Author: Andre Coleman

As social beings we naturally form groups for survival and support, as the popular saying goes “No man is an island”, and indeed, we are not. We form social groups that unite us with one another and give us a sense of security. These groups can be created from the tiniest of excuses, for example; a group of people that meet at the bus stop every Tuesday at 5am, after seeing each other regularly they easily form alliance and share mutual goals and norms i.e. getting the bus on time. It is within these groups that we receive our social identities. These social identities can be awarded within a small intimate group like a family or in a large scale group like a class in society. Their common goals create an ‘us’ and a ‘them’ response governed by a group conscience (Tajfel, 1971). This response can be a strength, for example, a great championship team attempting to win 4x400meter relay race, find that distinguishing themselves from others could be positive experience that builds self-esteem, making them work harder than others and mesh better. However, even though these social groups provide us with positive identities, securities etc., they can at the same time have a negative effect and create bias towards other groups whether they realise it or not. In this essay, I will discuss how specific social groups based on class and status, come to exist and explore their importance in society.

The disadvantages or advantages experienced by a social group within a stratum reflect the amount of power they have in society. The power comes directed from the resources one is advantaged enough to have, for example, ranging from being able to afford an education, from which, one can gain employment, from which, one can move up to a moderate position within a company, from which, they have the income to buy a house, car and pay for healthcare; to owning an international chain of restaurants, from which, one can afford a luxury yacht that offers luxury cruises, generating enough income to buy a third house and another yacht or two. This is why sociologists believed that social stratification was the core factor that influences the sharing of power in society.

There have been many attempts to determine a deciding factor for social power. Some feminists like Firestone (1971) believed that “all societies were divided into opposed ‘sex classes’ that were the basis of gender inequalities”. She argued that all men in society oppressed women because of the biological, psychological and physical shortcomings they experienced due to pregnancy, child-birth and child rearing. Her ideas stemmed from the women’s liberation movements in Europe and America in the 1960s and represented emancipation. Meanwhile, other systems presented a supressed, racially influenced explanation of social stratification. In the 19th century, the idea that race determined specifically by inherited biological distinctions was the deciding factor in social strata becoming prominent in society. Gumplowicz (1885) viewed “ethnic and racial conflict as the fundamental mechanism of social development”. Gumplowicz believed that it inevitable and natural for one ethnic group to surpass another, giving chance for the strongest to emerge. Gobineau (1853-5) and Chamberlain (1899) promoted racial stratification and warranted the oppression of ‘inferior’ ethnicities. Ideas like these were detrimental to the seemingly ‘inferior’ ethnicity and fuelled thinkers like Adolf Hilter (1925) who sought to eliminate inferior races in favour of the ‘Aryan’ race.

Sexual and racial inequalities are undeniably influential, however, they cannot be individually crowned as the primary causes of social stratification. Race itself does not exist, it is a social construct, and there is only one human race (Gordon, 1964). Ethnicity instead of race, on the other hand, does exist, based on cultural differences springing from history, origin, religion language and the like, however, it is an inequality that contributes to social stratification but does not solely determine the outcome. Similarly, sexual stratification struggles to define all social division because men and women thrive in complete isolation. Men and women’s sexual differences are the building blocks of society and essential for existence so they cannot be the core reason for stratification because stratification is division of society, they are requirements. Neither sexual nor racial inequalities can define a single source of stratification because people are so complicated and diverse, they cannot individually account for the complexities within society. Other sources of stratification are political status, religion or class.

Max Weber (1948) suggested that a wider perspective that incorporates sex and ethnicity should be considered. He believed that there were three unique aspects that spread across humanity and influenced the distribution of power in society and life chances in their own way. The three aspects were class (economic power), status (communal power) and authority (authoritative power). Weber was initially influenced Karl Marx and further developed his own ideas specifically about class and status. Social class refers to a conscious group of people that share the same socio-economic background, whose life chances are decided by the class they belong to. The class system in Britain is a prime example, society is divided into the upper class (mostly aristocrat families, headed by the Queen); middle class (upper-middle class e.g. architects, barristers, high level doctors etc.; middle-middle class e.g. management, teachers, accountancy, social work etc.; and the lower-middle class e.g. clerical, administrative etc.); working class (skilled e.g. a white van man or self-employed contractor and unskilled e.g. customer service or telesales); and the underclass (long term unemployed living off welfare).

Marx (1867) believed that almost every society was a class society with exception of the most primitive societies because they were smaller and undeveloped. He viewed possessing ‘means of production’, especially property, was the deciding influence in social division. He suggested society was of capitalist nature, distinguishing two conspicuous classes: the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. The bourgeoisie owned the means of production and derived majority, if not, all of their income from capital. They were known as the capitalist class. On the reverse were the proletariat, who did not own any means of production and instead work for the bourgeoisie. They were known as the working class. The bourgeoisie, owning the means of production, kept majority of the wealth generated by the proletariat; the bourgeoisie received surplus value from their resources, meanwhile, the proletariat only received a small percentage of their economic worth. He believed that skilled labour in particular had greater value and deserved higher wages. Marx strongly believed that the proletariat were oppressed to the extent that the existed in a state of false consciousness, where they were content with their hardship. He believed that over time the classes would collapse due to internal conflict and a revolution would ensue. He believed the solution to the class system was effective communism.

Weber, influenced by Marx, overruled the idea of effective communism, thinking that the proletariat revolution was highly unlikely because the power of false consciousness was too strong. He understood the bourgeoisie/proletariat class relationship was not so black and white. There were grey areas such as the manager that does not own the means of production and governs the proletariat but does not receive surplus let alone receiving their fair wages. He suggested the distribution of power was not rooted purely in economic power. Both the possession and non-possession of economic assets disperse power in society because from both avenues income is secured, for example, working for an company is labour which has to be ‘bought’ by the employer, thus, providing income/capital via the non-possession of economic assets. Weber viewed class divisions as having economic basis only and that individually class alone could not condition people into stratum. He believed that the increase in wages that Marx sought after would, if granted, would produce cause and effect experience from significant changes in lifestyles, subsequently creating antagonism in the disadvantaged groups. This revolution would be spurred by rational motives instead of stir from false consciousness.

Instead of just class, there were two more aspects determining distribution of power and life chances in society: status (communal power) and authority (authoritative power). Status, for example, held ground when it came to prominent religious figures/poets that were highly significant in society with little economic power. Authoritative power could be executed by a senior police officer that has a lot of authority but not a lot of property. Other criticisms were that the boundaries between various groups are almost impossible to specify. Also, a moral stance was not identified, whether the motives for the division where good or bad. Dahrendorf (1959) also mentioned that in many western societies there are fairly large middle classes because education was more prevalent and available, creating the opportunity to progress.

Weber understood that unlike Marx, explaining stratification in only terms of economic factors was unreasonable and stressing the importance of non-economic factors. He further developed his ideas on the non-economic factor of status. Social status refers to the ranking of an individual in a society as superior or inferior according to the values that they have in common. It is the reputation of the individual granted by lifestyle and duties, dictating their life chances, those that successfully conform to the required standard receive great honour and prestige (high status); and vice versa. In minute societies, status is determined by intimate details gathered from regular face to face interaction. However, in larger, complicated societies, ranking is generated by generalisations based on age, sex, family relationships, ethnicity, sexuality etc., putting one into a specific social group regardless of ability or accomplishments. It is the potentially boosting or diminishing assessment of lifestyle choices without any real information about the individual preferences.

Diminishing status can be very dangerous because it can create a sense of negativity around those of said status, if not worse. For example, in the Indian Caste system, status is assigned according to ethnicity. They range from the religious scholars and leaders at the highest status group known as the Brahim, and the lowest status group known as the Dalits or the untouchables. This is a closed/ascribed status system where despite challenges one cannot change their status because they are born into it. An open/achieved status system is one where status groups are based on merit and achievement so there is social mobility. According to Parsons (1940) status is assigned depending on the most significant social position in a society, for example, lineage, gender, age etc. An example of status assignment are in a tribal society where older men have the highest ranking and young women have the lowest ranking until married off, then a young woman can increase her ranking via her association with her husband. Modern societies alternatively, determine membership by specific public positions. Despite the large variety of occupations, those with the most prestigious receive higher status and vice versa. Strangers are usually judged based on the assumed status gathered from clothing to accents to cars. In contemporary societies status is assumed via income and consumption, and aspirations are geared towards earning higher incomes.

Parsons was criticised by an array of sociologists, some argued that not everyone in contemporary societies share the same significant social positions. Therefore, a unified set of views cannot be assumed. Modern societies also have multiple value systems that dictate status. Others stated that in some value systems a person that is, for example, a black doctor despite the high status of being a doctor would be assigned a low status because of his ethnicity. Weber (1924) believed that when it came to life chances, status was a more important factor instead of class because majority of the population would be more likely to make sacrifices based on social status as it affected their day to day life more.

From a Functionalist perspective, stratification is essential for society to operate smoothly; especially in industrial societies with complicated division of labour. They believe that the inadequate wages served to motivate people to aim higher, creating competition for important roles in society. Critics contended that the definition of important roles were inadequate and stated that the importance of roles does not directly reflect in wages. Society is not a meritocracy because many are born into their class and status. Also, how is inequality essential for society?

