Author: Andre Coleman

How much is family life changing? In one of the BBC articles written by Mark Easton in 2007, he highlights that in a survey which is made by BBC, three quarters of Britain are positive about future of their family. Correlatively, it is deduced that 40 years ago people were less happy than now. When the BBC exhibited its research of families in Britain, the result demonstrated that closest relationships between family members were deteriorating in time in consequence of reduction in traditional family structures. In spite of all alterations, 93% of the people in the world are satisfied with their family life. Moreover, Easton claims that ‘for every three weddings there are now two divorces’ which shows the highest rate in Europe. Cohabitation has increased to 64% in ten years. So that, approximately half of children were born outside wedlock.

What is the Family Life for a Single Parent?

What Easton states in a BBC article in 2007 is that the highest proportion of lone parenting is in Europe which also indicates that one on four children now stay with a single mother. In addition, Academic studies have been proved in 2007 that children who have one mother are less successful at school than offspring of married couples. According to growing numbers of people (7/10) rely on that parent are getting worse at family life. Although Easton gives a general information and important statistics about lone parenting, Kimberly Gail highlights essential sides of single parenting in 2011 in BBC news.

According to Gail’s point of view, ‘parenting is a challenging endeavour.’ Lone parenting is not only challenging but also very fulfilling. The custodial parent struggles with responsibility of looking after and providing basic requirement. When you are a lonely mother, you are expected to make up your mind by yourself and so that you can have a healthy and happy family life through following some primary steps. Gail divides lone parenting into 5 groups.

COMMITMENT- In an attempt to be as successful parent, you have to have courage to take responsibilities as they fall on your shoulders. Your family is supposed to be your priority. Due to the fact that you are a parent, you are committed to spend time and money to support your children physically and emotionally.

HOME MANAGEMENT- Because lone parenting requires you to be alone in your house hold, organisation is essential. Many single parent families are responsible for arranging household. In order to be successful in organising, one of the good ways is to create an assigned daily list of household chores for everybody. It is even very easy for a small child as she/he will be picking up and putting away the toys.

RESPONSIBILTY- Single parents are responsible for rising children alone and direct them to variety of activities.

RELATIONSHIPS AND TRADITIONS- It is substantial for parents to carry daily rituals. Rituals and traditions are materials of keeping family members together and can be a relaxing reminder of stability. In order to give examples to keep rituals going; get together for a dinner, go out for bowling at the weekend and join to activities that will create a warm environment as it reinforces family chains.

SELF-CARE- Many single parents sacrifice a lot to make stable house warmer for their children. However, parents should know that taking care of them is also very important. Daily exercise reduces stress and provides you a healthy life. Taking time with family and parents is also essential to strengthen relationships. Some parents also take advantage of religious community and spiritual guidance.

Technology’s role

The other factor in family life which we can mention is technology. As it is easier to access to a public transport than 50 years ago, the distance between family members decreased. According to Mark Easton (BBC Home Editor) mobile phones have made communication between family members easier, even though the internet has not yet become very common in family environment. With regard to the researches in 2007 less than a third of internet users preferred contacting their parents every week and 8% of them communicated everyday. Although family life changes fast, we esteem are family ties more than ever.

According to what James Westhead states, despite increasing influence on family life, with computers and internet, it is clear that they have negative impact on relationships. Parents complain about the amount of time that their children spend in front of screens rather than involve in traditional family activities. To give an example, Second Life is a programme which makes people or families interact online as an avatar and even share family meals. Professor Lewis implies that ‘Technology is a double edged sword for families, it can erode and reduce human interaction but at the same time, technology is great at bringing people together just look at mobile phone use within families.’ (Lewic.C, BBC news: 2007)

A BBC pool has indicated that most of the British people are very positive about their family future. A question arises; what will size of families be in the future? According to predictions, in case trends in the past continue, parents in the future will not have many children and not get married. In reference to researches, the percentage of children who has non-married parents has increased 3 times more in last 50 years to 40% while the number of children has dropped to 1.8 in a family. A third of un-married parents are single and the rest of the people are co-habiting, however are more willing to separate than in the past.

According to James Westhead, predictions are unreliable. Professor Charlies Lewis (expert on family psychology) highlights that we will encounter with more single parents and more separation ‘People are already making and breaking relationships more easily and that is not necessarily a bad thing. Fighting between parents who stay together can be harmful for children.’ (Lewis.C, BBC News: 2007). The most influential factor is most probably economic. Moreover, the increasing cost of living and pressure leads people to have fewer children.

Families become hot political topic

It was brought forward that single parents and other family variations should not be involved in government policy. It is a common thought that while some traditional families which includes a married couple looking after children in a constant home seemed to be the ideal, dramatic social changes occurred in last decades and it became intolerable to base policy on it. According to Assinder in 2007, social changes caused the nuclear family to emerge. Furthermore, it was argued by some people that most of the social problems were generated by collapse in traditional family life. Correlatively, Tory Prime Minister John Major began to cut married couple’s tax allowance in mid – 1990s and it was ended by Labour in 2000. The leader David Cameron implied in BBC’s News night in 2007: “Marriage is, on the whole, a good thing that should be rewarded not punished.” In addition, the chief secretary, Andy Burnham gave his opinion about marriage and stated that “I don’t think the Tories should have a monopoly on this kind of thing. This is totally where Gordon Brown is coming from, your roots and your family are everything.”

Never the less, the policy on family is possible to alter, as majority of people showed interest to David Cameron’s announcements. Particularly, Cameron’s promissory speech in order to increase the inheritance tax to ?1million took less attention in the party conference. According to Liberal Democrats, tax break are not the right way to be chosen and they insist to focus on helping couples stay together.

It appears that the family is bound to become one of the most common issues in following elections and policy.

This essay will examine two theoretical sociological perspectives on society and how it functions. It will compare and contrast Marxism and functionalism. By describing and evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of both perspectives.

Marx called the system in which we live in, capitalism, He divided it up into two basic divisions, the ‘bourgeoisie’ (the owners of production), the bourgeoisie own all the means of production for example the farmland and factories and the ‘proletariat’ (The Workers) sell their skills and labour to the bourgeoisie. This is a simple view of a complex social phenomenon; theoretically more social classes should be identified. It fails to take into account any sub divisions.

The bourgeoisie or ‘ruling class’ benefit the most from the way that society operates and the proletariat do not and therefore gain far less than they deserve. Marx believed that the proletariats would, in the end, refuse to conform and revolt, destroying the bourgeoisie in order to become free for oppression and gain social mobility.

“What the Bourgeoisie, therefore produces, above all, is its own grave diggers, (Marx, Engels, 1884).

Marx thought that the bourgeoisie did not improve society but created situations of crisis, what he did not take into account was the money that they were putting back into society and that fact that without them the majority of the proletariat would be without work.

The superstructure for example: The Government, legal system, religion and the mass media are all owned by and used by the bourgeoisie to create ‘false class consciousness ‘ amongst the proletariat in order to avert them from rebelling from their exploitation (Haralambos,2002,p.2).

According to Marx capitalism is the newest type of class system, but it will also be the last. A communist society in which the means of production will be equally owned will replace capitalism, he thought that the proletariat will form unions, political parties and revolutionary movements enabling communism to overthrow capitalism (haralambous, 2002, p.7).

What Marx failed to do is set a time frame for the revolution. Some unions that have previously revolted against the bourgeoisie have failed and temporarily sent society into disarray. The power in economic systems is separable from other sources, male and female inequalities can not be explained in economic terms (Giddens, 2009, p.93).

The theory is inadequate because it only fully explains a proportion of society and does not take into account individuals ideals and ambitions.

A positive aspect of Marxism is that it highlights inequality and institutions that foster and perpetuate inequality it has brought a different perspective to examination of social systems and it has demonstrated a social conscience. The focus of Marxism has lead to the formulation of social policies and programs.

Functionalism is a sociological perspective that society is based on consensus, consensus assumes that norms and values in society are generally agreed and that social life is based on co-operation, rather than conflict (Lawson, 1996, p.48). What it fails to consider is that some people to not agree with the way that society functions and that not everyone holds that same norms and values. It is the oldest yet still is the most dominant theoretical perspective in sociology.

Functionalists such as Talcott Parsons (1902-1979), argued that the key to understanding human behaviour is understanding socialization. He used the analogy of the human body, with each part of society having a function (a purpose) like each vital organ for example; the government of society was compared to the human brain. If one part of society fails the whole system would fail, like the body would if it was to lose a vital organ. Parsons (1971) even viewed the whole world as a system of societies.

Functionalists believe that people and their social roles are produced by society and individuals themselves do not produce a society. He claimed that individuals are products of their influences e.g. families, friends, educational and religious background and the media that they are exposed to. They are born into their place in society, play their roles in it and then they die, without at all effecting how society functions, society does not and it continues to work long after they are gone(Moore,2001,p.6). For functionalists social institutes are believed to ensure that the socially acceptable patterns of behaviour are passed on or reproduced. For example family, education and the media socialise people into the key values of society this includes, respect for authority and the hierarchy (Moore, 2001, p.9). Stratification which is inevitable in societies unites people because it derives from shared values.

Durkhiem (1938) identified four main characteristics of crime he argued that crime is a social construct, which can actually benefit society because crime strengthens bonds between people. It reinforces norms and values, and a limited amount of crime is necessary to stop society stagnating.

“Crime could be reduced if individuals were controlled, but this would prevent development of positive deviants who go against societies norms and values, yet move society forward”, (Durkhiem, 1938).

Parsons (1965) identified religion as an important function in society as it helps people is crises, enabling them to carry on playing their social roles, allowing society to function normally.

Parsons also identified that in order for society to function everyone had to continuously play their own roles, he identified the ‘sick role’, where the function is to play the role of being ill and to get better as soon as possible in order to get back into your role. In order for the system to perform, all roles must be filled by those best qualified to perform them, he even thought that those who are unemployed had a role to play in order for those in higher authority to keep their roles. He stated that those in who successfully played their roles will be ranked highly and will receive rewards, although it can be argued that the mechanism (social stratification) for insuring effective role allocation; attaches unequal rewards and privileges to positions in society. However a criticism of Functionalism is that it is, descriptive and classificatory and only gives names for society and social changes, and does not explain them.

Although both Marxism and Functionalism see society differently, they also have some similarities: they are both positivists, built using scientific research methods. Positivism is called macro sociology because it looks at society as a whole; however looking at society from this perspective does not take into account the individuals and their norms and values.

They both have a ‘top down’ approach, the belief that viewing society as a real ‘thing’ which exists above and beyond us all as individuals is the best way to view society. Both theories agree on the importance of ‘totality’ (marsh, 2006)

The favoured research methods to look at behavioural patterns is those that generate sets of statistics such as questionnaires- known as quantitative methods this is not always that best approach to research society, because not everyone is studied.

They both believe that man is forced into his choices by the structures and systems in society, although they both have different views on this, functionalists believe that this is right and it has to be for society to work, and people accept society as it is. Marxist on the other hand believe that it is wrong and unfair, and that man will fight in order to create a fairer society

In contrast to Marxism which recognises social change and aspires towards it functionalism fails to recognise it altogether, and assumes every institution is a positive for society.

Looking at the evidence of both Marxism and functionalism, the society, today inclines more towards functionalism. Most people are happy with the system they live in. If too many people were to try and change it society would not work as well; an example of this is the post office strikes; people did not receive bills, money or other important mail, this forces society to have no sympathy for the postal workers. This is also an example of Marxist theory not working as he said it would; although it did not last too long and some people did benefit. This gives us reason to question if we only accept society as it is because as a society we are ‘lazy’, if we were to unite as a society, could we overthrow the bourgeoisie as Marx suggested we would?

Lower class citizens are keeping the higher classes in work, this keeps money within the system in turn they receive state benefits from the taxes that they pay. If all the lower classes were to try and move up the social ladder they may be no reason for some of the bourgeoisie, for example if all criminals and deviants, reformed and started working there would be no need for, law enforcement services, county courts and probation officers. Some amount of crime is necessary to keep higher classes such as the uniformed services in work.

Culture can be defined as the increasing deposit of knowledge, material objects, values, religion, notions of time, attitudes, hierarchies, concepts of the universe, spatial relations, roles, and beliefs and possessions gained by a group of people in the path of generations through individual and group striving (Poyatos, 2002). Culture can also be termed as communication and the vise versa. This is because culture is a symbol of communication. Some of these symbols include knowledge, a group’s skills, attitudes, motives and values. Culture can also be defined as the sum total of all the learned behaviors of a group that are commonly considered to be the tradition of a particular group of people and are conveyed from generation to generation. Identity can be defined as a set of personal or behavioral characteristics by which an individual can be associated with a certain group. Identity also refers to the state of an individual having some specific qualities which identify him with a particular group of people or things. The combination of these two nouns (culture and identity) gives rise to cultural identity which refers to the sense of belongingness to a particular group or culture.

From a personal view, culture refers to the way (aspects) of a person’s life. These aspects of life include language which is one of the oldest medium of expression in the human institution, arts and sciences which are the forms of human expression most refined and advanced and thought which can be defined as the methodologies in which an individual perceives, interprets, and understands the world around him. There is also spirituality which is a value system passed through generations for the purpose of well being in human beings. It is expressed through actions, language and social activities which are perceived to be the shared pursuit within any particular cultural community.

All cultures or social organizations have severe dimensions just like physical dimensions of length, height, width, time and height. The cultural dimensions may vary according to size, permeate the whole or by definition one cannot “see” a dimension of culture or society just the way we see an individual person however each person manifests each of the five dimensions of culture. Hofstede came up with five dimensions which are rated in 53 countries basing on indices of each dimension. These dimensions are namely power distance (hierarchy), femininity versus masculinity, collectivism versus individualism, uncertainty avoidance, and long term versus short term orientation (Hofstede, Pedersen& Hofstede, 2002). (PD) Power distance refers to the extent to which less powerful members expects respects and accepts unequal power distribution within a particular culture. According to Hofstede, high PD countries tend to maintain centralized political power and display tall hierarchies in organizations with massive differences in salary and social status. Subordinates always perceive the manager as a benevolent dictator and they are therefore expected to follow the rules just as they are stipulated. The low PD countries perceive subordinates and supervisors as closer to being equal and easily interchangeable (Marcus & Gould, 2000). They also have more flattened hierarchies in organizations and with less difference in salaries and social status. In these low PD countries, equality is generally desired and expected.

