from a number of roles people follow. Everyone engages and follows their own path in life, similar to how a character from a book follows the storyline. The rules and norms society follows add a sense of reality and help the formation of the social illusion. Like a fictional character, a human being has a “beginning”- his birth, and an “end”-his death. The beginning is associated with someone’s cause, reason to be there while the end reminds of his purpose, the role he managed to play. Bourdieu called this sequence of events “biographical illusion”. There are some attributes that contour the created illusion. The symbolic power of the sate supports these attributes by giving people dates of birth, citizen numbers, grouping them based on nationalities and sex. People often compare life to a story that is being written as time passes. They see it as a journey in which decisions guide the outcome of the narration.

Bourdieu constructed his theories based on real life circumstances that intrigued him. This means the theories can be tested by others as well, by applying them to a personal context. An example of social networks I am part of would constitute my participation in the Rotaract club. This allowed me to interact with other peers, have conversations in which we exchanged knowledge but which also allowed people to show their cultural capital. Being part of the club requires one to pass through a process of admission, which means that it is necessary for one to possess a certain amount of capital to enter. Once in, how you express your dispositions becomes one of the things other members notice first about you. The norms, or habitus, of the group can soon be observed as being different from the patterns developed in other circumstances. These patterns are assimilated by new members in an unconscious way and create a new way of thinking for that person. The objective experiences one has become subjective, interpreted in different ways by everyone.

This social network, or field, constitutes one part of my social capital. In addition to this network, being part of a class in high-school, maintaining a group of friends or even being part of my family is considered a part of my social capital. Similar to my capital, is the social capital of one of my friends. However, attending a different school, being part of a different family and having a different group of friends influences the amount of benefits he could gain from being part of a network. Our systems of dispositions might indeed be similar at a superficial level, given that we both come from the same class, in the same society. However, our acquired schemes of thought and perception differ at a deeper level. Institutional education as well as family education influences the most profound cognitive interactions. I received an education focused on science, which gave me a different way to view the world compared to him, whose education was based on art and music.

Little differences come from our economic capital. Comparing all of our possessions would lead to the conclusion that the only difference is him owning some musical instruments. However, the value of these instruments, an acoustic and an electrical guitar, does not put him in a different societal class. The differences in hierarchy, as Bourdieu argued, come from the quality and amount of knowledge one possesses, which form our cultural capital. Taste in food, art, music and literature are good indicators of class. Appreciating exotic food is something in common for both me and my friend. The differences would surface when comparing artistic and musical knowledge. I, for instance, cannot read music; neither can I play any instruments. But, playing the guitar is not an indicator of higher glass. Uncommon, more difficult ones, like piano or violin, are the ones that make the true hierarchy distinctions.

Yet, one cannot say that cultural and economic capital are not interconnected. For example, if cultural capital is institutionalized, meaning a high ranked university plays a role in defining the hierarchies, a high economic capital is also needed to be able to afford attending the said institution. Moreover, symbolic capital could also surface from this interaction. The majority of society views high ranking universities as something out of their touch, thus, they offer respect and power to people who got in. Having prestige and power usually means being part of more groups, having more interactions with people. This implies that one’s social capital is higher.

In conclusion, Bourdieu’s theories covered most of the components of society. These components interact and form subsystems which, glued together, give rise to the unified society. Social illusion gives people reason and a story to continue. With the use of all different forms of capital, people draw boundaries between them, differentiate themselves from the crowd. But still, society maintains the control through habitus, the norms everyone follows unconsciously. And given that humans are social creatures, they need to interact; Bourdieu presented the fields, which represents the subsystem that allows people to express themselves, to show their dispositions and continue playing their role.

Critically explore the claim that women have been excluded from the history of sociology.

When studying the history of sociology, it is evident that the perspective of male scholars and theorists has been much more prevalent than that of females and has had a greater influence on the nature of society today. In patriarchal society, men have made their own knowledge and their own gender representative of the whole of humanity (Daly, 1973;8, cited in Spender, 1981). The most dominant theorists who pioneered sociology during their time, were males such as Durkheim and Weber, regardless of the fact that they had many female contemporaries (such as Weber’s wife, Marianne, who became a feminist and writer) who at the same points in history, had developed theories and conducted research of their own. This essay will aim to critically explore the claim that women have been excluded from this history, and will attempt to show arguments both for and against this statement.

