toptermpaper.com

Social Darwinism is a social theory that Natural Selection in Darwin’s Theory is used to human society. Social Darwinism is evaluated from Darwin’s Theory. However, Social Darwinism is a belief and it is popular in the late Victorian ear in England, America and elsewhere. The purpose of this essay is to analyze the theory of Social Darwinism and its impacts on indigenous Australians. This essay will firstly have a brief introduction. Following it, it will discuss the theory of Social Darwinism. After that, it will explain the impact of Social Darwinism on indigenous Australians. Finally, it will be a conclusion of the essay.

Theory of Social Darwinism

The theory of Social Darwinism was put forward by Herbert Spencer in 19th century. Social Darwinism is the general term which applies to several different ways in which people (not biologists) tried to apply a distorted and narrow interpretation of the concept of natural selection to human cultural systems. (Peter, 2003) The popularity of Social Darwinism lasted from 19th century to World War II. Some people even think modern biology can be classified into Social Darwinism. The concept of Social Darwinism firstly appeared in American Historian Richard Hofstadter’s book in 1944–<> (Thomas, 2009)

Social Darwinism is a kind of concept. This concept thinks that the core of Darwinism-natural selection is a common phenomenon in the human society. Theory of Social Darwinism thinks that natural selection plays an important role in the human evolution and development. Social Darwinism has ever been used by its supporters to name on the social inequality, racism and imperialism. Social Darwinism itself is not a political tendency.Some Social Darwinists use this concept to illustrate the social progress and inevitable change. Some Social Darwinists think that human degradation is inevitable. As the same as Theory of Evolution, Social Darwinism is usually involved in the debate on Eugenics.

Social Darwinism also derived some concepts, including competition, eugenics and racism.

Competition

A simplified view of Social Darwinism is that people, especially for men, have to compete to survive in the future. They can not give any assistance to the poor because they must feed themselves. Most of Social Darwinism in 21st century supports the improvement of working conditions and higher wages in order to give the poor the opportunity to feed themselves, so that self-sufficiency is better than those who are lazy, weak or poor.

Eugenics

Another social interpretation of Social Darwinism is Eugenics. This theory is developed by Darwin’s cousin, Francis Galton. Galton believes that people’s physical characteristics are significantly from generation to generation. Therefore, the human brain qualities (genius and talent) have the same principle. Then the community should have a clear genetic decision to improve eugenics.

Racism

The racial superiority and competition ideology in the end of 19 century and early of 20 century are associated with Social Darwinism. The basic race concept of Social Darwinism is that white race should educate other races of people in the world by a civilized way.

Darwin’s Evolution Theory divides the race on the basis of Genetic Bifurcation and Natural Selection Theory. Genetic Bifurcation is a group of genetic material which isolated with each other, so they can develop its own unique genetic characteristics. This theory is applies to all living organisms. Because of gene bifurcation, people have different races and ethnic groups.

Impacts on of Social Darwinism on indigenous Australians

Theories of Social Darwinism brought the disaster to indigenous Australians. Australian continent appeared before 60, 000 years ago. Most of the indigenous Australians were isolated from the rest of world before Europe settled in Australia. After the settlement of British, population of indigenous Australians reduced by 90%, which is also influenced by Social Darwinism.

In the early of the twentieth century, Social Darwinism was also popular in Australia. The Racial Theories of Social Darwinism were used to justify settler treatment of the indigenous Australians, as ‘subhuman’, ‘primitive’ and an ‘inferior race’. Social Darwinism accelerated the death of indigenous Australians. As the skin color of indigenous Australians is similar to black, people are easy to link them to Blacks. Racism discrimination emerged with the popularity of Social Darwinism. The Aborigines Protection Act 1909 established camps to provide a place for the ‘doomed race to die off’ as indigenous Australian would ‘inevitably become extinct’. (Eleanor, 2002) Even cruel is that indigenous Australians were treated like experimental animals, which were allowed by settle policy. Between 1920 and 1930, thousands of indigenous Australians were used to ‘scientific’ investigation into brain capacity and cranium size. Australian fascination with eugenics is similar to the obsession of Nazi Germany society in relation to the Jews in the 1930s and early 1940s. (Geoffrey, 2004)

Eugenics Theory of Social Darwinism also impacted on indigenous Australians. Children of mixed indigenous Australians and Europeans descent were called “half-castes” and a threat to so-called “racial purity”. (Dickens, 2000) According to the Eugenics Theory, the policy took these children far away from their parents to “breed the blackness out of them”. Based on Eugenics Theory, about 100,000 children with indigenous blood were taken away from their families. Parents did not know where they children were and were not allowed to trace them. At the same time, these children did not know who were their parents and thought they were orphans. The racist government thought the problem could be solved if indigenous Australians were dying out. As a result, these children were called “Stolen Generations”. Settler policy believed that white, Christian families and boarding schools was the best environment in which to raise Aboriginal children. They believed they were doing what was ‘protecting them’ and was ‘best for them’, whether the children or their parents liked it or not. (Read, 2001)

Conclusion

Conclusively, Social Darwinism is a popular social evolution theory in 19 century. The theory itself did not contain any political position and it has ever been linked with politics. Influenced by the theories of Social Darwinism, many indigenous Australians were treated cruel and populations of indigenous Australians were reduced very much. Today, indigenous Australians share equal rights with other racial people in spite of existence of racial discrimination. It is wished that the world could eliminate the racial discrimination in future and every person could be treated equally.

From the vantage of a modern, Western, Liberal Democracy like the United States, the existence of gender inequality is hard to dispute. In March 2010, while engaging in an escalating war in Afghanistan, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, in her closing remarks to the UN echoed her speech of fifteen years ago at the World Conference on Women in Beijing stating, “Women’s Progress is human progress” (Altaffer, 2010).

In 2005 a Gallup Poll of U.S. households found that “gender inequality” was a top concern for American women when asked an open ended question on the, broadly named, “Muslim World” (Mogahed, 2008). But contrary to the perception of American citizens, women’s rights in the Muslim World vary greatly.

From a gender education gap of nearly 0 in Iran (incidentally the same as the U.S.’s gender gap in higher education) to women in Pakistan needing a 73% increase in women’s education to equal that of men, there is a vast range of both gender equality and the perceptions of gender equality in the Muslim World (Mogahed, 2008, p. 1). [1]

Overall Muslim women do not consider gender inequality as a main problem facing their societies. Less than 2% of women polled in 2005 in Morocco and Egypt mentioned gender inequality as a concern, and only 5% of Saudi women cited it. In Lebanon and Turkey, arguably the most Western of the Middle Eastern countries, only 9% and 11% of women surveyed, respectively, expressed women’s inequality as a top 5 problem (Mogahed, 2008, p. 3).

Clearly there is a disconnect with how Muslim women are viewed from the West, in particular America, and how they view their own gender equality issues. Muslim women have not, as the American viewer would have it, been conditioned to accept a second class status. Majorities of women in almost all of the over 35 countries surveyed in a 2008 Gallup poll say that women deserve the same legal rights as men, the ability to vote free of familial influence, to work at any job they are qualified for and to serve in all levels of government (Esposito, 2008, Moghaed 2008).

However the percent of women pursuing higher educations, a key indicator (Apodaca, 1998; UN, 2010; King and Samar, 2002) in women’s inequality and the overall social and economic status of a country [2] , in the Muslim Countries varies greatly. In Iran 52% of women pursue higher education while only 13% do in Pakistan (Mogahed, 2008, p. 1). While in neighboring Afghanistan female literacy rate is at only 29% and only 33% of females, as a percentage of males, enrolled, and attended secondary school from 2003-2008 (UNICEF, Afghanistan, para. 8).

Discussions of women’s rights in the United States when referring to the Middle East or the Muslim World [3] clearly do not distinguish between various countries and situations (Mogahed, 2008, p.1) although polls show that Americans are perfectly able to distinguish between Middle Eastern countries, when prompted, on issues of national security [4] (Rasmusse, 2009). Clearly this blanket view, by Americans, of women’s rights in the Muslim World leads to issues with strategies to improve gender equality.

But beyond America’s un-nuanced perceptions of gender inequality in the Muslim World and the damage this could cause to both national security priorities and efforts to improve gender equality, there is the fundamental question: why are there different levels of gender equality, between Muslim nations, when majorities in Muslim countries believe women should enjoy the same fundamental rights as men (Mogahed, 2008, p.1)?

In order to answer this question and larger social questions this paper will look mainly at Afghanistan, a country that is particularly pertinent not only because the United States is currently involved in an escalating conflict, but because Afghanistan has one of the lowest grades in the world on the Gender Development Index [5] at .310 (Morgan, 2008, para. 8). It will assess Afghanistan, in comparison to another case study, on gender inequality in relation to the theory of tribalization [6] . This paper will also consider the interaction between modern States and Tribes as a primary causal mechanism in the process of tribalization and make the connection, seemingly for the first time, that tribalization causes gender inequality.

These theories, and the above question, have larger social relevance as well. They seek to answer the question: what has happened along the evolution of human society to encourage the repression of women in tribal societies? This leads to larger implications for the understanding of this progression and applying it to Western civil societies’ attempts to modernize the rest of the “tribal” world. Ideally understanding why tribal societies repress women will result in more effective strategies to cure gender inequaltiy.

A few main theories have dominated the thinking on gender inequality and success and failures in improving gender equality, including that of feminist-socialism (Calasanti and Bailey, 1991), functionalist theory (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2009), conflict theory (New World Encyclopedia; Machiavelli; Hobbes) and symbolic interactionist theory (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2008; Blumer, 1986)

Feminist-socialist theory posits that gender inequality stems from the interaction of patriarchy and capitalism and is especially relevant to the division of labor (Calasanti and Bailey, 1991). The feminist-socialist theory loses a degree of nuance in that the interaction of patriarchy and capitalism can be said to occur in the United States even today; but whereby the levels of gender inequality are less than in most of the rest of the world it is unable to register the changes that occur to improve gender equality after the meeting of these two conditional factors, and is unable to explain why they succeed where they do and fail where they do.

Functionalist theory states that men are inherently more suited to functional or goal oriented tasks, while women are more suited to emotionally oriented tasks and when women ‘leave the house’ they are reducing their functional capacity to the detriment of society(Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2009). It has been proven that women are perfectly capable of performing most, if not all of the jobs that men can in the modern workforce (or else modern western societies with equality of the workforce would have empirically collapsed under the weight of functionalist theory). Gender equality in the workforce has not caused a loss of overall functionality of society, merely a more even distribution of traditional tasks.

Conflict theory argues for humanity existing in an inherent state of conflict which feeds into a pyramid structure of society where the elites survive on the backs of the masses, in a necessary structure to prevent a decent into anarchy (the ultimate state of constant conflict to which we as humanity, were born into). Essentially conflict theory seeks to explain how those in power stay in power. It has four main assumptions: competition is the inherent state of humanity; inequalities in power are essential to the survival of all social structures; change occurs through conflict not through evolution; and war unifies societies. In the framework of conflict theory gender inequality exists because women are inherently weaker and thus less able to defend them in the state of conflict. Therefore they have to make compromises putting them in a position with less power in order to survive. Once they are in a position of being subordinate to someone with more power then they are simply incorporated into the conflict theory pyramid and forever inherently unequal as a matter of self preservation (New World Encyclopedia; Machiavelli; Hobbes). Beyond the issues this author takes with the assumptions this theory is built, namely the state of conflict that is inherent to humanity, if the assumptions are taken at face value then conflict theory holds. But since the argument this paper will make is based on the evolution of social interaction to form covenants from the smallest units of society to the State, then the fact that these early covenants were egalitarian rules out conflict theory as a legitimate explanation for gender inequality.

Lastly symbolic interactions theory proposes that humans must cooperate to survive and that the human mind uses symbols to designate objects and people and then selects courses of action appropriate to this symbolic definition. Humans have a self reflexive evaluation of self while a biased symbolically based view of others. So once a gender becomes known for a certain role in society, the role become codified, magnified and eventually reflexively repeated into perpetuity in a self defining circle that is incorporated into the culture. It takes the functional aspect of femininity, giving birth, and transforms it into a socially restrictive definition through repetition (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2008; Blumer, 1986). This theory is the closest to that of tribalization that this paper proposes; but symbolic interaction is only a tool by which tribalization occurs and not the overall picture as this paper will show.