Another perspective was the conflict theory stating that stratification is universal but inevitable, unnecessary and not vital for society. Stratification was fashioned and maintained by the elite to guard and enhance their interests. Inequality is not inevitable and it does not promote the ideal functioning of society. They continue to sustain disparity by controlling ideas and information of the masses to keep them in their boxes spreading ideologies such as “scientific racism”, “the divine right of kings” and “a fair day’s pay for a fair day’s work” etc. Information released to the public is often manipulated or filtered e.g. Paris Hilton being mentioned on BBC’s 10 o’clock News etc. Technology is used to monitor our habits e.g. mobile phones, surveillance cameras, oyster cards, credit cards, Facebook etc. The elite sustain by keeping close-knit social networks that pass their privileges from generation to generation.

Having looked at the in-depth definition of stratification, I think society is divided for worse. Established class and status play an important role in keeping the rich ‘rich’ and the poor ‘poor’. I support the Marxist view when it comes to the bourgeoisie oppressing the proletariat recklessly. However, as Weber stated it is more complicated that two distinct classes but the presence of the “elite” is still felt. However, communism is not necessarily the answer to society’s woes. Stratification is naturally inevitable to a degree because the variety of innate differences in people’s abilities. It also provides necessary structure to govern large populations. Evolution states that after distribution of essential resources, the surplus will eventually rank some as more affluent. Symbolic interactionists mention that predominant symbols i.e. wealth, define all social interactions, which in turn develops a person’s sense of self and placing in society. Wealth is not necessarily a bad thing, particularly when it is earned through hard work; it is just harmful when its distribution is extremely lop-sided due to exploitation. The proletariat are the building blocks of society and they deserve a share of the capital.

We all have same basic needs and it is selfish for people to have ridiculous amounts of excess i.e. four twenty bedroom mansions and a private jet while the majority of people elsewhere cannot guarantee where their next meal is coming from. This is inequality and an exhibition of the ‘us’ and ‘them’ mentality to highest order. It is not necessary for the groups to fuse into one group and develop intimate social ties; however the groups should have mutual respect towards one another as fellow human beings regardless of personal differences. The resources in the world are not infinite and they do not belong to a single social group. Diversity should not be punishment; it is what makes humans great, ideally the gap between rich and poor would be moderate. Other than that, stratification is natural and the wealth should be distributed more freely throughout to ease irresponsible division and unnecessary antagonism in society.

Introduction:

Social class is a form of social stratification which impacts on peoples’ lives either negatively or positively. It refers to wealth, education level, occupation and prestige of a particular group of people. Factors which are inter-connected include the gender, sexuality, race and abilities (McDowell et al., 2013). It is important that social class be understood in the context from which it originates, primarily due to factors which occur inter-connectedly as mentioned above. There are many concepts relating to social stratification, but for the purpose of this essay I will focus mainly on Karl Marx’s conflict theory, supplemented by Max Webber’s functionalist ideology. Similarly factors such as education and employment will be central in this essay. I believe that the acquisition of knowledge and prestige via employment plays an important role in defining an individual’s lifestyle and subsequently their life chances.

Body:

It must be noted that most of the research done by Karl Marx was based on westernized capitalist societies and it is primarily due to this fact that his concept of conflict theory exists in an economic realm or context (Lenski, 2008). Marx demarcated class of people in terms of either lower, middle or upper class. In ‘Manifesto of the Communist Party’ Marx refers to lower-class societies as the proletariat and the upper-class as the bourgeoisie. The proletariat are a class of people who do manual labour which requires no specific skill, or simply put, they are the working (blue-collar) section of society. The bourgeoisie employ the working class society in order to increase their capital (Mohandesi, 2013). It is interesting to note that the position an individual finds himself or herself relative to the above category, impacts on their life chances and thus their social class. According to Max Weber (Davidson, 2009) social class and a person’s life chances are interdependent. In this sense, the higher an individual is positioned in the social hierarchy (class) the better his or her life will be; the opposite occurs for those who are in a poorer position. Factors include becoming wealthier, increasing one’s prestige, the acquisition of knowledge and the improvement of an individual’s living conditions. These are known as social advancements or improvements.

According to a research study by Jean Anyon (1980) educational opportunities vastly improved as the socio-economic conditions of a particular social group increased. Anyon (1980) in ‘Social Class and the Hidden Curriculum of Work’ found that schools were organised in a manner which reflects the social class of the families. Her results were derived from five schools which were broken down into working-class, middle-class, affluent professional and executive elite schools. Furthermore Anyon (1980) concludes that skills and knowledge which moves toward social power or prestige are obtainable to children from higher social groups but are inaccessible to the working class which are offered a practical curriculum. This study shows that the curriculum grooms children to fill an employment role suited to their social class or better put, so that the more challenging professions are occupied by the most skilled and talented individuals. In this sense, lower class schools educated individuals in a manner which requires them to follow orders rather than use their own initiative and understanding of the work. The emphasis on individualism increases as the social class of the school increases. In my experience I concur with what Anyon has found because there exists numerous types of schools or institutions ranging from technical to managerial and professional. Examples are the Cape Peninsula University of Technology, Cape Town College and The University of the Western Cape. Marx also suggests that institutions are used to oppress the subordinates of a society, this statement coupled with Anyon’s research, displays a rather frightful image. Institutionally people are being transformed and socialized, from a young age, to follow the layers of strata found in society.

Education ultimately leads to employment which in turn culminates in the acquisition of wealth or material property. According to Max Weber, the ownership of physical assets, which is obtained by means of production, creates unique characteristics in terms of the individual’s life chances (Shortell, 2012). Furthermore, Weber believes that the ownership of property is central to class differences and in this case there will always be a relationship between employee and employer or property renter and property owner. In our modernized capitalist society empowered by neoliberalism, emphasis is placed on the acquisition of wealth thereby stratifying society into upper-class rich and the lower-class poor inhabitants. In this sense one can improve one’s social class by increasing wealth and also the ownership of property-making this an open societal system (opposed to the system of slavery). Employment is therefore an opportunity to achieve wealth and increase status, however, inequalities occur whereby a bread baker (regardless of his skill) has less chances to improve his conditions than the owner of the bakery. Functionalists (Marxism) would argue that economic disparity benefits the majority of society and is also an essential element for the operation of society as a whole (Lenski, 2008).

Conclusion:

In my opinion, I see employment as the second phase in a three phase process in light of an individual’s life chances. The first phase being education and the last being a successful business owner or CEO. As mentioned above, the level of education provided to individuals varies according to their socio-economic standing. This is the crux of my argument mainly due to the manner in which institutions shape society in preparation for their pre-planned future i.e. external forces of which they have no control over. A false consciousness thus exists in the open capitalist society whereby the proletariat is made to believe that they have equal opportunities to improve their life chances, when in actual fact their original social class serves as a key which only opens a limited number of doorways to success. Those who are endowed with a higher social class are granted unlimited opportunities to all elements of success, prestige, wealth, knowledge and ultimately advantages to better their life’s chances.

Assess and explain the impact of social class inequalities on education outcomes

In this essay I will explain and evaluate the impact of social class inequalities on education and its outcomes. Sociologists see society as a stratification system that is based on factors such as; hierarchy of power, privilege and wealth, which leads into social inequalities. Inequality is about who gets what, how they get it and why they get it. Social inequality is about class, gender and ethnicity, it is characterised by the presence of unequal opportunities and rewards for different social groups. There are two main views of social inequalities in education within sociology; the functionalists and the marxists.

The functionalists believe that the education system is meritocratic because if you work hard, you get rewards. Emile Durkheim believes that education contributes to social solidarity which is essential for society as it binds society together. It has provided norms and values, a sense of history and a feeling of belonging in society. Durkheim also believed that education contributes to individual’s specialised skills as these are taught with education and being passed on from parents. The education system teaches individuals the skills and knowledge required to enable an individual to do the job. Talcott Parsons developed further into Durkheim’s theory and suggests that education is a secondary socialisation where schools build on the primary socialisation, which is taught by parents. That education system develops on value consensus and prepares children for their adult roles. He believed that education helps with individual achievement as it rewards high achievers with praise, it offers equal opportunity for individuals to a chance of success. He also believes that schools are a miniature version of society which prepares them for adult roles and assists with role allocation as it helps them discover their talents and expands them further. However functionalists were criticised as there is evidence that certain groups underachieve in schools which suggests that individuals do not have equal opportunities, their talent is was not effectively developed or the role allocation is not effective.

The marxists believe that the education system operate as an ideological tool. Louis Althusser believed that schools prepare individuals for their roles in jobs, are taught to except future exploitation and are provided with education and qualification to match their job roles. He believes that the education system brainwashes and manipulates individuals. Bowles and Gintis argue against Parsons’s role allocation theory as they suggest individuals who get the highest qualifications and the top jobs do so because they work hard and do as they’re told. They found the individuals with the high grades where obedient, hardworking and conforming and are rewarded with high grades as they are the qualities required for adult work.

It is said that the higher a person’s social class, the higher their educational qualification, which has been proved over the past 50 years by sociological research and government statistics. For example statistic in 2012/13 show that in London, pupils living in the area of Westminster achieve 86.6% in achieving 5+ A*-C grades, compared to pupils living in the area of Newham achieve 79.1%. Although both areas are within inner London the results show a difference due to class social factors within educational attainment. It is also said that a parent’s social class has a greater impact on how a child preforms at school, research by the University of London’s Institute of Education found that parent(s) who are in professional and managerial jobs were at least eight months ahead of pupils who parent(s) were unemployed. They took into consideration such factors as ethnicity and family size. The education system has been suggested as being biased and designed for white, middle class children and ignoring the needs for the working class and ethnic minority. However it is argued that there is a similar range of ability in every social class and factors within society such as low expectations, lack of deferred gratification and economical issues are the reasons for failure in working class. Working class children tend to experience economical hardship than any other class, because it has been linked to material deprivation, such as lack of money and things money could buy is the reason for working class underachievement. Sociologists believe that the children are unable to obtain needed educational items such as computer with internet, desks and books which is a disadvantage for them as well as the costs of education such as tuition fees meaning that people within the working class believe they cannot afford to attend further education. Parsons believed that middle class children from a young age receive more attention and encouragement from their parent(s), which gives them a higher attainment for when they begin school. However J Douglas believed that the working class children’s parent(s), do not understand what their children needs are to succeed in education. He believed that the interest displayed by parent(s) in the children’s attainment contributed to their education. Also the attitudes of the parent(s) to the teachers becomes apparent and this can encourage a teacher to treat one pupil different from another.