The exclusion of women in the history of the sociological field can only be fully understood when examining the exclusion of women in the history of society as a whole. For example in late 19th century England, women were not recognised as individuals. They were confined to the private and domesticated world, where they were unnoticed by public society. Some women did engage in more public activities, although there were restrictions, such as the factory legislation, which limited the involvement of women in the industrial sector. Men held formal power over the family, and women were confined to the private sphere of society and were excluded from the public sphere where they enjoyed few of the same benefits and privileges as men (Eisenstein, 1986).

As during the 19th and 20th centuries, the dominant role of women was involved in the private sector rather than the public, this could perhaps have lead to the exclusion of women in sociological history. This meant that sociologists at the time were unable to conduct research on women, as they were unaware of the exact roles of women in this sector of society had. Additionally, at this point in history there were many other aspects of society that were to be observed, for example the industrial revolution. This created many changes in the lives of the working classes, and as such a majority of the work force was male, this only aided in the exclusion of women, as they were unavailable for observation by sociologists. It is because of this, that sociologists who sought information on working classes were unable to obtain sufficient information on the female workforce and accurately represent women. Instead they could only describe the working classes as being predominantly male and based the majority of theories on this (Spender, 1981).

In 1865 Mill became a member of the House of Commons and fought for women’s suffrage, and fought to “amend the laws that gave husbands control over their wives’ money and property” (Eisenstein, 1986). Such suppression is also evident in other sectors of society, for example women have been encouraged to specialise in less prestigious areas than men, and areas which are least likely to be thought of as preparation for any academic career (Roberts and Woodward, 1981). The omission of women from the expansion of knowledge in academic fields such as social and physical or natural sciences has been documented (Roberts and Woodward, 1981), this illustrating the lack of female perspective and lack of acknowledgement of females in academic fields. The majority of knowledge in our society is that documented and discovered by men, although has been passed off as the knowledge of mankind as they claim it is representative of the whole of humanity. The views of men have become the legitimate view of society as a whole (Spender, 1981). Even the knowledge that society has of women, is not from a female perspective, but that of male scholars. It is also men who controlled the media outlets, such as women’s magazines in the 1950s, which dictated to women their expected roles and behaviours and according to Betty Friedan, was so influential in shaping their lives (cited in Spender, 1985).

From more recent investigation, it seems that employment prospects of women in social sciences have yet to see much improvement (Roberts et al., 1981). Beard (1946, cited in Spender, 1981), insisted that women had actively contributed to the development of society throughout history, however as womens’ contributions to society had been ignored for so long, this only makes it easier for this to continue and also reinforces women’s poor self image (Spender, 1981). It has been argued that women need to prove themselves to be better than their male counterparts in any field before they can be accepted. It is perhaps for this reason that there is little documentation on what women did in the past (Spender, 1981). However, throughout history women seem to have played a lesser role in times of crisis and revolution in comparison to men. For this reason Hexter argued that “historians were concerned with the process of social change and that since women did not play a decisive role in such processes, they were not the legitimate subject of history” (Spender, 1981; 55). In other words, the patriarchal society of this time did not see the actions of women to contribute significantly enough to deserve historical mention. Evidence of the continuation of this

Despite the majority of sociologists, during times of the industrial revolution, focusing for the most part on the lives of the working classes (or in other words, working class men) Margaret Hewitt (1958, cited in Spender, 1981) was writing about the behaviours and experiences of wives and mothers in the Victorian industrial era. Even before this, Pearl Jephcott (1949, cited in Spender, 1981) wrote on ‘Girls Growing Up’ which remains a classic text in sociology. This would suggest evidence against the exclusion of women in sociological history, as there were sociologists who were writing about them.