The first section of this paper will look at the evolution of human society as a sociological justification for the theory of tribalization as the primary cause of gender inequality. It will compare the two case studies of tribal Afghanistan and that of tribal Mormons in America to assess the global implications of this theory clear of the restrictions of individual cultures. The second section will look at the data avalible on these two case studies in modern time to asses the validity of the State and Tribe interaction as the causal component of the tribalization theory.

If the theory of tribalization holds true this paper will show that the conflict between the purest form of social grouping, the Tribe, and the evolving forms of society, the State created a psychological group effect (with similar processes to those shown in the theory of symbolic interaction) called tribalization, which resulted in a shift from what was essentially an egalitarian society to a gender repressive society.

Theory

Tribalization, as used by this paper, is a combination of sociological developmental theories and the psychological effects of group consciousness that is brought out by the contact between the State and the Tribe. By looking at the evolution from early human groupings to the modern State this paper defines the Tribe and the State for the purpose of later examining why they are incompatible and in conflict in modern life. The psychological process of group consciousness radicalization that occurs during the conflict of the Tribe and the State is Tribalization. This paper argues that Tribalization is the causal factor in gender inequality in the societies the theory applies to.

The stages of social development, although varying from author to author are generally separated into four stages (although the stages are inherently flawed because of imperfections in demarcation as well as the lack of homogeneity among the groupings) (Diamond, 1999).

The first of these stage is the earliest of human grouping comprised of anywhere from five to eight people who, as a rule, are extended relatives. Typically they are dubbed Bands (Diamond, 1999; Sebastian, 1 as cited in Haviland, 2002, p.326-328). Today examples of such autonomous bands can be found living mostly in New Guinea and Amazonia. Within the State apparatus Bands include African Pygmies, South African Hunter-Gatherers, better known as Bushmen, Aboriginal Australians, Eskimos and Native Americans. As Jaraed Diamond (1999) argues in his book Guns, Germs and Steel, it is probable, “that all humans lived in bands until at least 40,000 years ago, and most still did as recently as 11,000 years ago” (p. 268).

Bands are a social grouping inherited from gorillas and chimps that exist where there are not enough dense local resources to permit many people to live together. Typically there is no single base of residence resulting from the fact they do not have the technology or numbers to artificially create a resource rich area. They are constantly on the move in order to survive. One of the more distinctive attributes of a Band, when contrasted with the State, is the lack of an institutional structure. The extended family architecture as well as the small numbers make the type of higher organization seen in the State unnecessary and even detrimental to inner group peace. This paucity of a formal framework also manifests itself in the lack of Band specialization of craft, trade or occupation beyond those decided by ability (Diamond, 1999, Sebastian, 1 as cited in Haviland, 2002, p.328-331).

Labeled the original egalitarian society by many social theorists, Bands do not contain the formal social stratification of leadership or a monopoly of decision making power. Prestige is gained through ability and not inherited. In short Bands are egalitarian because all members start on an equal footing and have the opportunity to gain in prestige and power through deeds and not the accident of their birth. At the most basic unit of social organization there is almost a sum zero in gender inequality (Diamond, 1999; Frederiksen, 2010; Engels, 1876). In terms of gender equality models the Band is the theoretical ideal that can never be recreated.

The next tier up the social evolutionary ladder is the Tribe. In historical terms tribes began to emerge around 13,000 years ago in the Fertile Crescent. [7] As a rule a Tribe consists of one hundred to two hundred members that have moved beyond the extended family structure of the Band to a slightly more formalized kin, or clan based relationship. Generally they have a settled location and more than one formally recognized kin group. This mean land belongs to particular clans and not to the whole tribe (Diamond, 1999; Sebastian, 1 as cited in Haviland, 2002, p.328-331; Engels, 1876).

. Famous tribal examples in myth and history include the Tribes of Israel, as well as the Tribe Muhammad was raised, and that of his grandfather Abd al-Muttalib of the Banu Hashim clan of the Qurysh tribe (one of the larger tribes surrounding Mecca) (Armstrong, 2001; Rogerson, 2003).

In order to exist tribes need the ability to produce enough food for their members. Muhammad’s tribe, the Bedouin Quarysh, did this through trading with the nearby cities of Mecca and Medina as well as through the raising of sheep (Armstrong, 2001). Other tribes learned to use agricultural technology or settled in resource rich areas. The development from Band style wandering is only possible because of specialization, which in the Tribe specialization is still slight. Within the classification of Tribe there is also a trend towards more variation (Diamond, 1999, p. 260-270; Sebastian, 1 as cited in Haviland, 2002, p.328-331; Bodley, 2008, p. 13-20; Engels, 1876). The Quarysh tribe migrated in order to sustain themselves but they also learned trade (Armstrong, 2001), while other tribes became more agriculturally proficient (Diamond, 1999).

Early Tribes were egalitarian to an extent. Tribes usually have a leadership position or council which is based on ability and not inherited, although the position of leader is codified (Diamond, 1999 p. 265-279). The modern Tribes of this paper’s case studies most closely resemble ancient Tribes with a “big man” at the head. Relevant to the examination of gender inequality in these societies it is important to note that women were not inherently at a disadvantage or repressed. [8]

In the example of Muhammad’s Tribe, the Quraysh are said to have worshipped a Goddess before the Revelation of the Qu’ran, and much of early Bedouin poetry is centered on Goddess figures using the allegory of a woman’s love to describe other aspects of desert life. Muhammad’s fist wife, Kahdijah bint Khuwaylid, was herself a prosperous merchant many years older than Muhammad and independent in her own right (Armstrong, 2001; Rogerson, 2003).

Defining the Tribe coherently from a historical basis will later help in the comparison to the State in this paper’s case studies of Tribal Afghanistan and Tribal Mormonism in the United States.

Around 5,000 BC in the Fertile Crescent Chiefdoms the next stage of social development between Tribes and States began to emerge. Chiefdoms consisted of several thousand to several tens of thousands of people who were most notably not related. As of 1492 AD Chiefdoms were sill in existence in areas not yet under State control, such as the Eastern United States, South and Central America and Sub-Saharan Africa (Diamond, 1999).

The massive gap in size between the populations of a Tribe and a Cheifdom caused a problem where strangers fell under the same authority. The solution was a Chief who exercises a monopoly on authority, the right to use force and information. Additionally the office of the Chief becomes hereditary in most cases. To accommodate the larger population needs food had to be produced on a much larger scale and extreme specialization occurred. Finally Cheifdoms are the stage of social development where Religion became codified (Diamond, 1999; .Sebastian, 1 as cited in Haviland, 2002, p.333-335). [9]

About 2,000 years after Chiefdoms arose in Mesopotamia States began to appear. From around 3,000 BC until just over 1,000 years ago in West Africa, States evolved from Chiefdoms to become the largest and most modern form of society (Diamond, 1999; Sebastian, 1 as cited in Haviland, 2002, p. 335-337; Bodley, 2000).

States evolved from Chiefdoms, but possessed far greater populations. Information was confined to an elite few and control was centralized and monopolized. Extreme economic specialization became the norm and multi layered bureaucracy arose as a necessity in order to maintain control over a population. Fundamentally the State was different from all earlier forms of society in that it was organized on political and territorial lines instead of purely kinship lines (Diamon, 1999; Bodley, 2000; Engels, 1876; Hobbes, 1651). [10] In terms of gender inequality the early State saw some of the largest gaps between the social status’ of men and women. In the history of the United States it took one hundred and forty four years for women to get the vote. In 1776 Abigail Adams famously pleaded in her letters to John Adams, “I desire you would remember the ladies and be more generous and favorable to them than your ancestors. Do not put such unlimited power in the hands of Husbands (Adams, 1776). Today women are still payed on average seventy seven cents to ever dollar that men earn (National Women’s Law Center). Yet through the mechanisms of Democracy, only possible through the State, women have earned the same rights as men, while the originally egalitarian Tribes have manifested themselves in modern times as some of the most unequal societies in the world.

The Tribe and the State are polar opposites in terms of human organizational structures. It then follows logically that conflict would arise between these two frameworks (Griffen, Ferguson, & Whitehead, 1993; Tajfel, 1982; Hyman, 2002).

In general there are two theories on how and why Tribes are formed when they come in contact with a State. The first is that warfare is the primary force of tribal formation. The argument goes that modern Tribes are a reaction of State intervention, particularly Colonial State intervention, into societies that would have naturally evolved from Band to State of their own volition with far fewer tribal outliers (Griffen, Ferguson, & Whitehead, 1993).

In the book War in the Tribal Zone: Expanding States and Indigenous Warfare, Neil L. Whitehead (1993) writes, “that the tribal organization is itself only a particular response to European state contact, with the corollary that this “tribalization” involves the degradation of preexisting political formations, be they chieftaincies or ethnic groups (Gonzalez, 1983; Helms; 1976; Wolf; 1982)” (Anderson, 1974; Griffen et al, 1993, p. 128; Todd, 1975).

The second theory argues that intensifying contact between various autonomous kin groups is the primary force for tribal formation. This sense of tribal formation is more grounded evolutionarily and is a realistic look at most of the progress of society. But the tribes that experience Tribalization are those that form from within the State in resistance to it; or those that are already in existence and are reinforced by outside State meddling. So for the purposed of this paper the theory of conflict in Tribal formation is more accurate. It is important to keep in mind that not all tribes are formed through the assumption of conflict that this paper assumes, nor that all tribes are unable to reconcile their tribal identity to the with the State (Griffen et al, 1993)

Whitehead (1993) argues that:

ethnic formations that lie outside state control at a given point in time are either “tribalized” or destroyed in periods of state formation and expansion. No other outcome is possible if the state itself is to survive, since the state is a political formation under which authority must proceed form a uniform source. In this sense tribal and sate organizations can be treated as historically symbiotic social forms, culturally antagonistic yet each relying on the presence of the other to become a fully viable mode of human social organization. Anecdotally one might note that the threat of the “savages” on the borders of states has often had an important function in controlling population internal to the state, as in the political philosophy of Thomas Hobbe’s Leviathan, while in the case of the Roman empire the German tribes actually became integral to it’s military efficiency. (Whitehead, 1993, p. 129-30, italics added by me).

Tribalization, as Whitehead argues it, occurs as the State expands or forms, but this paper argues that it can also come from within an already formed State as the process of psychological tribalization occurs.

Psychologically a society defines itself by two broad criterion: internal and external. (The relative importance individual groups place on both definitions are particular to each.) Internal criteria consists of a cognitive, evaluative and emotional aspect. Cognitively members must have a sense of self awareness in group ownership. Essentially the individual must be aware that (s)he belongs to a group. Once the member is aware that (s)he belongs then (s)he evaluates this membership and places some sort of value connotations on participating. Finally the individual member associates an emotional utility to belonging. The crucial process of identifying with a group, evaluating critically that membership and finally placing an emotional value on belonging is bolstered by the external processes labeling them as part of this group. An outside consensus that the group exists is critical to truly psychologically belong to a coterie (Tajfel, 1982; Griffen et al 1993).

The formation of group identity has often been compared to the cognitive process of stereotyping (Bullokc, & Stallybrass, 1999; Hogg, & Abrams, 2001; Rothbart, Fulero, Jensen, Howard, & Birrell, 1978; Tajefel, 1957; Tajefel, 1981; Tajefel, 1982; Taylor, & Aboud, 1973; Taylor, Fiske, Etcoff, & Ruderman, 1978). Oliver Stallybrass, co-editor of The Fontana Dictionary of Modern Thought (1977) defined the social significance of stereotyping as:

an over-simplified mental image of (usually) some category of person, institution or event which is shared, in essential features, by large numbers of people. The categories may be broad (Jews, gentiles, white men, black men) or narrow (women’s libbers, Daughters of the American Revolution)…Stereotypes are commonly, but not necessarily, accompanied by prejudice, i.e., by a favourable or unfavourable predisposition towards any member of the category in question. (p. 601, italics mine)

Members of a group stereotype not only their adversaries or the outside world, but also themselves in the opposition. Members of both Tribes and States, and indeed of any type of social group, form an identity for themselves that they are then able to tie to their membership. That membership psychologically oversimplifies themselves and the opposition in a process similar to that of stereotyping, which reinforces their group membership (Bullokc, & Stallybrass, 1999; Hogg, & Abrams, 2001; Rothbart et al, 1978; Tajefel, 1957; Tajefel, 1981; Tajefel, 1982; Taylor, & Aboud, 1973; Taylor et al, 1978). [11]

As out-group and in-group stereotyping occur a natural extension of this process is for the in-group to not only stereotype themselves as a group but also to stereotype internal divisions. This paper has already shown that group membership has an inherent process cognitively similar to that of stereotyping. Out of this mindset women began to be defined by traditional and thus subservient roles. Additionally the Tribe has an incentive to portray the women of the out-group in a negative light (as they are portraying everything of the out-group in a negative light in order to codify their own in-group.) In a modern culture of gender equality in the contemporary State apparatus the Tribe takes the opposite view point and the process of justifying the repression of women begins.