Social class subcultures such as the differences between the norms and values suggests differences in attainment according to some sociologists. Barry Sugarman believed that working class subculture was fatalistic as they accepted the situation and did nothing to improve it, it was present-time orientated as there was no planning for the future. He also suggested concerns with immediate gratification as there was no sacrifices for the future, whereas the middle class saw things differently. These differences contribute to the attitude in education and will lead to lack of enthusiasm and mind-set to succeed.

Other sociologists believe that cultural deprivation such as an absence of certain norms, values, attitudes and skills that are needed for educational success and this is why the working class were also underachieving. However Basil Bernstein believed there are different speech patterns between different classes. He developed the cultural deprivation theory where he suggested that speech patterns of those at the bottom class are inferior. He suggested that working class children adopt a restricted speech code and the education system adopts an elaborated speech code. He also believes that children suffer due to a language barrier, restricting the teacher to be able to teach and the children being unable to learn, which then causes underachievement. Pierre Bourdieu agrees that the working class are discriminated because they are unable to grasps the teachers meaning of grammar, tone, accent and the delivery of teaching.

Bourdieu states that the higher people’s position in the class system, the greater the amount of dominant culture they have. This culture is referred as superior as they have power which forms the basis of the education system. He argues that the higher class cultures are better when compared to the working class, because of the perceived superiority where the middle class believe the working class have themselves to blame for the failure in education. Bourdieu believes that children born into the middle class have a built in advantage as their culture is closer to the school culture which gives them an advantage to succeed, such as their language is closer to the teachers which gives them more of an understanding of what’s being taught. According to Bourdieu the dominant culture are seen as cultural capital, because it is converted into material rewards such as high status jobs and high salaries. He concludes that education is cultural and social reproduction as the education system reproduces the dominant culture which reproduces class system. By doing this is creates education success and failure which justifies the positions of those at the top and bottom. However Bourdieu believes that middle class should not assume that the higher class is better as the failures are measured in exam success, which is in fault with the education system and not the culture. He argues that individuals learn by what they see in life and what they expect, he states that different social groups have different chance and experiences in life. For example studying Spanish art, middle class children can go there and see it, whereas working class have to visualise it.

Diane Reay states that it is the mothers who make cultural capital work for their children as she believes that all mother are active in their children’s education, that working class mother’s work just as hard as middle class mothers. She suggested that middle class mothers had more educational qualification and knew how the system worked and used cultural capital to good effect such as helping with homework. Because of this working class mothers believed that they lacked the knowledge to be able to help with their children. Reay argued that middle class women had more material capital by employing cleaners it allowed them time to help their children, working class women didn’t have this as well as being able to afford private tuition. According to Reay it’s the mothers that help with educational attainment, their effectiveness depends on the amount of cultural capital and this depends on social class.

There is evidence that suggests that working class pupils are discriminated against middle class pupils for example pupils are always being assessed, they’re labelled as able and less able, placed into sets, entered for individual examinations and denied access to parts of school curriculum. It is suggested that middle class children are classed as able which is a disadvantage for working class. Once a pupil has been labelled they tend to respond or interpret that label which is a self-fulfilling prophecy and will continue to see themselves as that label. However it’s argued that this has no effect on pupil’s achievement, they believe that class differences in attainment are due to what happens outside of school. On the other hand others say it is a combination of differences in school as well as outside.

Statistic in 2012/13 show that girls achieve 86.5% in achieving 5+ A*-C grades, compared to boys who achieve 79.6% in achieving 5+ A*-C grades.

Bibliography

Department of Education, (2014, February 14^th). Statistic – national statistics GCSE and equivalent attainment by pupil characteristics. Gov.uk. Available: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/gcse-and-equivalent-attainment-by-pupil-characteristics-2012-to-2013. Retrieved 23^rd February 2014

Haralambos, M., Richardson, J., Taylor, P., Yeo, A. (2010). Sociology in focus (2^nd ed.). Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.

History learning site. (n.d). Social class and achievement. Available: http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/social_class_achievement.htm. Retrieved 23^rd February 2014

History learning site. (n.d). Pierre Bourdieu. Available: http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/pierre_bourdieu.htm. Retrieved 23^rd February 2014

Shepard, J. (2010, December 7^th). Social class has more effect on children than good parenting, study finds. The guardian. Available: http://www.theguardian.com/education/2010/dec/07/social-class-parenting-study. Retrieved 23^rd February 2014

The black report on Inequalities in health care was introduced by the Department of health in the UK by Health Minister, David Ennals in 1977. It wanted to point out why the NHS had failed to reduce social inequalities in health and to investigate the problems. He would do this by analysing people’s lifestyles and their health records from different social class backgrounds. It found that the overall health of the nation had improved but the improvement was not equal across all the social classes, and the gap in inequalities in health between the lower and higher social classes is widening. It seemed that some of the main causes of this were class and ethnicity.

Social Class

The black reports main focus was centred on social class. The report stated that both upper and middle class individuals had a better quality and standard of living than lower class people. Below are four types of explanations the black report gave for the differences in illnesses and life expectancy within social classes.

Artefact explanation studies the relationship between health and social class, age, profession, and views the relationships between social classes.

Natural or social selection: this explanation suggests that physical weakness and poor health conveys little social value as well as low economic.

Cultural explanation suggests lower social classes have less healthy lifestyles due to lack of exercise, eating unhealthy fatty foods and smoking. They have less money to provide themselves with healthier diets.

Material/structural explanation focuses on poverty, poor living conditions and environments. Studies in these areas confirm that social factors are the main causes which contribute towards ill health.

Ethnicity

According to the 2001 census 8% of the UK’s population is of an ethnic minority, which represented an increase by approximately 50% in the decade 1991-2001. The majority of the ethnic minority was Indians, Pakistanis and mixed ethnic backgrounds.

In many population groups, whether they are grouped by ethnicity or religion have many differences in ways of illness behaviour and seeking help with beliefs and health queries about an illness.

In some ethic groups, some diseases are more common than others, e.g. men from Indian backgrounds are more susceptible to cardiovascular illnesses. As a result of these statistics it has prompted further investigations into the detection of cardiovascular disease and the risk factors within ethic groups.

The two social groups that are being compared are social class and ethnicity. These two groups affect health related issues and explain sociological perspectives, patterns and trends.

Social class and patterns of health and illness

Social class is an intricate issue that comprises of status, wealth, culture, background and employment. The association between class and ill health is far from being straight-forward, there are many influences on health and one of them is social class. This is demonstrated by multilevel analysis (a method of assessing health inequalities using several different factors) which shows health inequalities even between households living in the same street.

Poverty and inequality in the social order have consequences on the social, physical and mental well-being of an individual. The following two factors are closely connected.

The infant mortality rate (IMR) children born to underprivileged parents are at more risk than that of a child born to more privileged parents. People from a higher social class are much less likely to die of illnesses such as cancer, heart diseases and strokes and would be likely to live longer compared to others.

The Black Report – which was introduced in 1980 – studied the health differences of people by dividing the population into five social classes and offers information on how social and environmental issues of health and illness and life expectancy are related to one another.

“There is overwhelming evidence that standards of health, the incidence of ill health or morbidity and life expectancy vary according to social groups in our society especially to social class”. (Stretch, B, 2007, Pg361).

One possible explanation is that higher social classes can afford to pay for private healthcare. Their level of income is much higher which then also results in a better lifestyle and accommodation. People who were in less paid jobs meant they had poor housing and a reduced amount of money to provide food and heating.

According to the above table from the Office of National statistics, life expectancy in the United Kingdom increased by approximately 20 years for both males and females between the periods of 1930-2009. Life expectancy in 1930 for males was age 58 and 63 for females, a 33% increase has occurred since then putting life expectancy up to age 78 for males and now a 30% increase for females to age 82. Life expectancy was at its highest in England between the periods of 2007-2009

The increase in life expectancy was mainly due to the decrease in infant mortality rates (deaths under the age of 1 year old). From the period 1930-2010 there was a 93% fall which was recorded as the lowest.

There is also a difference in health between different ethnic groups. According to the 2001 Census Pakistani and Bangladeshi men and women in England and Wales reported thehttp://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmselect/cmhealth/286/28608.gif

Age-standardised limiting long-term illness: by ethnic group and sex, April 2001, England and Wales

highest rates of ‘not good’ health.

Women were more likely to rate their heath as ‘poor’ compared to men across all the groups identified in the chart above, apart from white Irish and those from other ethnic groups.

Reporting poor health has been linked with the use of health services and mortality. Pakistani and white Irish females in England had higher doctor contact rates than females in the general population. Males from Bangladesh were three times likelier to visit their doctor than males from the general population after standardising for age.