Although these sociologists mentioned were themselves, women, and as previously described, the patriarchal society of the time did not see the opinions of women to be as important as that of men. Therefore it can be said that whist the place of women in society, and their lives, was acknowledged by female sociologists, as it is a male dominated field, their works were not to be regarded highly amongst their male counterparts. In identifying this, it can also be realised that the majority of well known female sociologists, are those which discuss the roles and lives of women, over that of men. Their stance on sociology, is that from a feminist viewpoint, rather than adopting the theories of the classical sociologists, such as Marx or Durkheim. Female sociologists who take these view points are to be forever in the shadows of the original male theorists, where as female sociologists who write and research under the principles of the feminist movement seem much more likely to gain wider recognition for their work.

To conclude this essay it can be seen that women were not fully excluded from the history of sociology, as there were other women who wrote about them and documented their place in society. However at the same time they did not receive the same recognition as males in society did and were not seen to have such a significant role in the history of society. Therefore the claim that women have been excluded from the history of sociology is largely true as their work and input have been much less appreciated and acknowledged in comparison to men of the same time. Jessie Bernard (1972, cited in Roberts et al., 1981) asked “not what sociology can do for women, but rather what women can do for sociology”. It can be seen that in the sociological field there is a definite bias towards the presence of men in society, both as subjects and as researchers, whilst that which involves women receives much less recognition. After all, the founding fathers of sociology, are the founding fathers and not the founding mothers (Spender, 1981).

References:
Eisenstein, Z. (1986). The Radical Future of Liberal Feminism. Boston: Notheastern University Press
Roberts, H. and Woodward, D. (1981). ‘Changing patterns of women’s employment in sociology: 1950-80’. The British Journal of Sociology, Vol. 32, No. 4 (Dec., 1981), pp. 531-546. Blackwell Publishing [Online] available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/590132?seq=1
Spender, D. (1985). For The Record. London: The Women’s Press Limited
Spender, D. (ed). (1981). Men’s studies modified. Oxford: Pergamon Press Limited

Education is one of the most important aspects of society and benefits the individual and society as a whole. It benefits society through economical, political and cultural means. But what has to be assessed is whether the aim of education is to benefit each individual, whether it is to further the development and production in society, or whether it is to do both, but in a fair and equal manner without causing separations and problems within society. Modern day society is ever expanding and globalization, which Coatsworth says “is where the movement of people, goods or ideas among countries and regions accelerates”, increasing. This then results in the world requiring a ‘global workplace’ of people working for TNC’s (Trans-National Corporations) across multiple continents in order to create the biggest amount of profit and spread of goods. Whether globalization is a good thing is one question but what is central, is whether education needs to be transformed to prepare children for this ever developing market.

Arguably, there are many different purposes of education. The Functionalist view is that education unifies and stabilizes society, it benefits society as a whole and is based on a meritocratic system. Education contributes towards social cohesion through shared experiences and a common curriculum. The expansion of education, for Functionalists, is directly linked to the requirements of industrial production. Therefore, the essential purpose of education for Functionalism is to keep society going by creating workers and people who can benefit society economically. The Functionalist belief is that each individual child’s achievement is based on how hard the individual works (meritocracy) and whether they want to achieve highly. This is a very positive view of education but unfortunately, Functionalism fails to notice any negatives within society and education. It fails to recognize any exterior or genetic factors that can affect a child’s achievement within education such as poverty, gender or ethnicity.

Karl Marx would argue that the “purpose of education is to reproduce inequality and social hierarchy” (keep the rich, rich and the poor, poor). What Marx says is that children are being labelled in school according to their social class and then the education system makes sure they are kept in that class to produce low-skilled workers and manual labourers for means of production within society. “The bourgeoisie has torn away from the family its sentimental veil, and has reduced the family relation into a mere money relation” (Marx, 1848). Making profit is more important to the capitalist society than the effective development and education of our future generations. One of the ways children could be kept in their social class within education is through language. Basil Bernstein said that humans use a restricted and elaborated language code depending on what social situation they find themselves in and with which types of people. The Restricted code is a simple understanding of language used with family and friends whilst the elaborated code is more abstract and complex and would be more commonly used within institutions. Bernstein’s research found that working-class children had access to the restricted code whereas middle-class children had access to both the restricted and the elaborated code. It is the dominant use of the elaborated code within education though, that is disadvantaging working class children by affecting their understanding and ultimately resulting in lower achievement from them.(Bernstein, 1977). Marxism would argue that social class is based on the possession of means of production but in the modern day society class is based upon knowledge and wealth. Capitalism has created a society where knowledge creates wealth and power. Overall, the Marxist view would be that education is already preparing children for the global workplace by reproducing inequality and manual labourers who will be underpaid and mistreated in the workplace so that Trans-National Corporations can make the biggest profits; whilst the middle class children shall become the management of the companies and the hierarchy shall be present in the global workplace as it was in school.