As a citizen of United States my country has a current PDI of 40 in comparison to the world’s range of 55 (Marcus & Gould, 2000). I support this low PDI because in my American culture there is better equality between the societal levels, government institutions, organizations and within families. My American cultural environment is stable and there is cooperative interaction in all power levels. I practice American culture and identity and it’s because of this that I can say my culture has sense of equality. For example teachers, students (children) and parents perceive each other as equals but not necessarily identical. The students and teachers relate well. Personally, I relate well with my lecturers and none of us feels like he/she has power over me as his student. In work places, people hold different position but regardless of this many perceive each other as brothers and it is therefore difficult to find some work related humanitarian crises. Individualism in culture refers to “loose ties”. This mans that one is expected to look after himself, his immediate family and no one else. Collectivism on the other hand means that people are incorporated together by birth into cohesive, strong groups that act as protection in exchange for unquestionable loyalty.

According to Hofspede, individualistic cultures value freedom, personal time and extrinsic motivators like material rewards at work (Marcus & Gould, 2000). In these individualistic cultures, individual socio-economic interests are highly valued and strong rights of privacy are maintained. In general it advocates for the ideologies based on self-actualization, self government, self realization and freedom. On the other hand collectivist value skills, training, physical conditions and the intrinsic rewards based on mastery. In relations to family they value harmony, silence, use of shame in the achievement of behavioral goals and the strife to maintain face. The socio- economic interests are highly valued rather than individuals.

According to the American culture which is also my cultural identity, we prefer situations whereby there is self sustenance. For example personally I like attending to my issues in my own way since that’s what my parents have taught me. If I am in need, I believe I should consult my parents, brothers and sisters before going to the external world. I also try to realize my goals using my own version without interference. This tendency is very common in the American culture. This is well supported by the studies of Hofstede which show that in the year 2009 the United States had an IDV of 91 the highest dimension compared to the other countries (Marcus & Gould, 2000). This means that the society has high individualistic attitude and relative loose bond with others. Therefore, the society is more self dependent and is concerned only for themselves and their close family members. Masculinity and femininity refers to the gender roles in a particular culture. Traditionally the masculine roles were based on assertiveness, toughness and competition while the feminine roles were based on tenderness, orientation to people, home and children. These traditional gender distinctions are almost breaking due to the collapse of feminine roles. The traditional masculine work goals included recognition, earnings, challenge and advancement. The traditional feminine work goals included good relations, employment security and good living and working conditions.

As an American upholding the American culture, I have realized many women trends are changing since they are pursuing degrees and diplomas to get into white-color jobs unlike in the early days when females used to stay at home taking care of children. Many females have taken jobs such as engineering, medical and teaching jobs which used to belong to men. According to Hofstede, in the year 2009 the MAS for America was 68 meaning the country experiences a higher degree of gender differentiation roles (Marcus & Gould, 2000). This means that the female population is more assertive and competitive just like men. Uncertainty avoidance dimension deals with the society’s tolerance as it pertains to ambiguity and uncertainty. It depicts how members in a society have attempted to cope with the anxiety through the minimization of uncertainties. In the cultures of high uncertainty avoidance people always prefer formally designed activities and explicit rules. You will also find that most of the employees tend to retain their employers (Amanda.com 1). In low uncertainty avoidance cultures, people always prefer implicit rules and more informal activities. Again, employees cannot retain their employers. In my American culture rules are very flexible and it accommodates diverse ideologies. For example there are many religions unlike in other countries like Islamic where only one religion is tolerated.

My American culture has few rules and it doesn’t do much to control all outcomes and results. It also tolerates a variety of ideas believes and thoughts. The long term versus short term orientation refers to the society’s time horizon. It also examines the importance of the future compared to the present and past. In my American culture I believe that I believe that I will meet my obligations and I also believe the American society will always meet its obligation no matter the hardships and inconveniences we will experience. Also, I appreciate my American tradition which is characterized by a lot of hard work in order to achieve something meaningful in life. Culture and identity positively influences the relationship between me and my parents because we rarely have any conflicts. This is because I know what my parents advocated for since my childhood (family traditions) and this makes it easier for us to interact without much issues arising.

Culture and identity has had a negative impact between my family members and me because some cultural aspects are continually changing but they are not adapting to these changes. For example the American culture has shunned the traditional segregation that existed between the black and the white Americans but my parents do not always welcome the idea of the association between these too American ethnic groups. This means that I am not always allowed to bring visitors from a different ethnicity. Again my culture doesn’t allow people to attend church without formal dressings. This has caused a negative impact on the relationship between me my parents and the church. Due to changing modes of dressing I find the cultural church dressing code not entertaining while at the other hand the church leaders are opposed to the new ways of dressing in the church. Our culture advocates for good mannerisms at school failure to which one is subjected to parental punishment. This has fostered a positive interpersonal relationship between my peer group, teachers and me. This is because I am aware of the rights and the wrong and therefore I try to avoid conflicts resulting from disobedience or arrogance towards my peers. My American cultural identity has also helped me in forming positive personal relations with the surrounding people and communities. This is because it advocates for brotherhood and I therefore try to be careful when socializing with people so as to avoid conflicts. Consequently, many people in the community find me as their friend who they can count on and therefore good interpersonal relations.

Due to my cultural identity I have individually and collectively experienced many challenges in the American society. One challenge is that of persistent identities in form of biracial perceptions. This is because many people keep on asking me about my race because my bodily appearance doesn’t suggest it. Ethnocentrism is the other challenge. This is because some of my college friends like the children from the very rich families in the community feel that they have superior ways of life (culture) than us from middle class families. They tend to perceive us as inferior, wrong in all aspects and strange. Another challenge I have faced due to my cultural identity is prejudice. This has been caused by the attitude of ethnocentrism. My fellow college mates from wealthy backgrounds tend to show intolerant and unfairly biased attitude towards me and other people of my status (middle class). The next challenge is cultural stereotyping. This is because of the exaggerated generalizations about a particular group (females). For example in the American culture the females have been stereotyped in terms of their emotions. It is believed that females experience and also express sadness, fear and sympathy. On the other hand men experience and express anger and pride. Another challenge is cultural proximity whereby many cultures are assumed to be similar. For example due to modernization, the subcultures (white and black) in my country have now been integrated almost into one though people come from different places of origin.

The other challenge I have faced due to my cultural identity is that of misinterpretation of codes. For example due to my dress code most of my colleagues mistake me for a Muslim lady because I always have veil on my neck and put on a long skirt. There are several occasions whereby my verbal behaviors or cues have been misunderstood like when I use inflections (variation of speech). When I lower the pitch of voice too or make it deeper on certain words. This low pitch implies confidence, certainty, and authority. However my college mates view this as a sign of ignorance or lack of cooperation in speech. Other times I use upward inflection (raised pitch) in speech to communicate uncertainty, surprise and doubt. This however bring about miscommunication when am talking to my college friends who come from other cultures like Muslims who perceive my tone as a sign of coercion and harassment. Some times I repeat my statements as a sign of emphasis but some of my friends perceive that as a speech problem. Often, I get frustrated or angered when my friends mistake these verbal behaviors to be signs of weakness. There are several occasions when my non-verbal behaviors have been misunderstood. For example when I use a frequency of glances to indicate attention, interest and involvement most people think that am being timid and am using it to protect myself from them or as a sign of fatigue. Some of my friends have also misunderstood me through tactile communication (touch). For example I give a warm hug to all my friends as a sign or greetings when we meet but some friends mistake me for a multiple lover. Others mistrust their companions due to these kinds of greetings. This mistrust is caused by the fact that they interpret it emotionally. Some of my friends misinterpret my use of “fig” which in my culture means “you can’t have it”. They say that it is immoral or obscene. I feel sad when people misinterpret these non-verbal cues.

Many countries have experienced very significant changes in patterns of family formation and family structure. Great Britain is one of the countries where these changes have been particularly marked with the result that British families have become less stable . The roles of women and men with the parents or within the family have also changed. The last 100 years have seen changes in attitudes and expectations. Bruner, J. (1985) Vygotsk, the last 100 years have been seen in the structure of technology, attitudes and expectations. Families are mix of cohabiting parents, stepfamilies, single parent families, those living apart together and civil partnerships, as well as the traditional family. it was necessary to prove that in one of five ways such as unreasonable behaviour, desertion, adultery, two years separation with consent, five years separation without consent.

The changes in marriage, divorce and cohabitation have contributed to the growing number of new types of family. Two in five of all marriages are now remarriages, which makes stepfamilies one of the fastest growing family forms in Britain. In the decade to 2006, the number of single parent families also increased to 2.3 million, making up 14% of all families. Consequently more and more children are now growing up in single parent families, and in stepfamilies. A growing number of couples are also now living apart together, often following failed marriages or cohabitations. Initial estimates suggest that around two million people have regular partners in other households excluding full-time students and people who live with their parents. In most cases this is due to working in a different location to the family home or because the relationship is still in the early stages . However, women’s focus on their career may also be a factor. As women choose to focus on their career before settling into a committed relationship, they are getting married and having children later in life. Finally civil partnerships between same sex couples have created a new type of family. By the end of 2007 there had been 26,787 civil partnerships since the law was introduced in December 2005.

Teenage motherhood is one of the most distinctive features of British Demography. Without teenage pregnancies, Britain’s rate would fall from 1.8 to 1.68 (Coleman and Chandola, Chapter 2; also Coleman 1997). Teenagers throughout Europe both East and West now engage in sexual intercourse at earlier ages than their parents or grand-parents. In disapproval pre-marital

sex . Marriage was broken, little remained to prevent young people who are physically ready to have sex from doing so. The analysis of European social attitudes data (Chapter 3; also Scott, Alwin, and Braun 1996) provides information about attitudes to pre-marital sex in various countries in 1994. In these information ,52 per cent were opposed to men, and 63 per cent opposed to women, having any pre-marital sex. Only a small number believed that pre-marital sex was ‘natural’ (McKibbin 1998: 296)

For teenage men and women in Britain today, the average age at i¬?rst intercourse is 17. But whereas in most of Western Europe, rates of teenage motherhood have fallen as teenage sexual activity has risen. Demographically, Britain more closely resembles to Eastern Europe, where a tradition of marriage has long meant high teenage fertility rates (Coleman and Chandola, Chapter 2; also Coleman 1996b: 23).Almost all of the East European births are inside marriage while all of the Western are outside marriage with a large number being outside partnership as well. In Britain, teenage births account for just over one-i¬?fth of all non-marital births 21 per cent while 80-90 per cent of teenage births are outside legal marriage.

In 1996, there were 44,700 babies born to women aged 15-19. Although this represents a rise over the previous year. However, it is also the case that the number of teenage girls in the population was falling from the early 1980s onwards and that the rate at which 15-19 year olds become pregnant and remain pregnant .The conception rate and the abortion rate was stable or rising throughout the period and into the late 1990s (ONS 1997d: 62). Figure shows changes in the abortion rates for selected years since 1974.There was a large drop from 1974-84 when teenage births fell steadily. From 1984 onwards, however, conceptions have i¬‚uctuated around 60 and abortions around 35, per 1000 women aged 15-19. The stability of both the conception and abortion rates gives few grounds for thinking that in the short term at least . British teenagers will behave different than they have in the past. And as their numbers in the population are set to rise over the next decade and number of babies born to teenagers (Craig 1997).

Britain is also distinctive for its high divorce rate. Thirty years ago, there were two divorces for every 1,000 marriages. Liberalization of the divorce laws in the 1970s was sharp rise in divorce and by the mid-1980s about 1,000 marriages ended in divorce a rate (Pullinger 1998). The rate of increase is slower now than in the 1970s and early 1980s largely because the married population contains fewer of those at high risk (Murphy and Wang, Chapter 4). Nonetheless, 40 per cent of marriages will end in divorce measures of divorce per 1,000 marriages or per 1,000 population. Moreover, people are divorcing after shorter periods of marriage. One in ten marriages which took place in 1981 ended in divorce within 4.5 years, compared with one in ten divorcing within 6 years in 1971 and after 25 years in 1951 (Roberts 1996: 2). Early marriage have long been understood to be strongly associated with marital breakdown. The younger the age at marriage, the greater the likelihood of the marriage ending (Kiernan and Mueller, Chapter 16). Between 1971 and 1996, people under age 25 experienced the greatest growth in divorce rates with rates increasing for men and women (Pullinger 1998).

The problem of lone motherhood is poverty. Research suggests that, as a group, lone mothers have few chances of obtaining other than low-paid work, often because they enter the labour market disadvantaged by their low level of qualii¬?cations (Bryson, Ford, and White 1998). The majority, however, have young children to care for and thus need jobs which provide enough income to meet the costs of child care. Consequently, lone mothers in Britain are less likely to be employed than in most other case countries and in the 1970s and their employment rate has declined. The difference in economic activity between married and lone mothers is particularly sharp between women with children under age 5. In the 1970s, lone mothers with preschool children were more likely to be in work than married mothers This changed during the1980s, and during the 1990s married mothers with young children have been twice as likely as lone mothers to be economically active. During the1990s one in two married mothers with pre-school children have been in employment compared with fewer than one in four comparable lone mothers (Kiernan, Land, and Lewis1998: 128). Most of the fall in employment among lone mothers has come in full-time work while the full-time employment of married women has risen with part-time work remaining stable. People live alone for a variety of reasons. For example, living alone may be a permanent choice and for others , it may be a temporary. While there are more people living alone at all ages and the largest increases since 1971 have come among men and women under retirement age, particularly those aged under 40 (Hall and Ogden 1997). The increase in solo living among people under pension age rejects the way in which household change is some-times linked to economic change.