There are two schools of thought in the thought process regarding how out-group members are stereotyped, and stereotype; based on individuals non-typical or typical to the group. The first supported by the works of Rothbart et al (1978) in their article titled From Individual to Group Impressions: Availability Heuristics in Stereotype Formation holds that,

Under high memory loads the assumed typicality of certain distinctive instances tend to be retrospectively overestimated. This is the case in the association of “extreme” individuals, such as would be one or a few members of a social minority in groups of mixed composition, with some forms of “unusual” behavior which would tend to be unfavorable. (as cited in Tajfel, 1982, p. 3)

In other words out-group members can identify groups negatively by the actions of a few individuals thus reinforcing in-group stereotyping and membership.

The second school of thought holds that groups can only be stereotyped (by the out-group) by the actions of their individual members (thus reinforcing the process of group psychology) if those individual members are typical of the group. In the book, Intergroup Relations: Essential Readings authors Michale A. Hogg and Dominic Abrams make this case based on works by Johnston and Hewstone (1992) that, “Experimental evidence has shown that disconfirming attributes will become associated with a group stereotype only if they belong to an individual who is perceived as typical” (as cited in Hogg & Abrams, 2001, p. 393). Essentially in cases of realistic contact [12] between in and out-group members, typical members of both groups are associated with negative attributes to the detriment of their interaction.

In both of these arguments it is clear that psychological group formation occurs because of how individuals are perceived in relation to their group interacting with other societal formations.Where there is contact with an outside, opposing or different group there tends to be the development of a more positive self view and a more negative view of other groups. The stereotyping goes both ways and is reinforced by contact with individuals of the group, whether typical or atypical [13] (Hogg & Abrams, 2001; Rothbart et al, 1978; Tajfel, 1982, p.7).

Jaspars and Warnaen (1982) found through a study in Indonesia that discrimination was more marked in the capitol of Jakarta than it was in the provinces because of a salience of group membership in a addition to a more mixed environment (as cited in Tajfel, 1982, p. 8-9)

But what accounts for the normalization or what would seem to be Tribes interacting with the State, such as immigrant groups integrating? When there is an inequality of status perception and the reality of status among group interaction there is sometimes a phenomenon of “defection” especially in groups that are integrating into the State environment (which later this paper will show is an alternative to Trabalization.) In separate studies on Asian and West Indian children in Britain in the 1980s Mullin (1980) as well as Davey and Norburn (1980) both showed that Asian and Indian children expressed an out-group preference in response to perceived status gains (as cited in Tajfel, 1982, p. 11).. Although this would seem to contradict the theory of group psychology the differences between the rate of “defection” between the two different ethnic groups tell a different story.

Although both showed a preference for the out-group in response to a low actual status in contrast to a high in-group perceived status, the West Indian children were showing a much higher rate of defection than the Asian children. This can be attributed to the fact that the Asians in Britain has a stronger social community, preserving more of their language, history, traditions and religion (Tajfel, 1982, p. 11). Essentially the strength of the Asian in-group in attempting to preserve their group identity mimics more accurately the group behavior of those societies at risk of Tribalization. Their higher group salience and lower rate of defection shows the group psychology tendency to prefer in-group rather than out-group membership no matter what the status gains are.

Conflicts over status, or other scarce resources often precipitates a greater psychological group effect. Scarce resources can refer to land, or food in ancient or less economically developed situations or non material resources of rank, status and prestige. When the norms of the social situation encourage and legitimize this competition there is more of a tendency to express in-group preference (Tajfel, 1982). When there is already a basis for competition over the scarce resources of status and physical gains between the in-group and the out-group, there is more incentive for in-group members, already stereotyping “their women” as the opposite to modern State women, to decrease the status of women in order to eliminate some of the competition for limited resources such as status and jobs.

The process of group psychology in the setting of conflict between the State and the Tribeis the basis on which Trabalization theory is built.

Introduction

Karl Marx has been dubbed as one of the most prolific and influential thinkers of the nineteenth century. He advocated the creation of a classless society that would be guided through proper democracy and equality. In essence, Marx criticized the capitalist system as an order in which the powerful firms have gained considerable power and clout. He argued that workers are treated as commodities under this system. The theory of alienation argues that workers are disenchanted with their work because it is controlled and supervised by hierarchies of managers and supervisors. The individual creativity and freedom has been stifled in the name of efficiency and effectiveness. Furthermore, Marx argues that the abject poverty of workers means that they cannot live in prosperous conditions. The capitalist system reaps tremendous profits but gives meager wages to its workers. Marx also believed that alienation resulted in workers being suspicious of each other due to the competitive nature of capitalism. Finally the workers are instructed to perform specific tasks which are against the intrinsic nature of humanity. This nature helps them to attain creativity and design robust challenges to new problems. This report will seek to analyze the four types of alienation that are observed in Marx’s theory. The personal experiences of the researcher will also be included in this report.

Aspects of Alienation

Karl Marx argued that alienation was a natural consequence of capitalism because of several reasons. This is because the workers are manipulated by the forces of capitalism in order to increase productivity and output. The results are that the workers will ultimately lose hope and determination (Leopold, 67). This is because the capitalists strive to ensure that the work activities of the workers are oriented towards specific goals and objectives. The desire of organizations is to ensure that workers can be exploited to attain the maximum surplus value. The worker is considered to be an instrument which leads to the loss of personal identity. It can lead to frustration and resentment since the modes of production are privately owned.

Alienation from Products of own Labor

Marx argued that the capitalist system seeks to create an illusion that workers are adequately compensated for the work that is performed. In essence, the capitalist system seeks to control the workers by deriving the benefits from the work activities of the latter. This can create alienation which can lead to serious consequences for entire society. In addition, the consumers are manipulated which is achieved through the offering of products (Desai, 93). The huge profits reaped by the capitalist system also can cause high levels of resentment and frustration among the workers.

Alienation from Act of Producing Itself

Marx believed that the capitalist system encouraged mechanical and repetitive work patterns that do not create any intrinsic value for the workers. The power of workers is transformed into a commodity which is manifested in the form of wages (Carver, 78).

Capitalism controls the destinies of the workers by supervising and directing their work activities. This creates serious resentment among the workers who feel deprived of their destinies. In addition, the workers are unable to consume the products that are developed by them within a capitalist system.

Alienation from his or her species being

Marx argued that human beings have the capability to develop dynamic thinking through the pursuit of multiple endeavors. Thus humanity retains the ability to contemplate the surrounding environment and develop robust challenges to problems. Marx therefore argues that human society is characterized by a constant state of flux and change. The social classes emerge to overthrow existing orders and manipulate the masses (Carver, 78). The results are that a new class relationship that exists in capitalism eventually stifles the creativity and innovation of human beings. This can create resentment which leads to serious consequences.

Alienation from Producers

Marx argued that capitalism eventually confines labor to the position of a commercial commodity. This means that social relationships are ignored while human beings under the system strive to attain endurance or betterment. The competitive nature of capitalism eventually creates conflicts and disputes. This can cause high levels of alienation and resentment among the masses (Carver, 80). The basic structure of the capitalist system is such that it can cause deterioration in social structures and relationships since workers must compete for scarce resources in order to survive.

Personal Alienation

I have been working as a sales coordinator for a large organization that is involved in the sale of curtains, sofas, beds, and other furniture. Marx argues that the primary form of alienation is when the workers’ feel disillusioned with the work activities. This is true for me in many ways. A sales job can be frustrating as we are told to meet basic targets and increase the revenues of the firm. Marx argued that pre-capitalist societies allowed artisans to have a degree of independence in their work activities. Modern capitalist organizations tend to have hierarchies in which the workers are controlled through a system of checks and controls (Wolff, 91). Managers seek to develop the targets and ensure that compliance with organizational policies is achieved.

As a sales coordinator, I feel disillusioned with my work activities because of the absence of any incentives. The long hours means that I have to ensure that goals are being met in an efficient and effective manner. The sales strategy promoted by the firm is based upon the notion that existing approaches will be implemented. There is no concept of workers’ autonomy which could lead to high levels of creativity and innovation. This creates problems because Marx argued that it was essential for workers to be given high levels of autonomy in order to increase their motivation. The second point of Marx’s theory is the fact that workers are living in abject poverty due to the conditions of capitalism. He argues that workers are unable to meet their basic requirements due to the wage structure and working conditions of the capitalist system. As a sales coordinator, I believe that this is true because I have to ensure that targets are being met in an efficient and effective manner. The commissions earned from direct selling are often inadequate to meet the basic requirements of life. Wages earned from a sales position are adequate for sustenance but they do not enable me to improve my quality of life. It means that I continue to remain trapped within my specific social class due to the structure of the capitalist system (Wolff, 96). Income disparities remain in the United States as top executives are earning remuneration that is fifty times greater than sales coordinators like me. The income gaps create a sense of resentment and alienation towards the system. Therefore my organization is an oligarchy which does not have the proper functions of a democracy.

Marx argues that workers do not control their destinies because the capitalist system tends to have overwhelming influence over the modes of production. The results are that workers are unable to increase productivity and output. They cannot derive significant social relationships from each other (Wolff, 93). Marx argues that capitalism has created a system whereby work activities are confined to a set of mechanical and repetitive tasks. For these tasks, the workers are provided meager wages that are inadequate to respond to their primary needs and requirements. As a sales coordinator, I have always focused on competition rather than creating a collaborative network with my fellow colleagues. This is because it is essential for sales coordinators to improve the revenues and profits of the firm. Each worker strives to move up the ladder through competitive strategy. the concept of cooperating orA working together as a team has been replaced by the notion of competition. Each person therefore perceives his or her own interests rather than analyzing the common interests. As a consequence, I have to compete for scarce resources in order to improve sales. My only duty is to ensure that the organizational targets are being met in an efficient and effective manner.

Marx argues that humans are born with the intrinsic ability to contemplate and perceive about the entire environment. This helps to encourage creativity which can be used to resolve complex situations. In addition, humans desire freedom and autonomy as a means of escaping the harsh social structures. Marx believes that social structures have always exerted a strong influence on individuals by creating a set of rules and regulations. In addition, humans must be left free to develop according to their interests and passions. This is surprisingly absent in the capitalist system that seeks to control the workers by treating them as commodities (Singer, 67). As a sales coordinator, I have to work according to the whims and desires of the management. This means that I will seek to achieve the targets of the firm. I will be left with no time in order to pursue my passions or interests. The job is necessary because it is vital for survival in a harsh environment. The market conditions determine the nature of human work. In my example, the needs of my furniture company are to target consumers and develop robust marketing strategies. As a sales coordinator, I have to ensure that consumers can be reached in an efficient and effective manner. much of Marx’s theory of alienation remains appropriate even in the twenty first century. The abject poverty of workers remains in the world with sweatshop like conditions. The power and clout of the capitalist organizations remains superior. The workers are forced to undergo harsh activities in exchange for meager wages.

Conclusion

Karl Marx’s theory of alienation was postulated in the nineteenth century which was characterized by the rise of capitalism. Industrialization had swept the developed world along with other phenomenon like urbanization, immigration, and capitalism. Marx argued that the capitalist system was based upon reinforcing the divisions of class. His theory of alienation appears to be appropriate even today. His first premise was that workers were alienated with their job duties. Capitalism had controlled the aspects of workers by forcing them to perform monotonous and repetitive tasks. Another premise is that workers live in abject poverty because of the meager wages that are given to them. Workers do not have control over their work activities which stifles their creativity and innovation. It also creates the conditions for oppression and exploitation at the hands of capitalist enterprises. Another premise of this theory is that workers do not have social relationships. The urge to compete has thus led to the destruction of the notion of cooperation and collaboration. Finally Marx argued that the workers were unable to attain self actualization in the capitalist environment. This is because capitalism seeks to create rules and regulations that will ultimately create bad conditions for workers. Personally, I have been alienated with my job as a sales coordinator. This is because of the poor working conditions. In addition, the checks and controls have led to monotonous work activities.