According to the January 2007 report by the Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology, Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) groups generally have poorer health than the rest of the general population, it was proposed that the poor the position of socio-economic BME groups is the main reason which is motivating ethnic health inequalities. A number of strategies have aimed to challenge health inequalities in recent years, although to date, ethnicity has not been a continuous focus.

Race, culture, religion and nationality can have a major impact on an individual’s identity. There are many different levels of identification within ethnic groups; many see themselves as British, Asian, Indian, Punjabi and more.

Health inequalities are differences in health status that are influenced by variations in society. Influential factors on health may include lifestyle, wealth, housing conditions, discrimination and health services. These factors over periods of time could be passed down through generation through maternal influences and could affect infant and child developments.

The Health Survey for England showed that BME groups are more likely to report ill health and that ill health starts at an earlier age than White British individuals.

Patterns of ethnic differences in health are varied, and connected with a lot of factors for example:

Some BME groups experience worse health than others. For example, surveys commonly show that Pakistani, Bangladeshi, and Black-Caribbean people report the poorest health, with Indian, East African Asian and Black African people reporting the same health as White British, and Chinese people reporting better health.

Patterns of ethnic inequalities in health vary from one health condition to the next. For instance, BME groups tend to have higher rates of cardio-vascular disease than White British people do, but lower rates of many cancers.

Ethnic differences in health vary across age groups, so that the greatest variation by ethnicity is seen among the elderly.

Ethnic differences in health vary between men and women, as well as between geographic areas.

Ethnic differences in health may vary between generations. For example, in some BME groups, rates of ill health are worse among those born in the UK than in first generation migrants.

Sociologists try to describe how society ranks itself but there are many different philosophies for this, which often clash with one another. Some of these philosophies include Marxism, Functionalism, and Interactionism. Each sociological perspective has different views.

The Marxists theory is an explanation of how society works, how and why history unfolded and an account of the nature of capitalism. The theory believes that society is in conflict between two classes.

Functionalists argue that society is organised much like the Human Body. Everything must function correctly in order for society to work as a whole, just like every organ in the body must function correctly in order for the body to work as a whole.

Another classic view is Interactionism. We can liken Interactionism to a play; everyone must play their respective roles in order to create a successful performance – in society everyone must do their jobs in order to create a successful society. This approach is much like the functionalism viewpoint.

The Biomedical Model is mainly used by physicians in diagnosing diseases. This approach concentrates on physical processes such as physiology, biochemistry and pathology of a disease. This model signifies freedom from any disease, infection, pain or defect is considered as being healthy although this model doesn’t take into account social factors of an individual, and the diagnosis is a result of the doctor and patient negotiation.

The biomedical model considers the body as a machine and if a particular part of the body isn’t functioning, it must be corrected in order for the body to continue to work properly.

The Social Model of health is based on how society and the environment affect everyday health and well-being. Influential factors may include social class, household income, education, occupation, poverty and poor housing could lead to ill health such as respiratory problems. The social model aims to encourage society to provide better housing and to fight poverty to help prevent future ill health in individuals.

The focus of these models is to explain why health inequalities exist and continue to be a problem. The key cultural explanation places emphasis upon extreme consequences of behaviour such as poor nutrition, excessive alcohol consumption, smoking, drugs or lack of exercise. Inequalities in health will be reduced when society make healthier personal and behavioural choices.

Socio- model of health is:

The state of health is socially constructed resulting historical, social and cultural influences that have shaped perceptions of health and ill health.

The root causes for diseases and ill health are to be found in social factors, such as the way society is organised and structured.

Root causes are identified through beliefs and interpretation for example, from a feminist perspective, root causes relate to patriarchy and oppression.

Knowledge is not exclusive but has a historical, social and cultural context as it is shaped by these involved.

The biomedical of health is:

The state of health is a biological fact and the norm.

The body is a machine and ill health results from dysfunction of that machine.

Ill health is a deviation from the norm.

Ill health is caused by biological factors such as viruses, bacteria, genetic characteristics or trauma.

The cause of ill health is identified through the process of diagnosis, considering the signs and symptoms.

Individuals play little or no part in the interventions to restore the body to health.

There is no consideration of the individual’s interpretation of health and ill health or social factor that may contribute to ill health. Finding a cure is a greater concern than preventing ill health.

Culture plays an incredibly important role in the cause and reasoning of mental health. Cultural beliefs can shape the way people identify stress and the way in which they seek help. Indeed, in some cultures, people suffering from depression and anxiety disorders can also present with physical/psychosomatic symptoms.

As Britain becomes more culturally-enriched, striving for a melting pot of nations and ethnicities as opposed to a salad bowl of clearly defined ethnic groups, our society is slowly adapting.

There are many cultural factors which can influence mental health, for example, Asians; in particular immigrants, language, age and gender can be a contributing factor.

The knowledge of English is an important factor which influences access to care. Asian languages are not usually spoken outside of the ethnic group. Age is another factor, the younger a person is when they migrate the better chance they have of adapting to living in that particular country. Also gender contributes; men seem to have acculturated quicker than women though this may change as more women enter the working environment.

According to the traditional belief system mental illness is caused by a lack of harmony, emotions and sometimes caused by evil spirits. Social stigma, embarrassment, and ‘saving face’ often prevent Asians groups from seeking behavioural and professional health care help.

The table below shows the health beliefs and behaviours of Chinese, Korean, Japanese and Vietnamese cultures.

Table 2

The term ‘mental illness’ was made more popular at the beginning of the 1900’s by physicians, social reformers and former asylum patients. They wanted to reduce the stigma that was linked with the word mental illness; they felt that it caused prejudice against asylum patients because it implied isolation between the mentally sick and well, healthy patients.

The labelling of mental illness is stigmatising too many, it makes people think that mentally ill people are a completely separate group from ‘people like us’. Society seems to overlook the fact that they are simply just ordinary people who have severe emotional difficulties which they are failing to cope with.

Misconceptions of this label can be fuelled by things such as the media and describe the mentally ill as being dangerous and violent people. Stereotypes like these seem to be contradicted by people’s experiences of mental health, which than can affect not only themselves but their family, friends and even work colleagues.

The use of the word ‘mental illness’ could be very misleading, it could be seen that the majority of mental health problems are caused by biological or medical factors. Whereas, in fact, mental health problems result from complicated interactions of biological, social and personal factors. For example someone who is vulnerable to depression but has a strong social support could make them less susceptible to becoming severely depressed.

Reducing stigma that is attached to mental health issues has been a main focus for several groups, but in order to change this stigma, attitudes of the general public need to be changed first. The media could help this by reporting more positive aspect of mental illness, for example; peoples recovery and modern treatments which are available.

Delivering better care for patients could be helped by further training for mental health staff; this could lead to less negative attitudes from the public which would help patients to be a part of society giving them a better everyday life.

Before the start of industrial capitalism, in a pre-industrial societies work is referred to as a general way activities directed at satisfying the human need for survival. Which were all non-industrial, work such as hunting, gathering or farming. Starting in the 18th century and continuing into the 19th century work has become regular paid employment. The simple rural lives were exchanged by mass production of goods. Industrialisation led to urbanisation, it changed the medieval customs, beliefs and ideals. The term ‘industrial revolution’ is used to describe this transformation. Industrial Productive activity involved Factory systems and mechanisation powered by energy sources that is undertaken outside the home in a building or factory, Where workers has to work as industrial labourers under hazardous conditions. Karl Marx argued the capitalist who are the owners of the means of production, must essentially exploit the workers for maintaining the existence of the structure and organisation. The capitalism is a system based on profit, within the capitalism the workers are given a paid wage enabling them to survive. It is necessary that capitalism continue to grow, to give the mass population the surplus wealth. It depends on continual growth and, therefore, it makes sense to give the mass of the population surplus wealth for enable them to buy goods; ‘the more goods they buy, the more the system can produce.’

Marx was one the first social theorist to examine in to the conditions of work in factories that were emerging during the industrial revolution, looking at how the transition from self-working craftwork to working for a boss in a factory resulted in alienation and deskilling. For Marx capitalism created the world of work then turned it against the workers, not only workers were prevented from realising themselves but they developed a system where work became the cause of alienation and exploitation. Max used the term alienation to describe what it were like to be wage workers under industrial capitalism. He used four type of alienation in factory workers: first alienated from the objects of their work as job becomes repetitive and automatic. Second workers are alienated from the activity of working; they are forced to work for them. Third Workers are alienated from the chance to determine what it is to be human and finally Alienation from other workers, not having to spend time with people you enjoy and are forced to work with people even if you like them or not.

Braverman similarly mirrored most of Karl Marx’s writing and applied it to work in the twentieth century. Braverman claimed that many jobs in the capitalist economy were subjected to a process of ‘deskilling’; this is where professional knowledge becomes replaced by machines and automation and tendency toward specialisation of task. He describes this as the period of monopoly capitalism. ‘Taylorism’ exemplified this managerial strategy’.

At the beginning of the twentieth century Henry Ford combines the organisational innovation of taylorism, which introduced special machine tools that standardised production in a continuous flow in the form of assembly line. It was used on a large scale and using semi-skilled workers. Workers had one task each that they had to repeatedly do which is why they did not need to be particularly trained. However, he has been criticized for his idea; Ford’s mass-production system. The regulation theory explained that as a capitalist production system, Fordism is alienating and involved deskilling; therefore, Fordism is unable to overcome workers dissatisfaction. Another argument is that it is unable to overcome consumer dissatisfaction. Both arguments concludes that during 1970’s Fordism was in crisis. Many solutions were adopted to solve the crisis of Fordism with a development of wide range of better quality products with neo-Fordism, McDonaldism, and post-Fordism.

