Author: Andre Coleman

Education is just as an important factor in a persons’ life now as it was in the past. Only, the difference between now and the past are the people that are able to receive a complete education. Education was gender segregated for hundreds of years. Men and women went to different schools or were physically and academically separated into coeducational schools. Both had separate academic subjects, separate classrooms, and separate expectations. Women were only taught the social graces and morals, and teaching women academic subjects was considered a waste of time. Men had the choice of continuing education after high school, while women had the household choices ranging from what to wear to what to cook. By being educated for the sake of family and society which needed educated mothers to produce knowledgeable and responsible male citizens, it was expected by men and society that women were to have children, raise those children, and to be the best homemaker. Although today, everyone is entitled to the right to peruse an education, sexism is still maintained in obvious and subtle ways. Ways in which show that gender inequalities are and have been shifting into a more female advantaged educational system.

The inequalities between girls and boys are apparent even before a child begins elementary school. Girls are first introduced to the idea that they are unequal to boys, with girls being dressed in pink and given dolls for toys, while boys are dressed in blue and given toy cars and trucks to play with. Even different behaviors are acceptable for boys than for girls. For example, every time teachers seat or line-up students by gender, they are confirming that girls

Page 2

and boys should be treated differently. While girls are distinguished for being neat, calm, and quiet; boys are urged to think independently, be active, and voice opinions. Girls are socialized in schools to believe popularity is most important and that educational performance and ability are of lesser importance. “Girls in grades six and seven rate being popular and well-liked as more important than being perceived as competent or independent. Boys, on the other hand, are more likely to rank independence and competence as more important” (Bailey, 1992).

According to Dr. Sax, author of the book Why Gender Matters, what parents and teachers should really know about, is that the brain develops differently and is wired differently in each sex. In girls, the language area of the brain develops before the areas for open relations and for geometry. Emotion is processed in the same area of the brain that processes language making it is easier for most girls to talk about their emotions. But for boys, the area involving talking and the areas involving feelings are completely separate. Girls and boys also respond differently when it comes to stress. While stress increases the learning ability in males, the same exact stress actually makes learning more difficult for girls. Ignoring these differences between the male and female mind can increase the chance of misunderstanding among the youth and thus lead to dissocialized outcomes.

Research shows that one is born with either a male or female brain and that nothing can change your brain from male to female. The lay-out of a young boy’s brain is so different compared to that of a young girl that it is easily visible with the naked eye. An example of how a male brain functions differently than that of a female can be seen through a task as simple as

Page 3

giving directions. While the male tends to use distances and directions such as east, west, north, and south to map out the path, it is easier for women to use simple reminders such as landmarks.

Knowing how the brain works has a lot to do with knowing how someone learns; it is where everything is stored. When it comes to learning, boys and girls do not learn the same way at all. Psychologists have found that girls set higher standards for themselves when it comes to school, and they look over what they have accomplished more critically than guys do. Recent evidence even shows girls becoming more academically successful than boys, despite reviews showing how boys and girls are still socialized in ways that work against gender equality.

“Because classrooms are microcosms of society, mirroring its strengths and ills alike, it follows that the normal socialization patterns of young children that often lead to distorted perceptions of gender roles are reflected in the classrooms” (Marshall, 334). Gender bias in education is reinforced through lessons, textbooks, and teacher interactions with students; as well as, through the resources teachers choose for classroom use. For example, textbooks that leave out contributions of women or those that stereotype gender roles. Teachers should be aware of the gender bias hidden within such materials and texts and discontinue their usage.

“We need to look at the stories we are telling our students and children. Far too many of our classroom examples, storybooks, and texts describe a world in which boys and men are bright, brave, curious, and powerful, but girls and women are passive, silent, and invisible (McCormick pg. 41).”

Page 4

Girls enter school in the first grade with the same skills and ambitions as boys, but due to biased conditioning in the classroom, they suffer lower self-confidence and aspirations by the time they graduate from high school. Even though, two out of every three teachers may be women, they are usually for sexual stereotypes, favoring the assertive male students and the non-assertive female students. Typically, teachers call on boys more often, give them more detailed criticism, and compliment the quality of their work more than girls’ work, while more likely complimenting girls for their neatness. Such bias and stereotypes sparked ideas into many people over the injustice of these outcomes and because of this, equal education was a major theme to write about among many authors.

Mary Wollstonecraft, a female writer in the late 1700s, took a firm position toward the empowerment of women. In 1792 she wrote A Vindication of the Rights of Women, which revolves around the idea that women should share equal rights with men relating to education. At the time, women were basically still invisible and secluded from outside activity and they had little to no contact with the world outside their own homes. In order for women to raise well-rounded intelligent children, Wollstonecraft suggested that mothers needed to be educated so that they could successfully raise their children to become contributing members of society (Wollstonecraft Para. 11). She pleaded that women should reject submissive behavior and educate themselves, building up their own self- esteem and respect, which would turn women into “more affectionate sisters, more faithful wives, more reasonable mothers-in a word, better citizens” (Para. 16). The education of women would have these positive effects because women would be free from restriction, allowing them to find happiness in sharing common interests with

Page 5

their husbands and allowing mothers to assist in the teaching of their children (Para. 14). Wollstonecraft felt that if women had independence in providing support for their own needs that they would be closer to their entitled freedoms and equality, as well as marry for love instead of support.

Daniel Defoe, also a famous writer, expresses how women were taught to do housework and nothing else throughout his essay The Education of Women. “Their youth is spent to teach them to stitch and sew or make baubles. They are taught to read, indeed, and perhaps to write their names, or so; and that is the height of a woman’s education” (Defoe Para. 2). Defoe thought that if women were taught more than housework, then they may gain more wit. He talks about the possible reasons that men had to not educate women and expresses that if men were to give women the same education, women could possibly be smarter than men as “the capacities of women are supposed to be greater, and their senses quicker than those of men” (Defoe Para. 4). Thus, Defoe believes, men fear women battling for superiority resulting in his views of still restricting women’s education. He limits their education to just learning music, dancing, learning the French and Italian languages, teaching women to hold an intellectual conversation, and learning history. Obviously, these are not the only things that men were educated in.

The passage of Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 banned single-sex education in American public schools, marking a huge landmark in the fight for gender equal education. It states, “No person in the U.S. shall, on the basis of sex be excluded from participation in, or denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any educational program or activity receiving federal aid” (Hansot pg. 19). Before Title IX, women

Page 6

were not allowed to be admitted into certain colleges because of state laws prohibiting all women, married or single, from being accepted into their college. Only eighteen percent of women had completed four or more years of college compared to twenty-six percent of young men. Women were also less likely to be in high math or science classes and tended to drop out of school more than males.

After the passing of Title IX, the effects on women became immediately clear within the educational system. The dropout rate of females as well as the number of females who became pregnant declined. There was a significant increase in the completion of bachelor, graduate and professional degrees. By 2004, women were earning 58 percent of all bachelor’s degrees in the United States and according to the Department of Education, the gender gap will only widen in the upcoming decade. “It certainly seems clear that when women are provided with certain important resources and with opportunities to learn and practice specific skills, their academic achievement improves” (Pollard pg. 104). These significant increases in statistics show how Title IX has opened many new opportunities for females.

Title IX was originally enacted to impact high school and collegiate sports; although, it does not specify due to the statute covering all educational activities and complaints alleging discrimination. The statute shows how women can be just as successful as men by allowing both to have equal opportunities. It has made a large impact on the lives of many Americans today, by allowing them to make decisions and choosing any school they would like to attend. It applies to almost everyone, whether you go to an elementary school, or a university or college.

Page 7

From all of this, it is clear that women have fought hard for the educational freedoms they are destined to have, but is it possible that women are changing the educational system more to their advantage? Researchers Thomas DiPrete and Claudia Buchmann seek to answer this question and discover the reasons for the growing gender gap. They explained how greater chances of getting and staying married, higher wage earnings, and a better standard of living resulted in the growing number of women achieving success in higher education.

According to data from the General Social Surveys (DiPrete & Buchmann pg. 522) which provides information on educational accomplishment and family background, in individuals born prior to the 1960s, daughters were only equal to sons in families where both parents were college educated. Whereas, in less educated families and female headed households, parents favored sons over daughters. Surprisingly, the female disadvantage was even greater in households where mothers had more college experience than fathers.

For those born after the 1960s, the male advantage began to decline. DiPrete and Buchmann note, “A shift appears to have taken place between these two periods such that the mothers’ level of education has become more important for daughters and the fathers’ level of education has become more important for sons”(pg. 523). Their research shows that after 1966, the status of fathers within the family became a main influence in forming the educational outcomes of girls and boys. In families where the father was absent or only high school educated, a continual shift has occured, changing from a male advantage to a female advantage. Boys growing up in such households had, and continue to have, difficulties in obtaining a college degree, despite the fact that prior to 1966, a father’s education did not affect his son’s educational achievement. On the contrary, daughters growing up under the same conditions demonstrated the highest increases in college enrollment and graduation, further influencing future generations of women.

Throughout hundreds of years, the educational system has been an absolute patriarchal system in which the male is in control. But recently over the past few decades we have seen a shift in this control; a change in the educational system that we as a society are so well adapted to. More women are becoming more academically successful then men and are graduating with honor at higher and higher levels. This can be attributed to many the factors mentioned previously; structure changes within the educational system, women’s increase in labor participation, higher wages, the difference in each person’s learning habits and brain make-up, and the effect of background on education. Each factor influences the academic outcomes of each sex. In a society where man once ruled academia and stood as the working figure, women have progressed throughout history to weaken the male role within education among other feats. They have taken gender bias in education and weakened it for the good of the people to give themselves the overall advantage.

The word gender refers to the socio-cultural definition of man and woman, it is a way through which society distinguish men and woman. The distinction between sex and gender was introduced to deal with the general tendency to attribute women’s subordination to their anatomy. There are multiple reasons to understand the current increase in the proportion of male versus female in population across Asia. Firstly sex ratios in India have been recorded since the early 1980.the Indian scenario of female discrimination is extremely complex in view of India’s social and economic diversity: the interplay of cultural and economic factors, along with the impact of policy initiative has produced a heterogeneous situation .This complexity offers ways to better understand the mechanisms at work and to inform the policy debate on the struggle against gender discrimination.

In our society it is seen that characteristics, roles and status accorded to women and men in society are determined by sex, that they are natural and therefore not changeable. Gender is seen closely related to the roles and behaviour assigned to women and men based on their sexual differences. When a child is born our families and society starts the process of gendering. If son is taken birth than it is celebrated and the birth of a daughter filled with pain; sons are showered with love, respect, better food and proper health care. Boys are encouraged to be tough and outgoing; girls are encouraged to be homebound and shy. All these differences are gender differences and they are created by society.

Gender inequality is therefore a form of inequality which is distinct from other forms of economic and social inequalities. It dwells not only outside the household but also centrally within it. It stems not only from pre-existing differences in economic endowments between women and men but also from pre-existing gendered social norms and social perceptions. Gender inequality affects the development goals which reduce the economic growth. It hampers the overall well being because blocking women from participation in social, political and economic activities can adversely affect the whole society.