Since 1970s ,the number of lone-parent families has been increased in Britain and also the proportion of children raised in such families (Coleman and Chandola, Chapter 2). In the late 1990s, 1.6million families in Britain with dependent children. During the 1960s, divorce overtook death as the primary source of lone-parent families while in the 1970s and 1980s, sharply rising divorce rates and falling remarriage rates furthered their growth (Kiernan, Land, and Lewis 1998; Murphy and Wang,Chapter4). From the mid-1980s, however, most of the growth in lone-parent families has come from never-married mothers as changing attitudes towards pre-marital sex. Nonetheless, there has been a substantial increase in the number of single women who become mothers while not living with a partner (Berthoud, McKay, and Rowlingson, Chapter 15).

Since in 1990s, women who had never married before becoming mothers (Pullinger 1998).

The parents who were working and busy of whole day to day responsibilities, grandparents could spend more time with their grandchildren and develop a special bond (Weissvourd, 1998). Children and their grandparents each were close to each other and were able to offer mutual support for each other. There were lot of facilities on the parents to teach their children even that grand parents played important role in this situation. This gave scope for reciprocal social relationships and joint interaction in learning and contrasts with the role of the parents as well as grand parents in learning (Bruner, 1985). In the context of the family, mutual trust and respect for each member’s perspective (Rommetveit, 1974, 1979) was a important to this process.

Government has moved away from financial support for marriage towards families. Legislative changes have given families more flexibility to maintain their home and work lives and have a degree of choice in their options. The public would like to see support made available to families and delivered to the service provider and providing additional cash. In recent years the amount of money spent by government to support families has increased significantly but it has also been dramatically re-targeted which has the effect of shifting support from one type of family form to others. Up until 1999 the three key family benefits were Child Benefit (which began in 1975), Family Credit for low-income working families, ‘Married Man’s Allowance’ (it became the Married Couples’ Allowance in 1990). Family benefit as it is available to all those in employment with a low income including single people with no dependants. However, couples and single parents do get additional credit and there is a childcare element for those that have children.

Delhi is a complex system of parts. Each part is as critical as the other. Its transport system and its land-use must work in tandem to achieve a well-oiled traffic network. Placing the importance of people in the transport system correctly is critical to its success. But Delhi views the problem differently.

Today, transportation and vehicles are inseparable. The problems faced by city traffic are easily reduced to a simple set of numbers. The number of vehicles, road area, and other statistics dictate contemporary transport design. Transport is far more complex than that. People, the root of all the problems and solutions are left unaddressed. People make the city and therefore its transport system. Their inclusion immediately changes the problem-solution paradigm. How people affect the whole transport construct, their behaviour, social nature, emotions, desires and the rest of the rainbow is under the magnifying glass. (Jacobs, The death and life of great American cities, 1961)

Delhi traffic is plagued with problems which can be solved by introducing more people centric traffic design. Congestion, de-pedestrianization, increasing fuel costs, erosion of streets, design misuse and design failure are some of the problems approached in this study.

Congestion for instance is not always a road widening issue.it is an emergent property of large scale interactions of many people or vehicles or both.

De-pedestrianization occurs because of the risks involved in taking a walk . The transformation of a street to a road marked the end of its pedestrian friendliness. People are forced to turn to safer methods of movement like cars. (Jacobs, The death and life of great American cities, 1961).

But those who can’t afford any will have to manage in dangerous Delhi.

In-equity: The industrialization of traffic has thrown the equity and inclusivity scales off balance creating a self-generated need for powered personal transport. There is a lot of memory and aspiration attached to an automobile and its possession. (Illich, 1978)

This point is more emphasized when the automobile is compared to fashion. Vehicles, like clothes form a skin we’d like to wear on the road while interacting with other vehicles. It is a method today of displaying status.

The majority, Low-income groups are left to suffer due to lack of feasible options. They resort to walking or cycling and are constantly posed with a threat on the motorised road. (TIWARI, 2001)

It may be worthwhile looking into integrated multi modal transport because people tend to value choices in movement. Walking may rightfully be the best solution in any highly congested area, but this doesn’t apply to other places. For example; pedestrianizing and introducing the metro-rail in Connaught place may be a viable solution, on the other hand, the same may fail miserably in the mega-scale, unsafe, roads of Gurgaon. Planners, authorities, and the designers could resort to a more interdisciplinary approach to the challenge.

How can Delhi traffic be more human centric?

Scope of Study

Although what will be discussed could be applied to all cities in general, this study is specific to the city of Delhi and the National Capital Territory (NCT – Gurgaon, Ghaziabad, Noida etc.)

The traffic problems discussed here pertain to urban local road traffic. Automobiles, two-wheelers, Bus transit, metro transit and pedestrians.

The study deals with contemporary traffic. Any reference to the history of Delhi traffic will be only to assert the contemporary situation.

Although many things are measurable in transport networks, most human reactions are intangible and therefore interviews and observations form a major part of this research, i.e. case studies will be used to substantiate any hypothesis.

Limitations

The western v/s Indian literature perspectives in the studies presented is imbalanced content wise as India is a developing economy and traffic is relatively a new problem. The west on the other hand, has a formidable amount of experience in the matter.

Time is critical to any study. The study should prove sufficient for the abundant or short period of 4 months. There is room to always better any work.

Due to the size of NCT, the study will take an overview approach as well as present one or 2 specific examples to illustrate what is considered to be the generic of that area.

Methodology

This study looks at the following as a base to analyse the case studies

Perception, socio-economic and cultural nature of people. The effect of people on traffic and vice-versa.

Understanding the transport system of Delhi.

Comparing both of the above in terms of different critical areas in the city.eg: Shahjahanabad, Lutyens, and New Delhi etc.

As part of the dissertation the author will broadly research the impact of people in the Delhi transport system and its different facets. Case studies will be prepared, secondary studies will be analysed and interviews will be conducted to excavate the method of including people centrally in traffic system.

Definitions

Now, before any argument is put forth or any finding is validated, we must steer clear of any semantic argument. The definitions below are for that very purpose.

Movement: The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines ‘movement’ as the act or process of moving, especially, the change of place or position.

The philosopher Ivan Illich in his essay “Energy and equity” defines the following quite aptly.

Traffic : Any movement of people from one place to another when they are outside their homes.

Transit : Those movements that put human metabolic energy to use.

Transport: That mode of movement which relies on other sources of energy. (illich, 1978)

Why Do We Move?

In simple terms, we move because we can. We are capable of mobility from a very early age. It can be safely said that movement is ‘life’ itself exemplified. With respect to the city man lives at home, he moves to work, for food, clothes, and moves back to his shelter.

His movement is what adds life to the city. His movement along with many others movement induces ‘liveliness’ in the city. (Jacobs, The death and life of great American cities, 1961)

Methodology flowchart

IDENTIFYING THE QUESTION

UNDERSTANDING DELHI’S TRANSPORT SYSTEM

UNDERSTANDING DELHI’S PEOPLE AND THEIR NATURE

IDENTIFY AND ANALYSE CONFLICTS

BUILDING A CASE FOR DELHI

PRIMARY STUDIES

SECONDARY STUDIES

DELHI

OTHER

INFERENCES

INFERENCES

ANSWERING THE QUESTION

SHAHJAHANABAD

LUTYENS DELHI

NEW DELHI

URBAN VILLAGES

SATELLITES

3

2

1

INTREVIEWS

AUTHORITY

LAY MAN

INFERENCES

Before even beginning understanding traffic, it is important we understand the city. The city and its traffic system are so intricately intertwined that for urban areas to be capable of economic activity, an easy and sustainable flow of people and goods must exist. Poor mobility is known to be a major economic dampener and can even lead to deterioration of everyday life. . (POLICY, 2001)

It goes without saying that the city and its traffic are inseparable.

Delhi an Introduction

In 1639 AD, the Mughal emperor Shahjahan built a walled city in Delhi which served as a capital of the Mughal Empire from 1649 until 1857. The British had captured Delhi by 1803 and announced in 1911 that the capital of British India would be Delhi. So a new capital city, New Delhi, was built to the south of the old city during the 1920s. When India gained independence from British rule in 1947, New Delhi was declared its capital and seat of government.During the partition of India, thousands of Hindu and Sikh refugees, fled to Delhi, while many Muslim residents of the city migrated to Pakistan. Migration to Delhi from the rest of India continues (as of 2012), contributing more to the rise of Delhi’s population than the birth rate, which is declining.

The Constitution (Sixty-ninth Amendment) Act, 1991 declared the Union Territory of Delhi to be formally known as the National Capital Territory of Delhi. (Wikipedia)

Construction, power, telecommunications, health and community services, and real estate form integral parts of Delhi’s economy. Delhi has India’s one of the largest and fastest growing retail industries.

In 2001, the population of Delhi increased by 285,000 as a result of migration and by an additional 215,000 as a result of natural population growth – this made Delhi one of the fastest growing cities in the world. By 2015, Delhi is expected to be the third-largest agglomeration in the world after Tokyo and Mumbai. (Wikipedia)

The districts and the satellites
E:workdissertationwrittenintro to delhi634px-Delhi_districts.svg.png

Central Delhi

North Delhi

South Delhi

East Delhi

North East Delhi

South West Delhi

New Delhi

http://mapsof.net/map/delhi-districts-mapNorth West Delhi

West Delhi

Districts

New Delhi – Lutyen’s brainchild, New Delhi has its fair share of circuses and axes.Built to the south of Old Delhi, It consists of India gate, Connaught place, etc.

Central Delhi houses the central business district and high-rises. It includes Shahjahanabad (Old Delhi) which served as capital of the Mughal Empire, and is home to the monuments like the Delhi Fort and the Jama Masjid, Delhi’s principal mosque.

Administratively, the district is divided into three subdivisions, Darya Ganj, Pahar Ganj, and Karol Bagh.

North Delhi administratively, the district is divided into three subdivisions, Sadar Bazar, Kotwali, and Civil Lines.

South Delhi administratively, the district is divided into three subdivisions, Defence Colony, Hauz Khas, and Kalkaji.

South district is considered to be the most affluent of all residential districts of Delhi. With upscale areas like Greater Kailash, Chittaranjan Park, Alaknanda, Hauz Khas, Green Park, Defence Colony, New Friends Colony, Gulmohar Park, Gulmohar enclave and Vasant Kunj, it has the highest land prices outside Lutyen’s Zone in Delhi.

South West Delhi administratively, the district is divided into three subdivisions, Delhi Cantonment, Najafgarh, and Vasant Vihar. (Wikipedia)

In this study, we will focus on places in New Delhi, Old Delhi, and South Delhi.

Satellites
Gurgaon
NOIDA

With focus on Gurgaon

The Transport System of Delhi
The automobiles

Prior to the early 1990s when India opened its then-restricted market, owning a vehicle was viewed as a luxury and taxed accordingly.

Today, along with increase in spending power, a combination of issues are dissuading potential buyers in India from actually buying a car:

India is “scarcity use” economy, one in which families find ways to continually reuse products until the products completely wear out. The combination of fuel cost and insufficient infrastructure has led Indian consumers to purchase primarily two-wheelers and small cars. So, even though some people can afford larger cars, many purchase smaller ones. (Bruce M. Belzowski, 2009)

Automobiles are often conveniently tagged as the villains responsible for the ills of cities and the disappointments and futilities of city planning. But the destructive effects of automobiles are much less a cause than a symptom of our incompetence at city building. .

Suppose automobiles had never been invented, we would still have essentially the same. It is questionable how much of the destruction wrought by automobiles on cities is really a response to transportation and traffic needs, and how much of it is owing to sheer disrespect for other city needs, uses and functions.

The mechanical vehicles, in their overabundance, work slothfully and idle much. As one consequence of such low efficiency, the powerful and speedy vehicles, choked by their own redundancy, don’t move much faster than horses. Trucks, by and large, do accomplish much of what might have been hoped for from mechanical vehicles in cities. They do the work of much greater numbers of horse-drawn vehicles or of burden-laden men. But because passenger vehicles do not, this congestion, in turn, greatly cuts down the efficiency of the trucks. (Jacobs, The death and life of great American cities, 1961)

Economy and Production

In the mid-1990s, foreign manufacturers entered the market through Joint Ventures with domestic manufacturers as required by the government. This entry raised the level of competition and brought many global suppliers to India to support their manufacturer customers.

In 2000, the government lifted the requirement that foreign companies establish JVs with domestic companies. As its gross domestic product (GDP) grew, India built and sold more vehicles, reaching the 1-million-vehicle mark in the 2004-2005 fiscal years.

There has been a shift in the vision of Delhi. Delhi earlier emphasised on the development of the public, but now seems to be concentrating on the middle class.