Also the process of de-industrialisation began around 1970’s with a decline in employment among the manufacturing and industrial jobs and an increase in employment in service sector jobs. However, de-industrialisation was not just about the end of particular jobs but the dismantling of social and cultural relations in some societies. For example, manufacturing employments were sites of masculine occupational cultures and part of working class male identity. De-industrialisation was evident to large number of unemployment in industrial areas in the UK which led to a crisis of masculinity for working class men. On the other hand theorist such as Bell (1973) saw this as a positive way in ‘The coming of Post-industrial society’. He argued that it will be less alienating than in industrial societies. Class may also lose its power as knowledge and professional will have power rather than the anachronistic industrial ruling class.

When people are unemployed, they get involved in the labour market. Labour markets works through the interaction between workers and employers. They try to understand employers demand and workers supplies by looking at pattern of employment, income, wages or often pattern of racism and sexism that are existing in society. These patterns of discrimination have led to what is called dual or segmented labour markets. Trade unions are part of fight against such processes in our society. They provide an important function for millions of workers. They protect workers from being exploited and making sure they have fair wages and working conditions.

While work occupies a main role in our lives, its social significance extends beyond our personal identities and daily activities. It is closely involved with other social institutions, social structures, and social processes, especially social inequality.

Ever society is subject to change. These social changes occur due to many reasons and factors, but we may note a number of social changes taking place in our society in the recent period, which is, mainly, due to the rapid technological advancement and progressions.

And in all of these social changes occurred, the emancipation of the women is the one of the biggest and the most significant social changes occurred in our society. Now, we see a phenomenal change in the entire social and cultural settings, as more women joining the men’s world with more zeal and passion. The participation of women into all socio-political, educational, economical, and development affairs is being increased at the fastest pace.

‘Women’s emancipation is an integral part of the political program of socialism’. (Lupri, 1983, 296) As a major part of an extensive social engineering process, women are being pushed strategically into the outside world by design be it a field like sports, politics, military services, or legislative assemblies etc.

Women are becoming independent economically, thus giving an alarming rise to family break-ups, single parent phenomenon, mentally disturbed kids and a social breakdown altogether. The whole human race is in danger, and today’s mothers utilize all available means to restrict the number of children and multiply their total income, as well as social evils to further degrees

Children are the real sufferers. Today’s women, still, want to be labelled as mother; its other matter that they don’t to play the role of a mother. Kissing a baby’s cheek once or twice a day can be easily performed by a puppy or programmed robot then why do children need these type of frequently disappearing mothers? Part-time mothers, most of the time, are rented to take care of little children by full-time working mothers. These working women, performing the role of mothers simultaneously, are too busy in their daily schedules and spend most of the time at work and mainly rely on babysitters and child-minders. Out of such time-bound restricted motherhood, the incoming generation is in absolute danger and jeopardy, but where are our social scientists and supporters of women’s rights? The rise of career-oriented selfish mothers is just start of a massive destruction. For their own rights, women yell and cry at the top of their voice. On the other hand, today’s women have become extreme violators of children’ rights, giving minimum rights to their children as proved by terribly decreasing breastfeeding trend among these women.

‘Understanding that women of any society make grand impacts on their family and surrounding community, women’s stories must be tracked as primary considerations of the development needs and changes of any society’. (Foster, 2011)

This social change is nothing, but social degradation. Now we can easily see an increased number of mothers doing some paid work outside their homes when their babies are still in their infancy stages being less than a year old. In 2009, according to a research report published in UK, seventy per cent of British mothers of nine-to-12-month-old babies were doing some sort of paid work outside their homes as compared to only 25 per cent in 1984-85. What value addition these women are offering in the present world, except bringing up a package of social evils with them when step out of their homes?

Being a hockey, cricket or squash player, these enlightened women are, also, playing with the nature. Recent achievements, though much little in nature, has attracted more fans from the opposite sex to endorse their permanent stay in the outside world. And by pushing these women in every walks of fields, we are creating a masculine woman with a pretty female physique, but behaving like a man from head to toe.

‘Many women remain dissatisfied with the results of women’s access to political life, usually on the grounds that formal equality with men has not netted women an equal share of wealth, power, and prestige’. (Fox-Genovese, 1998)

More women are joining the outside word day-by-day and more sexual crimes are being committed against these women. The nature of crimes against women remains the same, though the ratio of these crimes is increasing like a storm. It means more exposure of women in the outside is directly related with more crimes committed against women. The media world, on the other hand, is ruled by the women as they get more coverage then hairy masculine faces. Being a women, especially an attractive one, needs no more qualification and degrees. These women are heavily paid to show their faces on the screen and they spoil the total image of women in general.

The term ‘gender balance’, in its actual meaning, is ‘gender replacement’ which, in fact, refers to creating imbalance in the working environment by replacing men by women in the main workforce. More employment positions are being created for women, while highest ratio of unemployment among men is pushing them to commit suicide in the end.

Now, it has become a favourite and most chanted slogan to title women as superior and great creatures. As a result of such misconception, every next woman mistakenly considers herself a great creature without even knowing what she is, really, offering for the betterment of the society. Being a woman doesn’t mean that she is, really, a great creature than man. Greatness requires a disposition of human dignity, character, and sacrifice and, without showing these attributes, no man or woman can be ever titled as being a great one.

The wicked tactics, employed to promote representation of women in our society, are easily noticeable through mass media. The entire media portrays working women as a most sublime and supreme form of womanhood. Terms like ‘super mom’, ‘super woman’, and ‘girl power’ are now included in everyday jargons of daily life.

The clumsy women unable to represent their own homes now represent the country on a global level. Most of these women, in the same way, are totally incapable of managing an 80-yards house, but still dream for ruling the entire roost. Our women are doing whatever they can but not doing what they, really, should. They try to appear like a pure woman, but in order to seize rest of the world they have, successfully, transformed themselves as ditto social replica of man.

Heart-ravishing beauty of social butterflies, flying from one corner to another in many parties and get-togethers, further multiplies a never-ending respect for the womenfolk. They are looking for appreciation and admiration for everything these gentle souls physically possess and socially contribute.

One wonders how easily men are accepting this social change. Representing women in every section of society like sports etc. is a part of social castration process or, in simple words, an attempt to castrate the society. In form of a social change, we are, now, experiencing a well-designed feminization of our society, bringing more and more women in the mainstream world by using all frequently-repeated pretexts and engineered justifications. In fact, we are, speedily, heading towards a social and ethical anarchy.

In 1978-1979 the Chinese government installed an ambitious program of market reform following the economic stagnation of Cultural Revolution. In mid 70-80 china was home of quarter of the world’s population who were having just 7% of world land. More than two third of the population were under the age of 30 years. The baby boomers of the year 1950-1960 were entering their reproductive years. So it was getting important to control the population for the economic reform and to an improvement in living standards, so they introduced one child policy. (Massachusetts medical Society, 2005)

This policy consists of different set of rules and regulations .government governing the size of families, sometimes late marriages, child bearing and family planning. This also restricts to couple to one child for one couple but it still allow few cases like twins, rural couple , ethnic minorities and couples who are both only one children themselves. By this policy china controlled more than 250 million births between 1980 and 2000(BBC September, 2012) and about 400 million by 1979-2011(People Daily online, October 2011)

This policy is a controversial issue within and outside the china, because how it was implemented, good and bad consequences of the negative social concerns. Due to this policy there were other problems and concerns rose which are against human rights. Forced abortions were increased, female infanticide and under reporting of female birth. These are the main reason of gender imbalance in china, but still after the survey done by Pew Research Center roughly 76% of people living in china accept this policy.(Pew Research Centre ,2012)

As now we know about the policy and its implementation, merits and demerits, so now I have to take a clear stand is that policy is ethically justifiable or not and I will go with that is this policy is not ethically justifiable but there are a lot of examples which are proven that with this policy china has controlled population of country so I will be comparing both of the sides of the policy with final conclusion against this policy.

First I will discuss about the demerits of over population. Over population is a condition where an organism number exceed the carrying capacity. This is a direct link between human population and its environment. The main reason for the over population is increase in birth and decline in mortality rate. The current population of china is 1319175364 which make china the first most populated country of the world. (US Census Bureau, 2012) China represents a full 20% of world population so every one in every five people on the earth is a Chinese.(Washington Institute of China Studies ,2007) So due to over population because other different problems also like:

Healthy Living – this is the one of the main concern of the people who is living there because the health resources are limited like fresh air, fresh pure clean water, and greenery which people all people are not getting.

Equal opportunities-people living in china to them when comes to access some of the things like public sector jobs, examinations few people don’t get those opportunities because either they are not rich enough to support or some other factors.

Access to medical treatment- as china is growing up faster the amount of people getting sick and getting congenital disease are also increasing which is also directly related to the cost of treatment, government can’t provide those expensive treatments to everyone so a lot of poor people die because of no access of hospital or clinics.

Controlling big population- it is not an easy job for the government of china to control 1.5 billion people; police always have hard time when there is any riot, national events going on.

Traffic problem. Due to over population need of vehicles on the road is increasing which is creating big heavy traffic jam on the road, and government always try hard to provide public transport but due to more number of passengers travelling that also become hard.

Good quality higher education- As families had more number of children at their home which sometimes is also a problem i.e. children can’t get good higher education reason behind this is education nowadays is expensive and parents can’t afford all their kids the same education.