THE Indian experience

IN India it represents a clear picture about education and employment opportunities for girls. Our culture, social factor still prevents girls from getting education and employment.

In rural area the girls’ child is made to perform household and

Agriculture, cleaning the house, preparing food, and they have to perform many tasks like that. In village physical safety of girls especially when they travel a long distance to school and fear of sexual harassment are the reason s that impedes girls` education.

In the urban area, girls have some opportunities in comparison to rural area but there is also some difference in the opportunities that girls get for education and employment .Through the figure for girls would still be low as compared to boys.

In employment opportunities too, women in India today have stormed all male bastions. Be it piloting aircraft, heading multi-national corporations, holding top bureaucratic positions, leading industrial houses, making a mark as photographers, filmmakers, chefs, engineers and even as train and lorry drivers, women have made it to all hitherto considered male bastions in India.

However, this is not reason enough for cheer. For the number of girls and women who have been left out of education and employment opportunities, still far outweighs those who have got them.

Gender segration in employment

This term refer to the occupational unequal distribution of men and woman in the occupational structure sometime also called occupational segration by sex. These are two type vertical segration; describe the clustering of man at the top of occupation hierarchies and of woman at the bottom, horizontal segregation.

Many developing countries including India have displayed gender inequality in education, employment and health. It is common to find girls and women suffering from high mortality rates. There are vast differences in education level of two sexes. India has witnessed gender inequality from its early history due to its socio-economic and religious practices that resulted in a wide gap between the position of men and women in the society.

Woman’s salary in India, less than a third of men

According to the survey done by world Economic Forum (WEF) it show that a big gender gap in corporate India in the employment of women from the entry level to the top management of companies. As reported by Financial Chronicle the survey which is based on the response of 60 of the 100 best employers in India, showed that women employees held only 10 percent of the senior management positions in two-thirds of the surveyed companies. None of the companies had women chief executive officers (CEOs) and almost 40 percent of the respondents had only 10 percent women work force.

The survey show that only 4% of the companies surveyed monitor salary gab. Nevertheless 84% of the companies don’t believe that there is a wage gap while the remaining 12% do not track wage gap at all.

India stand 114th among 134 countries in the WEF’s India gender gap review 2009. It has closed 93 percent of its health gender gap, ranking 134th out of as many economies. It stands at 121st position in education gap with 84 percent and is at 127th place with 41 percent of economic participation gap. Besides, it is ranked 24th with 27 percent of the political empowerment gender gap, according to the study.

Causes of gender discrimination

1. Religion

One of the main causes of gender discrimination is gender. In many organisation woman below man only due to the different religion.

2.

LITERATURE REVIEW

1. Pandey Prahlad Kumar (2007) in his study on gender discrimination studied the Gender equity is giving boys and girls ,woman and men equal opportunities in the utilisation personal capabilities to realize full human right .according to him a country cannot realize its dream of becoming super power by doing gender discrimination. Researcher has proved that a country where there are more employment opportunities for woman tends to provide better and honest governance.

2. Pollard, Taylor and Daher (2007) said that discrimination is not only the problem of India but it also exists in a developed country like USA .the finding clearly indicate woman discrimination. In USA woman earned $45,258/year while men earned $50,250/ year, having a median wage gap of $4,965.

3. Joanne Healy and Zucca J. Linda Mid-American Journal of Business; Spring(2004) study that only 3 percent of the most highly compensated executives are female, that the position are held by disproportionately by men, and that female executive are likely to clustered in particular industry group.

4. Simon Appleton (1977) suggested that expanding female education will improve gender equity which was the outcome of the study done in Uganda. The study focused on the involvement of women in politics in South Africa and Uganda. He also found a relationship between the importance of gender equity to economic growth and traced women’s civil society in Uganda was given importance.

5. Song, Appleton and Knight, 2006 study that boys are more attend school in China than girls, is the work of scholars who worked to find the causes of the same. Boys are more likely than girls to attend school in rural China. There is evidence that gender equity is a “luxury good”; the demand for female schooling is more income elastic than that for male schooling.

6. Another study by Shellenbarger to find out the nature of work undertaken or assigned also differs on the gender ground. Boys tend to be given more physical tasks like lawn mowing and fixing things, `while girls are stuck with housecleaning and doing the dishes. Even parents who fight for gender equity in their own marriages find themselves splitting their children’s tasks along traditional gender lines.

7. The chairman and the CEO of PepsiCo, Indra Nooyi said that there was a need to educate the male population about women empowerment, besides educating the female population. “If you do not treat the women well, society will not progress.

8.

THE METHODOLOGY OF GENDER AND EMPLOYMENT
OBJECTIVES:-

1. For low income women seeking employment, one of the most critical problems is a lack of adequate skills. Therefore, the provision of skill training can meet an important practical gender need. In contrast to this, skill training in such areas as primary school teaching, nursing and dressmaking can and do meet the practical gender needs of women to generate an income and this will automatically reduce the gender discriminating.

Data collection

Secondary data – In this study I use only secondary data for literature review, situation of gender and employment in our economy.

Explain the differences between Macro and Micro sociology. Identify some of the key sociological approaches in both areas. Which do you think is more useful for studying society and why?

Giddens (1989) defines sociology in the following way: “Sociology is the study of human social life, groups and societies. It is a dazzling and compelling enterprise, having as its subject matter our own behaviour as social beings. The scope of sociology is extremely wide, ranging from the analysis of passing encounters between individuals in the street up to the investigation of world-wide social processes”. Sociology is a significant subject so it is almost impossible to know all its aspect, it is only possible to learn how to apply “sociological imagination” , that is why all the sociological theories may be broadly divided into macro and micro approaches, which will be deeper discussed and considered from each angle in this essay.

Macro sociology studies social structures, communities, big social groups, layers, systems and processes that occur in them. The social community such as civilization is the main objective of macro sociology. It is not focused on detailed analysis of certain problems and situations; its target is a complex understanding of the issue. Macro sociological approach to phenomena is associated with the social world systems and its interaction with different types of culture, social institutions (complex social forms), social structures and global processes. Mainly macro sociology concentrates on the models of behavior that help to understand society as a whole. The main concepts of macro sociology are: society, culture, social institutions, social system, structure and also global social processes. Macro sociologists argue that society is in a more priority than individual as his behavior is formed by society he was born and brought up in. Macro sociology includes several important sociological perspectives such as: functionalism that focuses on relationship between the parts of society and how aspects of society are functional and Conflict Theory which main focus is competition for scarce resources and how the elite control the poor and weak.

Micro sociology is one of the main branches of sociology, examining the nature of everyday human social interactions and agency on a small scale. Micro sociology is based on interpretative analysis rather than statistical or empirical observation. It includes a theory of Symbolic interactionism that focuses on the use of symbols and face-to-face interactions. Micro sociology appeared in the late 30s of this century and had another name – sociometry. This term is associated with Jacob L. Moreno, who was a Jewish Romanian-born Austrian-American leading psychiatrist, sociologist, thinker and educator. During his lifetime, he was recognized as one of the leading social scientists. Sociometry has got very original research methods, which are widely used as a general scientific tool in various social studies. For Moreno three the most important concepts of the sociometry were: “socius” – companion, “metrum” – measurement and “drama” – action. Moreno (1948) defines sociometry as “the inquiry into the evolution and organization of groups and the position of individuals within them.” For Moreno and other representatives of sociometry the main object of research is an existing small social groups and the most important, what characterizes these social groups is the people’s emotional relationship with each other that is forming an atomistic structure of society. Simple observations are not able to capture these relationships, but they can be identified by using specific measurement methods, particularly survey techniques and processing of data. For example: sociometric tests, sociomatrices and sociograms. This technique allows detecting the actual situations of conflict and efforts to eliminate them. The creation of sociometry has importantly contributed to the sociology and is considered to be one of the most significant achievements of sociology as a science for the entire period of its existence. The introduction of quantitative methods in sociology considerably transformed it and allowed to study with unprecedented accuracy. One of the most significant consequences of creation of the micro sociology has become the increase of interest and opportunities for social research in the study of various problems of human existence with the use of quantative methods and modern computer technologies.

Functionalists mainly focus on the “macrostructures” of society, but representatives of symbolic interactionism are usually more concerned about “micro aspects’ of social life. Also they argue that micro sociology is more useful for studying society. For instance John H.Mead and H. Blumer studied the social interaction of individuals and speculated how they manage to coordinate their actions with each other.

The Representatives of symbolic interactionism emphasize the fact that people are social beings. However, in comparison with ants, bees, termites and other insects, that are leading a social life, people almost do not have any inherent models of behavior that connect us with each other. Consequently, if people have essentially no inherent nature of the mechanisms of social behaviuor it is not clear how society can be created. Representatives of symbolic interactionism find the answer in the ability of people to communicate through the symbols. Geogre Herbert Meed (1863-1931) and other representatives of symbolic interactionism state that we perform an act by conforming to the meaning we put in it. Generally Blumer states that the meaning is not something initially related to the things, on the contrary, it is characteristic which emerges from the interaction between people in their everyday life. In other words, social reality is created by people when they act in this world and interpret events occurring in it.

Nietzsche’s 1880’s notebooks repeatedly state that “there are no facts, only interpretations.” We choose the facts from the universal context by the activity of our brain , and because of that all the “facts” are the creations of a man. Accordingly, representatives of symbolic interactionism believe that we perceive the world as constructed reality.

All this leads representatives of symbolic interactionism to the conclusion that if sociologists want to study the life of society, they must first understand the words and actions of members of this society, taking their point of view. This theory was largely influenced by Weberian concept of understanding (Verstehen) or ’empathetic understanding. This gives an opportunity to the sociologists to “mentally put themselves into “the other person’s shoes” and thus obtain an “interpretive understanding” of the meanings of individuals’ behaviours.”

To conclude, the advantage of this approach is that it introduces the “people” in the panorama of sociological research. It pays attention to the activities of individuals in their daily lives and sees that the people are not robots that mechanically carry out the orders of social rules and institutional norms but beings that are living their lives and have got and ability to think. Through interaction, they operate on symbols and meanings aˆ‹aˆ‹that enable them to interpret the situation, assess the advantages and disadvantages of certain actions and then choose one of them. Thus, representatives of symbolic interactionism suggest the image of a man as an individual, actively shaping his behavior, rather than passively reacting to external dictates of structural limitations.

Here are few differences between Actor Network Theory and Social construction of technology that I found from various analysts’ point of view.