Roads of Delhi

Delhi is a city for the car owners. The number of car owners and the variety of cars available in Delhi has increased exponential over the last 15 years. The car has gone from a vehicle for the elite to a necessity for every middle class household. The type of car one owns projects one’s status and the car is now seen as one of the symbols of one’s success. They are no more marketed as a way to commute but as a product that is essential for one to own. The lower classes aspire to have one while the upper classes aspire to have more. All this comes from the global level competition to become the biggest consumer. One would expect that, at this rate, the maximum number of people use motor vehicles to commute but the distribution of commuters over the different types of transportation facilities says otherwise. (Nair, 2012)

According to a study conducted by Unified Traffic & Transportation Infrastructure (PLG. & ENGG.) Centre (UTTIPEC), 14%of the total commuters in Delhi are car owners, 13% own 2 wheelers (scooters & motorcycles), and 40% use public transport and 34% are pedestrians and cyclists. Though a large percentage uses public transport, it should be understand that that percentage is also required to walk, to and fro from the point of pick up and drop off. The planning of the city does not seem to accommodate this. (Nair, 2012)

‘Delhi city has invested heavily in its road infrastructure in the recent pastaˆ¦and was welcomed with much fanfare. However, in order to create a private vehicle oriented infrastructure, the public transportation system was neglected. Furthermore, with the city’s buoyant economy, cars have replaced buses on the road and cyclists have switched to two-wheelers and motorcycles. Pedestrians are therefore increasingly being treated like the most marginalised commuters on the road’ (Public Transport International, 2009)

The streets are designed in a way that best accommodate the car. This compounds the idea of trying to portray New Delhi as world class city even if this image only depicts a small section of the society. The streets are centred on the road with maximum area given to it. The pedestrian area is hardly comparable while the area given to cyclist is minimal, and in most cases absent. The advertisements that one sees while travelling on the road, ranging from huge billboards to those on bus stands all give central focus to the road. Even with a minority using the vehicular roads, it is still given the utmost importance and the central view point. (Nair, 2012)

On the road, preference is given to the car over the bus. Nothing is provided for better and safer bus travel. Better buses and bus stops are the most acceptable improvements as they do not hamper the car owner. Any other changes that have tried to be implemented have been received with scepticism and protest. The Delhi Bus Rapid Transport System is a great example of that. (Nair, 2012)

Delhi Bus Rapid Transport (BRT) System

The Delhi BRT was introduced to combat the rising requirement for better public transport and to decrease congestion on the roads. The BRT was designed to provide dedicated lanes for buses, cyclist and pedestrians who make up 50-60% of the total number of commuters. Comparing that to the fact that buses only make up 2-2.5% of the total number of motorised vehicles on the road, goes to show that there are large inadequacies in the infrastructure of the public transportation systems.

A total of 26 BRT corridors were planned, covering a total length of 310 km in major parts of South Delhi. These corridors were placed in the centre of the road, along with bus stands on pedestrian islands, and were divided from the rest of the road by barriers. The pedestrian islands were universally accessible, had well designed street furniture, and even had a demarcated auto rickshaw bay. These changes led to the reduction of motor able area left for the cars. (Nair, 2012)

The Delhi Metro

The latest mode of transport; the metro, is considered to be inclusive. It does not break all boundaries and include everyone, but it compresses the social gap in society. As of now, the widest range of people from different classes use the metro over other modes of transport. (Nair, 2012)

“The metro ‘It has also made public transport a more egalitarian experience. A plumber from Jahangirpuri, in kurta-pyjama and plastic chappals, sits beside a slick-haired, shiny-shoed executive armed with a laptop.’” (Chaturvedi, 2010, p. 6)

On the other hand, only 4-5% of the commuting population use the metro. Those that travel by cycle or walk to their destination still don’t consider this a viable option. Even compared to other modes of transport like the bus and train, it is expensive. The metro was not targeted for the public but for the ever increasing middle class and upper classes. The metro was designed to look ‘world class’ for the upcoming Common Wealth Games, 2010. The materials used and the general appearance of the metro and its stations brings to light the demographic the metro is directed towards. These features dissuade people from lower sections of society from using the metro, as it makes them feel uncomfortable. It is also not as easy to get into the metro as it is to get into a bus.

It is wrong to state that this outlook is unjustified as one of the objectives of the metro was to reduce traffic on the roads; which it did. This was due to the fact that it targeted those people who used private modes of transportation who were used to more affluence. This is also why it was well received (Nair, 2012)

On the flipside, the metro has completely ignored those that do not fit into the preferred bracket of society. The construction of the metro has left many homeless, including the workers hired to construct it. It has also led to the gentrification of the areas surrounding the metro. The Delhi metro bridge the gap between the middle class and the rich but expands that between the poor and the rest. (Nair, 2012)

‘So it is a sleeker, more prosperous Delhi that the Metro has helped create, a city that spares no space for housing its workers even as it continues to rely on their labour to make life easier and smoother for the better-off’ (Chaturvedi, 2010, p. 8)

Owning a car is seen as the ultimate goal in society by the lower classes in terms of mode of transportation and this desire is accentuated by the commercial images one sees every day. While the number of people with financial capacity to own cars continuously increases, the notion that one requires a car to be social acceptable rather than to commute is also becoming true. While sitting in a bus, one sees numerous cars zip past them. The car owner always seems to have the right of way and arrogantly so. Consumerism is also influencing us subliminally on the road, with the constant advertisements of various products. (Nair, 2012)

‘We are exposed to numerous commercial messages while driving on the freeway: bill boards, radio advertisements, bumper-stickers on cars, and signs and banners placed at shopping malls that we pass. Most of this exposure is random-we don’t plan to seek it out.’ (Woodward, 2000)

If one is to compare the Delhi Metro with the Delhi BRT, both were given similar importance and propagated equally. The difference lies in the demographic it was intended for.

The image and exclusivity of a transport system has become very important. The different transport system segregates society depending on their economic status irrespective of the majority that use them. (Nair, 2012)

‘In Delhi, however, it has meant that car owners have felt deprived of what they feel is their birth right. The BRT, therefore, is perhaps the largest symbolic manifestation of the class struggles’ (Chaturvedi, 2010, p. 96)

The implementation of the BRT in Delhi led to the shift in importance from the car owner to the public transit user. Though the BRT created inconveniences, it was also not given the chance to succeed. It was not the type of transportation system the consumer Indian would use and so, it received much criticism when it was introduced. (Nair, 2012)

‘The success of the BRT system mainly depends on managing the behavioural changes. This requires comprehensive planning and on-going efforts at improving the system, as well as driving its acceptability in order to bring about necessary behavioural changes.’ (Public Transport International, 2009)

Infrastructure

Designing an automotive infrastructure for over one billion people is a daunting task for a developed economy, but developing economies must also contend with other challenges, including limited funds and inadequate roads. (Bruce M. Belzowski, 2009)

Transportation infrastructure is a vital element to the automotive industry.

Road construction is the key, and it is a task only India’s government can tackle.

“There is a direct relationship between better connectivity of the metropolitan areas and the progress the industry can achieve. Roads are clearly the biggest bottleneck, both the quality and availability of roads.” (Bruce M. Belzowski, 2009)

Lack of traffic-law enforcement is often cited as an inhibitor to growth.

Traffic fatalities in India are 8.7 per 100,000 people, as compared to 5.6 in the United Kingdom, 5.4 in Sweden, and 6.7 in Japan. (Bruce M. Belzowski, 2009)

As congestion grows, enforcement becomes increasingly more critical.

“Driving and road discipline needs to be enforced both individually and by policy.”

30% of drivers have had no driver’s education, do not understand signals or lane discipline and, as a result, are causing accidents on roads.

Progress in government education, national auto testing centres, licensing of individuals, and the reduction of varying velocity vehicles on the same roads are key to dealing with the problem. (Bruce M. Belzowski, 2009)

“We need to improve on the oil tanking facilities at ports, oil terminals, and cross-country pipelines. Significant investment is required to provide a level playing field between public and private sector companies.”

India’s government needs to build more and better roads to support future not just current growth, and hasten the vehicle friendliness of India’s cities including wider roads and more parking spaces. Improved air quality is also critical. (Bruce M. Belzowski, 2009)

The percentage of urban Indians is currently around 30%, but, this figure is exponentially increasing. The stabilized western countries have over 60% of their share living in cities.

India is going to grow till at least twice its size before it stabilizes. This calls for a plan where the future of a city is well predicted and duly buffered .i.e. Prepare for expansion and concentration. (POLICY, 2001)

Of course, India is only adequately prepared for the present. As basic necessities such as education, recreation, work, are getting more difficult to get to, India is still grappling with the burst in number of automobiles and the lack of road space.

“During 1981 to 2001, the number of motor vehicles went up by over 7.75 times during the same period.” (POLICY, 2001)

Safety

In her book, the death and life of great American cities, Jane Jacobs discusses the importance of safety and security on the street. The success of a city district lies inevitably on the safety and security of streets. The failure of which results in the discomfort of its residents, and that is only the beginning of the problem. (Jacobs, THE DEATH AND LIFE OF GREAT AMERICAN CITIES, 1961)

Travel in the city has become more risky with accident rates having gone up from 1.6 lakh in 1981 to over 3.9 lakh in 2001. The number of persons killed in road accidents has also gone up from 28,400 to over 80,000 during the same period. (POLICY, 2001)

The poor end up in the wrong end of most things in the city and here again is no exception. Among those who are frequently hurt are cyclists, pedestrians, and pavement dwellers. (POLICY, 2001)

Delhi’s People and their Nature
Perception of Spaces

‘We experience the world as a series of spatial patterns and we store them, and we recall them and we match them up against reality and we are making predictions all the time’ (TED, 2003)

Every individual has the ability to observe, understand and respond to their environment. Through the course of one’s life, one’s brain stores every experience that one encounters as mnemonic devices which help them process further situations.

This inference is taken from the cognitive theory of the brain. According to this theory, the observations that one makes are stored in a part of the brain as a database which is the memory. One’s brain is continuously interpreting every instance by cross-referencing every sensory input to their memory. The person then reacts to the environment depending on their inference. (TED, 2003)

The database that each of us creates individually, can be attributed to our culture, local environment and society. As a group of people belonging to the same environment, one can say that, they all share similar inferences and therefore, respond similarly. At the same time, the behaviour of an individual is not constrained only by their society and culture but also by the choices they have previously made.

Culture

All over the world, people have the same basic requirements and perform similar activities to sustain themselves. The basic human needs can be satisfied in any environment. The difference lies in the way they fulfil those needs and that difference is contingent on the physical environment. These variations reflect in the distinctions between cultures.

The ‘constancy, homogeneity and uniformity among traditional groups’ can be termed as a groups’ culture. (Moore(Editor), 2000, p. 183)

Culture gives a society a set of guidelines which tells them how to behave and interact with each other and the spaces around them. It is a form of transmission of information from one generation to the next, through the design of spaces and artefacts and by how a person interacts with them. (Moore(Editor), 2000, p. 180)

Segregation & Exclusivity

Class is a further division of society within a culture. It is the class that one belongs to in a society which establishes for a person their position and status in society. In most societies, occupation was the common basis of segregation at the commencement, but soon occupation as well as status became hereditary. The segregation was also based on the value of ones occupation in society but very little on the character of the person. (Ross, 1920, pp. 404-405)

There is always an aspiration of the lower classes to progress to a higher class. In earlier times, it was impossible to bridge that gap and progress from a low class to a higher class, but, through the ages, the ability to climb up the social ladder has become possible and comparatively easier.

In all cases, the upper class is smaller in number and has greater power than the lower class masses. Those who are part of the upper class try to maintain that divide. They prize and try to maintain that gap, as it makes their position more exclusive. (Ross, 1920)

Exclusivity is the act of excluding or placing restriction on something to only a certain group of people. Exclusivity is a dominant social phenomenon today. It is the modern interpretation of caste and class in most Indian cites.

Architecture has always responded to the divisions in society and compounds exclusivity. Spaces have always been designed to respond to these aspects of culture and society and to propagate these notions.

Cities over the world now have the ability to communicate with each other and influence each other. This has led to an increase in trade and has changed the culture in most cities.

Globalisation & the New Culture

This new culture of the 20th century is highly influenced by the political shift to capitalism and widespread privatization. These changes, along with the boom in technology, lead to great economic growth in many parts of the world and affected the world economy. The privatisation of most major economies has led to economic globalisation.

Today, culture, has grown past being distinctive and unique and is moving towards a common globalised culture which is highly determined by currency. In India, the culture prevalent is still one that is rooted to its people, but in major cities, this is slowly changing and its effects slowly trickling down to the rest of India.

There has been a global shift from state control to privatization. This, combined with the invention of mass productions and better mean of communication and transport, has led to a fierce competition among manufacturers to sell and sell fast. The global culture has now become one based on the mass production of goods and their consumers. (Featherstone, 2006)

The perception of a human being has changed to one of a consumer and their monetary value. One’s income becomes the determining factor of their class in society. This has led to a shift in how people value themselves and others.

‘Consumerism is a social and economic order that is based on the systematic creation and fostering of a desire to purchase goods and services in ever greater amounts’ (Wikipedia, Consumerism)

This new culture, which is broadly termed as consumerism, has started emerging in major Indian cities. Today’s society and culture is based on monetary standing. The socio-economic group now determines ones class. The products one buys, the concept of brands, etc. are the factors that govern how one judges another. One bases their value in society on their buying index and the products they have. Society is now divided on their economic standing and from this stems the underlying exclusivity that is present today in cities like Delhi.

India and especially Delhi, is trying to portray itself as world class city. The modern Indian is represented by the booming and ever increasing middle class, always aspiring to reach the higher classes. They have

The purpose of this explanatory research was to study how gender socialisation influences gender inequality. For the analysis, we used unstructured. It was a qualitative study and it was supported by some closed ended questions, which had helped me to do a quantitative analysis as well, that allows a better understanding on the topics. After the analysis, there will the discussion chapter and some recommendation.

Our major finding upon this research is that, gender socialisation leads to enlarge gender inequality. But however, it helps women to maintain their primary roles which help to maintain a healthy society.

Since birth, children are expected to have a few of the qualities, apart from the physical ones, that we expect of human beings “they cannot walk or talk, they don’t know how to eat, to drink, to go to toilet, and they don’t have any idea on politics or sport. In a sociological perspective, human beings are not created in a physical manner only, but they are socially constructed (Moore, 1997). If people were left on their own after birth, merely being fed and physically cared for, they would not develop into recognizable human being. They would not be able to talk, perhaps even to walk, to laugh, or to understand other. In effect, they would merely be animal.

The process of socialization is mainly divided into two parts. Firstly, there is the primary socialization, which takes place between the individual and the family itself. It relates to the transmission of culture, norms and values from one generation to the next one. Gradually they learn to internalize the correct pattern of behavior, and girls are encouraged to follow the behavior of their mother while boys will be encouraged to imitate their father. Secondly, there is the secondary socialization, where socialization is being shaped by the mass media and school. Children learn proper behavior for girls and boys through parents, the media, the school and other sources of socialization

Gender role socialization may be define as a lifelong process whereby individual learns to internalize the values, attitudes, motivations, and behavior according to their sex which is acceptable and which is regarded to be fair in their culture. Gender role socialization takes place from earliest childhood through adolescence and throughout all social interactions in which we participate.