Violation of human rights- like different activities happening often in china which violate human rights like female feticide, gang rapes, abortions.(Bridgeport.edu ,2012)

So now I will talk about the advantages and disadvantages of one child policy.

Advantages

The growth of the population decreases: if there was no one child policy in china the population of china must be 2.4 billion today.

By this Chinese people are getting more benefits like: Free/cheap health checkups.

Their kids are getting god or best education.

Women get extra three month maternity leave.

Parents have good bond with children, like it will be easy to divide time with one child and it makes it easier to know each other and needs.

Disadvantages

They don’t have any siblings and there is nothing like cousins called in china because everyone is child of the family.

Forced Abortions: As we all know abortion are legal in china but having forced abortion is against human rights.

Female Infanticide: People kill their daughter because they think they will have only one child and if that’s a female then who will take family business and bring up family to generations.

87% of all married women use contraception and abortion which is also not healthy for the female’s health condition.

Ethical Perspectives

The one child policy raises many ethical concerns one individuals own liberty, collective rights and state sovereignty. We all understand that will less population there will less environment degradation and pollution but according to me whose rights are more important individual or collective? This one child policy in china asks questions towards the individual rights and collective rights in the community. As per Locke’s view in any of the society an individual have the basic human right and more important their negative liberty and rights or the freedom to have choices for self development without other interference.(William Uzgalis “John Locke”,2006)

This one child policy provide community growth which may provide higher quality of life i.e. can be serve malnutrition, good care of medical illness and social and economic problems are uncommon.

Communitarians: As we all know china is a communist country so they have only one people’s party ruling the whole big nation. The communitarian argument is derived from Jean Jacques Rousseav “Communitarian argue the survival of the community must be protected because individual member depend on it for their self identity, the organization of collective action and the production of public good’s” So this lighten the view that state of nature as they have not yet developed the capacity to reason . So a communitarian would for the individual thinks, thoughts, individual rights and autonomy for the benefits of the community. (Modern China, 465, 1987)

Utilitarian Approaches:

It is an ethical theory in which there are basically more happiness and reduced suffering which is based on the word utility. So as per china one child policy people’s behavioral choices are counted and those choices reflect their course of action. By increasing the pleasure and minimizing the pain china is using utilitarian approach perfectly.

International Human Rights:

China’s one child policy is seems to be based on utilitarian approach. They argue that policy is installed according to the fairness standards as every family is entitled to have one child and in addition to this those families are getting financial incentive like bonus, better housing options and three months maternity leave which as per rule to international provisions of human rights but on the other side as per policy only one child is allowed per couple so communitarian would be against of those who claim individual reproductive right against the policy of single child.(American Political Science Review,2001)

Western & Asian Preferences of Individual Rights:

China one child policy is mostly offended by the violation of human rights and laws. They argue that as western countries have their own official languages as a mean to protecting communal harmony and Identity similarly Chinese government has the right to implement of population related policies is the responsibility of each and every country and should take a stand into account the economic, social and environmental diversity with respect to all religious and ethical values at international conference on population & development in (cairo 1994). This policy also disturbs the fundamental human right of every couple to decide freely the number and spacing of their children. Chinese government relative this policy as “Duty to act responsibly in a manner which will benefit their family and community as whole” (Population and Development review, 1996)

Success and flaw of China’s One Child Policy

China’s population is both the country’s greatest weakness and strength. China is world 3rd largest economy and 2nd largest exporter. The more population in china makes it cheap labor which attracted a lot of foreign investment. This policy accelerated china’s economic growth in past 2 decades which also helped to create highly educated skilled and more efficient work force.

It was reported in 2001, there were almost 20,000 forced abortions and sterilization occurred to the people of Huai ji in Guangdong province of china because those people were not following the rules of this policy.(Telegraph Media Group,2012) After that in 2002 china stopped the physical force to force for the abortion, but still there are news on regular basis of abortion and violence. Even there is news about the killing of the babies during the pregnancy of eight months or it’s more horrifying of killing of baby during labor in birth canal or immediately after birth.

Tons of thousands of children with birth defects, disabilities are handed over to state funded orphanages that often have poor facilities which now become house of adoption of girls for the rich western people. In 2001 there was official 55,000 adoptions registered. So what do you think are these children guaranteed a better life but I am pretty much sure that they will lose all traces of their Chinese identity? (Wei Guo Zhang, 2006)

In addition to this one child policy also disturb the male -female birth rate ratio. The sex ratio in main land china is 118: 100. So this means there are 18 extra boys for every 100 girls born which compared to global natural baseline of 103:100. Even the state population and family planning commission admit this problem and think this will create big problem in coming future i.e. finding partner by the time they will reach adulthood or reproductive age. As according to survey there will be 30 million more men than women in 2020. (BBC, 2012)

Since 90’s there is other problem rising weather this single child will be over pampered. There have been seen many over pampered children in society with poor social communication and cooperation skills.

As in upper text I mentioned about the over pampered children, so now here I am going to focus on the policy positive and negative effects of single child . As per (Quoss and Zhao,1995) parents are usually the most important socialization agents in their young age. This gives an impact on their child to learn about social relationship. In addition to this parent- child relationship are complicated cultural, ideological, political, economic and social factor but main can be psychological, cultural and structural to understand parent child relationship. It is assumed those children are the empty vessels which are filled with parent’s socially defined values. So mostly children learn from parent’s attitude and behavior. If child is not recognized as an active social person this means he is influenced by parents. These changes in the family structure and size have some major effects i.e. shorting of family tree, weakening of cooperation in the groups and the changes in the way how parents treat their children.

According to Cardwell wealth- Flow theory (1982, 1976) the wealth from younger to older generations is related to high fertility rate same as wealth flow from the older to the younger generation is related to low fertility rate. But in China they have only one child there is nothing like that seen which either improve or spoil the parent -child relation. The nation’s one child policy has lead to the reduced number of births which have highlighted children value in the family and caused more flow of family resources towards that only child. China’s successful implementation of population control policy shortened the way to Cordwell’s equilibrium of wealth flow and birth rate declination.

Population and Socio Economic Development

This over growing population even one child will be creating big problems by 2040. There will be four main challenges faced by Chinese population.

Agriculture : Food challenge: It will be a problem of producing sufficient grain for the expending population, as country is growing faster, people are moving to cities and no one is doing more agriculture and because of population explosion there will not be enough spaces to grow crops which will give Chinese community a very hard time in upcoming years.

Employment Challenge: It is one of the main signals to economic performance which is correlated with income distribution, poverty and social stability. Before rural people used to depend on agriculture but now it’s hard to depend as living standards are getting high and 40% of rural labor are not fully utilized or they are under employed and need to be re employed.(Taylor and Banister 1991 ; Shen and Spence 1995)

Urbanization challenge: fast pace industrialization and urbanization will be a drastic change in rural-urban population shift. The speed of urbanization was very slow in 1970’s as compared to other developing counties (shen, 1994). A large number of towns and small cities are immerged to bigger cities. Old cities are rapidly expanding .Shanghai. increased its urban area from 141 to 230 square kilometer; rapid urbanization resulted in the arable land available

Homosexuality In china Associated with One Child Policy.

There is also one other problem arising in china because having a single child and that child being homosexual. Homosexuality is legal in china since 1997, but this created a lot of problems in Chinese local community. Chinese couples try and do a lot of efforts to have a son in their family and what if that son is homosexual that can be a big major tragedy in the family. Many gay and lesbian commit suicide because it’s not much common in there.

Zheng estimates there is about 27-30 million homosexual people living in china from which 18-20 million are gay man and 9 to 10 million are lesbian women. So homosexuals are not accepted by social customs at home or at work place. This creates two other different problems:

They don’t have freedom to enjoy their personal life -> It is seen that gay man and gay women get married to each other as ‘homowives’ under a formal union they have normal marriages but allowing each other to conduct their homosexual relation outside.

Many stories came up how gay man starting loving each other. some said they can’t find the right female partner so they changed their self to homosexuality or bisexual and other say the girls don’t want to leave parental house as they are the only daughter who want to stay with family.( The New York Times,2012 )

The Effect of China one child policy 30 years

To control the population china government and Chinese people did very hard work and much sacrifice to limit the population growth with one child per family. So in condition to hold this population growth there is a heavy reliance on long term contraception with IU device and sterilizations together accounting for more that they don’t have any other options except which they heard from health workers recommend for family planning. This helped in 25% decreased in abortion rates.

This policy is reduction in the total fertility rate before between 1970-1979 the fertility was 5.9 to 2.9 but after this it’s less stabilized at approximately 1.7.

There are some signals that may be the traditional thinking for boys will change. As a survey done by National family and Reproductive Health reports say 37 percent of young urban women said they have no preference with the sex of the kid either its male or female but on other side 45 percent said the ideal family is one boy and one girl.

Ratio of old age Dependency

The rapid decrease in birth rate with stable and improved life it led to increased proportion of old people in the community. In 1965 the population of 65 year old people was 5% in 1982 which now is 7.5 percent which is expected to be 15 percent by 2025. (World Bank, 2012) That’s one reason in urban areas the couple who themselves are single children are allowed to have other second kid.

The future of china’s one child policy:

The Chinese government is facing an important challenge, first will be the need to balance the basic population right of reproduction with population growth. 10 million people are adding to Chinese population every year which is equal to the population of Belgium.

Relaxation of this policy can be considered because of baby bomber are getting older, but increased wealth and freedom is not allowing government to relax this policy.