To start with, I would like to jot down the basic difference between Actor network theory and the theory of social construction of technology. Actor network theory (ANT) considers both technical determinism and social determinism, i.e. it does not stick by the idea that technology shapes the society or the society shapes the technology (latour, Reassembling the social: an introduction to actor-network-theory, 2005). Social Construction of technology (SCOT) theory follows the ideas that technology is emerged from the social interaction of social group, which can be called social determinism. (Klein, H. K. & Kleinman, D. L., 2002)

Both of these theories involve participants in process of shaping the network or in shaping the outcome, known as ‘Actors’. Actors involved in ANT are humans and non-humans which are treated equally as separation between the two are difficult, as it cannot be said who played the major role. (latour,1997). The actors involved in SCOT are the ‘Relevant Social group’ which includes people sharing the same interest in shaping the technological artifact (Bijker, Hughes, & Pinch, 1989). Actors in ANT need to be performing constantly to keep the network flowing without any lag or hick up. SCOT does not follow a strict principle on the performance of the actors or the groups. If a certain relevant social group’s involvement or influence is less than the other group, in that case it only brings in a few changes in the outcome of the technological artifact. (Klein, H. K. & Kleinman, D. L., 2002) Talking about the aim of these theories, ANT is more about how the networks are formed rather than why they are formed. It does not predict the outcome of the socio-technical artifact at any point. These entities are known as mediators where the input by the actors cannot predict the outcome; rather it multiplies or deletes the input/object passing through network known as ‘tokens or quasi objects’. (Wikipedia) Whereas SCOT illustrates how the social surrounding which include RSG and other actors give rise to a particular artifact. Right from the beginning the outcome is predicted or decided. It acts more like an intermediate unlike ANT. It does not really matter if there are changes that come through in the social surrounding while building the artifact, the previously assumed idea of the outcome would still remain the same. (Klein, H. K. & Kleinman, D. L., 2002)

If we study ANT carefully, the actors involved in it are not just objects but an association of other elements which self constitutes a network. To look like a single point actor, these elements are simplified or ‘Black boxed’. That means the network actors are open to new ideas and their contents can be reconsidered (Gidding, 1999). The idea of reconsidering the content does not exist in SCOT. It limits the influence of the RSG once the interpretive flexibility starts to gradually diminish. This causes it to reach the rhetorical closure, thus the alternative idea of a new design is eliminated. (Klein, H. K. & Kleinman, D. L., 2002)

‘Following the actor’, this method in ANT suggest that the actors set their framework and the limits of the network by themselves. Actors in ANT are able to make their presence ‘individually felt’ by the other actors (Tatnall & Burgess, 2002). As discussed earlier, actors can be thought of as a ‘black box’, which has many actors hiding one behind other. So basically all the actors can be found at one place or it can be said that all the actors form a single point actor and this effect is known as Punctualisation (latour, Reassembling the social: an introduction to actor-network-theory, 2005). When the same method is compared to SCOT, actors are followed who are relevant to the technology and that may lead to another actor who is also relevant to that technology. The process is continued till no new actor’s pop-up. This causes the interpretation to come to a closure.

Both of these theories have a positive and a negative side of their own. The biggest drawback of SCOT is that it ignores the effect of the technology after it has come into existence by social determinism. The technological artifact might have been developed for a particular purpose. But it is hard to expect the end-users to use it the way it is suppose to be used. In that case, it means that the effect of the technology after is has come into existence from a social determinism method, is slowly shaping the society in its own way. That brings us back to technological determinism. (Klein, H. K. & Kleinman, D. L., 2002)

As we know RSG solves the technical problems, seeking solutions, etc. We do not know who decides the which group are relevant social group and with the same the social interest. It fails to include the groups that have no voice and also the groups that will be affected by the results of technological change and also the groups that have been stamped down and excluded (Prell, Christina, 2009).

It also fails to explain the circumstances where one of the relevant social groups seriously disagrees to either to the design or technological system or artifact, etc. There is no explanation on how the theory would handle the disagreements of the groups. Many critiques has pointed out on the same fault of theory that it portrays all the social groups on the same level or sharing equal authority or power. There is a slight fault with the interpretive flexibility once it reaches the closure. It does not look back for further interpretations in the future. (Hard, 1993)

Actor-network theory treats humans and non-humans equal. It has been argued by many critics that how can a non-human be assigned to be an agency. For example, a technology can only be identified because we differentiate it from human actors. Technologies do not speak for themselves nor do they exist outside of processes of human assumption. Analytically speaking there is no such non-human actor to be described by ANT. ANT assumes that all actors, which include both humans and non-humans, are equal within the network, and have the same power. This leaves no space for power instability is left. Thus the power struggles within the network. ANT case studies leads to a lot of useless descriptions that seem pointless. (Whittle & Spicer, 2005)

Another major drawback of ANT it gets very difficult to ‘follow the actors’ as the researcher would have to get into the depth of the topic for investigating a particular case without knowing where they will lead. As the actors are ‘black-boxed’, the researcher is following only one actor and would not know if it would open up further possible investigation. One of other weakness about ANT is that the actors, ANT requires both the actors to be performing constantly to keep the network flowing. Even if one fails, the whole system fails. (learning-theories, 2008)

Talking about the strength of SCOT, one of the plus point of SCOT is how it overcomes one problem by finding a better way to adopt the technology. For example. Bicycle. There was a lot of debate on the safety and the way it was built or looked. But then, the eventually they adopted it because of the fact that they were fast when it came to speed. They overlooked the problem by relating it to another better plus point to the technology. To think about it, end of the day we (humans) are the once who are going to use the technology. So doesn’t it make more sense that we shape the technology the way we want it? Based on our application we can shape the technology, SCOT is something that does exactly the same. Unlike ANT even if one if the actors fail to perform, the outcome of the system or the technological artifact does not fail. In that case that particular actor or the group will have less influence in the process of making the artifact. (Bijker, Hughes, & Pinch, 1989)

Actor-network theories main strength would be how it overcomes both social and technical determinism. This makes sense in a way because in a particular invention, it is hard to say who played the major role, humans or non-humans. For instance, let us take the example of how the laptop came into existence. If we have a look into it, the invention results from human and technology. The technical aspect of the laptop is achieved by the technical team which in-turn is influenced by the social background. Therefore, what seems to be social is partly technical and what seems to be technical is partly social. (latour, Reassembling the social: an introduction to actor-network-theory, 2005)

‘Following the actors’ might have been criticized in the case of ANT but it has its own positive side too. When compared to SCOT, it does not have to approach each and every actor of the same revelant group. In ANT all the actors act as a single point actor which can be found in the ‘Black box’. (Gidding, 1999)

Sex is defined as the biological differences between men and women whereas gender is the fashion in which society highlights the sexual differences among both species (Siann, 1994). From the moment we are born, our lives are shaped by our biological identity, which in turn, is further influenced by an unlimited number of social, cultural, environmental and psychological forces. Even when we reach adulthood, these social and psychological forces are still prevalent. Determining what it means to be male or female involves more than a strictly biological definition. Often without our awareness; our behaviour, attitudes and aspirations have been strongly influenced by the gender role expectations of our particular culture. By the time we reached late childhood and adolescence our concept of gender identity and sexual orientation is firmly entrenched (Wood, 2010). This essay will relate sex in comparison to gender and eventually how the latter develops.

The term “sex” refers to the genetic makeup, internal reproductive organs and the organization of the brain of individuals that distinguish them as male or female. On the contrary, the social roles and behaviour associated with both males and females are due to their cultural awareness and the way they were brought up (Lippa, 2005). Thus one can claim that the gender of an individual is nurtured by social, environmental and cultural factors whereas sex is a biological trait and, while it can be altered in the course of advanced surgery, it is normally believed to be fixed and determined by natural forces.

Nature has made men and women different from the very outset in their inceptions when they became human beings. Scientists in the medical field have found that the determination of basic sexual behaviours are not conditioned by society and the process of socialisation, but are innate- inherent during the very making of the babies in the mother’s wombs. The way the brain of the girl is wired, and the quantities of male hormones (testosterone) that exist in the babies are responsible for influencing this sexual difference (Williams, 2011). On the other hand gender is an existing socio-cultural model that describes social outlooks of masculinity and femininity. The gender theory suggests how society typically expects men or women to do; how they behave and what kinds of personality attributes to associate with each gender (Hutson, Warne & Grover, 2012). Thus one can assert that sex refers to biological variables and that hormones play a chief role in sex differentiation. In contrast gender refers to the cultural, social and psychological orientation of feminine and masculine behaviour.

Playing with what is considered gender appropriate toys is one way children begin to form their gender identities. When a child is between the ages of two and three, they start to acquire gender role stereotypes by the kinds of toys and games they prefer along with similar preferences for clothing, household objects and work (Rathus, 2010). When does the idea of gender begin? There are two major theories: social learning theory and gender schema theory. According to the social learning theory, children learn appropriate behaviours for each gender through concepts such as reinforcement, punishment and modelling to shape their behaviour. The gender schema theory suggests that from an early age, children develop mental categories for each gender and that underlined awareness influences what they have learned and remembered and how they apply it to themselves and others. Gender identification starts when we are troubled and continues throughout childhood and adulthood (Devor, 1989). Therefore one can claim that the social learning theory lays emphasis on how people learn from behaviours and attitudes of others to model their own. Conversely, gender schema theory explains how an individual regulates his behaviour to society’s definition of gender vis-a-vis the internalised beliefs he acquired in childhood.

In order to understand how gender identity and roles develop, cognitive psychologists highlight the significance of critical reflection process. They are keen in how children collect and grasp information about gender and how their perceptive of gender modulates. Cognitive psychologists presume that gender differences in behaviour reveal changes in how children value and reflect about gender. Kohlberg’s theory suggests that a child understands gender as he matures with age. The child thinks in distinctive ways about gender at succeeding stages and as he transits from one stage to another; he develops a complex understanding of gender. The first stage is gender identity (at age of two years), is where the child is able to properly identify his own sex. The second stage is gender stability (at age of four years) is where the child realizes that gender is consistent and stable. However, a boy at this stage might say he would be a girl if he wore a dress. It is only in the third stage (at age of seven years), that the child is aware that gender is independent of external features (Cardwell & Flanagan, 2003).

Men and women are very similar in social, personality and cognitive aspects but still that there are some significant differences between the sexes. In the area of personality, research has proven that women do tend to be more nurtured than men. Nevertheless men tend to be more assertive than women and there are some limited differences in certain cognitive abilities. Men outscore women in some tests involving spatial skills and test slightly better in mathematical ability. In areas of verbal fluency however, women scored much higher than men. These skills include reading comprehension, spelling and basic writing manner. Men are assumed to be more rational and logical and think in a very linear way. Women are believed to reject logics and rely mostly on their feelings and intuitions. Scientific evidence suggests that there are differences in the way men and women process information but that doesn’t automatically mean that a woman is incapable of doing a job that a man might traditionally do or vice versa (Carter & Seifert, 2012). Hence one can affirm that social, personality and cognitive aspects determine the differences between masculine and feminine behaviour.

To conclude; sex refers to one’s physical anatomy and the sexual orientation of a person is determined by a combination of genetic and hormonal influences. In opposition, gender is shaped by culture, social expectations and behaviours assigned to being male or female (Giddens & Griffiths, 2006).

Marx’s 1848 discussion of theoretical Communism is widely held by historians as one of the most influential political texts ever written. Its principles formed the basis of the Communist movement and offered an alternative to the growing capitalism within various societies around the world. However, many of the principles that Marx offered have been debated by political commentators and historians through the ages. For example, Cohen argues the following: “Now, there exists a debate about whether or not Marx regarded capitalist exploitation as unjust. Some think it obvious that he did believe it to be unjust, and others think that he patently did not.” (1995, p. 195).

This premise will be examined in this essay, drawing on various academic works in order to provide credibility to the argument that Marx did indeed condemn capitalism as unjust.