Weber’s Interactionist theory examines how individuals and groups create patterns of behaviour which shape the systems. Becker’s labelling theory explains how if a teacher labels a pupil negatively in school then a pupil will go on to fulfil that label. Labelling is an effect of the characteristics of a pupil on a teacher’s views of the student. If a child is labelled in school by a class teacher because they appear scruffy or lazy, this can be down to relative poverty in the home which could cause the child to be frequently tired and without the necessary resources to assist their learning. This can result in a teacher labelling a pupil as lazy, unenthusiastic or simply unwilling to learn, which then goes on to affect the child’s achievement within school and possibly even later life. Labelling is potentially a major factor in working class children going on to perform manual labour jobs, making up the majority of a national and global workforce and remaining in their social class. Marxism would maintain this is true and would state that this is the sole aim for the education system, to produce a global workforce that can benefit society economically.

“The world is in a transformation that means there is ‘no longer a clear distinction between international and domestic, external and internal affairs” (Rosenau, 1990). This statement by Rosenau explains how the world through modernisation is now merged into one global workplace. Globalisation has created a world where each individual country is now reliant upon one another for goods and services and so act not alone, but more as one.

“Globalisation has integrated rich, affluent, and educated classes, but has fractured working classes and marginalised the poor, who do not have the skills and economic clout to profit from open markets” (Shalmali Guttal 2007). This statement from Guttal shows how Globalisation may be positive in terms of benefitting the rich and providing opportunities for the middle class but at the expense of the working class. Therefore if a student struggles academically and cannot go on to higher education, they should not suffer in today’s society by not benefitting from the gains of globalisation. This is one way that Globalisation is creating inequality in society and if the education system was to prepare students for the global workplace then this would simply be reinforcing inequality in school. The purpose of education is to benefit the lives of all children in school not just to progress the lives of those children who have already been born into the middle and upper classes. Economic gain is not the vital target for the result of education. “Globalisation enters the education sector on an ideological horse, and its effects on education and the production of knowledge are largely a product of that financially-driven, free-market ideology, not of a clear conception for improving education” (Carnoy, 1999).

Bowles & Gintis explain how school relates to the workplace via the overt and the hidden curriculum. Orders are given by the teacher/boss to the student/worker to follow. The person in charge of the student/worker will have to give permission for the individual to use the toilet, when to go and return for fixed time breaks, will assign work tasks to the individual/group, give rewards for hard work, place emphasis on attitude towards tasks, give work to be done at home and discipline the students/workforce. Nearly every single thing a person will experience when they enter the workplace is imitated within the schooling system to prepare students for the global workplace.

The restricted and elaborated language code explained by Bernstein not only puts working class children at a disadvantage in the schooling environment but also in the working environment and especially in the multi-national corporations of today’s global workplace. If a working class child is underachieving in school because of the dominant elaborated language code used by teachers, then that student will not secure themselves a well-paid job in the management sector of TNC’s because of their achievement academically and because of their dominant use of the restricted language code. In the global workplace, as well as in education, the elaborated language code is used. Therefore, the use of the elaborated language code in education and the global workplace is reproducing inequality by keeping the working class limited to the restricted code which results in them only gaining manual labour jobs and becoming the primary workforce of the global workplace. As a result of this, more emphasis needs to be put on teaching children the elaborated language code in school before they reach the workplace, but in a gradual, subtle way so they can pick it up rather than being at a disadvantage right from the beginning of school. This is one major way that education needs to prepare students for the global workplace simply so that inequality is not being reproduced as a result of the schooling system.