End of Cheap Labor: Professor Cai Feng- a Chinese labor economist estimated there will a downfall in the labor force by 1.5 percent points by 2015 and will decrease further in 2016-2020. A fast pace decline of the labor force will cause shortages and rapid increase in wages which will be weaken the china’s export industry in the international marked effecting economic growth .(BBC,2012)

Conclusion:

The people republic if china and its one child policy remains an international concept as in means of regulation, human rights, birth and fertility, national duties, ethics and principles. In 30 years of this policy china have created dramatic results of controlling population and limiting total fertility rate at 1.7 births per women. It also helped to control the problems which can be occurred with over population. On the other side this policy also created drastic effect on highly unbalanced sex-ratio between male and female. Many couples can’t find the suitable match for each other. There is an increase in female infanticide and more use of contraceptive methods. An increased social and economic demand on small families due to aging is also common. According to Xinhua the national press agency of china ” china have paid a lot of political and social cost for this policy but still it resulted in social conflict, high administrative cost and let to gender imbalance too(Xinhua, 2012).

My reaction to this one child policy is that they should not make it very strict at the starting. Second child in family bring the fine of $3500 which is almost equal to the income of 10 year of a poor farmer. Many Chinese women commit suicide under the pressures of one child policy(Amnesty International,2012) . Some rich people who can afford $3500they have two kids in family which is not equal to other resident of china. For poor if they can’t pay the fine they have to pay their fines with 200kg of rice. Families in Guangzi province are afraid of breaking rules because they are already poor and this gives them hard time paying the fine. This is the reason of disturbance in sex ratio. I think Chinese government should educate people to the benefits of having lesser children but not to force them for abortion. Couples should have their own freedom they whether they want children or not.

The Government should educate people and promote to have more female babies to equal the uneven sex ratio. There is a high divorce rate involving women whose one child turn out to be a girl however the laws have changed by those women have to suffer physical assault at home.

It is clearly see there are many advantages and disadvantages of china’s one child policy but when it comes to health, law and ethics it is not justified because of many dilemmas on the ethical ground.

Many experts have investigated differences between men and women in terms of behavior, group, and individual traits since early 1900s and have identified much dissimilarity between the two sexes. Few of the differences are identified in early years while others emerge in adolescence or late childhood. In his book Men Are from Mars, Women Are from Venus, John Gray (2002) states: “after all, we are unique individuals with unique experiences” (9). The differences among individuals appear in intelligence, personalities, physiological and psychological differences, gender etc. Gender is the sole representative of the differences and similarities that exist between males and females. It is a fact that the differences between the two genders are more evident than the similarities between them. However, this fact cannot be ignored that there exist some similarities between them as well. There are differences and similarities between men and women in terms of their physical strength, brain size and structure, and behavior and thinking.

According to a renowned psychologist Carol Tavris, “the similarities between the sexes in behavior and aptitude are far greater than the differences” (Crooks and Baur 120). Therefore, this fact cannot be ignored that men and women have many similarities. In a meta-analysis carried out in 2005, more than 7,000 research studies on cognition, group and individual traits were analyzed which showed very less differences between the two genders (Hyde, 2005). One similarity between the two genders is that both have the same hormones which function in the same manner. Sometimes, men have a higher level of resting hormones called androgens whereas; women may have different types of reproductive hormones however, these reproductive hormones are the same utilized by males for production of sperms. Thus there is an overlap between male-female endocrine processes.

Similarly, the brains of both male and female function in the same manner. Although, the brains of both the sexes vary in size, the basic function of the organ across the sexes remains the same. Female brain may react differently to different stimuli as compared to male brain but that difference is across individuals rather than genders. Another similarity between the two sexes is the similarity between genitals. It is a common understanding that genitals in male and female are different due to their appearance however, the fact is that both the genitals are produced from embryonic tissue. The clitoris and labia are produced in sixth or seventh week, before which both the organs are physiologically developing in an identical manner. In the same context, men and women exhibit almost identical sexual behavior in most parts of their lives. Studies have stated few differences in both sexes in terms sexual activity of both sexes. Both genders almost have same amount of sexual activity in the similar kinds of manners throughout their lives.

Some psycholinguistic experts believe that both men and women tend to communicate in a similar fashion. For example, men and women who belong to the same social or communal background possess same kind of vocabulary. Moreover, men and women with comparable educational background have the same intellect in problem solving, reading comprehension and task completion. Experts also believe that both sexes reason alike, interrupt conversation at almost same number of times, are equally prone to disclose personal information, and are equally assertive.

On the other hand, many experts believe that brains of male and female are completely different in form and structure. This difference occurs due to sex hormones at a very early stage of the development of fetus. Studies of the female brain show that females have language functioning in both the sides of their brains (Sonawalla ). In men, language functioning seems to be present in the left hemisphere only, although males have brains 10% larger than that of females (Greenberg, Bruess, and Conklin 295). The gray matter present in a male brain is also 6? times more than that in a female brain but female brain has white matter that is 9? times greater than that of a male brain (Carr 36). There are also differences between the cerebrums of both the sexes, due to which women are able to score higher in verbal skills while men score higher in mathematics and spatial skills.

Since the brain structure in males and females are quite different, there tend to be differences in behaviors of the two genders as well. Women tend to communicate more efficiently and effectively than males, due to their language functioning, therefore are able to establish better human relationships than men. Men, on the other hand, are more isolated, less-talkative and task-oriented. Women are able to take care of themselves and form friends, or “tend or befriend” even in times of stress, whereas men do not possess this ability and respond with “fight or flight” (Franzoi 186-88). The reason for this behavior is rooted in hormone difference between the two genders. Women are also able to express their emotions and feelings better than men, which helps them in creating strong bonds with other people. They are more social than men due to their language skills and their ability to connect to others. Apart from this, men have stronger spatial abilities than women. However, when it comes to physical alarming, both the genders are physically alarmed when threatened; the only difference lies in the response of that threat where men react with more aggression than women.

Men and women also differ in a number of ways in their physical characteristics. Women tend to enjoy a longer life-time than men; they outlive men by three to eight years. According to some, this statistics is true for women around the world, except in some countries, such as Bangladesh and India, where men outlive women (Daniluk 263). The diseases in men and women are also different. For example, women are more prone to breast cancer and reproduction disorders than men. The skeletal structures of both men and women are also different. Women have shorter built than men and usually have shorter heads, legs and longer trunks as compared to men. Women also have smaller lungs and a larger stomach, appendix, liver and kidneys than men. In physical strength, men are 50% stronger than women (Francis, MacRae, and et al 110-11). The heart rates of both men and women are also different and a woman’s heart beats eighty times in a minute as compared to a man’s heart, which beats 72 times a minute (Steinach 38). The lung capacity in females is also lesser than in males; it is approximately 20 – 25% lesser (Harris 344). Women are more capable to withstand high temperatures than males, due to their metabolism, which slows down lesser than males.

In conclusion, it can be stated that men and women share different responsibilities and tasks and might seem to be different in many ways, but still as human beings, they share many similarities. As Amy Patterson – Neubert (2004) says, “For the most part, men and women use, and strongly prefer, the same ways of comforting others – listening, sympathizing and giving thoughtful advice.” Both the sexes are similar in terms of hormonal activity, brain functionality and sexual activities. However, some experts believe that brain form and functionality if both males and females are completely different. Evidence also states that males and females are similar to each other in terms of the way they communicate and approach a task. On the other hand, various studies state that due to differences in brain structure and functioning, women are more talkative than men and are able to express their emotions more easily. Similarly, physical characteristics of both genders are also profoundly different, which enable the sexes to carry out different tasks with different levels of efficiency.

Today we are going to discuss the similarities and differences between two societies, Turkish and Saudi Arabian, from the cultural and moral point of view. Firstly it is important to get familiar with these definitions.

Culture is the way of life, shared beliefs, values, customs and behaviours, that the members of society use to cope with their world and with one another, and that are transmitted from generation to generation through learning.

Norms specify the type of behaviour that is considered appropriate and normal in a society. For example, norms of dress give guidelines on what to wear. Norms are set of rules that vary from society to society. A change in society leads to new ways of behaving and therefore culture and norms are always changing.

Values are general rules and principles that tell us what is good, important and worth striving for in our society. Values lay down general principles and guidelines.

Inequality concerns differences in access to scarce resources when one group is better positioned than the other in society. Social inequality involves voting rights, freedom of speech, education and many more. Inequality is present in every society, even if it is said that all members in society are equal.

Both countries share similar history, culture and values. Religion in particular plays a big part in people’s lives. The major religion is Islam, the second largest religion in the world. In Saudi Arabia, Islam is the only officially recognized religion and other religions in the country are not tolerated. Turkey is more democratic in this way. While in Turkey state and church are separated, religion in Saudi Arabia influences every aspect of social and political life. Even the legal system is based on sharia (Islamic) law. The forms of punishment in this country are, according to some organizations, against human rights. For example, theft is punishable by amputation of the right hand. Flogging is way of punishment for offenses against religion, drunkenness and gambling. The death penalty is the highest form of punishment in the country and is used for a range of convictions including the distribution of drugs from abroad. The death sentence was also practiced in Turkey, but it has since been reduced to thirty years imprisonment. Homosexuality is strictly forbidden in both societies (a view strongly linked to religious beliefs), and is punishable by lashing, prison or death.