Before analysing Marx’s argument against capitalism, it is necessary to examine it and draw conclusions as to what the implications within the text actually are. The Communist Manifesto and German Ideology both deal with social dynamics and the interactions between capitalism, production, the proletariat and Communism. Marx actually identifies capitalism as the following: “To be a capitalist is to have not only a purely personal but a social status in production. Capital is a collective product, and only by the united action of many members, nay, in the last resort, only by the united action of all members of society, can it be set in motion.” (2002, p. 236).

As such, he actively asserts that capitalism is a manufactured state that is borne out of selfishness and the personal need to be materialistically rich. This implies that capitalism does not benefit the collective, instead being of benefit to the individual looking to climb the social ladder. Despite this, as capital is a collective notion and so this gives the impression that it can be used to benefit everyone if it is utilised in the correct manner. This would create an equality that would ensure that nobody need ever suffer within society again. In German Ideology, Marx explains why this has not yet occurred:

“…the patriarchal relationship between journeyman and master continued to exist; in manufacture its place was taken by the monetary relation between worker and capitalist – a relationship which in the countryside and in small towns retained a patriarchal tinge, but in the larger, the real manufacturing towns, quite early lost almost all patriarchal complexion.” (1970, p. 74)

Patriarchal societies had existed for centuries and implied that there was some sort of responsibility being taken for those less fortunate than the business owners, even if there was a major disparity in terms of wealth. The fact that Marx asserts that the patriarchal element of society has been removed speaks volumes about the level of social responsibility that he thought existed following the development of capitalism. The social responsibility that every individual had for his fellow man had disappeared and so it became every individual for himself, which not only led to social climbing but also led to a greater gulf between the classes than previously existed (Jacoby, 1976, p. 206). This is just one of the reasons why it can be argued that Marx believed capitalism to be unfair and unjust.

The fact that every individual became concerned with what he could get and forgot about his fellow man was just the start of Marx’s damning social commentary. The impact that this had upon the proletariat was far more profound in retrospect than anybody imagined beforehand. However, Marx predicted the unjust treatment of the waged people that Hampsher-Monk highlights:

“There was a battle to establish – against the remnants of political and economic feudalism – the institutions of a liberal and commercial state, and there was, for some others at least, the battle to establish a socialist answer to the veils of developing capitalism, the poisoning and maiming of workers and children in regulated factories, the discharge of untreated poisons, the destruction of familial stability and resulting poverty…” (1992, p. 487)

Reports of the events outlined above had begun to filter through when The Communist Manifesto and German Ideology were published but got worse after the spectre of capitalism began to grow. Those events within the quote represent just a sample of the treatment that the waged people had to experience and they aptly highlight the problems that capitalism provided them with. Unable to escape industry because they needed to feed their families, the proletariat were subjected to awful conditions for their bosses to make a profit and the latter did not care providing their own wealth grew. This is yet another example of how and why capitalism was indeed unjust. By highlighting these events and the lack of care from the higher social classes, Marx actively and effectively argues that capitalism is unjust and uses the very principles of capitalism to do so:

“It is important to remember that the assumptions Marx begins from are assumptions about capitalism taken from capitalism’s own ideologues. His is a picture of a buoyant and innovative capitalism, competitive, and with plenty of capital accumulation through profits.” (McClelland, 1996, p. 558).

By using the ideology of capitalism to frame his argument, Marx is able to highlight the social injustice that capitalism can bring within its own framework, thus highlighting the negatives that lie behind the presented positives.

Tucker also introduced the idea of capitalism actually being “legalized robbery” (1969, p. 43) because it deprives the individual worker of what he or she is actually entitled to: “…the wage worker under capitalism was being robbed of something that rightfully belonged to him, or that profit was theft” (1969, p. 39). In short, the individual worker is only paid a fraction of what his or her labour is worth under capitalism with the remainder going to the employer. As such, it is not the labour offered by the worker that proves fruitful but rather the exploitation of that labour by an individual from a higher class who never has to get his hands dirty in order to reap the rewards. This exploitation and lack of appropriate reward is repeatedly highlighted by Marx, especially in relation to wages: “The average price of wage labour is the minimum wage, i.e., that quantum of the means of subsistence which is absolutely requisite to keep the labourer in bare existence as a labourer” (2002, p. 236). This particular quote highlights how unjust capitalism actually is in relation to the present and the future. It also provides evidence that there are no just rewards available for the proletariat. Designed to maintain the status quo, much as feudalism was, it actually provides a worse situation for the working class because they become further entrenched in capitalism. There is no hope of relief because of the lack of patriarchal values and opportunity to advance in the workplace or life in general. When placed alongside Marx’s ideological system of equality, capitalism is proven to be unjust.

Husami asserts that “… no social system has ever been condemned more radically, indicted more severely, and damned more comprehensively than capitalism was by Marx. It is a system of domination of men by men, of men by things, and of men by impersonal forces.” (1978, p. 27). In doing so, he effectively makes the case for Marx arguing that man is subordinate to the machine under capitalism. In fact, this is evident within all of Marx’s political texts. The proletariat is considered to be the commodity in that it is effectively the machine. If the proletariat did not work then the machine would not work, but a machine does not have needs. A person and indeed a society does. This is another reason why capitalism is so unjust. The needs of the individual wage worker are ignored and so are in no way fulfilled. In becoming a cog in the capitalist machine, the wage worker is forced to forego all rights and individual wants and needs he may have. As Husami argues, everything becomes impersonal and nobody is treated with the respect and individualisation they deserve. In stripping every wage worker of his humanity and rendering him a faceless machine part, it is easy to ignore the individual without focusing too much on what he is being deprived of. Capitalism makes that possible and ensures that “…the threat of unemployment [is] hanging permanently over their heads” (McClelland, 1996, p. 537). This, in turn, ensures that wage workers remain in their social place and do not have a voice to use unless they come together as a collective. As such, this is the basis of the argument for the onset of Communism that Marx presents within his ideological texts. The workers have to come together in order to create a movement strong enough to overthrow the unjust capitalism.

However, not all academics agree that Marx argues that capitalism is unjust, citing that there are “…explicit denunciations and sustained criticisms of social thinkers (such as Pierre Proudhon and Ferdinand Lassalle) who did not condemn capitalism for its injustices or advocated some form of socialism as a means of securing justice, equality, or the rights of man.” (Wood, 1972, p. 244). Whilst it is true that the views of the social thinkers did stand opposed to Marx’s views, this argument can be perceived in a number of ways. For example, Marx himself denounced Proudhon because “his petty bourgeois leanings had a tendency to wish to resort to authoritarian solutions” (Thomas, 1990, p. 237). As such, it could be argued that the way in which social thinkers viewed capitalism did not match up with the way Marx himself perceived it, meaning that he neither thought it completely unjust or worthy of total eradication. In fact, it is possible to read The Communist Manifesto in a way that agrees with this perspective. For example, if “Capital is a collective product” (Marx, 2002, p. 236) then the lower classes control it as much as the upper classes do. However, even with all of the above in mind, there is too much evidence available to prove that Marx did consider capitalism as unjust. Marx’s use of language and words like robbery, embezzlement, booty, theft, plunder and usurpation betray his feelings towards the concept of capitalism for all to see (Husami, 1978, p.43). This dichotomy just serves to prove that “…capitalism can be both just or unjust, depending on one’s class interests and the conditions which determine them.” (Kain, 1991, p. 160). Marx’s perspective definitely belonged to the latter category and not the former.

In conclusion, whilst an alternative reading is possible as a result of the nature of the debate itself and Marx’s condemnation of social thinkers that followed in his footsteps, it is quite clear from in depth analysis that he believes that capitalism was unjust. His argument against capitalism characterises it as dehumanizing, disenfranchising and downright unfair based on the contribution of workers to society. Although there is no direct argument against the modernisation, there is an argument against the social condition that it imposes on the workers. In terms of the rewards that the individual gets, capitalism most certainly is unjust and the Marx argument can still be applied to society today.

In this essay I shall review The devil makes work by Clarke and Critcher. Using wider information I shall evaluate the books strengths and weaknesses and suggest implications for the sociology of leisure.

The book deals with the historical development of what we now call leisure. The change from older forms of economic markets to capitalist industrialisation forced a schism in the work/leisure relationship. “The identification of leisure as the sphere in which needs are satisfied and pleasure found simultaneously makes work less susceptible to criticism as unsatisfactory and more salient as that which has to be tolerated to ‘earn’ the freedom of leisure.”^[1]

This demarcation is seen as the principle victory, in a stream of relatively uncontested battles, of capitalism in regards to leisure. The alienation of labour is made more tolerable by leisure activities and pursuits. Work became a means to an end, leisure.

The sphere of leisure offered the ruling classes the opportunity to restrict and control workers lives further, in insidious ways, permeating what was supposed to be ‘free’ time. “If the working class wants alcohol and music, it shall have them – but only to be consumed under certain conditions.”^[2] Under the guise of caring for workers needs, and by setting up institutions of leisure, the dominant ruling classes could ensure that time away from work was spent in activities deemed appropriate. The point of this control was to ensure their productivity thus perpetuating the capitalist market.

“The establishment of leisure as consumption…has also been of considerable significance.”^[3] This was capitalism’s second great victory. The capitalist process, at its most fundamental, is consumption. By turning leisure into a commodity, to be bought, sold and used, revenue could be exploited. The irony and hypocrisy of the sphere of leisure, supposedly free of capitalist ideology, feeding that ideology with new avenues of revenue, production and reproduction, is shown by Clarke and Critcher.

The book points out the fallacy of the ‘freedom’ of leisure. “The much vaunted democracy of the market-place rests on the rather less democratic foundations of the profoundly unequal distribution of wealth.”^[4] Instead of resistance to the fact that choice is limited, nay controlled, by the market, we, the consumer, value what choices we do have all the more. Choice in leisure is curtailed by social division and unequal distribution. Clarke and Critcher indicate a direct link between the alienation of work, to an alienation of leisure, precisely because they conceptualise leisure as being a by product of what we term as work. Leisure is defined by work, caused by work and needed because of work.

Resistance to leisure models is ultimately futile. The market can not completely control how leisure products are used, the young especially tend to use them in ways never envisioned. This would be seen as resistance except, “Such strategies may modify but cannot challenge the market/consumer model. Before we can modify the meaning and use of any commodity, we must first enter the market as consumers to acquire it.”^[5]

“The major forms and definitions of leisure seem to be changing under the diverse pressures of economic recession and the transition to a post-industrial society.”^[6] The piece ends with some predictions. The current (1985) change to a post industrial society would cause mass unemployment. This unemployment would greatly impact leisure, not least because in the capitalist model leisure time is a reward for work, when a person isn’t working they receive fewer rewards.

Clarke and Critcher’s work has its place in a continuum of Marxist thought.

Simmel stated, “In this context then, the history of forms of leisure is the history of labour … The exhaustion of our mental and physical energies in work lead us to require …leisure.’”^[7] These notions support the work of Clarke and Critcher, that leisure is a reward for time spent working. The real purpose of leisure is to repair and relax the worker ready to once more be a useful member of the industrial complex.