As soon as a child is born, the members of the society begin to influence and mould the child’s beliefs and personality. What changes human beings from animals into the social actor (a term to describe people living in society) whom we recognize as member of society, is the process of socialization. This socialization process begins in childhood, but continues throughout life. The growing child, through contact with others of the society, gradually learns the language, beliefs and behavior of the group in which he/she is brought up. The values and behavior of groups vary, so that the socialization process is different from one society to another.

The growing up of boys and girls, that is, members of the different sexes; their socialization process is not the same irrespective of different cultures we may have (Commonwealth of learning, 2010).

Boys and girls are socialized differently, which can be explained by the “gender socialization”. That is; boys and girls are expected to behave differently, that is according to their gender roles. Task assignment is generally based on the appearance of the genital and the society’s expectation of gender role from different sexes (Wallen and Hasser, 2009) For example: boys are encouraged to play with gun, making him understand that he has no right to fear, but he should rather be strong and aggressive. Whereas, girls are encouraged to play with dolls and kitchen sets miniatures. This is to make the girls understand that she has to be docile, submissive, caretakers, and so on. This is how gender socialization is being socially constructed.

Hence, the gender roles are socially constructed and are considered to be classified in a hierarchical manner, as a male-advantaged gender hierarchy (Wood & Eagly, 2002). The roles that are attributed to men, were often those that make them superior, in form of getting access in controlling resources and in the decision making power, rendering men not only superior dispositional attributes via correspondence bias (Gilbert, 1998), but also higher status and authority as society progressed.

1.3 Problem statement

The process of socialization is a must for each individual in order for him/she to be able to inculcate the society’s norms, values and culture. But, socialization according to sex differentiation, it reinforce gender inequality in our society. Hence gender socialization is being socially constructed and it shows these gender inequalities which had ever been taught to the children since childhood and they develop stereotypical conceptions of both genders, and begin to use these conceptions to organize their knowledge and behavior. Therefore, the enlargement of gender inequality is increasing day by day without arousing anyone’s awareness and this seems to be normal.

1.4 Aims:

The aim of this dissertation is to study how gender socialization within the nuclear family reinforces gender inequality between the rural and the urban within the Mauritian society. It is the study how gender roles are assigned to both sexes and how it impacts males’ dominance and women’s subordination.

1.5 Objectives:

To conduct a comprehensive literature review on gender socialization and gender inequality.

To analyze how gender socialization between boys and girls differ within family.

To determine the unconscious trend within family and its direct impact on gender inequality.

To investigate about the relation this may exist between gender socialization and gender inequality, in the Mauritian Society.

To propose recommendations and this may help to reduce gender inequality and how to improve gender socialization.

1.6 FLOW OF DISSERTATIONS

Chapter 2 focuses on the literature review and gives insights and ideas about gender socialisation and gender inequality, about different views and perspective, different researcher and in the context of Mauritius. This chapter provides profound discussions about how these technologies have become a must in the life of these teenagers.

Chapter 3 provides a complete description of the approach of the approach of the research methodology. The techniques to collect the data within families are also presented. The difficulties encountered in gathering the data are also pointed out.

Chapter 4 presents the analysis and findings from the data collected from the respondents and give an indication about the main issues emerging from this topic.

Chapter 5 ultimately concludes the dissertation and deals with the recommendations.

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.0 INTRODUCTION

In literature review section, it will be based on many researchers’ views and analysis, which will explain the relationship between gender socialization and gender inequality. We will see if ever the process of socialization between boys and girls are the same, and if “no”, therefore to which extent it is differ. Different researcher will explain as well the relationship between gender socialization and gender inequality.

Gender socialization is the way how males and females are socialized differently, according to their specific sex and specific task are assigned to specific sexes, which gradually leads to gender inequality.

2.1 Theories on Gender Socialistion and Gender Inequality

According to the functionalist (2012), they argued that gender inequality should exist in a society. Women’s role is to stay at home in order to socialize their children, so that society can progress. Parson (1955) called the role of women within the family as expressive. Therefore it is their duty to stay at home and to take care of their children. Parsons (1995) argued that women are more suited to stay at home and to look after the socialization of the children because they give birth and are naturally closer to their children. The fact that women give birth and become mother is an important relationship towards their children. The functionalist also stated that children are psychologically damaged by the absence of their natural mother or mother substitute, during their early years. Therefore, men and women are socialized in different ways in order for them to learn their roles when they will become adult (Macionis, 2000).

According to Talcott Parson (1955), inequality should exist in our society. It is for the benefit of women due to the expressive role that they are assigned. Thus, referring Oakley (1974) argument on gender socialization which enlarges gender inequality in society, but according to Parson (1955) viewed on gender inequality; the process of gender socialization should be continued.

A study of Murdock (1949), a functionalist, in 224 societies, argue that man do hunting, heavy work and engage in welfare, while women do the gathering, cooking, repairing clothes and carrying water. This result from practical reasons that men are stronger and they are not burdened by pregnancy and nursing children. Murdock (1949) argued that there are sexual divisions of labour that exist between men and women due to their biological differences.

On the other side, Gilman (2012), they argued that the gender inequality had develop since childhood, through the process of socialization, where boy are encourage to be aggressive whereas girls are taught to docile. They state that the female subordinate on society, result from the emergence of private property (Engels, 1972). In order to pass the wealth, men need to control women; to impose their power (Engels, 1972). Therefore, according to Marxist (Sharon Smith, 1997), women are exploited at work and as well at home, because of the capitalist society. The Marxist and the Socialism (n.d.) theory argued that in order to stop the gender inequality, the capitalist society must be replaced by the communist society. This is because; there will be equal opportunities and no discrimination for neither toward males nor females.

Gender inequality has been due to the process of gender socialization (Gilman 2012). In Mauritius itself, a friend of my dad, living at Camp de Masque Pave, owned a field of pineapple. He said that in his field and in general, women are paid less than men even when they are both performing the same job.

2.2 Biological v/s Social Constructions

There is difference between sex and gender. Sex refers to the biological differences of their genital between both males and females. Whereas gender, it is socially constructed and both males and females are expected to have different behavior rather than being the investable result of biology. Kessler and Mckenna (1978) argue that the way to which society sees people as male or female: the society is already molding the gender role of males and females.

According to Kessler and McKenna (1978), they study how both males and female are differently allocated. Through the studying of transsexuals, this reveals that people who seen biological normal but who feel themselves to be members of the opposite sex. Normally gender and genitals are equated with each other: the connection between males and females are taken for granted. There is lots of evidence which are puts together so that a gender attribution can be made by the observer. People with the appearance and behavior of a female or male will simply be assumed to have appropriate genitals.

The existence of transsexuals means that this assumption is not always accurate. Biologically males, sometimes live as, and are accepted as females.

How then do people decide what gender another person is? According to Kessler and McKenna (1978), there are four factors:

Content of manner of the speech

The way, into which people communicate, both verbal and non verbal communication, are taken into account. Some male-to-female transsexuals have socialized themselves to appear as women and by putting more inflection in their voice and by having more mobile facial movement when talking. Some will [resent themselves as “miss”, to settle any doubt there might be in an observer’s mind.

Public physical appearance

Another important factor in gender attribution is public physical appearance. For ex., female-to-male transsexuals may disguise their breast by wearing baggy clothing or by using strapping.

Past life

The past life’s information that people may provide will help in determining gender attribution. Again, transsexuals have to be careful to avoid suspicion.

Private body

Usually there is a problem in keeping the body covered, but transsexuals may need to avoid certain situations (such as visiting beaches or sharing rooms with others) if they have not change their sex physically.

Talking on the identity of a sex to which they do not belong biologically is difficult and demanding for the transsexuals. For most people, hormones, chromosomes, genitals and gender attributed to them will all coincide. Nevertheless, the exception studied by Kessler and McKenna (1978) demonstrate that even the most basic division; that between male and female, can be seen as being socially constructed.

Kessler and McKenna (1978) argued that process of socialization is still encouraging and enlarging the sex inequality. Even if the society is fighting for gender equality and women’s right, however if the socialization process is not revised, it will be difficult to have gender equality.

2.3 The concept of masculinity

Masculinity had been described as the right way of being an adult male in your society, and the gender socialization of each society varies, Gillmore (1990), argued that masculinity is not only determined by sex but is socially constructed as well. . They state that answer to manhood is linked to the culture of society.

Gilmore (1990) suggests that there are three typical features of masculinity found in the most societies:-

Man: the impregnator

Men’s role is to impregnate women. Therefore, men are expected to take the decision in courtship and sexual encounters. There in competition between men for access to women. Gilmore (1990) give an example in the Turk Islands in the South Pacific, “the Trukese man must be the initiator, to orgasm time and again”. If he fails, the women laugh at him and him and the man is shamed. In Sicily, a real man must have big testicular.

Man: the provider

Men are expected to provide for them and their off spring. In the Mediterranean, Gilmore (1990) argue that “the emphasis on male honor as a domestic duty is widespread” and moreover, in the traditional Greek peasant village, the honor of the fathers rests upon their ability to provide their daughters with large dowries.

Man: the protector

Finally, the way to which men are look like, is the protector. Being only the impregnator and the provider is not enough. They must be a protector for their family as well. Men must protect his family from any dangers and other men where threats may arise. Gilmore (1990) another example, that is in the Sikh Jats of the Punjab adhere strongly to the concept of Izzat, which is a philosophy of life which reflects their paramount concern for male power, in which “a man’s duty is to be stalwart in the defense of his family”.

2.4 Gender Socialisation between males and females

Oakley (1974) stated that how gender socialization in our modern’s industrialization society mold the behavior of boys and girls in different ways, since childhood. She argued that that there are four main ways through gender roles are assigned:

Firstly, there is the manipulation of self concept Oakley (1974), for example: pink color is given to girls whereas blue color is given to boys.

Secondly the direction of girls and boys towards different objects and toys are being canalized in different ways Oakley (1974). Boys are encouraged to play with guns and cars, while girls were encouraged to play with dolls and domestic appliances miniature. Thus, trough canalization, boys are encouraged to have more power than girls, while girls are encouraged to be more docile and caretaker.

Thirdly, there is the “verbal appellation” Oakley (1974), such as “naughty boy” and “beautiful or good girl”. Therefore, these verbal appellations make children identify themselves as a girl should be good and a boy can be naughty.

And finally, different sexes are direct to different activities Oakley (1974). For example: girls are encouraged towards domestic task like cooking, and boys towards masculine task, like washing cars.

Gender socialization starts at birth. It is the process where the individual learn the culture, the norms, and the right pattern of behavior of the society, according to their gender. The process of socialization shaped the behavior of the individual. Different treatment was given to different sexes. In other words, the behavior of boys and girls were dictating by the society’s beliefs, norms and culture. A small story: a young lady will have her first child. When people asked her whether she prefer either a boy or a girl, she has no preferences. There was a grandmother who was near to here, simply reply: “Oh, hopefully it will be a boy” (Unicef for Children, n.d.) Gender socialization take place in an unconscious manner, that people don’t even realize that later, it often leads to male dominance and female subordination; that is gender inequality. At an early age, children start to differentiate between male and female. Boys are expected to be brave, have no fear, no cry, unassertive and strong. Despite, girls are taught to be assertive, kind, docile, submissive and “ladylike”. Consciously or unconsciously, there gender inequality as a result gender socialization towards girls. As result, female are being discriminate in term of care they receive toward the availability to “nutritious foods and health care”, thus it creates a feeling that they have to be treated differently than males.

2.5 Culture and socialisation

Patriarchy is still dominating because it is mostly a transmission of culture in our society and it is very difficult to stop gender inequality. Hence, if socialization was made equally between male and female, there would be no patriarchy society. The process of gender socialization between boys and girls, consciously or even unconsciously, it is leading to an enlargement in gender inequality.

Four factors will be explained by Germaine Greer (The Whole Women, 2000), and this will show how patriarchy is maintaining:

Men are more advantageous in sexuality compared to women, that is sexual freedom are for the benefit of man. “There is still and overwhelming emphasis in heterosexuality on the penetration of the vagina by the penis, and an increasing expectation that women will service male sexual fantasies”. The more subtle and varied ways which women gain sexual pleasure are neglected.

Society is still encouraging women to be obsessively concerned with their physical appearance and public image that is to be well dressed and have a well toned figure. For example, women have to shave their legs and their armpits so as to match to the norms and cultures of the society.. In other words, women are simply not allowed to be themselves.

Male dominance leads women in a position so that female to be afraid of man.

Men hate women. Women have very little idea about this hatred. Males’ hatred toward women is a norm. Greer (2000) will argue that “all men hate some women some of the time” and “some men hate all women all the time”. According to her research, she reveal that a quarter of women have experienced domestic violence from male partners. Greer (2000) gives some examples where McDonald was “viciously beaten, raped and attacked with a rusty pick by her male partner”. Furthermore, Jacqueline Newton was attacked by her husband, “who poured hydrochloric acid and paint stripper over her”.

Gender socialization, is shaped by the society itself. Different societies have different ways in the gender socialization process. It depends from cultures, norms and values. Gender socialization, referring to men and its masculinity, there is only a few who attached different meanings to it. Societies can work with a wide variety of definitions of masculinity. For example, in “Djibouti, Mbouti, the concept of masculinity does not require men to be providers and protectors. In Tahiti, men are encouraged to be timid and passive just like women” (Gillmore, 1990).

Hence, the gender socialization starts till birth and it is a continual process. For example: in the east African Samburu tribe (Haralambos and Holborn, 2004), males have to demonstrate their mascunility by showing that they are braves, which is during their adolescents, at the age of 14 to 15. The first test is a circulation ritual which is performed without anesthetic. The boy must not flinch, despite the pain as his foreskin is cut off, or “he is forever shamed as a coward”. Later in manhood the male proves himself by rustling cattle from other tribes, this runs the risk of being caught and beaten or even killed by the victims of the rustling. However, it confirms that the male has become manly; it makes him attractive to females, and shows that he will be able to take care of a family.