Inequality, in both societies, is most distinguished between men and women. Saudi women suffer discrimination in a range of areas within their daily lives. For example, women are not allowed to drive cars or ride bicycles on public roads and the driving age of 25 is one of the highest in the world. Saudi Arabia is also one of the four remaining countries that have not granted women the right to vote. Women cannot travel abroad without the permission or presence of a male guardian (mahram), and also have to be accompanied by a close male from the family (father or brothers) when outside of house. As chastity and sexual modesty are very highly valued, women can be arrested for socializing with a man who is not a relative and may be charged with prostitution. In public, dancing, playing music and showing movies is forbidden. Women make up just 5% of the workforce in Saudi Arabia, which is the lowest proportion in the world. A woman’s status within the family is high, especially in the roles of mother and sister. However, their rights may continue to be restricted, for example, it is believed that women should stay at home, caring for their husbands and children. Most marriages are arranged and polygamy is permitted up to four wives.

Similar attitudes towards women had existed in Turkey, but in 1926 new reforms brought changes to the position of women in society. Polygamy was abolished and it is very rare nowadays. Along with religious marriages and divorce, child custody became the right of both women and men. Education levels of women have increased since the reforms and many Turkish women are able to access education, have jobs and careers. The right to vote was granted in 1930.

Although the position of women outside of family has changed significantly, inside it remains more or less the same. Husbands remain at the head of family and woman must have their permission to work or their approval if going out. Both Saudi Arabian and Turkish societies place huge value on the family and take their responsibilities seriously. Families tend to be large and the extended family remains close.

Significant inequality also exists between women from different sectors of societies. Women in these two states have different life styles and rights. For example, abortion in Turkey is legal up to ten weeks, while in Saudi Arabia it remains illegal, except in situations where the mother’s life may be at risk.

The norms for public behaviour in Saudi Arabia are extremely conservative. To ensure that these standards of conduct are observed, the Saudi religious police can arrest foreigners for improper dress and other alleged infractions, such as consumption of alcohol. Turkish women no longer have to wear the veils and long garments, whereas in Saudi Arabia it is still required by the old religious beliefs. While alcohol is banned in Saudi Arabia, it is allowed in Turkey. In Turkey, Friday is considered a normal working day, regardless of the fact that to Muslims it is considered a holy day. Saudi Arabian’s continue to acknowledge this tradition – most shops and other public places are closed on Friday and individuals practice their prayers. All Muslims pray five times a day and during the holy month of Ramadan they must fast from dawn to dusk (this includes eating, drinking and smoking). According to Islam, the left hand is considered unclean and reserved for personal hygiene.

To conclude, Turkey is now considered a secular state, the first ever Islamic society to be considered as such. In contrast, Saudi Arabia’s unique culture makes marks it as a distinguished Islamic country. People in these countries are extremely proud of their culture, heritage and nationality.

Bibliography
M. Haralambos and M. Holborn (2008) Sociology , Themes and Perspectives
http://marketing.about.com/od/marketingglossary/g/normsdef.htm
http://www.umanitoba.ca/faculties/arts/anthropology/courses/122/module1/culture.html
http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/cis/cis_1012.html
http://www.enjoyturkey.com/info/culture.htm
http://www.eastwestinquirer.com/Islamic%20Turkey%20Versus%20Islamist%20Saudi%20Arabia.htm

In this piece of writing I will look at how women were treated in Hinduism in the historical context, and how Sikhism and the Gurus in the religion changed the situation, and affected the status of women. I will also look at how Sikhism is still not perfect after all these years and how even still there is some inequality between men and women. Also I will talk about some examples of how inequality is shown to girls in today’s society.

Hinduism was the religion that dominated India and the Punjab at the time of the gurus. Historically speaking, in Hinduism women were taught that they couldn’t get liberation from the cycle of Samsara, so they were excluded from leading religious ceremonies. They were taught that they couldn’t become one with God, and wouldn’t reach Mukti. Women and girls were regarded as the property of men (Paraya dhan); therefore divorce was impossible for a woman to initiate. Girls were not educated, as they were seen to stay at home, and look after the house and the children. They could not get a job, whereas men would be educated and would earn money for the family. Many Hindu women were sold to Islamic foreign countries as slaves. Baby girls were murdered by their parents (female infanticide) as they were too expensive to bring up and didn’t bring any money into the family. Also, because they were seen as the property of their husband, widows were expected to throw themselves on the funeral pyre of their husbands (sati) as they were seen as having no further use in the society. This patriarchal society treated women worse than animals! In addition, the birth of a daughter in the family was not an occasion to celebrate; it was humiliation.

The Gurus lived in a time when women were only there to serve men. They were meant to stay at home and look after the family and house. Women were not allowed to work nor have any means to live independently. Sikhism therefore changed the situation, and the gurus taught that everyone is equal regardless of colour, race, beliefs, or sex. They taught that everyone is born equal and that everyone contains the divine spark: ‘everyone has the same form, everyone has the same soul’ (Guru Granth Sahib). Sikhism not only practices equality between the sexes, but also between religions and races. This idea was revolutionary in India at the time. The idea had never been introduced before and it was a drastic change in ways of thinking and behaving. Many men didn’t convert to Sikhism because of the fact that Guru Nanak believed in equality. They wanted to own women as their property, and they wanted to maintain that figure of superiority. Women were treated as a prize, and only treated as a servant or for entertainment. Guru Nanak sent out his sister to become a missionary, (Religious worker), however many people opposed this, as they still believed that women should be excluded from religious activities. Some people argued that men and women are different biologically and so act differently. Women are naturally the people to stay at home and care for the children because they are programmed to do this (The natural argument). Others argued that men and women carry out different roles in society because this is what they are taught to do. Young girls help their mothers with housework, while boys spend time with their fathers. In this way, boys and girls learn to ‘conform’ to the stereotypes. This was the nurture argument. The Gurus changed the situation for women by insisting that women as well as men could achieve liberation from samsara. Guru Nanak’s action of sending out his sister to become a missionary changed many people’s views about women, and led to the introduction of women becoming granthis and members of the gurdwara committee. The gurus accepted the right of women to lead any religious or public service. They changed the situation for women by permitting them to become members of the Khalsa and go through the exact same ceremony including wearing the 5K’s, just like men. The Gurus also encouraged the participation of women on the battlefield. They gave women the name Kaur (princess) which originated from the same caste in Hinduism as Singh (lion). The gurus banned dowries which was money given to the groom or his family by the father of the bride. They banned sati as murder. Widows were now not allowed to throw themselves on the funeral pyre of their husbands. The gurus began a Sikh wedding hymn which is called the Lavan. This stresses equality within marriage. Another way that the gurus and Sikhism shows equality is by insisting that men and women worship in the same prayer hall and then prepare and eat Langar together. Both male and female are encouraged to perform sewa, which is service to others, in all three ways (tan, dhan and man). Also both men and women sit at the same level in the Diwan hall. The gurus expected girls to also be given an education, just like boys. The guru’s teachings on the role of women are in the Guru Granth Sahib. In one part it says “We are conceived and born from women. Woman is our life-long friend and keeps the race going. Why should we despise her, the one who gives birth to great men?” Guru Hargobind declared, “A woman is the conscious of man” from his respect for women.

Equality is now central to Sikhism because of the gurus. The Gurus taught that Waheguru (God) is neither male nor female; therefore in today’s society women have equal rights to men. Women are allowed to hold any office in the Gurdwara. This includes becoming a Granthi, a Ragi, and/or a member of the Khalsa. According to Sikhism, males and females are two sides of the same coin. They are considered to have the same souls and are seen equal in service, devotion, bravery and sacrifice. According to Hinduism, women and men have different roles and responsibilities. As a young child the female will stay in custody of her parents. When she gets married she will become the property of her husband, and then when she will have sons she will become the property of them. The role of a woman is always given very high status in Hinduism, so they are expected to be good mothers and wives. Some Hindus have a traditional point of view, and they believe that women should stay at home and look after the family. They believe that women should be protected by men because they are not independent. Other Hindus are less traditional, and therefore education is becoming more popular in females.

In Sikh society gender discrimination is not allowed, however this equality has been difficult to achieve. Parents sometimes treat boys and girls differently and may have different rules for one. Girls are more likely to do better in education, so some teachers in schools might treat boys and girls differently. Women are more likely to be victims of domestic violence, and they’re more likely to be victims of ‘date rape’ and ‘drink spiking’. Even if both the husband and wife work full-time, the woman often does most of the house-work. Women are much more likely to give up work to take care of the children and home. Women’s salary levels are on average 25% lower than men’s. Women are less likely to be promoted and only 10% of managers are women. Because of this women are more likely to be poor – single mothers are one of the poorest groups in society. And finally, nearly all of Britain’s 6 million ‘carers’ are women – most are unpaid and their work is invisible. Even though the gurus taught that everyone is equal, Sikhism is still not perfect after all these years. Some Sikh women would say that although the gurus raised the status of women in society and gave them new, more meaningful roles, the situation in Sikhism still isn’t perfect. Why? They say that it is still rare to see female granthis, and there are few women serving on Gurdwara committees. The dowry is still paid, but just in a lesser form. The milni, which is a simple ceremony where both families exchange well wishes on meeting each other, is dominated by the male relatives. Girls are still expected to stay at home looking after the family when they are married. And giving females the name Kaur still expresses a deep rooted idea that girls/women are expected to be prim and proper, and treated in a different way to men. So although the Gurus put across such powerful messages of equality, men are still sometimes seen superior to women.

Overall, the gurus played an extremely big role in preventing inequality between the sexes. Before the gurus’ teachings, women were treated appallingly. But soon after the teachings that women were equal to men, views on women changed and they were respected more. However Sikhism and also other religions are still not perfect. There is still some difference between the genders. Though now, the role and status of women has greatly improved.