The ruling Bourgeois idea of leisure, for Veblen^[8], was conspicuous consumption, the ostentatious display of wealth through the purchase of commodities. For Freud, it was, “ Just this ‘objectivity’ which…viewing the individual as…consumer…regarded pleasure as the consequence of possessing valued objects.”^[9] Freud depicted the Bourgeois ego as deriving its pleasure from owning commodities. This pleasure was leisure and inexorably, both implicitly and explicitly, the subordinate classes were compelled to adopt this view because, “the ideas of the bourgeois class are the ruling ideas in society.”^[10] These notions support Clarke and Critcher’s assumptions.

Clarke and Critcher state that their work, “Does not attempt to lay to rest all those complex definitional questions about what is or is not leisure.”^[11] Moorhouse raises the very salient point that one could consider it blithely ignorant to conduct research without first defining what it is one is researching^[12]. Clarke and Critcher rely on the ‘self evident’ truth of what leisure is. ‘Self evident’ truths are, quite often, less than self evident. They rely on common sense notions, but in this case sense is not necessarily common. For Moorhouse, their treatment of work is crude and their definition of leisure spurious. They refuse “To allow that paid labour can be, for most, a source of satisfaction, purpose, creativity, qualitative experience, and so on.”^[13]

Classical assumptions of the nature of work and leisure may no longer be sufficient. Clarke and Critcher themselves state that they are writing during a time of transition to ‘post-industrial’ society. If one takes this claim seriously then it has important implications. “The introduction of flexi-time and the development of human relations techniques in management have made the workplace less oppressive and monotonous for many workers…Moreover, technical progress enables paid employment to be conducted from the home.”^[14] Technology, in particular that most wide of world webs, has magnified the possibilities of working from home further blurring the lines of what constitutes work and leisure. The dualistic and simplistic account as found in Clarke and Critcher may no longer serve. Their account seems isolated in a very specific moment, a moment of change. As noted above, they attempted predictions. Mass and continued unemployment never occurred and one can question how much this fact weakens the conclusions they derived.

Some sociologists see leisure as a site for developing essential social networks, places that maintain and improve cohesion and interaction^[15]. If one considers Simmel’s conception that sociability is leisure in its, “Pure form,’^[16] then one might conclude that the development of leisure networks are a ‘morally’ good occurrence that let actors enjoy true or ‘pure’ leisure, pleasure and fun.

“Social structure may also be manipulated by the intentional activities of actors.”^[17] The Marxist based argument is one sided. The bourgeois are the active oppressors, the working class the submissive victims and there is no room for any real dialogue between worker’s and capitalist ideology. ^[18] Also it assumes that capitalist ideology is uniform and coherent. The ideological structure is rarely that simple.

Feminist theorists such as Wearing^[19] raise the issues of the problem of women’s experiences of leisure. Though raised in Clarke and Crichter’s work, their account does not, perhaps, delve deeply enough into the feminist sociological perspective. The structural and pervasive ideology of Marxism is, in many ways, present in feminist accounts, however particular attention should be paid to the fact that this ideology is exclusively the preserve of men, and is not exclusively economic. Theorists such as Butler^[20] indicate the problem of explaining women’s position in society while being forced to use the only language available, the language of masculinity. Still further Collins critiques feminism as the preserve of white women only.^[21]. “If one ‘is’ a woman then that is surely not all that one is…gender intersects with racial, class, ethnic, sexual and regional discursively constituted identities.”^[22]

In conclusion, Critcher and Clarke’s work fits very neatly within Marxist theoretical framework. As such it has the strengths, and indeed weaknesses, of much Marxist and neo-Marxist theory. Using any one methodology can leave a study exposed to accusations of one dimensionalism. This is a charge that can be levelled, probably fairly, at their thesis. Not only this, but the book, timed during a change in leisure practices, is dated and some of its conclusions are clearly inaccurate. Nonetheless that is not to say that the text is of no use as it does represent many of the dominant ideas that course throughout the study of leisure. The best way to proceed is to use all of the implications noted here, and yet others, when investigating the sociology of leisure.

Bibliography

Leisure for leisure edited by Chris Rojek. Published by Macmillan press 1989

The devil makes work: Leisure in capitalist Britain by J Clarke and C Critcher. Published by Macmillan 1985

Leisure in society, A network structural perspective by Patricia A Stokoswki. Published by Mansell 1994

Ways of Escape by Chris Rojek. Published by Macmillan Press 1993

Leisure and Feminist Theory by B Wearing. Published by Sage 1998

Gender trouble by Judith Butler. Published by Routledge 1999

Black feminist thought by P H Collins. Published by Routledge 1990

The theory of the leisure class by Thorstein Veblen. Published by The new American library 1959

Critically evaluate the research evidence in support of the contention that Britain developed an “underclass in the 1990s?
What are the main differences between the use of underclass and the concept of social exclusion and why is the distinction important?
Introduction

The idea that society was stratified and inhabited by different classes of people dates back to the thought of Karl Marx. Marx saw capitalist society as exploitative and oppressive. Marx maintained that the conflicts between those who rule and those who are ruled, would eventually lead to changes in the economic system of a society (Marsh, I et al.2000). According to Marx the blame for class exploitation does not lie with individual capitalists but is inherent in capitalist systems . Conflict and tension are also evident in capitalist systems. These are especially evident between between different groups of wage earners and between the ruling classes these would intensify due to a number of developments, namely polarisation, homogenisation, and pauperisation (Marsh, I et al.2000).

Polarisation, Marx believed, would occur as a result of increasing tension and hostility between the ruling class and the working class, within the groups individuals would become more like each other resulting in homogenisation, capitalists in their desire for expansion and workers in their reliance on work in factories rather than on traditional skills. The success of capitalism meant that wages need to be kept down and the gap widened between employers and workers. In this way workers are made poorer, or become unemployed and are pauperised. Marx believed that this would result in social revolution and the setting up of a new social system (Marsh, I et al.2000). This did not happen and such pauperization, it might be argued became the basis for what Charles Murray (1990) has termed the development of an underclass.

This paper will evaluate evidence to assess whether and in what ways an underclass may be said to have developed in Britain during the 1990s. It will also look at the main differences between the concept of an underclass and the concept of social exclusion and why this distinction is important.

Charles Murray and the Underclass

Charles Murray is an American and his theory of the underclass was originally developed in over there. He saw an increase in violent crime, a rise in the number of illegitimate births and people dropping out from the labour force, it was on this basis that he formed his theory of a developing underclass. He then attempted to apply this theory to the UK where he observed similar phenomenon taking place. Some of his views led to heated debates, particularly with regard to single mothers, during the Thatcher and Major governments and under New Labour.

Unlike America, Britain is more of a welfare state, or was at the time, and he believed that the over provision of welfare services encouraged welfare dependency and a decreasing desire to work for a living (Murray, 1989). Greater welfare provision, he argued encouraged young girls to have children out of wedlock because they no longer had to rely on a man to support them and their child. The culture of dependency that Murray identified, did, he argued, have a generational aspect. Young males growing up without proper role models ran wild and fathered illegitimate children themselves thus continuing a dependency culture.

Debates in England

His arguments were welcomed by the then Conservative Government who had already vowed to roll back the welfare state. Claiming themselves to be the party of the family (Giddens, 2001) they agreed with Murray that those who did not work should not have children. Those who did have children out of wedlock and could not support them should have their benefits stopped and be forced to give their children up for adoption. Throughout the 1990s this view was espoused by a number of British politicians who aired their views on television debating shows. Although this did not happen, successive Governments have tightened their hold on benefits purse strings and made life much harder for those who have to live on welfare benefits. This had further repercussions in policy making in the UK.

The Housing Act of 1996 was seen by many as a result of these debates and deleted some groups from local authority housing lists those people e.g. single mothers, who had been a priority when it came to local authority housing allocation, thus reducing the responsibility towards the homeless for local authorities. It also brought in the Single Persons Homeless Register, thus reducing responsibility for those who would have been seen as in priority need (Bramley et al, 2005). During this time increased unemployment left large numbers dependent on benefits. The number of those who are long-term unemployed also rose. Social changes and successive government policies has widened the gap between rich and poor. Field (1996) has argued that the actions of the Conservative Government in targeting benefits through means testing, actually increased welfare dependency and put people into an inescapable poverty trap. Field further maintains that these policies were a major factor in the development of an underclass in Britain.

However, in Field’s view the blame rests squarely on the shoulders of the Thatcher and Major governments.

The Underclass and Ethnicity

Some of Murray’s views might be considered racist, in that he claims that black people are less intelligent than whites and black women are more likely to have illegitimate children and live on benefits. Giddens supports Murray’s ideas of an underclass and (albeit for market reasons rather than the reasons given by Murray) also argues that a dual labour market is in operation and as a result of discrimination the underclass contains a high proportion of people from ethnic minorities. Much of what he has to say pre-empts Murray’s work as it was written in 1973.

Where ethnic differences serves as a disqualifying market capacity, such that those in the category are heavily concentrated in the lowest paid occupations, or are chronically unemployed or self-employed, we may speak of the existence of and underclass (Giddens, 1973:112).

Gaillie (1994) has questioned the arguments of Murray and Giddens. He disputes the idea that the underclass develops a specific culture and maintains that there is little evidence to support the existence of a dual labour market. He does however, acknowledge that the position of many people in the labour market has been weakened to the point where they are working for slave wages. While this does tend to support the existence of an underclass, Gaillie refutes the notion that such groups are forming either a class or a culture.

Murray’s Later Work

Writing in 1999 Murray observed that unemployment among young males was much higher than ten years earlier. He disputes the findings of others when he maintains that there was no evidence to suggest that this was the result of a shrinking market. He cites a rise in crime rates, particularly violent crime as further evidence that an underclass sin Britain is developing in the same way as in America. These figures are however disputed by other theorists who would argue that although the crime rate is high it has been on a downturn. He also refers again to the number of single parent families, but figures in Britain evidence that the majority of single parent families are that way as a result of divorce or the death of a partner, rather than the never married single mother. Some of what Murray has to say takes little account of other social problems that may contribute to people living on the margins of society. Some of the groups that Murray refers to might be said to be socially excluded, but this is not the same thing as an underclass.

Social Exclusion

Social exclusion is a term used in a variety of ways but is generally seen to refer to those people who for one reason or another are not fully included in the social life of a community. The reasons for social exclusion are connected, and are poverty, unemployment, and a lack of education. These are not only reasons however, where a person lives, their ethnicity, sexual orientation, or disabilities are also reasons why they might be regarded as excluded. Government recognises that they cannot tackle social exclusion unless they adopt an approach that deals with all these issues together (ODPM, 2004). However, much Government discourse tends to make little distinction between the socially excluded and an underclass because many of its documents refer to single parent families, anti-social behaviour and youth crime. This is wrong because people can be socially excluded without being part of a sub-culture or underclass, if such a thing exists. Social exclusion is a process that stops people from fully participating in society (Giddens, 2001) whereas the concept of an underclass implies that some people choose to opt out of society.