It is the culture who will decide whether to encourage gender inequality or not. This will be done through the transmission of the socialisation process, which is transmitting from generation to generation.

2.5 Mauritian Culture: Gender Socialisation v/s Gender Inequality

Mauritius long ago, in the traditional society that is for my grand parents or even for my parents, these differences was clearly shown. It was argued that the patriarchy role will be given to their son, which is the inheritance of the father to the son. The father will bring the son to the field, hence; the role of the father is gradually delegated to the son and also all the welfare of the family, it will be the son who will possess it. Whereas the main role of the girl is to stay at home, to help the mother, to learn to cook, to do household chores, to be a care taker. All these are the process of socialization, according to their appropriate gender. It is the son who will inherit all the wealth and property after the death of his parent, whereas the girl had learned to be submissive, caretakers, because one day she will leave his family and get married. She will become a wife and have to manage her household; afterwards a mother and will have to take care of her child. This is the example of my family itself, that of the generation of my parents and my grand parents. Hence, this resume a bit about what Parson (1955) had argued according to the female’s gender role.

In Mauritius, the emerging labor market needs skill and qualification in the scientific and technological field which many of the qualified women do not possess. According to Cartel (1994), he surveyed on Mauritius, revealed that women were far from occupying an equal position with men in the labor market. This means that there is skill discrimination in terms of wages towards women.

From Cartel’s (1994) research itself, the percentage of women’s participation in the labor force is 44.5%, lower than men. It is noted that within the manufacturing sector, women are largely concentrated. There are both vertical segregations, where men are generally at the top level and women generally at the bottom of the company, and the horizontal segregations, where the women concentrated in certain occupation which are forced to be women’s job, for example; secretary’ nursing, pre-primary school’s teacheraˆ¦ That is why according to the process of socialization, female gender are taught to be docile, care takers, hence this will help her in the future, for ex. in her job as a nurses.

With the process of gender socialization, the state, whether, internationally and locally, had found the gap between men and women and they acknowledge that there is gender inequality in our society. This had been caused due to the differences in the process of socialization between both male and female. Therefore, some policies had been taken in order to reduce the gap between both sexes.

I will base myself in line with the Common Country Assessment, Mauritius (May 2000). In 1995, Mauritius has signed an agreement with the Commonwealth Plan of Action on Gender and Development in regarding some measures which should be implemented in order to meet the objective of gender equality.

Since 1998, in order to decrease the gap between the both sexes, a Gender bureau has been implemented by the Ministry of Women, Family Welfare and Child Development (MWFCD), through the Gender Management System.

In recent years, women in Mauritius, was mainly depending on their husband. Many were illiterate and they were found within the primary sectors, in the agricultural and textile industry. Furthermore, even if there are at the secondary sector, still women are occupying second position in their particular sector. Job with a high wages, like, prime minister, director, CEO, and so on, it is mainly reserved for men.

2.6 Conclusion

Even measures are taken to reduce gender inequality, the problem is: if gender socialization is not revised, male dominance will continued. Through gender socialization, the patriarchy society is still maintaining. To have gender equality, socialization between boys and girls should be quite the same; otherwise, working toward gender equality would be in vain.

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
3.0 Introduction

Socialization is a must for each and every human being. But societies are fighting against gender inequality, because gender socialization favored mostly male. Sex discriminations and gender inequality is one among the social problem and a main cause gender socialization. Thus it is becoming an alarming problem and this is the main reason of conducting such a study. The study is being carried out into three steps:

Definition of research objectives

Development of research plan

Collection of information

Once the objectives have been specified, a most suitable research plan is devised so as to collect the desired information. The design of a research plan basically rests on:

Locating the most appropriate data sources.

Devising the right research approach.

Using the most relevant research instrument.

Adopting the most unbiased sampling procedure.

3.1 Data Sources

In this research, the information to be gathered will be qualitative nature since it deals with gender socialization as quantitative method will also be used to facilitate our research, since based on how boys and girls are socialized, and gender socialization in relation to gender inequality. Harmmersley (1996) argues that while we used both methods like qualitative and the quantitative it helps to cross check the findings produced by the other methods.

In order to gain a better understanding of the current situation to the extent on how gender socialization may lead to enlarge inequality, both secondary and primary data do necessary, in order to gain a better understand of the subject and to have a good groundwork to build on when collecting primary data.

3.2.1 Secondary data

Secondary data is the data that have been already collected and accessible from other sources. The aim was to use as relevant and updated information as possible. In this study, the secondary data were obtained were from the University of Technology’s library; from previous studies made by undergraduates and postgraduates, from textbooks, and from publications and journal articles; like EBSCO and Emerald.

3.2.2 Primary data

Primary data is data that has not been previously published that is the data is derived from a new research study and collected at the source. Thus the aim of our research is to come out with a primary data; about a study on how gender socialization contributes to gender inequality within the extended modified family.

3.3 Qualitative Research

A qualitative research method is know as a category type of research model herby data in the form of descriptive narratives like field notes, recordings or other transcriptions from audio and videotapes and other written records or pictures or film analyzed.

3.3.1 Strength of qualitative research

A qualitative research method allows researcher to have an in-depth study of a social unit.

Researchers normally use the qualitative research methods since they exemplify a common belief that they can provide a ‘deeper’ understanding of social phenomena than would be obtained from a purely quantitative data. Hence, it helps to generate new theories.

Qualitative research helps to recognize social phenomena which have been ignored by most or all previous researchers and literature. In other words, the aim is to present people on their own terms and tries to represent them from their perspective.

3.3.2 Drawbacks of Qualitative Research

Normally it is difficult to generalize the problem under a qualitative research method as fewer people are studied and the sample is limited compared to a quantitative research methodology. As a result, the study cannot be representatives and it is difficult to aggregate data and makes systematic comparison.

Moreover with a qualitative research method the problem arises when the researcher goes categorizing the events or activities described. In other words, this is known as the problem of reliability. Reliability refers to “to the degree of consistency with which instances are assigned to the same category by different observers or by the same observer in different occasions” (Hammersley, 1992:67).

As qualitative studies provide readers with little more than brief persuasive data extracts, the problem of consistency particularly arises because of shortage of means.

Also there may be the problem of validity in such research studies. Validity is another word for truth. Sometimes one doubts the validity of the researcher has clearly made no attempts to deal with contrary cases.

3.4 Triangulation

It is the use of both qualitative and the quantitative methods. Harmmersley (1996) argues that while we used both methods like qualitative and the quantitative it helps to cross check the findings produced by the other methods. In my study, I am using the qualitative method, but quantitative method also will help me in achieving my objectives of this dissertation.

3.5 Reasons why opted for “modified extended family”?

I would like first all to define the “modified extended family”. In twentieth century, in Mauritius, we have mostly the modified extended family, and fewer the other types of families; that’s why our study will base on the socialization process within the modified extended family. The modified extended family is types of family which is similar to the nuclear family, having two generations living under the same roof, but they maintain regular contact through regular visits, phone, social networks, letters/mails (even they live in the Mauritius or abroad), on living the same yard but different houses, or in the same street.

3.6 Research Approach

The most suitable approach to this particular study was t

It is crucial to gain an understanding of what social construction is, in order to assess its influence on human bodies. However it is difficult to operationalise social construction in literal terms. Social construction encompasses a multitude of elements, Hacking (2002) notes, ‘social construction is a kettle of many very different kinds of fish’. Typically however, social construction is concerned with the ways in which society has conceptualised ideals and expectations, looking at this in relation to specific areas of sociological interest. For sociologist when looking at the body their main concern is with ‘the process of… transforming a biological entity through social action’ Chris Shilling (2003).

‘Members of a society construct their bodies in ways that comply with their gender status and accepted notions of masculinity and femininity. That is, they try to shape and use their bodies to conform to their culture’s or racial ethnic group’s expectations’. (Lorber and Martin 2005)

This essay will look at the ways in which the body is a social construction, with particular focus on the extent in which individuals in society are willing to perform to socially constructed ideals. It is important to recognise that social construction of the body is a global phenomenon; however this essay will look at westernised social construction of the body in particular.

By looking primarily at the social construction of femininity, a subject which has typically been theorised extensively when looking at the body, an attempt will then be made to look at the social construction of masculinities and the aging body, in relation to the complex role that society’s expectations have to play.

The body is often seen as something which is ‘straightforwardly biological, ‘natural’ and given.’ (Macionis and Plummer, 2005). Unsurprisingly different types of bodies can be seen in terms of shapes, sizes and physical build; however there is an increasing notion of what aesthetically is socially acceptable, with women in the media industry in particular being promoted in a certain way. ‘In affluent Western societies, slenderness is generally associated with happiness, success, youthfulness and social acceptability’ (Grogan, 1999). This notion could be said to have largely contributed to the fact that, increasingly, women are dissatisfied with their bodies. For Grogan (1999), media, as an industry, depicts the ideology that slenderness is preferred. This factor no doubt, has impacted the rise in eating disorders and women’s willingness to have cosmetic surgery in modern times, in order to fit such ideals of slenderness which are conceptualised in magazines and television programmes. ‘In western culture dieting, breast enhancement and face-lifts are ways that women have changed their appearance to fit ideals of feminine beauty’ (Kivisto, 2005)

Grimlin (2000) looks negatively at the role of cosmetic surgery, as a multi-million pound industry, with the notion that women’s bodies are treated as commodities, ‘Cosmetic surgery stands, for many theorists and social critics, as the ultimate symbol of invasion of the human body for the sake of physical beauty.'(Grimlin 2000). This view could be criticized, in the idea that many women who choose to have surgery, rather than to fit in with social constructions and therefore demands of society, do so in order to express their own personal individualism and identity, perhaps advocating their rights of freedom to adapt their own body if it pleases them to do so. Featherstone and Turner (2001) note ‘Bodies have become the ultimate vehicle for writing ones identity.’; this looks at anything from the clothes and makeup an individual wears, to self decoration through tattoos, piercings and cosmetic surgery. It is questionable to what extent women ‘self decorate’ in order to fit the stereotypical views of social expectations of what is ‘beautiful’, or to oppose these views of conventional attractiveness, both however implicitly relate to the body as a social construction, either in a way that conforms to, or rebels against ideas of socially constructed beauty.

Sexuality is closely linked with that of the female body, with socially constructed expectations of sexual femininity, ‘Women are expected to be nuturant and emotionally giving, willing to subordinate their own desires to please men and their own interests to take care of children, Therefore women’s bodies should be yielding and sexually appealing to men when they are young and plumpy maternal when they are older.’ (Kivisto 2005). This mass of generalizations, and assumptions, (that women are heterosexual, that all women want children, that women will forget about their own pleasures to please men), highlights the typical socially constructed views of western culture. It is therefore important to notice a change in women’s sexual role through feminist ideas which reflect a modernized culture, with a new type of woman emerging in the 21st century. Through ‘promoting sexual autonomy’, feminist’s attempt to, ‘advocate women’s control of their sexuality and reproduction.’ (Macionis and Plummer 2005), making their bodies less socially constructed to please male expectation.

It is interesting to look at the social construction of the body in relation to the process of aging, as commonly, especially in traditional thesis, the bodily aging process has been referred to as a biological one, without consideration of its social relevance,

‘Popular stereotypes about old people, usually centered around the inevitability of old age and its manifestation as physical decrepitude from which culture irrelevance could be inferred. Old age was therefore out-side the social because it was an essentially biological process.’ (Tulle-Winton 2000).

With this in mind, Christopher A. Faircloth (2003) looks explicitly at the social construction of the aging process on people’s bodies. Reinserting that older bodily images are ones which are to be looked at with equal importance to younger women. Faircloth (2003), gives a detailed examination of the sexual attractiveness of older aged women (than that which is traditionally conceptualised in the media), concluding that there need to be seen as sexually attractive is still of extreme significance. Faircloth looks at the visual representations of older women through the realms of film and photography for example, with specific reference to a loss of sexuality in the representation of the older generation in society. Similarly Itzin (1986) states, ‘Rarely are women portrayed as capable and independent, never as sexually attractive’, (with the word ‘women’ in this case, referring specifically to that of older women). Itzin notes that societies construction of what is sexually attractive is rarely looked at in relation to that of the older generation.

When looking at the social constructions of femininity and the aging process, it can be seen that menopause is often reflected which considerable negativity, with the term being one which has connotations of a loss of sexuality and the idea that a noticeable change on the youthfulness of a women’s body can be seen. These socially constructed misconceptions, suggest that the menopause directly affects a women’s body, creating wrinkles and bodily sagging, which biologically is not the case (Winterich 2003). In a bid to maintain the socially constructed body which is considered attractive, characteristically one of youthfulness, merchandise, such as hair colouring products, anti-wrinkle creams and an increased number cosmetic surgeries can be seen to be endorsed by the older generation, (Craig Thompson 1995).

Traditionally much theoretical focus on the social constructions of body, has been on that of femininity; however the social constructions of masculinity can be considered similarly,

‘western societies expect men to be aggressive initiators of action and protectors of women and children, therefore their bodies should be muscular and physically strong’, increasingly ‘Men life weights, get hair transplants, and undergo cosmetic surgery to mould their bodies and faces to a masculine ideal’ (Kivisto 2005)

This observation of men in the 21st century shows masculinity of the body to be concerned with that of aesthetic pride in a similar way to women, however there is less pressure on the male community to fit the mould of these constructed ideals.

A modernised new man is also represented to fit the ideas of social construction, with the coinage of the phrase ‘heterosexual male’ to highlight the increased notion of male grooming as acceptable in society.

Inevitably this essay only looks at a small spectrum of the features that contribute to the body as a social construction, however a lot can be seen on how the body is effected by the views of society, a body which conclusively is not only ‘biologically constructed’ but also socially.

Discuss with reference to psychoanalytic theories of masculinity.