There have been a number of theories put forward by various Institutions, Organizations, Authors, Scholars, Researchers, and Development practitioners, somehow to explain the problem why the issue of gender varies from region to region and why implementing gender equality, and female empowerment is lower than expected in SSA. Amongst these theories are the Inequality and the Modernization theory used in this project to explain the wide gender problems existing in SSA. Borrowing from the words of John Martenussen, most of these theories have been propounded by Western and North American authors and have been termed growth and development theories. (Martenussen, 1997; p.51) As far as this project is concern, I am going to use the parts of the theories that are relevant to the project.

The Inequality Theory:

The origin of gender inequality between men and women has been one of the most intellectual debates after the rise of modern feminism. Great thinkers in the history of ideas such as Aristotle and Thomas Quinas suggested speculative interpretation of gender differences. Continuously, nineteenth century evolutionary theorist such as Bachofen and Karl Marx consider various possible evolutionary sequences in organization kinship and gender relations. Some early efforts aimed at justifying existing institutions and others to question them sound like contemporary standard. The argument behind the origin of feminist analyses is the ideological implication of female subordination over the centuries. Also, there have been a high superior prevalence of male status across time, space and social circumstances that are beyond denial especially in SSA. Therefore the pervasiveness of male dominance is the absolute aim of analyzing gender differences. The question that arises is that “how can the apparent universal subordination of female be reconciled with equality in SSA with it strong traditional background? (Robert Marx Johnson 2005 p; 30).

Assumptions of the Inequality Theory:

Firstly, Inequality theory explains the biological difference between men and women which is inescapable, amongst race, class, culture and tradition irrespective of being developed or underdeveloped. According to Linsey 2007, sex is the biological difference between men and women while gender is the social construction of sexes considering race, politics, social, economic, culture and traditional background. This cultures and traditions vary from place to place and from culture to culture. These cultures that are learned change with time within and between cultures. (Linsey 2007, P; 97)

Following this sex distinction between male and female, some advanced societies (Western and North American societies) have tried to narrow down the gender gap by empowering females, by redefining laws and ignoring others to enhance development. That notwithstanding, the distinction still persists and would always be there because no matter all the feminist analyses on sex and gender, humans would never revert nature on this perspective. Research have proven that no amount of theorist thinking can subtle the simple fact of biological distinction, therefore inequality would persistently exist no matter what. The question that ponders my mind is, why Sub-Saharan Africa is still lacking behind to comprehend culture and tradition to reduce the wide gender gap, thereby empowering females to enhance development?.

Secondly, content and expression of this biological difference is exaggerated in the situation in SSA. Tracing back from history until date, most of the hardest and most commanding jobs are carried out by men therefore inequality is bound to exist between sexes. The fact that men are a stronger sex to resist extreme hash conditions makes them dominant irrespective of sex division. Complex cultural societies are build up by institution that keeps men at a dominant position. This make the female sex constantly relegated at the background. The norms and values that govern these complex societies (SSA) procure men at the forefront. By respecting this norms and values women would be hardly seen in the public spheres. (Sushama Sahay, in king and Hill Anne. p; 89)

Thirdly, Inequality theory try to make some kind of biological differences that are sufficient and necessary to persistently cause inequality between sexes and puts men at a commanding and dominant position. There are three imputed biological differences that have received much attention by the inequality view, such as reproduction by females, physical capacity and predisposition toward violence. “Anthropologists largely agree that women have hardly occupied position of higher status or political power than men in any society anywhere, anytime” (Buthler 2006) Some feminist theorist argue that, reproduction everywhere is done by females that subordinates their position to men, others say that men are physically dominant in their actions and activities and set rules that are of their own advantage. Some theorist argue that men are very aggressive than women, that put them at a dominant position thereby creating inequality between the both sexes. (Buthler 2006 P; 78)

Lastly, apart from huge gender inequality and female empowerment sluggishness in SSA, inequality can also be traced amongst races and class. There have been and there are still traces of inequality amongst the white race and black race as well as amongst the upper and lower class group. There are two different kinds of historical inequality, example that can illustrate this point. First of all, I will want to look back at the history of colonialism and neocolonialism in SSA by the west that alone speak volumes of inequality and domination over a continent and makes a particular race dominant over the other. The history of racial inequality amongst the blacks and whites in the United States of America also illustrate an example of inequality amongst races.

On the other hand, there have been inequalities within races and cultures. The upper and noble classes in SSA have been dominant over the lower and powerless group. This means that a superior culture is imposed and forced on to the weaker group that makes them not equal. Just like the history of European nobility over the commoners in Europe. Yet the nobility have remained a powerful and privileged class in most European nations. From biological and racial distinction on the inequality theory, inequality is a fact amongst genders, cultures, class and race, although times have changed and things must change, this pushes us to criticize the inequality theory with changing times.

Critique of the Inequality Theory:

There have been a lot of theorists to critique speculative accounts on gender differences and female empowerment in SSA which creates inequality, but very little progress have been made to prove one theory over the other in their speculative analyses on gender issues. To a large degree, inequality theories have not gained grounds because societies have distinctively evolved and disproved the speculative ideas of inequality theorist. In SSA today, traditional institutional arrangement have distinctively changed in respect of both genders not too much subordinating women like in the past. Looking at a typical traditional African society, where farming is the only source of income, the man do the clearing of the farm while the woman do the planting and if harvest is good the subsistent crops are sold to maintain the family and educate their kids, both live in complementary way without gender distinction. Although traditional institution still exist and persist today in SSA, but most if not all operate in the interest of both genders.

Scholars argue that theories sometimes formulate persuasive speculative accounts which might fit what we already perceive or know. Therefore we must depend on the biological evidence provided by the inequality theory based on the reconstruction of inferences in well known societies to argue the inequality theory. Critics of Inequality theory also argue that, professional speculations of postmodern feminist by generalizing theories and with the political confusion by giving equal weight to every woman irrespective of race, class, sex orientation, culture and historical background makes origin of inequality theory to lost it attraction.

The biological distinction of sex and gender roles as ascribed by the origin of the inequality theory is almost becoming baseless in SSA societies today. My argument is that inequality theory relies on female reproduction, the strength of men and the predisposition of men in violence situation as a prerequisite of being unequal. This was true to an extent tracing the origin of the theory, but today societies have evolved with changing times, no society in the history of mankind is static. Reproduction have just become a female experience and also a sex difference which has little impact on gender roles today. In the other hand, today in SSA men are only dominant in specific jobs as that they are specialized in, not that specific jobs are ascribed for men although the both sexes co-exist in a traditional way, but there is rational distribution of resources and labor so that girls and women can be empowered in this communities and families.

The problems that arise sometimes are how to comprehend this inconsistent inequality that continues to persist with changing times. Theoretical efforts must be accepted to a certain degree and also the theory can only predict the future and to a larger extent crudely reconstruct the origin of inequality. There is evident that the system of inequality like any other social institution is becoming self sustainable today in most SSA societies. “Individuals are born sexed but not gendered; they have to be taught to be masculine or feminine. One is not born; but rather becomes a womanaˆ¦aˆ¦, it is civilization as a whole that produces this creatureaˆ¦aˆ¦, which is described as feminine” (Simone de Beauvoir 1952 p; 267)

The idea of inequality between men and women is created in the gender process following the way cultural institutions are arranged. Therefore inequality in itself does not exist between sexes but created in the act or reaction in each society. Butler 1990, argues that “gender as a process creates the social difference that defines “man” and “woman” in social interaction through their live, individuals learn what is expected, see what is expected, act and react in expected ways, thus simultaneously construct and maintain the gender order in each society” (Butler 1990 p; 145) In a typical African society, though still primitive and traditional the inequality do not actually exist but it is the gender roles that differ from family to family and from community to community. Take for example within the Muslim religion or culture in SSA; women are actually distinctive in their socially constructed roles ascribed by the religious laws. This does not mean that they do not live in a complementally as opposed by the inequality differences basing on sex division. I therefore argue that the issue of gender is a matter of understanding within families and communities, who should do what at a given time irrespective of the sex backed by norms and laws of that community. West and Zimmermann, holds that “in humans there is no essential femaleness or maleness, femininity or masculinity, womanhood or manhood, but once gender is ascribed, the social order constructs and holds individuals to strongly gender norms and expectations”. (West and Zimmaman 1989, P; 146)

The origin of the inequality theory have been attacked by it critics seriously in recent times. Recent studies also indicate that inequality would eventually lose it content as time evolves. The debate is centered on race and class subordination of inequality that existed in the past, but is currently loosing it value. It is clearly evident that racial inequality is gradually disappearing between and within races and class. I will like to illustrate this point on the colonial history of SSA. Africa have longed been colonized by Europeans to maintain a superior race and keep the African race subordinated under their control just like gender and sex. But because inequality is gradually loosing it originality in history, racial inequality have gradually faded away with changing times. Although some traces of racial inequality persistently exist between races. (Gramsci 1971, P; 165)

Another example that has made inequality lose it originality have been between whites and black Americans as well as European nobility. Whites and blacks have faced a long history of racial segregation in the United States, but because of time factor and new institutional arrangement the racial differences have almost disappeared. In the other hand, European nobility class use to be a more armed, politically and economically powerful class to the commoners in Europe but with the coming of decentralization of leadership and democracy this superior class have gradually disappeared thereby melting away the idea of inequality and subordination of commoners since everybody have an equal opportunity.

Well as much as SSA is concern there have been inequality in class division irrespective of the gender differences. Inequality have been gradually disapproved since the old traditional institutions are disappearing and new wants sees everybody the same. In SSA, apart from gender inequality, there have been upper and lower class inequality as well as people from the royal fondoms, are always seen differently with high esteem. The upper class have been people who generally enjoy high social amenities in the big cities of SSA, they have little or no gender differences between their families since almost everybody have a good education as compared to the rural poor who cannot even provide for a daily meal. They are not much educated so definitely they believe in traditional laws that puts the men at the forefront. But with changing times and the fight for global poverty reduction, development in these local areas in SSA is gradually improving making gender inequality to extensively disappear. On the other hand, Fondomites in SSA have maintain an extensively unequal powers in every aspect in SSA, this is because most traditional laws do respect and give special consideration to everyone from the fondom. But with the coming of democracy and the respect for human right and dignity, this traditional superiority is extensively disappearing there by making the class values to loss it weight. Today whether from the fondom or not, everybody is the same because of democracy. Though there have been a mixture of traditional laws to democratic values to combat the aspect of inequality amongst fondomites and common citizen. (Foucault 1972, P; 223)

Importance of the Inequality Theory to the project:

To begin with, inequality theory is essential in this project because it explains the origin, history and persistent pre-domination and domination of males in almost all aspects of life in SSA. Through this theory, I understand that socialization, tradition and biology are interwoven to explain the persistent male domination in most SSA societies. To better understand the importance of the theory to this project, I will like to examine each role played by each of these concepts to understand the role of inequality theory to the project.

“Men and women yesterday and today think and act differently and achieve differently in the varying regions in SSA” (Banque and Waren 1990, P; 90)

Connecting inequality theory to socialization, it helps me to distinguish between the upper and lower class socialization in SSA. To understand the importance of socialization in this project, it has to be treated differently with divergent identities and expectations. Socialization has helped me to understand why there is little or no gender inequality and more female empowerment in the urban than rural families in SSA. I have used socialization to compare inequality in urban and rural areas, which further makes me to understand class division in the two areas. It is certain that gender equality and female empowerment is higher in urban than rural milieus, because in the urban areas, generally, individuals and families are exposed to high social amenities and high standard of living. Social interaction is generally more modern than in the local interior in SSA. The upper wealthy class is found in urban areas while the lower poor and primitive class is found in the local areas. Therefore, as a result of this social division, inequality theory through socialization has helped me to distinguish and understand this phenomenon in details and further explains why there is persistent inequality in class and socialization in SSA.