Bourdieu’s forms of capital can link to Bernstein’s language codes in terms of class and social structure. Bourdieu’s says that a group or an individual’s position in the social structure depends on three forms of capital: Economic, social and cultural. Economic capital is everything with a monetary value a person owns, social capital is what types of groups the individual may belong to and cultural capital is the way a person may have been cultured such as frequenting museums and art galleries as a child. These three forms of capital are something a child is either born into or not and as a result is crucial to the individual’s position in the social structure as they grow up. It is also important to mention that economic capital can be converted into cultural and social capital by means of paying for a University degree from King’s College, London, and influencing the right to membership of an esteemed social group. A further form of capital that Bourdieu also explains is linguistic capital. If an individual is raised in a higher class family where the elaborated language code is used on a daily basis and the child even comes into contact with another language such as Greek or Latin, then that is going to raise their position in the social structure right from a young age (Bourdieu, 1986). Consequently, it is easy to see what role that child shall go on to take in terms of hierarchy in the global workplace and what role a child who has grown up without that form of capital will take.

Harbison and Myers say that the role of education “Unlocks the door to modernization”. In terms of capitalism though, it is debatable whether modernization is a positive thing when it is reproducing inequality and reinforcing the class system. However, inequality is being reproduced not just now in a national sense, but a global sense where the poverty-stricken underclass are being exploited for cheap labor in third world countries by capitalist countries such as America.

In conclusion, education is crucial to the development of society but not at the expense of the majority of individuals within that society. The rise of the global workplace through Globalization has created possibly more inequality and greed within the world and to prepare students for that in school would be ethically and morally wrong. It would be right to prepare students for the global workplace by dismissing social backgrounds, treating all equally and assisting those in more need. This could go on to reduce the gap in social class to create equal opportunities for all within the hierarchy of the global workplace. School already prepares students for the world of work in terms of its discipline and rules, and with the world becoming an ever increasingly multi-cultural place, schools are teaching children about other cultures. This therefore, is already preparing children for the global workplace. However, when there is so much inequality and exploitation in the global workplace, simply to enable cheap labour costs and higher profits, it is more important to focus on creating equality in the classroom and trying to make sure all children can achieve what they desire.

Karl Marx- (1848), The Communist Manifesto.

Margaret L. Andersen & Howard F. Taylor, (2005) Sociology: understanding a

diverse society. Fourth edition.

Howard F. Taylor, (2007). Sociology: The Essentials. Cengage learning, P.425

S. Bowles & H. Gintis, (1976). Schooling in Capitalist America. Basic Books Ltd.

Shalmali Guttal, (2007). Development in Practice, vol 17, numbers 4-5. Taylor & Francis Ltd.

Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. Reproduced in Ball, S. (ed.) (2004) The RoutledgeFalmer reader in sociology of education. London: RoutledgeFalmer, pp.15-29.

Bourdieu, P. and Passeron, J.-C. (1977). Reproduction in education, society and culture. London: Sage.

Layard, R. & Dunn, J. (2009). A Good Childhood; Searching for Values in a Competitive Age. London, Penguin.

Paul Willis, (1977). Learning to Labour: how working class kids get working class jobs. Columbia University Press; Morningside edition.

Bernstein, B., (1977). Class, codes and Control vol 3. London: Routledge.

Bourdieu, P., (1986). The forms of capital. Reproduced in Ball, S. (ed.) (2004). The

RoutledgeFalmer reader in sociology of education. London: RoutledgeFalmer, pp.15-29.