It is widely argued that Western Societies are currently witnessing a crisis of masculinity. The status of masculinity is changing and this is partially due because the society is changing economically, socially and especially in relation to the position of women. These changes also affect the sphere of consumption and popular culture.

I will examine at first how Freud places a great emphasis on the early relationship of the young boy. This relationship will have important consequences for development. According to Freud, this relationship is overshadowed by the oedipal conflict. Secondly I will go through Klein’s theory about the relationship between the boy and the mother. Contrary to Freud, Melanie Klein emphasis the powerful maternal figure. After that I will explain how masculinity is shaped by social and cultural theories; how and why masculinity is changing. “Masculine” identity as it has been seen formerly within patriarchal cultures as evolved into a new “male”. The roots of a crisis in masculinity are analysed in social theories in terms of a conflict in gender roles. Cultural theories, which intersect with Lacan’s idea, are also important in how the crisis in masculinity has been studied. The rise of feminism has surely encouraged many men to question how they view women. Now that feminism has attacked the patriarchal systems of power and control, masculinity has been left undermined and unsure. Finally I will give an overview on how masculinity is view between men.

To evaluate how masculinity might be in crisis, it is first necessary to examine how psychoanalytical theories assume that boys gain their masculine identity; or in other words how they become men. Freud’s ideas about masculinity developed in three steps. The first one is the idea of continuity between normal and neurotic mental life, the concepts of repression and the unconscious, and the method that allowed unconscious mental processes to be read through dreams, jokes, slips of the tongues and symptoms (Connell, 1995). Freud understood that adult sexuality and gender were not fixed by nature but were constructed through a long and conflict-ridden process. Freud places a great emphasis on the early relationships of the young boy with his parents or caregivers. It is the vicissitudes of these relationships that will have important consequences for development. In Freudian terms, this early relationship is overshadowed by the oedipal conflict. The Oedipus complex is characterized by the desire for one parent and hatred for the other. For boys, the Oedipus complex is the rivalry with the father and terror of castration. Here Freud identified a formative moment in masculinity and pictured the dynamics of a formative relationship.

Freud argued that homosexuality is not a simple gender switch and “a large proportion of male inverts retain the mental quality of masculinity”. The second step in Freud’s analysis of masculinity is the development to gender. He goes further by saying that masculine and feminine currents coexist in everyone. In his final stage, Freud developed his account of the structure of personality, in particular the concept of the superego. The superego is formed in the aftermath of the Oedipus complex, by internalized prohibitions from the parents. Freud gradually came to see it as having a gendered character, being crucially a product of the child’s relationship with the father, and more distinct in the case of boys and girls. This provided the germ of a theory of the patriarchal organization of culture, transmitted from one generation to the next through the construction of masculinity.

The most important processes that occur in early life that influence the construction of the male identity is the oedipal complex. According to Greenson (1968), the idea of disidentification is divided into two processes: firstly a boy must sever the emotional ties he has with the primary caregiver, usually the mother, and secondly he needs to identify with a male role model, usually the father. The role of the father in the masculine identity is seen as crucial by psychoanalysts. Horrocks (1994) sees the role of fathering as an introduction to manhood. He also identify one of the most important functions of the father as to show the young boy that it is possible to live with the mother, to have conflict, fear and guilt. According to Horrocks, the modern damage male is seen as “unfathered”.

The boy’s entry into his ‘masculinity’ can only be achieved through his castration complex which sets in motion his separation from his mother and identification with his father. Freud (1925) explains the castration complex by a few stages. First, the young boy believes that everyone has a penis. Secondly, he discovers that women do not have penises and assumes that they have been mutilated. Thirdly, when he begins to masturbate, he is told that he will be castrated. Fourthly, when he finds that the breast has been removed, he believes that the penis will be next. The Oedipus complex is abolished by the fear of castration.

In contrast to Freud, Melanie Klein argues that is envy of the mother rather than rivalry with the father that impedes psychic changes. The relationship between the boys and the mother has been left undeveloped by Freud. Disagreeing with Freud, about his account of oedipal feelings in relation to the father, she argues that the first signs appear in relation to the mother. In fact, according to Horrocks (1994) the young boy is surrounded by feminine presence throughout his early childhood, and it is important for him to break away and discover a world of men where he can gain his roots of male identity. The central paradox is that men want to escape from womanhood but there is also the desire to become close to a woman. For Klein, ‘masculinity ‘and ‘femininity’ are biologically determined and reinforced during childhood in opposition to Freud who believes that bodies and minds are structured through patterns of cultural power. Klein assumes that the concept of the womb envy is an important component in the male psyche. Minsky (1995) describes how the Kleinian point of view sees the development of male power as being rooted in the fear of the womb. Besides his envy of his mother’s breasts, the young boy also becomes envious of her womb and the power it give to create life. According to Minsky (1995), the phallus saves men and provides a distraction from the womb envy. Klein’s concept of womb-envy is important to understand male misogyny. Boys envious of their mother have to accept that they can never have breasts or a womb. Unconscious womb-envy helps to explain the opposition between ‘nature’ (identified with women) and ‘culture’ (identified with men). Men have to opt for culture because nature, in the sense of giving birth and feeding children from their own bodies, is simply unavailable to them (Minsky, 1996).

Is the notion of a crisis in masculinity new, or it is just that each generation experiences it in different ways? The evidence has been suggesting the latter. As Mangan says “Crisis is…a condition of masculinity itself. Masculine gender identity is never stable; its terms are continually being re-defined and re-negotiated, the gender performance continually being re-staged. Certain themes and tropes inevitably re-appear with regularity, but each era experiences itself in different ways.” (Mangan 1997:4).

Cultural conceptions of masculinity and femininity vary between cultures and alter over historical time. Cultural theories, which intersect with Lacan’s ideas, are important in how the crisis in masculinity has been studied. According to Lacan, the phallus is the central signifier of the sexual difference. The principle of masculinity rests on the repression of feminine aspects and introduces conflict into the opposition of masculine and feminine. Faludi (2000) described the new male as objectified and subject of a sexist consumer culture. In addition, he believes that the man’s secured attachments and relationships with the workplace are no longer powerful and exclusive as they were. Now that the rise of feminism has attacked the patriarchal systems of power and control, masculinity has been left undermined and unsure. Apparently, this rise has left men confused in the way they view women. Faludi strongly believes that this crisis in masculinity can be resolved if both women and men can work together to combat it.

There are a number of contributory factors to the so-called crisis in masculinity. I will be describing some of them.

Maguire (1995) point out that men’s crisis concerned their social role and identity. For her, these uncertainties manifest themselves in violence, increased levels of suicide and abusive behaviour towards them or others. Men are more likely to commit suicide than women. Suicide appears to be triggered by relationship problems, unemployment, drug and alcohol abuse, low self-esteem and mental illness. Many men remain bad at acknowledging and expressing feelings which left them trapped between the old-style macho and the new-man type behaviour requiring a man to be in touch with his feelings.

Social research finds that men are choosing to remain living at home rather than move out on their own (Office of National Statistics, 2000). Whitehead (2002) found out that this evidence prove that men are failing to cope with the new challenges they are facing.

Society is moving from a patriarchal culture, to give way to different masculinities. The rise of feminism, changing family patterns, social concerns about jobs contributed to these changes.

The advent of post modernity has resulted in redundancy, constant job role changes and unemployment for men. According to Beynon (2001) men now suffer deep depression at the loss of the breadwinner role and the status that went with it. He claims that men are falling out of family life in greater numbers and may end up lonely. More men end up isolated socially and psychologically, finding it difficult to ask for help. At least 50% of marriage in UK result in divorce and as Beynon found out men is mostly responsible for marital breakdown.

Nowadays, women have demonstrated that they can bring up children without men. Clare says that “the rise in the number of single mothers suggests not merely that men are inadequate as partners and fathers, but they are simply redundant. Women are asserting that they can convince rear children on their own. They don’t need men to father their children…women can do without them in the workplace. Even more significantly, they can do without them in their beds.” (Clare 2000:100).

A significant number of fathers involved in divorce leave the family home and become non-resident. “The visiting father is a shadowy, displaced figure trying to avoid becoming an ex-father, who stops but does not stay, who is no longer a man of the house, but a visitor who come and goes.” (Clare 2000: 150-1).

Women are seen to be living more successful and fulfilling lives, without relying on their partners. So, the loss of patriarchal authority and the equality in heterosexual relationship have left men disoriented.

In other way, is the notion of a crisis in masculinity new, or it is just that each generation experiences it in different ways? The evidence has been suggesting the latter. As Mangan says “Crisis is…a condition of masculinity itself. Masculine gender identity is never stable; its terms are continually being re-defined and re-negotiated, the gender performance continually being re-staged. Certain themes and tropes inevitably re-appear with regularity, but each era experiences itself in different ways.” (Mangan 1997:4).

The policy exchange think tank makes a compelling argument, for change is needed in such a time of economic uncertainty and Britain’s housing crisis could become stagnate and a generation could pass before resolve is found. The housing minister in England Grant Shapps said the proposal from the policy exchange was ‘blindingly obvious’ but on the other hand Former Deputy Prime Minister Lord Prescott described it on Twitter as ‘sanctioned gerrymandering’ (The Guardian Monday 20th August 2012 http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/aug/20/sell-social-housing-fund-homes) I believe a lot of things have to go to plan for this to follow through, planning procedures, cost of production and lack of delays, its al well and good making this suggestion but I believe its slightly flawed, I do agree with aspects but with the overall plan a lot more research would need done.

Hosing associations have come down very hard on this recommendation to create the largest social house building programme since the 1970’s’ the National Housing Federation described the idea as ‘fundamentally flawed’, some working people cannot afford their own home and with this recommendation warns these people will be out priced even in the private market. National Housing Federation chief Executive David Orr said, ‘It could effectively cleanse many towns of hard working people who simply cant afford the high prices of buying or renting privately'(Rural Services Network 21st August 2012 http://www.rsnonline.org.uk/community/flawed-plan-to-sell-social-housing)

All government has flaws, no matter who is in place, the conservatives who are in a coalition with the Liberal Democrats at this time do not benefit the poorer parts of society. From the 1980’s when Margaret Thatcher was in power it seemed to be the case with social policy the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer, when Labour came back into power near the late 90’s I believe they did their best to even out this unfair balance within social society, now that the conservatives are back in power they have not changed their ways, with this policy recommendation the poorest in society will unfortunately bear the effects of this.

Labour claim that the tories are failing to build social housing for the poorest people, under coalition government new social build and has falling by 91%, from 35;600 to 3,305 so for this policy think tank to suggest that 170,000 homes could be built between 2011 to 2015 is a mad suggestion giving that this 91% fall could not just be a one off for one year. Labour believe lack of planning permission and funding may not cause an upsurge any time soon. Also giving that the coalition government cut the capital grant for social housing by 63% in 2010 so why the sudden change in creating the largest social building programme since the 70’s? (http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/aug/28/tories-failing-social-homes-labour)

To back up the claim of this report not helping the poor, the report suggests that it will ‘raise tenants standards of living’ but it does not highlight which tenants and which background they may come from, again John Prescott mentioned on twitter that the report amounted to trying to ‘kick the poor out of the rich areas'(http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/08/20/policy-exchange-report-social-cleansing-council-homes-new-builds_n_1809141.html). I know in Northern Ireland we have had a divide for many years but this report seems to be causing a divide of a different sort one that could eventually have major effects on society in the future.

To back my evidence up more, Liberal conspiracy highlights how the recommendation would make the UK a miserable place to live, with conservative not noticing social housing the last couple of years why is there a sudden urge to become involved in it? It highlights 4 factors why this would make the UK a miserable place the first factor being that communities that are mixed are more at peace with themselves and could live in harmony in an easier way. The second factor being segregated communities make it harder for poorer people to commute to work and would cause a lot more congestion and emission of vehicle fumes. Third factor being that once the social housing is sold it is almost certain that all the money wont be re invested back into social housing and the final factor being that this could cause a political advantage when it comes to elections. All of this worries many parts of society who cannot afford such housing in the future. ( http://liberalconspiracy.org/2012/08/20/policy-exchanges-latest-idea-would-make-the-uk-a-more-miserable-place/)

The policy exchange asks why this idea had never been thought of before why has no one ever suggested this? Well as Jules Birch of Inside Housing explains that it conflicts with policy in the regeneration sector in areas throughout England, it would affect social divisions within education with the sale of housed ‘the good schools’ will become more socially divided and education opportunities will be missed by other children. Most importantly it completely conflicts with any government attempt to maintain mixed communities. (http://www.insidehousing.co.uk/inside-edge/6502506.bloglead?yearmonth=2012.08)

From my own point of view politics destroy society even if a government aims to do good for society in England there is always going to be opposition to a good deed, I believe money is good but money can also mean greed. And selling the housing would generate a great amount but I would not be too sure if that money would be re-invested back into social housing. This can be really frustrating for people especially those with financial difficulties. It’s obvious that the best quality homes are not going to be the cheapest and with the conservative ideology, people from poorer backgrounds cannot be confident with selling off such a large stock of social homes. For society to be equal compromise has to be made in terms of education, type of shops available, and essentially housing and for this document to possibly cause segregation in this area then government has to take a long look at themselves before passing this through Westminster. With a coalition not only one but two parties have to see eye to eye for clarity to be reached in this issue.