Connecting inequality theory through tradition, it has helped me to understand why there is still a wide gender gap and low female empowerment in typical traditional SSA societies today. “People honor traditional established ideas and teach them to their children. But what is the source of the gender traditions by which women are made everywhere subordinate”. (Drage 2003, P; 23) From the origin and history of inequality theory, men have established ideas and institutions that have always kept them dominant letting females at a subordinated position. The theory is therefore important in this project because it lets me understand why some primitive ideas are still led down from generation to generation in sub-Saharan Africa. Take for example, in most local communities in SSA, male inheritance have been a long established traditional belief and have been passed down to generations for centuries. These practices have become stronger so much so that even a male unborn child is celebrated before delivery. Women are regarded as properties and sold out for marriages, since bride price is been paid on them. Females have also been considered as products because they are forced into early marriages to reduce poverty since they are been bought by paying a bride price to their parents.

Tradition is held at high esteem and has been a led down idea and still exists today in most of the local communities in SSA. By believing that only a male child can inherit property, has placed male sex dominant over females. This established idea have retarded development because resources are not rationally distributed by both sexes thereby making the female sex subordinated. As a result of this established believes, inequality persistently exists in this primitive areas that are reluctant to accept new changes because of illiteracy and poverty. Inequality theory is therefore important in this project because it has deepened my understanding of the continuous male domination because of these established ideas that have been passed down to generations. Inequality theory is also relevant because it explains these beliefs in such ideas and goes a long way to increase gender inequality and reduce female empowerment in SSA.

Although there have been some changes in this traditional beliefs, but these changes mostly affects exposed families that is families that have acquired good education and have been exposed to more valuable cultures. Inheritance in these situations goes with responsibility and how you can manage the resources irrespective of being a male or female, though most often it ends up with problems from males since it has always been like that in most of the societies in SSA. Giving authority or property to a female is just like depriving a male from his traditional right. But with continuous realization on how these have been affecting the societal development, I personally think it is going to disappear with changing time. Thanks to the inequality theory that I am able to explain this primitive belief in most of SSA families and societies.

Connecting inequality theory through biology, it is relevant in this project because it has made me understand male domination in biological distinction of both sexes. This is because women and men are physically different in ways that make men to feel dominant. Through biological distinction in inequality, I came to understand why there is inequality in labor division. This is so because the theory persistently insist on the physical strength of men to occupy certain jobs. That is why there has been persistent gender discrimination in organizations and job opportunities because men think that some jobs can be physically carried out by them. For instance in SSA, it is hard to hear that a woman is a military general, bus driver, engineer, carpenter, technicians and or family head. Biological explanation also emphasize on the predisposition of men in extreme dangerous situation so to speak. In SSA men have always been involved in warfare and critical traditional decisions that involves sacrifices are carried out by men. Therefore, as a result of this, inequality is bound to exist and that is why I have employed it in my project to understand this in greater details.

However, with the advent of feminist theorist, and changing time, biological arguments for inequality in gender is gradually fading away. Technological improvement have made most jobs to be operated by machines and intellectual based not physical fitness. Therefore, both males and females can be trained to manipulate these machines to have a gender balance in job markets. However, since traditional African societies are still very backward and have not yet attained some level of technology, most jobs are still based on physical strength to acquire them. That is why biological explanation of the origin of inequality in gender is still very visible in SSA. Inequality theory is therefore useful to this project to understand the biological explanation of persistent inequality in physical strength, predisposition of men in dangerous situations and the reproduction of females that have made them subjugated and subordinated position since the beginning of time immemorial.

The modernization Theory:

According to (Deutsch 1961; Rostow 1960; Ruttan 1959), “modernization theory evolved from two ideas about social change developed in the nineteenth century: the conception of traditional vs. modern societies, that viewed development as societal evolution in progressive stages of growth” (Deutch 1961, Rostow 1960, Ruttan 1959) Following a modernization tradition, problems that have held back the development and empowerment of females in SSA have been irrational allocation of resources. Modernization theorist believe that for traditional African societies to become developed, there should be a rational distribution of resources for both sexes and the elimination of traditional, institutional and organizational roadblocks that have made Sub-Saharan African societies underdeveloped. Therefore, the society must pass through transformational stages to become modern.

General Assumptions of the theory:

Following Rostows modernization assumption, there have been five circular stages a society must pass through to become modern such as traditional society, precondition for take-off, take-off, the drive toward maturity and the age of high mass consumption (Rostow 1963, p; 127)

The stage of traditional society is characterized by primitive technology, pre-Newtonian science and spiritual behaviors in the material world. There is traditional gender inequality and no idea of female empowerment since the society is too primitive and recognizes male superiority. The traditional economy depends soly on primitive methods of farming and limited productivity. There is limited mobility in the traditional society and most agricultural lands are owned by men limiting the female powerless and have absolutely no say in land ownership. That is why development is still imbalance today in SSA because resources are irrationally distributed and there is no female inheritance of property. Since it is a linear pattern, for a society to move to a pre-takeoff stage it has to do away with some ideas in the traditional stage so that there should be a regular growth. (Peet and Hartwick 1999, P; 81)

The pre-take off society stage is characterized by development of modern technology and it application to agriculture and industry. Gender inequality is very high and there is little or no female empowerment because most machines were believed to be operated only by men. The idea of modernity was seen to develop sectors like educations, banking, commence, manufacturing and investment. This means that there was still very high gender discrimination in education and labor in SSA. Traditional African women could not own accounts according to traditional institutions and cannot be exposed to the public spheres. This was injected in a society that was still is primitive. (Ibid)

The take-off stage as assumed by the modernization view as the stage for technological expansion, socio-political structures of society including gender rules in the distribution of labor in most urban areas in SSA. There is a little economic growth and a period to begin industrialization. In this stage, the discourse on gender and empowerment to modernize and enhance development increases in the urban and still very dormant in the rural sectors of SSA. (Ibid)

The drive toward maturity stage is characterized by the spreading of technological expansion on economic activities and also there is sufficient entrepreneurship to practically fabricate heavy machines and equipment resulting from heavy industry. In this stage, the discourse on gender and participation have somehow gained grounds in most advanced societies and some prominent African cities. Women get more and more involved, the fight for economic growth and political dialogues and participation increases. (Ibid)

The stage of mass consumption is characterized by the production of durable consumer goods and services. The rate of production of goods and services surpasses the need of consumption and employment is very high at the urban milieu in SSA. At this level there is little gender gap and female empowerment is high in most urban centers. This means that most families are exposed to western education and enjoy high standard of social amenities in the big cities. There is capability to invest in social welfare and social security on both genders, therefore cultural values comprehend modernity. (Ibid)

Research have proven that most traditional African societies are at the take-off stage and at this level of development gender inequality is still very high at the rural sector and the society is very reluctant to any social and developmental changes. This means that the society is still very traditional, primitive and reluctant to social and development changes due to strong traditional and cultural beliefs. Also the theory explains why development has not made any significant progress in SSA especially in the rural communities where there is still a very wide gap between gender and female empowerment in SSA.

Modernization theory can be seen as the legacy of the ideas of progress developed in Europe in the eighteen century. This means that progress and evolution was viewed as an irreversible, natural and systematic path toward modernity. The idea of traditional vs. modern society propped up in the different stages of growth and development in each society. This evolutionary progress of society was seen as a transformational stage from the simple to the complex. Therefore SSA being in the third stage according to the modernization vision, female empowerment and gender equality is very low, since the society is somehow very primitive and

pre-occupied by male domination. Traditional beliefs which support female subordination is very high at this stage of development. (Latham 2000, p; 37)

According to Nick Cullather, the idea of natural pattern of progress and development, as assumed by the modernization theory is a set of ideas and discourse used as a strategy by US to try to differentiate the US from former colonizers in their actions toward third world countries. (SSA). It was in the interest of the US as they also think that it was in the interest of the third world countries (SSA) to elevate third world countries to engage in the transformational steps toward modernity, this means that both sexes were to be involved in the stages of development thereby reducing the gender gap and empowering women in the process of development. The American idea could help assist third world countries avoid “wasted steps” in transition. This was seen as the Americanization and westernization of third world countries which was not more or less than the policy of assimilation by the French. (Black girls could eat and dress like French girls in French colonies to be assimilated and modern) (Nick Cullather, 1997; 94)

The modernization theory advocates two fundamental concepts universalism and linear process. Both concept had and have huge impact on gender and female empowerment in SSA. This means that girls and women in Sub-Saharan Africa have the same cultural and identical background to move from a traditional stage to a modern stage in universal and linear order of development. (Redfield quoted in Cullarther) Supported by the same vision, all societies in SSA were seen as taking the same pattern toward modernity through recognizable stages, without considering other historical background, origin and geographical conditions. In the same light, following a modernization vision, all cultures were seen in a trajectory way. Therefore the theory never considered cultural institution, tradition, and customs and viewed as obstacles to female empowerment and gender equality. (Cullarther). By classifying the society in a one pattern way of development, the theory was therefore criticized by other prominent development theories such as the dependency theory, power theory and the rise of feminist thinking in SSA.

Critique of the theory:

“Modernization theory has received criticism in recent years from political scientists and political economists since it neglected cultural, historic, and socio-structural factors in it analysis” (Chirot,1986; Black, 1991; Wallerstein, 1980) The modernization theory has witnessed a lot of critiques from varying development theories to scholars, researchers, institutions and other development practitioners. Most prominent development critique of the modernization theory hold that cultural values would still continue despite the shift from a traditional to a modern society. Therefore the argument is that despite the modern values of the modernization theory to transform traditional African societies to become modern by reducing the wide gender gap and encouraging female empowerment, African values still persist despite the values of modernity to enhance development in SSA. “There is evidence that the broad cultural heritage of a society leaves imprints on values that endure despite the forces of modernization in other words cultural change depends on a societyA?s cultural heritage.” (Inglehart 2000c)

Sub-Saharan Africa is made up of diverse cultural backgrounds, origin and history of migration. Though jointly colonized by the West, the fact that the society is culturally divided in origin and history, the values of modernization cannot hold at the same pace in the African societies respectively. This means that linear and universalism of the modernization theory could not work effectively in SSA and considering the fact that societies give different respects to their cultural heritage as considered by the modernization theory as an obstacle for development. Take for example the Islam religion, practices and beliefs is very strong in the Muslim society in SSA, therefore the issue of gender and empowerment of Muslim women can be a serious disorganization of religious rights since the later is very stiff in it traditional religious claims. The modernization theory had never taken traditional religious beliefs into consideration as ascertain by many of it critics.

Previously there has been a lot of work done to determine the causes of domestic violence and their relationship with it. This literature review focuses on the theories related to causes of domestic violence and highlights the key findings of these theories. This literature review is a summary of selected sources which directly or indirectly address domestic violence and its causes. Sources range from academic research papers, other literature reviews, scholarly articles and online books.

Work and family have reciprocal relationship with each other and this has been proved by the research and the effects of one are spilled onto other. Occupational spillover effects are best explained by feminist and work-family theories because work and violence are gendered. Research that was done previously has ignored issue of violence when analyzing occupational spillover and has only focused on occupations influencing workers identities health outcomes, renting styles and health outcomes. Relationship is being discovered by researchers between interpersonal conflicts and arguments at work leading to arguments at home. There are few family violence researchers who have focused on occupational characteristics affecting intimate relationships. Occupational violence spillover means that men in physical violent jobs are more likely to cause violence on their partners because they have learnt at work that violence Is a legitimate way to exercise control on their partners. Compensatory masculinity focuses on work-family linkages and according to this, men who are unable to earn satisfactory income level and are dissatisfied in their working environment try to gain satisfaction at home by perpetrating violence at their female partners. It has been found by family violence researchers that men in blue collar, male dominated occupations have higher rates of domestic violence as compared to men having white collar jobs but the issue has not been examined thoroughly. Research has concluded that men in physically violent occupation usually bring their work home in the form of violence and their female partners suffers from occupational spillover. Few work-family researchers have focused on the role of occupational stress in causing domestic violence on intimate partner and are unable to explain the root causes of violence.