Child sexual abuse is definitely not a new or modern phenomenon and even though it was not necessarily acknowledged before the 1800’s, it does not mean that it did not exist. Throughout history, documentation about child sexual abuse has existed, with references especially to Greek and Roman civilisations, as well as in colonial America and Europe (Bolen, 2002). Jean-Claude Chenais (1981), in a study using multiple data sources has been pivotal in the attitude changes in Western societies over the issue of child sexual abuse over the last hundred years. His studies have shown that due to a number of different contributing factors, in some European countries like Germany and France, child sexual abuse was so frequent as to be considered normal (Bagley & King, 2004). As cited in Bolen (2002), in his research on classical childhood analysis of different historical eras, DeMause (1988), states that:

“The history of childhood is a nightmare from which we have only begun to awaken. The further back in history one goes, the lower the level of child care, and the more likely children are to be killed, abandoned, beaten, terrorised and sexually abused”.

In her research of historical child sexual abuse, Florence Rush has found that it is predominantly a phenomenon of the patriarchal systems in history, where children were considered as property of the father. In Talmudic law it is the tradition that a female daughter can be betrothed by her father by means of sexual intercourse after the age of three. Even though not encouraged, sexual acts including intercourse with a child younger than three years is not a crime. Such sexual activity with young girls was not discouraged by the Catholic Church either in history, as in a Papal decree of the sixth century stated that for a marriage to be valid it was copulating that was the overriding factor and consent only desirable. The age of the girl was taken into consideration for the purpose of betrothal where if the girl was not at least seven years old than this was considered invalid. Also, through history we find however that sexual abuse was not limited only to girls. Especially in Greece, it was popular to use boys for sex. It was also common to castrate young boys and buy or sell them as sex slaves (Bagley & King, 2004).

In its broad sense, child sexual abuse is when an older person forcibly engages in sexual activity with a child. The definition of the terms sexual assault on children or child molestation is different in different legal jurisdictions (Rowan, 2006). As cited in Kinnear (2007), child sexual abuse is defined by Fraser (1981) as being “the exploitation of a child for the sexual gratification of an adult”, whilst Baker and Duncan (1985) claim that “[a] child (anyone under 16 years) is sexually abused when another person, who is sexually mature, involves the child in any activity which the other person expects to lead to their sexual arousal”. In their 2003 report on the maltreatment of children, the Children’s Bureau of the US Department of Health and Human Services defines it as the “involvement of the child in sexual activity to provide sexual gratification or financial benefit to the perpetrator, including contacts for sexual purpose, molestation, statutory rape, prostitution, pornography, exposure, incest, or other sexually exploitation activities” (U.S. Department for Health and Human Services, Administration for Children, Youth and Families, 2005). The age of consent is also different from one country to another. However, it is commonly understood, that a child is not able to understand or willingly consent to sexual experiences with an older person. It is also acknowledged that there exists sexual experimentation between young people and therefore molestation charges are only enforced when the older person is sixteen or eighteen and that child is three or five years younger (Rowan, 2006).

There are certain factors which categorise sexual encounters as abuse according to the World Health Organisation. As well as the age difference it also includes in the definition the misuse of a position of authority by the adult which then leads to sexual acts. The child must also be unwilling to participate in such acts even if he or she did not offer resistance. It also requires the attempt to touch the genitals or breasts of a child or make the child touch the ones of the adult. If the adult attempts to touch the child by exposing himself or if the child is undressed, made to, as well as the attempt to seduce or tempt to take to another place whilst psychology threatening the child (Fegert, 2003). Sociological definitions of child sexual abuse differ from the clinical or legal ones and whilst some are universally acknowledged some are less so even though equally important and influential (Lawrence, 2004). One of the definitions widely accepted by child protection services is that of Schechter and Roberge and it states that “Sexual abuse is defined as the involvement of dependent, developmentally immature children and adolescents in sexual activities they do not truly comprehend, to which they are unable to give informed consent” (Schechter & Roberge, 1976).