Conclusion

Although there are times where Murray presents a convincing argument, it is not convincing enough to be able to say that there really is an underclass in Britain. Too many different forces could account for the increase in the number of people on benefits, not least a shrinking labour market which Murray refuses to acknowledge, even though many theorist will agree that this is a global phenomenon. Some points that he makes could place people in the category of socially excluded, but as this paper has attempted to establish that is not the same thing as being a member of an underclass. It is certainly the case that some groups of people are a lot less fortunate than others. Many single parents are forced to rely on benefits because if they go to work they will be even worse off. The costs of childcare are astronomical. In conclusion I would say that the evidence does not support Murray’s theory of an underclass. It does tend to suggest that we live in a society where the gap between rich and poor gets wider every day. This in turn means that people are excluded from full social participation e.g. many parents cannot afford for their children to go on school trips. People who live in poorer areas go to the worst schools and so exclusion becomes a vicious circle, but that is not the same thing as saying an underclass is developing in Britain.

Bibliography

Bramley et al, 2005 Evaluation of English Housing Policy 1975-2002

Field, F. 1996. Stakeholder Welfare. London, IEA

Gaillie, D 1994 “ Are the unemployed and underclass? Some evidence from the social change and economic life initiative” Sociology 28, 3 pp737-757

Giddens A 1973 The Class Structure of the Advanced Societies London, Hutchinson

Giddens A 2001 Sociology 4^th ed Cambridge Polity

Murray, C 1989 Underclass Sunday Times Magazine I 26^th November

Murray, C 2000 Underclass+10 Charles Murray and the British Underclass 1990-2000 London, Civitas in association with The Sunday Times

ODPM, 2004. Theme 1: Supply, Need and Access London ODPM

Walsh, I ed. 2000 Sociology: Making Sense of Society. Edinburgh, Prentice Hall.

Every society is dependent on people that comprise of both men and women who are responsible for every activity that is done by them; without people society has no existence. In the 19th century, sociologists started studying relationships between society and people’ interaction with it; it is studied under separate discipline known as “Sociology”. In other words, sociology is both scientific and systematic study of behaviors of human, society and social groups; sociologists are continuously striving to study the forces which are structural and institutional to determine their impact on people’s behaviors, lives, social values along with creation of socially defined structures and institutions (Bau, 2009).

Sociology is described both as a discipline and a practice that requires various attempts by sociologists to attend this field; they have to study people’s activities to note what they are doing on daily basis. It has been rightly stated by a Greek philosopher, cited by Dunn (2010) that sociology is a science that has accumulated every aspect of human’s life; various facets of human interactions have emerged into different subjects or disciplines and that is why sociology is considered as the basics of all social sciences. According to UNESCO (2010), people prefer to assemble so that they can form families, tribes, groups, organizations, nations and communities which can even go beyond boundaries at national level.

As people decide to form groups, they have to make various conscious and oblivious choices regarding sacrifices for their freedom on individual level; at same time, various social benefits can be deduced during this process. The interdependency between individual and society is the main area of focus for every sociologist and they have been trying to study the relationship among people which is known as “social imagination”; it is a mind’s quality which develops an understanding about people in larger society’s context (Anderson, 2006).

Development of Sociology and ideological viewpoints in Sociology

As a result of changing social climate, many developments took place in field of sociology; some problems were observed in worldwide industrialization, immigration, urbanization and changes in intellectual climate and they initiated the need of finding explanations that were impacting social, economic and political sectors in United States and Europe (Dholokia & Wilcox, 2010).

The word ‘sociology’ was coined by a French philosopher “Auguste Comte” in 1839 who is recognized worldwide as father of sociology. The term “Sociology” is basically combination of Latin word ‘Socius’ which means ‘society’ with Greek work ‘Logus’ which means ‘knowledge’ or ‘science’ (Dunn, 2010). According to Auguste Comte, sociology is defined as ‘science of society’; it is the study of societies, groups and social life of humans and it is a discipline that focuses on understanding human behavior as part of social life. Comte focused on positivism which emphasizes on analyzing society by using methods such as experimentation, historical evaluation, observation and comparison. His major contribution is identification of two major areas of sociology, social statics and social dynamics; social statics focus on stable elements such as social structure that can be easily found in societies, while, social dynamics focus on changes that happen on social level. Both of these factors contributed in development of structural functionalist perspective (Bau, 2009).

Harriet Martineau contributed to sociology by introducing first and thorough sociological treaty on social life of American people and did comparison among social stratifications of America and Europe by the name “Society in America”. Her major contribution is translation of Comte’s Introduction to Positive Philosophy in English language; she even realized the need of ending inequality that existed between women and black people. Likewise, Herbert Spencer introduced the idea of evolution which was introduced before Darwin coined the phrase ‘phrase of the fittest’; his philosophy is referred to as Social Darwinism. Social Darwinism is based on the concept that societies get evolved like living organisms that evolve with time while getting adapted to environment that is changing at an accelerating rate.

Emile Durkheim did a lot of work in field of sociology by establishing it as a vital part of academic discipline. According to the sociologist, there are a lot of social bonds that exist among various societies which are classified as mechanical solidarity and social solidarity. Durkheim believed that pre-modern and agrarian societies are held together by the mechanical solidarity which is a form of social bond that ensures that beliefs and traditions shared by a group have a sense of social cohesion. On the other hand, societies that are industrial ones are held together in the form of organic solidarity which is a social bond that is based on division of labor which creates interdependence and rights for individuals (Bau, 2009).

A German philosopher Karl Marx made major contribution in sociology by working on conflict theory; he lived during Industrial Revolution era when societal changes were taking place at an increasing rate and concept of capitalism emerged from his work which is the economic system that formed basis of private organizations and sector. Marx had a viewpoint that capitalism was causing class conflict and social inequality in between bourgeoisie who were the owners of factors of production (land, natural resources, money and factories) and proletariat who were the workers. His work also gave foundation to functionalist perspective of sociology. Max Weber contributed to field of sociology by studying the shift from traditional society into modern industrial society. Weber emphasized on rationalization process by studying application of economic logic to every activity of human as a result of the development of bureaucratic society (Dholakia & Wilcox, 2010).

Theoretical perspectives in sociology

In sociology field, there are three major theoretical perspectives in which all theories are classified that are Structural Functionalism Perspective, Conflict Perspective and Symbolic Interactionism Perspective. According to Structural Functionalism Perspective, society is viewed as a social system that comprises of interdependent parts and all of these elements have to fulfill vital functions to enhance effective operation. The origin of this perspective can be traced back to works contributed by Comte, Durkheim and Spencer. According to Dunn (2010), society is composed of a system that has interrelated parts or structures that are basically large-scale institutions which form society like family, politics, education and economy; each of these various parts have to meet society’s needs and when they work together they create a whole system in the form of society.

The concept of conflict theory emerged from the works of Marx who emphasized that social change and society are the basis of social conflict. Marx viewed society with materialistic viewpoint in which people try to maintain their status quo and in order to retain the same status, conflicts arise between people. According to conflict theory, conflict arises when there is disparity in resources both material such as wealth and property and immaterial such as ideology, power and identity of groups. All theories falling in this perspective have macro-oriented view and they emphasize on the structure of society that how it is originated and functions; structure of society is mainly controlled by cultural, social and economic assets. Capital is the main element in conflict theory that enables people to get positions of power in both private and public sectors in which structures are created which disseminate their interest and power (Bau, 2009).

The most modern perspective that is shaping the field of sociology these days is Symbolic Interactionism Perspective (Dunn, 2010). According to this theory, society is similar to a stage where people are the ones who define and redefine their interpretations as they do interaction with one another. The theorists of Symbolic Interactionism perspective view interaction and interpretation or meaning as foundation of society; it is assumed that meanings are created by interaction and they are not inbuilt. This perspective has proven to be highly prominent perspective of 21st century (Bau, 2009).

It is a belief that Symbolic Interactionism is a process in which things are constructed by people as human beings behave towards concepts, values and ideas on their basis of meaning which things have for them, all these meanings are results of interaction that take place in society and they can be filtered and revamped via a process that is interpretive which is used by each individual to deal with signs of outward level (UNESCO, 2010).

Issue of diversity

As a result of globalization, mobility has increased which has created an environment in which people from various cultures, religions, nationalities, ethnic backgrounds and races are forming part of society; such diverse culture is raising demand of creation of society in which everyone is given equal and fair treatment. There are many sociological researches that have indicated that every American is acknowledging diversity importance and well-known conceptions are ambiguous that reflect more on political correctness rather than understanding the existence of diversity (Bau, 2009). It is important for people to realize that social issues cannot be viewed solely by focusing on simple terms such as good or evil, white or black and right or wrong; diversity issue can be tackled only by understanding values, viewpoints, beliefs and lifestyles of people who have different ethnic backgrounds, nationalities, races, religions and cultures.

In order to understand diversity that exists in society, research should focus to make a sample that comprise of people of both sexes, complete range of roles of each gender, wide variety of groups such as ethnic and racial, diverse range of physical and mental abilities, various sexual orientations and many representatives from various political, cultural, religious and national affiliations along with social classes (Dholakia & Wilcox, 2010). Therefore, sociologists are taking interest in various variables like age, sex, social class, race and other social characteristics such as interaction on social level and society structure in which people are living. Hence, social diversity is being studied by many sociologists so that various aspects of social life can be questioned which is the basics of sociological thinking.

Impact of media on public attitudes

According to all three perspectives of sociology i.e. Structural Functionalist, Conflict and Symbolic Interactionism, media has impacted the way in which people view groups belonging to specific race, nationality and religion; it has high power in influencing people’s perceptions about various groups. Media has both benefits and drawbacks that have affected people’s attitudes towards diverse groups. With the help of various communication tools such as Television, Internet, Newspapers, Magazines, Conferences and alike, various critical issues can be heightened such as natural disasters, instability in society and war. As a result of various media activities, passivity has been encouraged, stereotyping is promoted, people are provided fake and inaccurate information, physical activity has been discouraged and critical thinking skills have been affected to a considerable extent (Dunn, 2010).

For instance, when 9/11 incident took place, Muslims were condemned worldwide and it was imposed by media that every Muslim should never be trusted and a stereotype was created about Muslims; this image was wrongly portrayed by various mediums of communication. However, when people protested about inequality between men and women and black and white people, the government took necessary steps by passing a law that there should be no discrimination on the basis of race, color, age, lifestyle, ethnic background, religion and nationality. Therefore, it can rightly said that media has power of influencing patterns of people’s thinking mechanism and even their attitudes towards various diverse people (Bau, 2009).

Subtle cues impacting Individual’s thinking about social structures and patterns

The sociologists have rightly pointed out that media plays an increasing role in creating social structures and patters that are preferred by powerful people of the society. According to Symbolic Interactionism perspective, media has the ability of defining situation in shortest possible time; some of the most effective tools are films, videos, advertisements and posters that have been used to create images about certain groups of society. All tools of communication create subtle cues that tend to impact their thinking about structures and patterns of society. For instance, when posters related to some ethnic group are posted to highlight their role in society, they will create certain images in minds of people which form subtle cues.