Research on intimate partner violence has explained the connection between income, education and employment with violence. Marital dependency (Kalmuss & Straus, 1990; Straus, Gelles, & Steinmetz, 1980) and stress frustration theories (Holtzworth-Munroe, Bates, Smutzler, & Sandin, 1997; Riggs, Caulfield, & Street, 2000; Straus, 1990; Straus et al.) view income, education, and employment as indicators of access to economic resources. According to Anderson, women face risk of abuse due to power differences rather than sociodemographic position. Traditional status of men along with several sociodemographic factors such as income, education, employment, race and social class increases the risk for women to face intimate partner violence. Marital dependency theory suggests that women are financially, educationally and occupationaly dependent on their male partners which limits their ability to end violent relationships. 1986). Lupri, Grandin, and Brinkerhoff (1994) suggest that because men hold the majority of high paying positions in society, it follows that they also command higher power in have adverse effects on marital relationships. Rogers and Amato (1997) and Rubin (1994) find that husbands with low level of income are likely to feel more insecure and consequently the couple will experience more marital problems. Socioeconomic differences favouring women are often viewed as uncomfortable and problematic by male partners.

According to Jasinski (2001), violence is used by men to construct traditional masculinity and when men are unemployed and unable to financially support their family, they use violence as a mean to regain their masculinity. Researchers have analyzed the impact of mens and womens financial contributon to household income and have concluded that overall poverty increases the risk of violence rather than income disparity between intimate partners. (Anderson, 1997;

McCloskey). Moreover, employment is also considered as an important factor causing violence and according to Macmillan & Gartner, a woman is more likely to experience violence when she is employed and has a higher job status compared to her husband. Many researchers have also found that women with higher education compared to their partners face greater risk of intimate partner violence than women with lower education (Hornung et al DeKeseredy and Hinch (1991)

Family violence and feminist researchers have focused on the role played by socioeconomic factors in causing partner violence but the literature lacks the exact role played by these factors in causing physical and emotional abuse so there is a continuous need to explore the relationship between income, employment and education with partner violence. Empirical analysis of the different forms of intimate partner violence and physical abuse is required to be done.

According to feminist theories, men perpetuate violence in order to maintain power and control and family violence researchers have concluded that structural environment plays an important role in causing domestic abuse. It has been found that elements of structural environment such as age, race, cohabition, educational and income resources have a relationship with domestic violence and these same structural elements do not lead to the violence in a similar fashion by men. Previously the role of cultural constructions of gender was ignored by the researchers and in most studies violence perpetrated by men is examined only. Moreover. Gender theorists argue that social constructs create masculinity and femininity and construction of feminine identity is much easier as compared to the construction of masculine identity. (Connell, 1987). Men try to maintain their masculinity by obtaining higher levels of income, more education and greater occupational prestige than women (Gerson, 1993; Segal, 1990). Men with higher educational resources and earning less income are more likely to perpetrate violence on their female partners than with lower educational resources and higher income (Fagot, Leinbach, & Hagan, 1986). Men use violence as a mean to maintain and re establish their power and control when they are deprived of material resources in their lives (Goldschneider & Waite, 1991). The study conducted by Horning Mcullough concluded that partners hold different expectations regarding decision making and housework when they have different educational levels.

The relationship between education and domestic violence should be studied more closely in the research because their relationship has been found inconsistent in the past studies (Lupri et al., 1994). Theories focusing on socioeconomic causes of domestic violence must be integrated with feminist theories to better understand the problem. There is a dire need of future research that should analyze and examine the interrelationship of sociodemographic factors and structures of gender and power. Strong relationship between domestic violence and age,cohabiting status, unemployment and socioeconomic status has been found by sociologists using national survey techniques. A link between stress and domestic assaults has been found by studies (Straus et al., 1980). Gender of victims and perpetrators hold a great importance when examining causes of domestic violence but the literature lacks an analysis of how and why gender matters in spousal violence. Furthermore, past studies of resource theory has limitations. One limitation is that the data is collected from one partner leading to gendered reporting bias. The literature lacks the emipirical and theoretical analysis of how gender matters in the relationship between resources and violence.

Research indicates that domestic violence may arise from feelings of low personal control among men and it negatively influences the personal control of women. According to perpetrator literature, feelings of personal control play a vital role in causing domestic abuse and the characteristics of perpetrator are low self esteem, poor self control and a high need for control. Research has proved that various aspects of social structural environment influences the men’s ability to perpetuate violence on women and these aspects are poverty social resources, stress and unemployment. A link has been found between socio structural conditions and domestic violence by the researchers. According to feminist theories, violence is used as an instrumental act by men when they have little control over an element of their environment such as unemployment and fewer resources to maintain or re-establish their sense of control.. According to studies conducted earlier, gender greatly influences personal control and domestic violence. Johnson (1995) suggests that there may be gender differences in motivation to control, physical strength differences that make violence effective, normative acceptability of control, inclination to use violence for control. According to Kirkwood (1993), men uses their personal resources and physical power to exert control on their female partners and if they also have access to more resources, they can use these to exert further control. Research conducted earlier has indicated that relationship between personal control and domestic violence is different for men and women and the experience of abuse is entirely different for men and women.

The literature has focused on men regarding control and domestic violence but it has not empirically tested the relationship between personal control and domestic violence

The literature is quite broad and vague when examining male control and domestic violence and it suggests that men initiate partner violence because they have little control over their partners and circumstances of their lives. More research should be conducted to find out more relationships among personal control and domestic violence and how the association is different for men and women. Moreover, there is a need of finding out possible gender differences using qualitative research.

There are many socioeconomic factors leading to domestic violence but the most important ones are poverty and low income. (Greenfeld et al., 1998; Rennison & Welchans,2000, Tjaden & Thoennes, 1998). According to interpersonal perspectives, the factors contributing to domestic violence are within the relationship conflict and ineffective conflict resolution increases the risk of violence for women. Family members aid in perpetuating violence on women violence (Hamberger & Hastings 1993, Cunningham et al 1998, Healey et al 1998, Eisikovits & Edleson 1989, Jewkes 2002). The most widely accepted theory of violence is that some groups in the society encourages the use of violence on women. According to feminist researchers, there are several control tactics used by men to exert power and control on women.

What shapes your self-concept of who you are? Discuss in relation to theories of the self in a social world.

The question of what actually shapes the self-concept of a person is one of the most complex topics in Psychology. The self and the development of the self-concept can be broken down in a series of explanations, which also depend on a number of characteristics such as social norms, gender roles, culture and many more. The essay will comprehend a number of explanations of how theories try to analyze the driving force or reasons behind the formation of the self-concept.

According to Murphy (1947) the self is “the individual known to the individual”. The perceptions and attitudes one holds towards oneself is what would define the self-concept. Psychologists have proposed various explanations of what the self-concept in fact is and what forms it. Higgins (1987) put forward the self-discrepancy theory which states that the difference between the actual, ideal and ought self forms the self. The actual self is the current self we are at present, whereas the ideal self strives to achieve the goals we think of as ideal and the ought self represents the self of how others would like us to be. The aim is to make ourselves feel good about us by erasing the differences between the actual self and our ideal/ought self (Dunning and Hayes, 1996). Higgins (1998) also suggested that the ought self also acts as a prevention of what not to do, therefore not expected by others. Merton’s self-fulfilling prophecy (1984) showed that other’s expectations can indeed change our behaviour, supporting the idea of the ought self. It is also supported by research out by Steele and Aronson (1995) who found that African-American students actually reduce effort and did not perform as well as they could have, because of less academic expectations put into them. Stainton Rogers (2003) presented a similar theory to Higgins (1987) but suggested that the self can be divided into three parts which mainly are: the personal self (an individual’s own conscious of oneself), the social self (classified by the social background the individual is in) and the relation self which relates to the relationships others have with the individual.

On the other hand, the explanation of possible selves by Markus and Nurius (1986) state that self consists of 2 parts: the vision of the self you dream of becoming i.e. the rich, successful etc. and the one you fear of i.e. the unemployed, the poor etc. This helps in having a specific goal to motivate us and to work towards to in order to achieve it. Lockwood and Kunda (1999) carried the idea further and found that models can inspire us to choose who we would like to be but also one should make sure that the model representing is indeed achievable. The image of a future model can also motivate us to make changes to one self e.g. quit smoking. However, Baumeister (1991) feared that not succeeding in who we want to be can have a negative effect on oneself, such as high levels of alcohol consumption.

Introspection is also put forward as an explanation to learn about oneself in which one privately thinks of who they are. Nisbett and Nilson (1977) emphasized on the fact that in reality we do not know why we act in a particular way in a specific situation but after the deed, we create logical theories explaining why we acted that way. It is misleading as Wilson and Kraft (1993) found that by creating reasons for their actions changed their behaviour, to match their stated reasons. As when introspecting we do not focus on the main driving force for the actions so it is likely to mislead our predictions about our actions in future.

Another distinctive theory put forward by Festinger (1954) relates the formation of the self-concept to something more complex rather than the theories explained so far. The social comparison theory proposes that in order to form one’s self-concept, individuals self-evaluate their behaviour by comparing their own behaviour to either a similar or dissimilar individual or to one’s own behaviour in the past, which in turn helps feeling affirmative about their own behaviour therefore reinforcing it. The temporal comparison describes the comparison of one’s present condition to the past. In social comparison, on the other hand, the individual compares their behaviour to others, referred to as the reference group. People mostly compare themselves to similar people to get approval for their own behaviour and to protect and boost one’s self esteem (Leary, 2001). It consists of two parts: downwards comparison and upwards comparisons (Bunk and Oldersma, 2001). Downwards comparison happens when one compares oneself to someone who is not doing as well as the individual, which as a result makes the individual feel better oneself. Upwards comparisons though occurs when the reference group is someone who is doing better, but also making the individual feel better, in a way to try and improve their own situation. However, Taylor and Lobel (1989) goes against this as they said that the individual will feel depressed and anxious if the reference group will always have someone more successful, rich, clever etc. in it.

Social identification theory (Tajfel and Turner, 1979) proposing that the membership of social groups affects our behaviour and relates to who we are contradicts the social comparison theory as it states that we are mainly representing our social group of how we interact and identify ourselves rather than relating each other to individuals on a one-to-one basis. Furthermore, Tajfel et al. (1979) state that identifying oneself with a social group gives one positive self-esteem. Self-esteem also plays an important part in forming the self-concept, discussed in following research.

Higgins (1987) found that people with low self-esteem often give up quickly and are more likely to be depressed if they fall short of their hopes. Also, people are more likely to be anxious if they feel they fell short of what they ought to be. Similarly, low and high self esteem can be linked to low and high self-efficiency, respectively. The self-efficiency theory (Bandura, 1989) states that it is not only determined by past interactions of what we are able to accomplish but also current interactions to the environment and people. This idea is supported by Collins (1982) as he looked at children with varying mathematical skills and either were low or high self efficient. He asked them to do a mathematical task and found that those who had a high level of self-efficiency performed better and did not give up if stuck, whereas this was less true for the children with low self-efficiency levels as they gave up quickly and were slower in solving the problem regarding their skills they had.

Furthermore, Weinberg et al. (1979) carried out a study in which they raised or lowered participants’ self-efficiency beliefs by giving them fake feedback on how well they performed on competitive tasks. They found that in following physical endurance tasks, those with a higher feedback did clearly better and tried to succeed even if problems aroused, whereas in the other group participants gave up much quicker and were not so enthusiastic about succeeding. This supports the self-efficiency theory and also supporting the belief that the levels of self-efficiency we have can give us a mental image of what we are and how we will act or perform.

Nevertheless, the self-perception theory (Bem, 1972) suggests that we learn about ourselves by observing how we act and that self-concept is developed through social impact behaviour. If there is no force to choose a particular behaviour and one does it with their own consent, one draws conclusions that this is what we are like and therefore the behaviour reflects us. However, Markus (1977) said that it is the reflection of past experiences, which form through the self-schema model, that are useful in processing information relevant to the self. It also proposed that information learned from the treatment of people towards us, makes us perceive specific behaviour about ourselves, e.g. being funny because people laughed wherever I go. This process is called reflected appraisal. Cooley (1902) put forward the looking glass theory suggesting for developing oneself it is crucial to get feedback from others. Also, Mead (1934) called this process the ‘reflexive self’, as one observes, reacts to and plans subsequent behaviour.

An important part of how we perceive ourselves also relates to gender differences, which none of the theories above mentioned. Guimond et al. (2007) stated that gender is not only important for differentiating between genders but gender also plays an important part in determining for we respond, interact and most importantly perceive ourselves. In addition, Cross and Madson (1977) noted that one of the most basic gender differences relating to self-concept is that women are more likely to develop as being interdependent, whereas men are more likely to develop independence. However, a weakness of this model is that it does not state a specific reason to why men and women differ in self-construal.