Each constituency has different priorities, so MP’s are voting in by how that area lives and what is needed in the area but since the coalition began some politicians have been caught in the middle of a storm, this is especially the case for some Liberal democrats such as Simon Hughes where his constituency is full of social housing and in the past he has had very strong views in this area. But his problem is not the conservatives but his own party colleagues who may back the proposals along with the conservatives, the problem for Simon Hughes is that there is support coming from Liberal democrats such as Andrew Stunnell so Simon may have a political mountain to face in the future. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/wintour-and-watt/2010/nov/22/simon-hughes-council-housing)

Each chapter that is highlighted in the policy is more of a statement of intent rather than a certainty, chapter one does make a valid point with a need for more social housing but is there only one solution? Chapter two states that the public does not agree with expensive social housing and want more homes, this is more a twist on words than the public demanding social housing to end. Being able to define ‘expensive social housing’ in chapter 3 is a very vague term and for taking the expensive housing to be from the ‘half way point of all properties’ I believe that this ideology to be wrong. The next chapter states that ‘20% of social housing is expensive’ is that really such a bad thing? Their proposal wouldn’t really help expenditure costs or saving costs in the future. As for chapter six saying that there will be no negative effects. The way it says it ‘could’ build 80,000 to 170,000 homes is a very vague statement it is a massive uncertainty. The final chapter says ‘wider economic effects are positive’ I don’t believe it is with the strategy that is set out and the fact that the policy think tank says that pushing reform though will help this process makes it even more laughable.

This talk of the ‘Big Society’ is a fairy tale story with the proposals to social housing and the impact of Welfare reform and the ‘bedroom taxes’ which means people may have to downsize their property to they are not hit with an extra charge, there may be a problem in this area given the fact that there is a lack of single social housing occupancy so people will not be able to downsize and there is a problem with the imbalance between the North and south of England with the overcrowding taking place in the south and under occupancy in the North. A blog on the Red Pepper site highlights what they believe what is happening and what they see the future to be, “a carefully planned PR operation by the Conservatives who dominate this Coalition to hide their real intentions of aggressively continuing and deepening the long-term assault on social housing and the welfare state that in many ways defined the Thatcherite project of neoliberalism.” (http://www.redpepper.org.uk/how-the-conservatives-ruined-social-housing/) It is as if the conservatives have always had this plan in the pipeline and it was just a matter of time before they unleashed their idea of a better future for society, but all of society does not agree.

Overall it is clear to see my stance on this policy and my view of the possible future within society in England, common sense has to prevail at some stage, I do understand that there will be people who back this policy and have their arguments for this. Everyone is entitled to their opinion on this topic. At the same time I think it is a good thing that this was released because it has now become a hot topic and people are becoming more and more passionate about social housing, so even though I may not agree with the Think tank, they have at least put effort into the issue so it can become a serious issue and lots of debates will be held to resolve this issue. All this is possible but with another election not taking place until 2015, there may be scary times ahead for those who are the poorest in society.

Topic: Critically examine the development and changes of social values of welfare held by Hong Kong people before and after 1997. What are the factors affecting the changes?

Welfare is “all collective interventions to meet certain needs of the individual and/or to serve the wider interests of society may now be broadly grouped intoaˆ¦ categories of welfare” (Titmuss, 1959). The development in the social values of welfare has always been changing throughout the centuries, particularly the 20th century. In traditional Chinese society, people used to believed that social welfare, or “fuk lei”, was given by kind-hearted philanthropists in society (N. Chow, 1994, p.325). In the early 20th century, the concept of social welfare was still very weak among Hong Kong people. Majority of welfare services were provided by non-government organizations before 1965 (W. S. Chow, 1993, p. 41). The situation changed after the publication of the white paper of the social welfare in 1965. Together with the rise of social worker, more people consider social welfare is part of their civil rights in the following decades. In 1997, the change in sovereignty of Hong Kong and the Asian financial crisis brought a significant impact on the social values of welfare. In the following paragraphs, I will briefly discuss the development of social welfare in Hong Kong and the corresponding social values of welfare, particularly the changes before and after 1997. As will be argued, there are both long term and short term factors that led the changes. The former would be the increasing consideration of civil rights and the latter would be the Asian financial crisis in 1997, the change in sovereignty of Hong Kong and the publication of Comprehensive Social Security Assistance (CSSA) Review.

In the early 20th century, majority of people considered welfare was given by kind-hearted philanthropists in society. As Hong Kong was a colony of Britain at that time, the colonial government put their focuses on protecting the British’s interest, particularly the British merchants. Hence, the living environment and welfare of local Chinese were not concerned by the colonial government unless it interfere the interest of British. With this colonial background, local Chinese rationalized the concept of “welfare would not be given by the colonial government”. The Chinese merchants “used their wealth to establish and maintain their reputations and leadership roles through acts of charity” (Leung, 1996, p.3). They set up organizations and gave welfare to the locals. Among these organizations, Tung Wah Hospital was the most noteworthy charitable organization which catered the medical services and welfare needs to the locals. Apart from these organizations, churches and clans’ man association would also give welfare to the locals too.

In the post World War II period, the situation had a slightly change. In the post war period, a large number of non-government or voluntary welfare organizations were set up in Hong Kong. It is important to note that most of these welfare organizations had their parent-bodies overseas. A typical example of these organizations would be the Hong Kong Red Cross. “During this emergency period, the internationally-linked welfare organization had probably done much more than the government in meeting the welfare needs of people” (N. Chow, 1994, p.324). Although the concept of “welfare is given by kind-hearted philanthropists” was weaken, “the majority of the Chinese in Hong Kong are still unable to wipe away the traditional notions of welfare and accept the modern idea that it should be the responsibility of the state to provide the necessary social welfare services” (N. Chow, 1994, p. 325). Meanwhile, a large proportion of population was refugee from mainland China (Due to the civil war in China). Part of them considered Hong Kong is there temporary shelter but not their home. Hence, welfare development would not be their consideration as they expected to leave Hong Kong soon. These factors made there were only little pressure groups would fight for the rights for the locals in that period.

The situation further changed after 1965. In 1965, the colonial government published the White Paper on social welfare. N.Y. Chow (1993) suggests that “to be exact, the beginning of social welfare policy of Hong Kong was after the publication of the first White Paper on social welfare in 1965” (p.41). The White paper was the first government document that discusses social welfare policy in Hong Kong. It explained the welfare development and integrated the experiences from the development. Also, it gives the stands of colonial government toward social welfare policy and reasons that made the government cannot implement comprehensive social policy in Hong Kong. Although the White Paper has been blamed for lacking in-depth discussion on the blueprint of social welfare development and the foreseeable challenges, but this White paper gives a foundation for the further development of social welfare system (W. S. Chow, 1993). The concept of “social welfare” and “government” were no longer dissevering like the past. More people started to integrate “social welfare” into the role of government.

The most rapid change was found in the 70s. There were two major factors that led the change, the “Big Bang” of social policy and the rise of social worker. The “Big Bang” of social policy was initiated by the 25th governor of Hong Kong, Murray MacLehose. “After MacLehose take office the governor in 1972, he had a strong sense of responsibility towards social welfare, under his influence, amendment of social welfare policy was necessary” (W. S. Chow, 1993, p. 52). Apart from it, the increasing social problems (i.e. the riot in 1966 and 1967, Corruption) led the demand for government’s involvement in social welfare further increased. These factors urged the publication of the second White Paper of social welfare in 1973. The aim of the White Paper was giving a five year plan of social welfare development and dividing the responsibility in providing social welfare between government and voluntary organizations. The aspects of social welfare in the five year plan included education, housing, medical service, social allowance, youth services etc. The comprehensive expansion of welfare services increased the involvement of people in social welfare system. The value of “welfare would not be given by the colonial government” was further weakening in this period.

Apart from the “Big Bang” of social policy, the rise of social worker also led to the significant change in social value of welfare. The rise of social worker could be traced back to the professionalization of social work and the implement of professional training at the University of Hong Kong and the Chinese University of Hong Kong in the mid-1960s. In the 1960s, “Fabian Socialism was the most fashionable approach taught in the social work schools of the two universities” (N. Chow, 1994, p.327). Equality, freedom and fellowship are the central values of Fabian Socialism. The social work students in 60s and 70s were strongly influenced by these values. They had a strong sense of “working towards a more equal and justice society”. Hence, when the students became social workers in society, they would try to advocate policies that achieve to these two ideals. More people would consider welfare as a means to achieve an equal society. Meanwhile, the young social workers at that time also stressed on civil rights. They believed that social welfare is one the important parts of civil rights. When they graduated, they would educate and advocate the public to uphold their civil rights through different social actions. As a result, under this influence, it led to the rise of the awareness of welfare system as rights enjoyed by citizen.

Another significant change of social values of welfare could be found in 1997. The major factor that led to the change is the Asian Financial Crisis in 1997. Before the crisis, the economy in Hong Kong was at boom. Majority of people were actively investing in property market and stock market. At that time, people emphasized on material values and short-term time horizon. “Material values are the major criterion used to evaluate the worth of things and people” (C.K. Wong, K. L. Chow & K.Y. Wong, 2001, p.68). Meanwhile, majority of Chinese investor were looking for the maximum benefit in the shortest period of time.

Topley states that many Chinese still prefer to invest in non-industrial property and trade because of the relatively quicker return of capital and profits.

When investing in industry, the overwhelming desire of investors is to look for quick profits by whatever means present themselves as attractive in the short run rather than to look for opportunity for starting long-term investment. (as cited in Lau, 1982, p.70)

As both of the property market and stock market were so flourished, the economic environment enabled people to achieve the above goals simultaneously. This in turn led Hong Kong became one of the wealthiest cities in Asia. The living standard in Hong Kong was one of the highest in Hong Kong history in the early mid 1990s. As most people could sustain their life in the market, they put less consideration on the welfare system. At that time, people would consider social welfare system was only for those who were in need in society, like elderly and disabled people. In other words, despite the underprivileged and the corresponding pressure group, majority in society would not care about the welfare system as they believed they could achieve self-sustentions in market. In general, social welfare development was overwhelmed by economic development at that period.

But a significant change was provoked by the 1997 financial crisis. A great depression in both stock market and property market was provoked by the crisis. Lots of people were bankrupted because of the suddenly fall in the property market. Also, a massive unemployment was accompanied with the economic downturn, particularly in the financial sector. The decline in consumption led to further depression in other non-financial sector. The financial crisis brought two major impacts on the welfare system. First, it led to a significant fall in the tax income of the government. Second, more people fall into the safety net of the welfare system. In other words, it led an increase in demand for welfare services. Simultaneously, it would increase the welfare expenditure of the government. As these two factors happened at the same time, this brought heavy pressure on the financial budget of the government.

At the same period, the sovereignty of Hong Kong changed back to China. One of the problems that foresee by the government is the increase in immigrants from China. In the review report of CSSA that published by the Social Welfare Department, it suggests that the increase in mainland immigrants would lead to an increase application for CSSA. It implies that the government believes that a number of mainland immigrants would rely on the welfare system for livelihood. Before the publication of the report, the government already spread this ideology through news and government press. At that time, the government disclosed different abusive cases of CSSA by the new immigrants. This made the public also be believed the new immigrants would bring pressure to Hong Kong welfare system.

The economic downturn, mainland immigrants, together with the foreseeable aging population, these made the government believed a review for welfare system is necessary. As the government wanted to tighten the budget for social welfare expenditure, the publication of the review report was a means of government to the public support. This report brought a momentous impact on the social value of welfare. In particular, there were more people believed that abusive cases are common in the welfare system after the publication of the report. For example, the report suggested the level of benefits for four-person household is high. The average monthly payment for a four-person household increased in 120% from 1980s to 1990s. But the median wage of workers only increased 41%. The government suggested that this would create disincentive to work and lead to long term dependency on welfare system. According to a survey, 36.4% of respondents believed that “the increasing number of CSSA cases because the criteria for application is too lenient” (C.K. Wong, K. L. Chow & K.Y. Wong, 2001, p.5).

Although the way and method that government used to interpret and present the statistics had bias and hidden agenda, majority still believed that CSSA was breeding lazy people. Since CSSA has a strict income test and asset test, statistics of Suspected Fraud and Abuse was minimal. But the mass media created a negative image of CSSA recipients as they only reporting fraud and abusive cases. This, in turn, created a strong labeling effect on CSSA recipients. In a survey, 40.8% of respondents agreed that “CSSA recipients are not deserved to be help” (C.K. Wong, K. L. Chow & K.Y. Wong, 2001, p.9). This reflected the fact that CSSA recipients were stigmatized.

Apart from stigmatization of CSSA recipients, the role of welfare that interpreted by the public is also worth to discuss. Compare with giving direct welfare, people considered that self-reliance would be more appropriate. In a survey, 70.3% of respondents believed that “people should satisfy their needs through self-reliance”. On the other hand, only 8.6% respondents believed that “people should satisfy their needs through social welfare” (C.K. Wong, K. L. Chow & K.Y. Wong, 2001, p.30). The development of the concept “self-reliance” could be explained by the Utilitarianistic Familism. Utilitarianistic Familism is social values of the Chinese people in Hong Kong (Lau, 1982). Chinese people would put the interest of family member in a higher priority over others. The bonding of the family members was strong. In addition to the extended family structure in the early mid 20th century, people would not look for help from government; rather, they would look for help from family members. As most problems could be solved without the help of government, it contributed to the development a sense of “self-reliance”. This concept is particularly prevailing value hold by the older generation (i.e. Those who born in the Post War Baby Boom).

From the above discussion, we can see two sets of contradictory social values of welfare have developed in Hong Kong. On one hand, more people consider social welfare as their civil rights. On the other hand, people stigmatize some welfare recipients. It makes the rights of accessing welfare become alienated from the civil rights. These two contradictory values lead to different conflicts in society. Social workers, pressure groups and non-government organizations are striving for destigmatization of the welfare recipients. Lots of social actions like social demonstration and public forum are used to promote this civil rights. But at the same time, the government is attempting to marginalize the welfare recipients in order to reduce the welfare expenditure. From time to time, the government would publish the fraud and abusive case in CSSA. It seems that it wants to remind people that “abusive cases are still common in welfare system”. These, in turn, led to never-ending debates between the two interest groups.

As seen in above discussion, it is hard to find a consensus towards the value of welfare in Hong Kong. The historical background, personal experiences and education would have a strong influence on the development of our value. But it seems that government would spread concepts and ideas that deviated from the principles of social welfare – equality and equity, because it’s political agenda. Whether the ultimate goal of government is bring a stable and harmonious society in Hong Kong is questionable.