Hence, in these days, various communication tools are being used in media to create awareness in the market; politicians even stage various media events so that they can create popularity of various important agenda and promote careers. Every activist organization and social movement organization has a website so that it can form images in people’s minds and promotes its mission and primary business objectives. Therefore, films and critiques even communicate information both real and overt that impact societal attitudes, patterns and structures. People get influenced by films and try to implement the things learnt from such videos in their real lives; it is vital for them to make sure that they accept right messages and implement those cultural aspects that will impact their culture. Therefore, media has played an important role in shaping societal patterns, structures and culture.

It started during the 1980’s. In the context of Philippine colonial education, Filipinos believe that scientific psychology came from the West. Murray Bartlett, an American established undergraduate psychology courses in the College of Education, University of the Philippines. American textbooks and English language were used as the medium of instruction. The good thing here is that literary writing was in Filipino language that was in dominance. Francis Burton Harrison’s policy of attraction was also introduced during this time. [1]

The works of del Pilar, Jacinto and Pardo de Tavera were rich sources of psychological theories even though they were propagandists and not psychologists. Even Gen. Emilio Aguinaldo mentioned the term “Psicologos del verbo Tagalog” in his speech. They were not title holders in Psychology but they still have this innate nature. The English language and the American system of Education were the instruments used. During the twenties American psychology teachers were replaced by Filipinos. [2]

The Philippine objection to uncritical importation of Americans’ Psychological models challenged some of the Filipinos. The first attempt was done by Sinsiforo Padilla who took over from Alonzo’s position as a chairman at the University of the Philippines. Nevertheless, it was his colleague Manuel Carreon who took the cudgels for appropriate relevant psychological testing. 1926 he published in New York his Ph.D. entitled the Philippine Studies in Mental Measurement. The arguments he presented was valid but the his wrong move was he published it in English. Nobody listened to him because during that time most of psychologists were ahead and they administered American tests. Some understood part of Carreon’s message were modified to fit the Philippine context. “change-apples-to-bananas” [3]

Isidoro Panlasigui identified the new culture of Psychology. The third generation of American brainwashed Filipino psychologists like Panlasigui. Due to this, Panlasigui admires America and it was clearly showed when he wrote about the psychology of the Filipino as he fought for the colonial language to be used.

Alfredo V. Lagmay and his colleagues were sent to the United States not to neutralize the department. Lagmay studied Psychology in Harvard where he was trained in the area of Experimental Psychology. He came back to the Philippines during the poor unrest under Hukbalahap with Luis Taruc, as the head. During that time, the Department of Psychology in the University of the Philippines was part of the College of Education. It was then Lagmay’s first move to transfer it to the College of Liberal Arts by changing the educational point of view to a more scientific basis of orientation. Experimental Psychology is now an integral part of the undergraduate curriculum in Philippine schools and it was because of him. The U.P Department of Psychology was perceived as behavioral orientation form the 50’s up to early 70’s. His students continued some remarkable and significant studies in the field. [4]

The History and Lines of Filiations in Philippine Psychological Thought
Psychology-Academic

This aspect of psychology became part of university curriculum under Francisco Benitez during 1922. It was first taught in the University of the Philippines as a part of the education curriculum. This is the period wherein several studies in psychology such as Experimental Psychology, Educational Psychology and Psychology of Advice Giving were introduced. It was said that the Western Psychology first entered the UP system but it was spread widely in UST (University of Sto. Tomas) and University of San Carlos in Cebu. During the year of 1954, Joseph Goertz established the Department of Psychology and used English as the medium of teaching. On the other hand, in the midst of its growth in Manila this discipline was also introduced as a course in the University of St. Louis in Cordillera. It was facilitated by Fr. Evarist Louis a missionary priest. [5]

Psychology-Academic Philosophy

However, Psychology-Academic Philosophy was established first at University of Sto. Tomas by Spaniards and improved by the Jesuits. This aspect was older than the aspect mentioned before. It started and founded in many universities like UST (University of Sto. Tomas) and other Spanish institutions like San Ignacio and San Jose. In such institutions the medical and philosophy courses started. The ideas and written records on that time were seen to be related to Psychology. In a deeper analysis those can contain the way of life before. It includes the language , how the “indio” perceive the concept of self ,its criticisms and the activities of the ancient civilization.

Ethnic Psychology

The third aspect of Psychology known as Ethnic Psychology. It originates from the Filipinos and through the influence of other countries. It is not only older but also much complicated compared to the previous aspects. It has many strands to be entangled and one of those is the psychology that came from the Filipinos themselves. An indigenous psychology that is owned or influenced by other countries. The language is a cone attributing factor especially those activities that can show the collective experiences of Filipinos. The works of Jose Rizal and Isabelo de los Reyes were consisted of Filipino Psychology and it was greatly connected to the Psycho- Medical Psychology of our forefathers. [6]

Social Psychology

The study of Social Psychology is defined as a systematic study of the nature and causes of human social behavior. Primarily, its concern is about human social behavior. It includes a lot of matters regarding the individual’s impact on other people, the processes of social interaction and the relationship that exist between individuals in the society. It is not just concerned with the nature of social behavior but also with its causes. The study seeks to unravel the reasons and pre conditions of social behavior. It also depicts the analysis of social behavior in a dynamic way. It relies on methodologies, findings, experiments and surveys. In asking what the study is all about its 4 main concerns were also considered as a means of knowing it clearly. Basically it is about the impact that one individual has on another, the impact that a group has on its members then vice versa and the impact of a group to another group. [7]

In the context of the discipline in a working definition. Psychologists focus their attention in understanding the behavior of individuals within the context of society. It is primarily concerned with the understanding of the how and why individuals behave, think and feel as the way they do. In dealing with behavior we mean feelings and thoughts as well as overt actions.” [8]

Consequently, it is defined as a scientific study of how a person’s behavior, thoughts and feelings are influenced by several factors that can be real or imagined in the form or the presence of others. The field looks at behavior and mental processes including the social world in which we exist, as we are surrounded by other whom we are connected and by whom we are influenced in so many ways. It focuses on influence. [9]

The definition of Social Psychology in the Filipino context was explained through the interview that I have conducted. According to Ms. Leslee Natividad from the Department of Social Sciences, University of the Philippines, Los Ba?”os ,when I asked her what is the role of Filipino Social Psychology in the deeper understanding of Filipino behavior? She gave me a definition to answer the question .

“First we have to define first what Social Psychology is soaˆ¦Social Psychology is the study of how individuals affect the society and how the society is affecting the individual .If we’re going to relate Filipino into that on how the Filipino is affected by the society that we have here in the Philippines and maybe in the world in general. Now the world and the Philippine society affect the Filipino individual. As a person, everything that we are experiencing around us. Things that we are seeing, things that we are hearing, things that are affecting each and every moment of our lives that is part of Filipino Social Psychology. All of our behavior is shaped by the kinds of experiences that we have.” [10]

3 Main Areas of Social Psychology
Social Influence

It is the way in which other people affect our behavior. It is a process through which the presence of others can directly or indirectly influence an individual. These are ways in which other people affect our behaviors through thoughts and actions. How we are raised by certain people to whom we interact can affect our behavior. It varies with Conformity, Compliance and Obedience.

Conformity which pertains to the changing of one’s own behavior to more closely match the actions of others, Several studies suggest that individuals will change their behavior to conform to those of the group. They can be influence by private vs. face-to-face contact Plus, the gender and culture. Compliance is the act of changing their behavior due to another person or group asking them to change. Particularly, it happened when there is absence of authority and power. Obedience is also a way of changing behavior at a direct order of an authority figure.

Social Cognition

It is defined as the ways how people thinks about other people and how they act toward other individuals. It varies because of attitudes which consist of the way a person feels and thinks as well a person behaves. Impression formation is also a part of cognition which is forming the first knowledge or judgment about a person seen for the first time. Attribution is the process of explaining self behavior or others. They use this to make sense of the social world through mental processes. [11]

“What was once called the objective world is a sort of Rorschach ink blot, into which each culture, lack system of science and religion, each type of personality, reads a meaning only remotely derived from the shape and color of the blot itself.”In this aspect of judgment of are beauty are based on the way we think about things. There is no universal concept or characteristics of people and object that are beautiful for them. Whatever we see around us is as much the sum total or our biases, thoughts and feelings as it reflects what physically exist. Those perceptions are active process of selecting, organizing and interpreting various bits of information so that we can create our reality. [12]

Social Interaction

It is a way of knowing the positive and negative aspects of behavior. It is the area of Social Psychology which involves interaction and relationship between people. It includes prejudice which happens when an individual holds an unsupported and negative attitude towards other members of the society. It also varies with discrimination as treating people differently because of prejudice. Liking and loving, aggression were also developed here. [13]

The liking and loving in our society known as interpersonal attraction is widely observed. Each one of us is attracted to some personalities in our society. It can be influenced and proved by the similarities, position, physical appearance and familiarity of both sexes [14] .

The nature of aggression involves hurting others. It has been defined as “any form of behavior directed towards the goal of harming or injuring another living being who is motivated to avoid such treatment.” (Baron and Richardson, 1993)

According to psychologists they have identified three types of aggression. Firstly, is the Person-oriented aggression wherein the main goal is intentionally hurt someone. Secondly, is Pro active aggression when an aggressive behavior is done to achieve some desired outcome like gaining possession of an object. Lastly, is Reactive aggression is the reaction of an individual to an aggressive act. [15]

In a positive way one of the best examples of pro social behavior is Altruism. It is a helping behavior that is costly to an altruistic person. It is a desire to help even there is no possible reward. It is always expected to depend on empathy. Empathy is the ability to share emotions and understand another person. [16]

Projects of Filipino Psychology

The first project is to develop indigenous psychological concepts. Ethnic concepts and theories can be translated into another language but deviations in meaning will occur especially with respect to location. There were some concepts that Filipinos exhibited and some foreign researchers tried to analyze and study. The first was the concept of Shame or “Hiya” which was studied by Frank Lynch in 1961. Sibley during the 1965 analyze this behavior. During 1981 Salazar studied it thoroughly and said that it was a complete societal feeling that is not only passive but also active. He showed the external aspects ” hiyain, ikahiya at manghiya” and also the internal aspect that involves the feelings and emotions like the act of “kahiya hiya and mahiyain”. The second concept was Fatalism or “Bahala Na”. Bostrom in 1968 was the first psychologist that become inquisitive about this Filipino behavior. He compared it with American Fatalism but in Filipino Psychology it has a different orientation. Before, Osias explained way back the 1940’s that “bahala na” attitude is the combination of fatalism and determinism.