Last but not least, one could argue that behaviour vary mostly among cultures so theories or explanations for the self described so far are not taking culture into account so it cannot represent everyone. As Marsella et al. (1994) argues that “despite much the psychological research into the self, it is still irrelevant to a large part of the world.” G.H. Mead (1934) expressed the importance of social interaction in developing the self as he belies that social interaction does form the self-concept, however, it is not only the interaction that helps, but also the social norms, personal beliefs and cultural patterns.

Moreover, research carried out by Simpsons (2000) found that 85% of people believe that it is possible to be whoever one wants to be in American culture. American culture which is an individualistic society gives more value to independence and freedom, which gives it more freedom to choose how you want to see yourself. But this is less true for a collectivist society as in Korea, people rate tradition and shared practices as being more important in contrast to developing a unique self-concept (Choi and Choi, 2002), supporting the belief of how cultural differences can affect the formation of one’s self-concept.

Likewise, Markus (2001) supported the idea as well, as Korean ads are more likely to feature people together rather than giving importance on a personal choice or uniqueness of oneself. Also emphasizing the differences, Boneva and Frieze (2001) found that people from individualistic culture value work and achievement more, thereby giving more importance to forming a self-identity and uniqueness, when resettling in a new country rather than being interested for relationships and family. In addition, self-esteem, which leads to the formation of one’s self-concept, does also vary among different cultures. Gray-Little and Hafdahl (2000) carried out comparisons of 261 studies of more than half a million of people and found that black people had higher self-esteem scores than for people. However, high levels of self-esteem can also cause problems. Baumeister, Campbell, Krueger and Vohs (2003) emphasized on the fact that low self-esteem can lead to aggression and negativity towards others whereas, however high self esteem can lead to bullying, narcissism etc. (Baumeister, Campbell, Krueger and Vohs (2005). Such behaviour triggered by the levels of self-esteem can result in what we are and how we perceive ourselves, thus forming our self-concept.

Compare and contrast any two theories of social disorder in contemporary UK society

In UK’s society, like in many other Modern society’s Life is ordered in a certain way, They live in what is called a democratic society where everyone in theory has a voice and is heard and everyone gets to help pick who is in power or rather they get the freedom of making a choice. Those that are placed in power by the majority of the society in theory help maintain the social balance and laws that will govern that society in a certain way. This type of society is arranged in a certain order and those that live in this society are accustomed to life having an order and an acceptable set of rules in which they live within. This is social order an accepted Group belief on the ways of life in the society. The people who live in these society’s are accustomed to its order and anything or anyone that disrupts their order are seen as a threat to their beliefs and on their ways of life these people are a seen as a disruptive or called and disruptive element and are said to bring disorder. This behavior can be categorized as antisocial or Social Disorder. But who gets to decide on what is actually classed as order and what is classed as disorder?”

To be able to provide an answer to the question about theories of disorder in contemporary UK Society. An understanding of social order and where it comes from needs to be understood. Then looking at why social disorder is, and how it affects society on a whole.

By doing so a better idea of UK societies is gained and why order is so important and why disorder can become such an issue to society. Looking first at Social order and how people get accustomed to order.

People get used to their society working in a certain way it becomes a natural accepted way of life to them. But who decides on this way of life and what the order should be. An attempt can be made to try to show this by comparing and contrasting the works of two social scientists Erving Goffman and Michel Foucault (Silva pp.316).

According to Geoffman’s Apotheosis people come together in many ways. Society is not a separate entity with needs of its own but rather instead, society is a construction of many individual parts these parts made up of actions and interactions of many parts. Society is like a vast network of individual parts and that social order is caused by action put together by its individual parts. These are not repeated the same every time, as actions are made remade, worked and reworked all the time. This can simply best be summed up in saying. Interactional order creates social order (Silva pp 317).

In comparison when the work of the social scientist Michel Foucault is looked at, He examined how the social order is organized and shaped. Foucault claimed society is made and remade through, power of discourses and authoritative knowledge. His apotheosis was that the dominant ways of thinking, Came from ether an authoritative entity, professionals and experts in positions of authority and that the order in society is made from alterative power and discourse. Foucault says that “in any given historical period, ways of thinking and talking are organized in systems of discourses”. These discourses can be seen as what determines the dominant ways of thinking and subsequently what the order in the society will be (Silva pp.319-324).

In the comparison between the work of Geoffman and Foucault, They both have different apotheosis as has been shown earlier and both gave a strong explanation on how order is created in society and where it comes from. Both had their own merits but Foucault Seems apart from lacking to take the creative process of the individual into account uses a scientific basis to his apotheosis which helps to add to the validity of his claims and this builds a stronger apotheosis than the one put across by Geoffman.

Now that a basic idea on what social order is has been gained its now time to take a look at what social disorder is, who creates it. To gain a better a basic idea of social disorder the works of the two social scientists Stuart Hall and Stanley Cohen, have been used and will be compared and contrast.

So let’s first look at what is social Disorder? Social disorder can be said to be any thing differing from ‘normal’. There is no universally recognized definition as to what contributes social disorder, disorderly/anti-social (which people are identified as anti-social or disorderly) or essential definition of certain things being ‘right’ and others ‘wrong’. The definition of disorderly or ‘anti-social’ is actually constructed in specific societies and therefore differs between places. Indeed, the very term ‘anti-social’ is of relatively recent origin (Kelly, Toynbee.pp367-368). And such definitions are potentially an issue of conflict and power. This leads to the issue of the value-laden nature of defining disorderly/anti-social behaviors’ and people via law, social policy and media. A definition of disorderly/anti-social behavior is also a concept invoked by communities, an imagined ‘we’ who judge some activities and people as disorderly/anti-social in the separated, yet overlapping, social space, Toynbee.pp368). Antisocial behavior’ has now become a catch-all term to describe anything from noisy neighbors and graffiti to kids hanging out on the street. Indeed, it appears that almost any kind of unpleasant behavior can now be categorized as antisocial or Social Disorder.

Stanley Cohen puts forward the Apotheosis on social disorder that society’s media over reacts to an aspect of a group or individual’s behavior which may be seen as a challenge to existing social normality. However, the type of media response and the way it deals with the representation of that behavior will actually helps to define it, communicate it and portray it to society as a model for others to observe and adopt in their own way. He puts forward that the way group or individuals behavior represented in the media causes moral panic and that the fears generated are out of all proportion to the scale of the actual behavior which is the subject of the panic by society and will arguable fuel yet further sociably unacceptable behavior. (Kelly, Toynbee.pp378)

Stuart Hall and his colleagues employing Cohen’s definition of moral panic theorized that the “rising crime rate equation” has an ideological function relating to social control. Crime statistics, in Hall’s view, are often manipulated for political and economic purposes. Moral panics (e.g. over mugging) could thereby be ignited in order to create public support for the need to “police the crisis.” this was the creation of a ‘Law and Order society’.

The media played a central role in this new law and order Society “in order to reap the rewards of lurid crime stories. After a period of stabilized consent the government relationship to the British society was starting to begin to crack and was coming to an end, in the form of social and political dissent. This dissent ranged from strikes and industrial unrest, intense political and military conflict in Northern Ireland, to the emergence of new social movements trying to promote or provoke social change. (Kelly, Toynbee.pp371)

The British state those that are those in authority the most rich or powerful in society e.g. government, police, judges, politicians and lords used a crack down on crime and violence, particularly among young men of ethnic origin. This changed the status and the state it became a definer’ of disorder. The media then taking the cue from those in power made use of terminology, for instance the word ‘mugging ‘and extended it in society eyes, giving them a popular ring. This helped cover the deep-seated causes of social conflict, chiefly inequality, and the original social issues were now masked and turned into a moral and legal struggle e.g. violence’. This was the birth of a ‘Law and Order society'(Kelly, Toynbee.pp380)

In conclusion in this essay it was shown what social order was and how it works and how disorder is made and used examples of how order works and about disorder was used to build a full picture. First by Geoffman who saw society as a network of individuals interacting. Then by Foucault who saw society as controlled and dominated by the powerful and authorities. Then we looked Stanley Cohen theories about media manipulating and escalating disorder in contemporary UK society and in part causing grater disorder in society. Then finally, Stuart Hall theory that social disorder was used as a way of manipulating issues and discord in society and that the media was used as a tool to suit there means.

So to conclude society in UK is a democracy where we vote for who has the power then those who are in power use the media to manipulate and escalate to cover deep-seated causes of social conflict and they become the definers of what social disorder is and use it as required to keep stability in their society. They become the definer of social disorder and can change it to suit there political and social needs.

. Word Count 1536

Self Reflection

On reflection I have totally enjoyed this assignment I found it has given me a large challenge translating the information given into an acceptable essay. Through putting this essay together I have learned a lot. The hardest thing was actually putting my essay together. The research into how to achieve the required results was the best bit

Introduction

Who am I? What makes me the person I am today? We might have thought about these questions at least once in our life and yet, we are still figuring out the answer. To explain oneself about identity is not a simple task. A lot of internal and external factors should be considered in the making of our identity. Identity is important in our life as it represents how we are being accepted or rejected in a society. Is it the differences that brought us together in the world we live or the similarities? Basically, we as the species of Homo sapiens are made from the essence of biological structures. Our ancestors (Barker, 1999) are always becoming the parameter to determine ourselves as who we are as it indicates our origin and how we live our life since from the beginning of our descendant throughout the history as an ‘unchanging truth’ (Woodward, 1997: 12). This outlook of identity is supported by the essentialist theories, which suggested that identity is seen as a set of fixed characteristics, which do not change over the time (Woodward, 1997). In understanding the sexuality and gender identities, essentialism claims that our physical body sets a boundary of who we are and provide the basis of our identity (Woodward, 1997). However, does that mean it gives us the true meaning of identity? Every human being is so unique to one another. Even the biologically twin siblings have different DNAs and possess extremely opposite characters. This can lead us to the question, does our identities developed by the nature or against the nurture? As one’s identity of a member in a particular marginalized group is being undermined, it becomes a major turning point for the political movements (Woodward, 1997). It is argued by many theorists that identity can be seen in a wider perspective rather than the essentialist identities for example identity as an ongoing process (Barker, 1999), identity as constructed with the ‘natural closure of solidarity and allegiance established foundation’ (Hall, 1996: 2) and identity as social construction (Butler, 1990). Until today, the viewpoints of identity between the essentialist and non-essentialist remain collide in academics debates.

The Concepts of Essentialist Identity

Identity is so crucial in one’s life and exists at many stages, as it may be located in the ‘global, national, local and personal levels’ (Woodward, 1997: 1) Without identity, one might feel being estranged within the society, treated differently from the others and that could bring problems afterwards. But does by possessing an identity is adequate enough to be considered as part of the society? What kind of identity is recognized as ‘the one’, which fits within?

In his article, ‘He moves about in Wonderland: Theories of identity and strategic essentialism’, Eduardo Barrera suggested essentialist identities are ‘theoretically dead’ and non-essentialist identities are ‘exhausted’. He criticized that essentialist identities are often characterized by ‘stability, that is, it already implied a fixed identity’. He prefigures this critique in Alice’s response to the Caterpillar and his implicitly Cartesian question taken from Alice in the Wonderland story:

“Who are you?” said the Caterpillar. Alice replied, rather shyly “I-I hardly know, Sir, just at present – at least I know who I was when I got up this morning, but I think I must have been changed several times since then.” “What do you mean by that?” said the Caterpillar, sternly. “Explain yourself!” “I can’t explain myself, I’m afraid Sir,” said Alice, “because I’m not myself, you see.”

Here in this example, it can be understood that the Caterpillar is representing the essentialism where he seeks to find the fixed identity which ‘do not alter across the time’ (Woodward, 1997: 11) in Alice’s answer. Alice on the other hand represents the non-essentialism where she explained that she has been changed several times, which means her identity is unstable and thus it is hard for her to identify herself. She focuses on the differences of the characteristics (Woodward, 1997) she had across the time. This is only an example to reflect one aspect of essentialism concept of identity.