When researching child sexual abuse, it is common to associate this with the phenomology of pedophilia. When assessing and treating sex offenders however, professionals know that it is important to explore different variables that have an important role in such deviant sexual behaviour. The sexual preference and history, including any of crime or violence, are taken into consideration. Any other disorders such as endocrine or neuropsychological ones as well as any other biological factors are to be explored (Langevin, 2003). By definition, a pedophile is generally an individual who for no less than a period of six months fantasises about having sexual encounters with young children or is sexually aroused by the thoughts of such fantasies. Usually the sexual urges of such individuals are focused on children younger than thirteen years of age. Pedophiles can be frustrated from these urges and often suffer from interpersonal difficulties because of these sexual impulses. However, even if not necessarily always the case, some pedophiles will act upon such fantasies and are usually only apprehended or brought to attention because of this. Most pedophiles are usually not necessarily disturbed enough about such fantasies about children and as a consequence do not seek voluntary medical help (Hall & Hall, 2007). The key factor in the assessment of pedophilia is the age of the children for whom interest is shown. In its most strong forms, exclusivity is shown towards prepubescent children with no sexual urges or interest in other adults. Not all pedophiles however commit sexual offences with child victims and not all sex offenders with children are pedophiles (Seto, 2004). Dr Langevin (2003) noted however, that even though there seem to be a number of factors that are common between pedophile priests and other pedophiles in terms of sexual preferences, pedophile priests generally have less antisocial behaviour characteristics.

In light of the huge amount of media coverage of the clergy abuse crisis in the last few years, it seems that even though much interest by the community has been sparked on the topic, little research has been carried out by psychological and clinical bodies. This may be due to a long existing mutual indifference between the Church and the mental health field. Only a few studies have actually addressed the issue of the ‘pedophile priest’ or the priest who sexually abuses children. Despite the surmounting media coverage and attention of the issue providing an alarming public assumption that most priests are pedophiles, an American study estimated however that only 2% of priests are pedophiles whilst another 4% being ephebophiles. However, it is also taken into account that a probably large number of sexual abuse cases by the clergy are not reported (Plante, 1999). Michael Rezendes (2002), part of the Boston Globe’s Spotlight Team was one of the first journalists who brought attention to the issue of child sexual abuse allegations against the American clergy. A year of investigations carried out by this team resulted in the resignation of Cardinal Bernard Law on the 13th December, 2002. This was mainly due to the exposure of a series of shortcomings and mistakes, in his handling of a well known pedophoile in Boston; Rev John J. Geoghan, where after being reported of sexual misconduct with children, he was reassigned. However, it was clear that Geoghn was only a sign of a more serious problem. The Spotlight Team investigated further into the Archdiocese of Boston and by the time of Law’s resignation, had published over 800 stories.

An earlier singular case which also received worldwide publicity however dates back to 1984, where Fr Gilbert Gauthe of Lafayette, Louisiana was charged on multiple counts of child sexual abuse. This was the first criminal case of its kind to receive such level of media attention and publicity and also was the first time that a civil suit was initiated against a diocese on the grounds of failure to protect children from a known abuser in its clergy (Murphy, Buckley & Joyce, 2005). Dr Richard Sipe, a psychotherapist and psychiatrist as well as a former Roman Catholic Priest, wrote extensively on the subject of child sexual abuse and reports that even as early as 1976, before the big scandals broke out on the media, there opened a programme, the first, perhaps, in the world dedicated to the treatment of psychosexual disorders for clergy. This included the treatment of disorders which involved the sexual abuse of children. The need for such a programme and its preparation, years before its opening, shows that knowledge of Catholic Clergy who had problems of sexual misconduct was already widespread in the 1960’s and 70’s (Sipe, 1995). With such an increasing interest in the phenomenon of priests as sexual abusers of children, the Catholic Church seemed to be spiralling into a crisis as portrayed so by the media, with an increasing number of people coming forward with new allegations all over the world. Philip Jenkins (2001), as cited in Dokecki (2004) explores the terms of moral crisis as opposed to moral panic. In order to fully understand weather the Catholic Church was being victimised by a new panic born out of media frenzy or if the panic was due to a moral crisis deeply rooted in actual facts and reality of the problem, one must also explore the issue in its full context. It is worth noting and reflecting upon the possibility of child abuse scandal by clergy as being a classic example of social construction. This is not to belittle the seriousness of priests committing such lewd acts with children, but it is more a manner of asserting how the media portrayal of such events can impact the way it shapes the social response to it (Jenkins, 2001).