On the other hand Lagmay corrected it and said that for him it is not about fatalism it is more of determination and courage to face unguaranteed times. Lastly, is the concept of “Utang na Loob” which was translated by Charles Kaut into English known as debt of gratitude. Enriquez disagreed and Holnsteiner gave his opinion that ‘utang na loob” is contractual. [17]

The second project is utilization of indigenous research methods. The role of Santiago and Enriquez in building a concept of Filipino oriented research was very important. They suggested a model to be used in research. The model will serve as a guide of researchers of indigenous ways. It was divided into two scales. First is used in knowing the idea and “diwa” of an member of a society. It includes “Pagmamasid”, “Pakikiramdam”, “Pagtatanung- tanong”, “Pasubok”, “Pagdalaw dalaw”, “Pagmamatyag”, ” Pagsubaybay”, “Pakikialam” at “Pakikilahok”. The other scale is for the researchers to know what will be the future or end of their study. They use several stages such as “Pakikitungo”, “Pakikisama”, “Pakikisalamuha”, “Pakikibagay” ,”Pakikisangkot” at “Pakikiisa”

The third project is to create an authentic and appropriate social scientific psychology. In the deeper analysis of constructing a real version of social psychology social behavior is a must. The society of Filipinos revolves smoothly because of their “Pakikisama and Pakikipagkapwa”. In dealing with both concepts it has been discovered that between the two “pakikipagkapwa” is more important for Filipinos. It has a more deeper sense and implication. It means treating other people as fellow man. In English the context was changed. The word “other” perceiving the self and other self in an individualistic way. [18]

The Bases of Filipino Psychology

Primarily, Prior knowledge of Psychology was the first basis of Filipinos for it involves important parts of Filipino Social Psychology. The knowledge of psychology “Babaylan” or “Catalonan” for the native Filipino people was an important part of Filipino Psychology. The “Babaylan” was the first Filipino psychologists. Aside from this were the prayers and whispers of various ethnic groups in the Philippines. Those were rich sources and stream of Filipinos’ prior knowledge of Psychology. We were also used in the psychology of the Filipino literature, even if it was expressed in oral or written way. It includes proverbs, stories and legends. The values and attitudes that Filipinos inherited were significant bases of Psychology. It includes most of Ethnic Psychology. [19]

Man and his Thoughts

The second is the basis of man and his thoughts and it denotes giving importance to man and his or her ideas. This is where Filipino Psychology and Psychology in the Philippines met. Filipino psychology was a part and always been a part of the world’s psychology. This basis has a clear influence of rational psychology that has been developed and improved in the University of Sto. Tomas. This was considered as traditional philosophy rooted in the ideas of Descartes and written works of Aristotle. Psychology is an aspect of Filipino Psychology as an academic discipline in some universities in the Philippines. [20]

Period of changing mind

It was the third basis because it is associated with Filipino personality. There were a lot of bases seen in this period. Particularly, this basis was evident in the written works of some Filipino writers like Pedro Serrano Laktaw and Isabelo delos Reyes. Even before the psychology of language was seen in written outputs produced by Filipinos. It somehow showed the shallow orientation of Filipino in terms of experiences in researching and conducting studies. Filipinos should not dampen their spirits instead they should hope for some improvements.

Period of giving value to societal problems

The time of giving importance to societal problems was the fourth basis because this serves as a witness of the society. Hartendorp is one of the American psychologists who become interested in our Psychology. The theory of Osias in 1940 is about the relation of language to the society and in connection of the knowledge of paralanguage in the actions of the individuals. However, his period is also the time of some Filipino psychologists. In such a way Filipino Psychology have this sure basis and it includes the works of Isidoro Panlasigui, Sinsiforo Padilla and Alfredo Lagmay who all gave importance to the acts and capabilities of an individual. [21]

Societal problems

Problems in the society were the fifth bases because it gave value for improvement and development. Aldaba- Lim is known for giving high value in societal problems. He often encourages Filipino psychologists to listen to the problems of the society. All doubts in his dedication will vanished if a person will examine all his efforts and contribution in some of his researches in Psychology. The period of Activism served as a witness of this basis.

Language, culture and Point of view

Language, culture and Point of view were the sixth bases because it is the most fundamental of all bases.Filipino language and dialect is very significant because it is a witness in the many studies conducted and translated into foreign language. The field must still use medium, system and ways to guarantee the wide scope of study. Regarding culture there are none or very few Filipinos who still doubt about the language and culture of the Philippines. According to some professors and psychologists there was this “acquiescence effect” in the can be seen in a scale used and answered by Filipinos. The American perspective was used in analyzing this. It must be done primarily in a Filipino oriented point of view. [22]

The Concept of Language

The concept of local language as a source of concept for Filipinos is a helpful tool because it gives a clear connection to their culture. Language is not just one effective way of communication but also a rich source of information. It is an affluent basis for the better understanding and orientation of culture. It is suggested to formulate a certain Filipino concept from the broader and wider scope it has. Language is the primary source in the study of Social Psychology of Filipinos.

The native language is a rich source of concepts meaningful for and significant to the local culture.” As a source of insight, some concepts were proven to be important in understanding the Filipino personality, worldview and behavior. Some of those were the concepts of “hiya”(shame), “utang na loob”(debt of gratitude) , “pakikisama”(yielding to the will of the leader or the majority, “bahala na” (fatalism) and “amor propio” (sensitivity to personal affront) which even some American psychologists attempted to study those.The problem with the token use of Filipino psychological concepts in the context of a western analysis is that it can lead to the distortion of Philippine social reality and can affect the education of Filipinos.It still preferable to use the language as a main resource. [23]

Most Filipinos speak Filipino, the national language; and English, the language for commercial and legal transactions. The Philippines is the world’s third largest English-speaking country, after the United States and the United Kingdom. Literacy rate is a high 96%.Approximately 111 languages and dialects are spoken in the country and most Manilenos speak at least one other dialect besides Filipino. [24]

The Concept of Kapwa

The concept of “kapwa” in Filipinos is an important aspect of Filipino social life. “Kapwa” is reflected because interaction among other individuals especially in the Philippines is an essential aspect of social life. Language reveals a lot about Filipino nature. For this reason, social interaction should be an evocative core of analysis in the process of classifying the concept of “kapwa”. The Filipino language in this notch, gives a conceptual division in several levels and modes of social interaction. Santiago and Enriquez identified eight in Filipino.

The Levels of Interaction

Interaction of Filipinos were categorized into levels namely pakikitungo (transaction/civility with), pakikisalamuha (inter-action with), pakikilahok (joining/participating), pakikibagay (in- conformity with/ in- accord with), pakikisama (being along with), pakikipagpalagayan/pakikipagmalagayang-loob (being in rapport), pakikisangkot (getting involved) and pakikiisa (being one with). [25]

The concept of Kapwa as a shared inner self turns out to be very essential psychologically and philosophically speaking. While “pagtutunguhan” (dealing with/acting toward) is another term which can be used to refer to all levels of interaction. Besides, pagtutunguhan also connotes the most superficial level of interaction: the level of amenities while “pakikipagkapwa” refers to “humanness at its highest level”(Santiago,1976) [26]

On the other hand aside from the concept of “kapwa” According to Russell, In 1922 there were several explanations in essay forms about the high Filipino Self Concept. One of the most ordinary is it being the character of race as Filipinos got from the Malays. In 1965 Fox said that this is a trait of Filipino culture that is paid to be in the social context because of its fortitude to produce close family ties. . [27]

The Concept of Human Interaction

The concept of Human Interaction includes the distinction between (Pakikisama or Pakikipagkapwa?) It is an essential part because it is very consistent in Filipinos. Aside from the good sides of interaction, previous work on Philippine values pointed our three evil characters in Philippine interpersonal relations. These are the “walang pakisama” (one inept at the level of adjustment); the “walang hiya”, (one who lacks a sense of propriety and “the walang utang na loob”, (one who lacks adeptness in reciprocating by way of gratitude.

In a deeper analysis some studies were conducted, It was argued that pakikipagkapwa is more important for Filipinos. According to Enriquez, in spite of the fact that western psychology works in the Philippines, the use of Filipino has led to the identification of the value “pakikipagkapwa” which is more important that pakikisama. The barkada (peer group) would not be happy with the “walang pakikisama” but the Philippine society at large cannot accept the walang kapwa tao.” Pakikipagkapwa is both a paninindigan (conviction) and a value. It includes all the other mentioned modes and levels of interaction. “Pakikisama” is a form of pakikipagkapwa but not the other way around. In fact “pakikisalamuha” is even closer than “pakikisama” in meaning to “pakikipagkapwa.” [28]

Application of Filipino Social Psychology
Filipino Culture

The Social, Political, Ideational dimensions are diverse into aspects which were exhibited by Filipinos. The study of the customs and beliefs of Filipinos serves as a function of social and economic dimension of Filipino culture. The Philippine culture is such very rich. It was very evident in the following ways. In courtship and marriage most of the Filipinos regard this as a process of love as a parental affair. The marriage is the family affair which is measured as a success based on the number of children. Filipinos also believe in ” Babaylans and Catalonan” which were said to posses supernatural powers to supplicate God. They were also fond of charms and they believe that when they perform their rites particularly on the Good Friday they will gain magical powers like anting-anting, lucky cards, stones and other stuffs. As a part of their social life they celebrate feasts to commemorate important events like Fiestas, Holy Week, New Year, Christmas and etc. It really played an essential role in the economic security and social solidarity of Filipinos. They are also known for their superstitious beliefs which are greatly connected to their rituals and ceremonies.

In connection to supernatural beings they follow these beliefs to avoid bad luck. It was seen in birth, illness and death which control the psyche of Filipinos. In religion when Christianity was introduced by Spaniards, it became a driving force to the life of the Filipinos. They were also thoughtful especially when someone is sick and in need. They are afraid of what other people might say. Some of their practices include giving dowry, carrying of guns, choice of padrino and carrying bow and arrows, sibat and kris. During the time of our ethnic groups’ laws were also made with regards to property ownership an settling arguments. [29]

Filipino Values

“Filipinos use values to fill the demand for democracy. “The Filipinos are known to be hospitable. But aside from this trait, there are many other values that the Filipinos possess which help them live harmoniously with their neighbors. These have also made the Filipinos appealing towards others due to their pleasant demeanor. The following are some of the Filipino values such as “Bayanihan” is the creation of an association with neighbors and helping whenever one is in disastrous need. “Close Family Ties” are something the Filipinos are well-known for. The primary social welfare system for the Filipino is the family. Many Filipinos live near their family for most of their lives, even as independent adults. “Pakikisama” or harmony, involves getting along with others to preserve a harmonious relationship. Hiya is shame and a motivating factor behind behavior. It is a sense of social decency and compliance to public norms and behavior. Filipinos believe they must live up to the accepted standards of behavior and if they fail to do so they bring shame not only upon themselves, but also upon their family. “Utang na Loob” or Debt of Gratitude, is owed by one to a person who has helped him great. There is a local saying: “Ang hindi marunong lumingon sa pinanggalinangan ay hindi makakarating sa paroroonan’, meaning, ‘One who does not look back o where he started, will no get to where he is going.”Amor Propio” is concern for self image. Filipinos believe that how they present themselves to others is an important aspect to be accepted in society. “Delicadeza” or sense of propriety refers to sensitivity regarding the limits of proper behavior or ethics in a situation. Filipinos try to avoid even the appearance of impropriety. “Palabra de Honor” or word of honor is very important to the Filipinos. They believe that one must keep their word whenever they make a promise for the person to whom one has made a promise will count on it.” [30]

Filipino Family

The study of Filipino Family is valuable because they value family relationship. In a traditional Filipino family, the father is considered the head and the provider of the family while the mother takes responsibility of the domestic needs and in charge of the emotional growth and values formation of the children. Children see their mot