The way that this issue in the US has been widely covered and reported by the media, it has undoubtedly generated a growing popular feeling of mistrust in the church. This might have been a trigger in the claim that the Catholic Church has been inefficient in its response to such abuses and allegations, as the increasing number of cases began to crop up all over America as well as the rest of the world. By 2004, the time of the Globe’s investigation of the Boston cases, it was reported that between 1950 and 2002, four thousand three hundred priests were alleged to have abused or molested almost eleven thousand children or adolescents (Paine & Hansen, 2002). A study of child abuse committed by clergy which was conducted by the John Jay College for the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops in 2002 recorded these figures. However, this only reflects the numbers for those victims who actually reported their abuse and came forward to the Church authorities. Studies have shown that a great number of victims, especially males, never come forward to disclose their abuse to anyone and even more never report it to the authorities. It is also important to note that not all dioceses participated in this study and not all kept official and accurate records (John Jay College of Criminal Justice, 2002). In the matter of establishing whether the problem of child sexual abuse by clergy in the Catholic Church is just moral crisis as opposed to just moral panic, numbers alone do not suffice. It is often normally recognised for organisations and public entities to take defensive measures when dealing with such serious accusation against its employees or members. Most importantly the defense would most certainly be targeted against a blanket condemnation of the whole organisation. Sometimes, such corporations genuinely fail to recognise and acknowledge the fact that the destructive effects of such allegations have deeper roots than simply moral panic (Dokecki, 2004).

Studies of other organisations entrusted with the care of children show that the prevalence of child sexual abuse is also of concern. In his study as reported in The Washington Times (1991), Patrick Boyle outlined that between 1971 and 1989 there were one thousand, one hundred and fifty seven reports of child sexual abuse out of a million volunteers (all adults) and four million member scouts; with the majority believed to be boys aged between eleven and seventeen. Case studies also seemed to indicate that in order to safeguard the image of the Boy Scout organisation, certain information was covered up in order to prevent the possibility of a crisis scandal. The police were not involved if the alleged abuser left the organisation. However, it was common practice for these offenders to move to other states and join new troops whilst those reported to the General Headquarters still managed to bypass the system and re-roll in new States (Boyle, 1994). Other studies of different organisations for youths and children also show sexual abuse incidents reported. These include institutions like the Big Brother Organisation, the YMCA as well as other athletic organisations and centres for child care-giving in day care institutions or families. In sporting organisations, the perpetrators were found to be involved in the majority of cases with a school; i.e., teachers or principals who appeared to have multiple victims, with one coach reported to have four hundred counts of sexual abuse. The majority of these cases occurred in the US, the UK and Ireland. In both the sports organisations and the Big Brother one, however, it seemed that legal action was taken against the perpetrators and screening processes put in place for all future volunteers (John Jay College, 2002).

As seen from the community, the sexual abuse crises in the Catholic Church presented a larger moral shock than any other abuse scandal, predominantly because of the social status priests hold within the same community. The priest is believed to be not merely a man serving the pastoral functions for his church, but also a delegate of Christ on Earth. The priest is often held in a position of trust within society; where people look upon him as a source of comfort and advice. In Catholic communities the clergy are viewed as central and present in everyday life through their work within the parish and as reference points for the safeguarding of the souls (Cozzens, . However, priests do not only function in a society as preachers of the word of God. In most cases, they will take on the role of therapists, care-givers and educators. They do not only earn their loyalty from the altar, but mainly from being there for the sick, the troubled, the dying and the dead. It is understood, because of such an intimate involvement in social and community life, that any case of sexual abuse by a member of the clergy will have relational and social implications as well as personal ones (Frawley-O’Dea, 2007). According to Lebacqz (1985), from an ethical perspective, priests are professionals and as such, a relationship of mutual trust needed. The clergy however go beyond our normal understanding of their sacramental office and thus in the relationship between priest and child, the typical power discrepancy is significantly amplified. This is so because the context of the relationship is the church and also the professional is a priest and the client a child (Dokecki, 2004).

From their early years children are socialised to view the Church as a ‘mother’ and a priest as a fatherly figure; hence also priests being called ‘father’.