Apart from this, essentialism claims on different foundation as such ‘political movements can seek some certainty in the affirmation of identity through appeals either to the fixed truth of shared past or to biological truths’ (Woodward, 1997: 13). That shows identity is viewed as ‘historical truth about identity’ (Woodward, 1997: 19) passed from one generation to another within the culture and across the centuries without any changes taking place. For example, the Chinese people have been using chopsticks as their utensils for eating purposes since the era of its Emperor more than hundreds of years ago and even now in the twenty-first century, where everything has been modernized, they are still using those utensils as part of their eating style. That is how the Chinese consume their food and that makes their identity as the Chinese remains the same over the time. But does by using chopsticks as your eating style is enough to make you a real Chinese? Then what do we call those people for example from the Middle-East, who use chopsticks as well but they have nothing to do with the Chinese, historically or biologically? Are they considered to have the Chinese identity? Woodward (1997: 19) in her example of English identity questioned “Could there be one, authentic English past which can be used to support and define ‘Englishness’ as a late-twentieth-century identity?” If identity according to essentialism is fixed and transhistorical, then whose history is more valid to conform the identity? For instance, the history of Dutch as one of the colonial powers who conquered a few parts of the world but what about the history of those people who have been colonized? How the colonized people view or have the ideology of Dutch? Both views about the identity of Dutch are historically true but whose ‘historical truth about identity counts’ (Woodward, 1997:19)? As Woodward (1997: 20) mentioned, “Histories are contested, not least in the political struggle for recognition of identities”. The recognition of identities is continually being explored by looking at the differences in the concepts of cultural identity and seeking the traits of authentication identity under the same past. This is supported by Stuart Hall in his article, ‘Cultural identity and diaspora’ (1990) where he acknowledges two main key points of thinking about cultural identity. The first one exhibits the position where a community try to find the truth about its past in the same shared history and culture which then be represented through languages, symbols, artifacts, discourse and so on. The second concept of cultural identity as Hall suggests it as ‘a matter of “becoming” as well as of “being”‘. It is noted that Hall does not deny that identity has its past but this kind of past endures continuous alteration and that we eventually recreate of what it is known as the historical identities. This recreation of identities may vary from one another and takes a long time to reach from one structure to another and occurs within the culture. Hall argues that in order to recognize the difference, the meaning is never fixed or complete. Thus, there is always a fluidity of identity (Woodward, 1997: 21).

Interestingly, Chris Barker (1990: 3) also suggests the same idea about identity in which he quoted, “By identity project is meant the idea that identity is not fixed but created and built on, always in process, a moving towards rather than an arrival.” This project is based on what we think of our identity of the past that reflects in our present time and afterwards make us think of how we would like to be in the future. For example, it is clear that Asian teenage girls are more reserve and polite as it is what they should become according to their ancestors tradition which has been passed from mother to daughter. In certain point, they cannot challenge or give out their opinion against the elders in their family and if they do, they are considered to be rude. In simple words, they are not allowed to voice out their opinion unless they are becoming adults and hold a responsibility. However, that fixed identity of Asian teenage girls is less likely to be seen in today’s society. It is undeniable that in certain part of Asia, this kind of identity is still being practice but there is some progress in another part of Asia that this identity has evolved where in certain families, the teenage girls’ voice is also being considered important. Besides, they are even encouraged to speak up their mind when there is a situation in the family. This kind of new identity might be adopted and influenced from the television through globalization as Barker (1990) points out identity is becoming more complex when we have more resources. That is Barker (1990: 4) suggests, “The process of globalization provides us with just an increased level of cultural resources.” Though television might not be the main factor that can construct and change one identity, it is unquestionably that it gives us the ideology of how one can have some particular identity for particular reason by representing the meanings and messages of the others (Barker, 1990). We tend to make sense of what we see in the television with our real daily life and television has been a major resource since then. It is therefore the concept of cultural identity according to Barker (1990: 7) “Does not refer to a universal, fixed, or essential identity but to a contingent, historically and culturally specific social construction to which language is central.” Further, identity can also be argue as not a single but multiple identities one can have where it is being ‘cross-cut and dislocate’ (Barker, 1990: 8) within time and space. For example, the black identity referred to essentialism would be those people who are born in Africa but what about the people who their national identity is not African but American or British? The black American or the black British might have different experience from the white American and British where their identities are much more complex and vary. Thus the meaning of American-ness, Britishness, blackness and so forth are not subject to be fixed and single but instead it is ‘a process that will never finished or completed’ (Barker, 1990: 28). Identity can be viewed as different forms of categorizations such as nationality, gender, social status, race, religion, ethnicity and many more. Indeed, there is no specific ‘essence’ to what identity is (Barker, 1990: 28).

Sexuality and Gender Identity

Identity according to essentialist is seen as being inherited and passed from one generation to another. It is made up from the internal element rather than the external influences. That is, what runs in your veins is the primary fundamental nature of becoming who you are. It suggests we are how we are because of the genetic composition we undergone when we were in the womb (Woodward, 1997).

Generally, in our common sense knowledge we see our body as a ‘natural, biological entity’ (Woodward, 1997: 73). In this point of view, naturalistic claim that our body is simply base on biological unit in which the structure of one self and society are founded (Woodward, 1997). The sex of a newborn child is determined whether ‘a penis is present at birth’ (Woodward, 1997: 75). It is the male sex chromosome, XY, which form the penis. If the ‘Y’ component is not there, then it will turn out to be a vagina, which comprise of XX component known as the female sex chromosome. When the body reached puberty, the hormonal changes will take place governed by the sex chromosome genotype and develop the sex characteristics of our body (Woodward, 1997). However, the external factors such as the lifestyle can also contribute to the development of sexual characteristics (Woodward, 1997). Woodward (1997:73) stated, “Naturalistic views hold that inequalities are not socially constructed, contingent and reversible but are given by the determining power of the biological body.” This lay on the matter of sexuality and gender inequalities (Woodward, 1997). Giving a situation, women are always being seen as weak and vulnerable because biologically, their body system is structured with the hormones that have strong relations to emotions and feelings. The estrogen level in female body which is higher than the estrogen level in male body has always become the reason for that. Thus, in nature, women are always being treated unequally as compared to men. To one extent, women are seen or deem as dirt. Besides, women also have been located in a very low status. For example, it is always accepted for men to be playful and ‘sleeping around’ with women but it is always wrong for women to do the same thing because as expected, it is not in the women’s nature to have that kind of behavior. Instead, for women who do the same thing like man in that matter, they will be considered as cheap or even worst will be labeled as the slut. It is normal for men to have that behavior but a bad thing for women to do so. Men on the other hand, are viewed as strong and dominant, again, by the nature of the biological system men possessed. Their hormone which is the male hormone known as testosterone (Woodward, 1997), somehow seem to relate them less with ‘vulnerable emotions’ and focuses more on the physical ability. Physically, the body differences between men and women do exists and cannot be denied thus make men looks or perceived as more stronger than women. Both female and male have the testosterone and estrogen hormones (Woodward, 1997: 75) but the level of differences of each hormone divides the obvious characteristics of female and male. Thus, would it be possible for both sexes to overlap? Does the overlapping process will establish the sexual and gender identity of one? Hence, do sex and gender constructed by the biological process or by social construction? As Butler (1990: 9) argues, “Originally intended to dispute the biology-is-identity formulation, the distinction between sex and gender serves the argument that whatever biological intractability sex appears to have, gender is culturally constructed: hence, gender is neither the casual result of sex nor seemingly fixed as sex. The unity of the subject is thus already potentially contested by the distinction that permits of gender as a multiple interpretation of sex.” That is, whatever sex the children had when they were born, that does not guarantee what gender they may become in their adolescence stage and finally adulthood. The journalist, author and novelist John Colapinto tells the true story of John/Joan case in the book entitled, ‘As nature made him: The boy who was raised as a girl’:

David Reimer was one of the most famous patients in the annals of medicine. Born in 1965 in Winnipeg, he was 8 months old when a doctor used an electrocautery needle, instead of a scalpel, to excise his foreskin during a routine circumcision, burning off his entire penis as a result. David’s parents (farm kids barely out of their teens) were referred to Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore, home of the world’s leading expert in gender identity, psychologist Dr. John Money, who recommended a surgical sex change, from male to female. David’s parents eventually agreed to the radical procedure, believing Dr. Money’s claims that this was their sole hope for raising a child who could have heterosexual intercourse-albeit as a sterile woman with a synthetic vagina and a body feminized with estrogen supplements.

For Dr. Money, David was the ultimate experiment to prove that nurture, not nature, determines gender identity and sexual orientation-an experiment all the more irresistible because David was an identical twin. His brother, Brian, would provide the perfect matched control, a genetic clone raised as a boy.

David’s infant “sex reassignment” was the first ever conducted on a developmentally normal child. (Money had helped to pioneer the procedure in hermaphrodites.) And according to Money’s published reports through the 1970s, the experiment was a success. The twins were happy in their assigned roles: Brian a rough and tumble boy, his sister Brenda a happy little girl.

The reality was far more complicated. At age 2, Brenda angrily tore off her dresses. She refused to play with dolls and would beat up her brother and seize his toy cars and guns. In school, she was relentlessly teased for her masculine gait, tastes, and behaviors. She complained to her parents and teachers that she felt like a boy; the adults-on Dr. Money’s strict orders of secrecy-insisted that she was only going through a phase. Meanwhile, Brenda’s guilt-ridden mother attempted suicide; her father lapsed into mute alcoholism; the neglected Brian eventually descended into drug use, pretty crime, and clinical depression.

When Brenda was 14, a local psychiatrist convinced her parents that their daughter must be told the truth. David later said about the revelation: “Suddenly it all made sense why I felt the way I did. I wasn’t some sort of weirdo. I wasn’t crazy.”

David soon embarked on the painful process of converting back to his biological sex. A double mastectomy removed the breasts that had grown as a result of estrogen therapy; multiple operations, involving grafts and plastic prosthesis, created an artificial penis and testicles. Regular testosterone injections masculinised his musculature. Yet David was depressed over what he believed was the impossibility of his ever marrying. He twice attempted suicide in his early 20s.

David did eventually marry a big-hearted woman named Jane, but his dark moods persisted. He was plagued by shaming memories of the frightening annual visits to Dr. Money, who used pictures of naked adults to “reinforce” Brenda’s gender identity and who pressed her to have further surgery on her “vagina.”

When David was almost 30, he met Dr. Milton Diamond, a psychologist at the University of Hawaii and a longtime rival of Dr. Money. A biologist by training, Diamond had always been curious about the fate of the famous twin, especially after Money mysteriously stopped publishing follow-ups in the late 1970s. Through Diamond, David learned that the supposed success of his sex reassignment had been used to legitimize the widespread use of infant sex change in cases of hermaphrodites and genital injury. Outraged, David agreed to participate in a follow-up by Dr. Diamond, whose myth-shattering paper (co-authored by Dr. Keith Sigmundson) was published in Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine in March 1997 and was featured on front pages across the globe.

This is a story about a boy who didn’t have the choice to choose what gender he supposed he’d like to have. It is clear that the female sex characteristics as well as the gender identity were asserted and injected into his body in order to change him from a boy to a girl not just physically but mentally. He had to undergo psychological process to affirm him that he is a girl and the way his parents treated him as a girl. However, his body kept on resisting those projections. It turned out to be the other way round and everything went wrong. He even experienced identity crisis where he felt that he was trapped in someone else’s body but could not find the solutions for that entire crisis he had. He went through all the ‘construction process’ without even had any slightest idea that he was born a boy. Hence, this case is different from the case were the transgendered, who undergone surgical treatment to transform their sex, by chance, had the choice to choose in which they make their own decision and thus socially constructed their identity by that process. It is remarkable that this case is relevance in supporting the essentialism theories about identity explicitly about sex and gender identity. The social construction process had failed to shape him as a girl. Instead, when he reached puberty and when he knew the truth about his original sex identity, he finally can appear to relate and make sense of the nature of his body. Referring to this case, the question of ‘nature vs. nurture’ has finally found the answer.

Identity Politics

According to Woodward (1997:24), “Identity politics involve claiming one’s identity as a member of an oppressed or marginalized group as a political point of departure and thus identity becomes a major factor in political mobilization.” The hope and aspirations for these groups of oppressed people lies in the new social movements that have been emerged in the 1960s in the West where they can either celebrate their uniqueness as well as analyze any particular oppression occurred (Woodward, 1997). In understanding this uniqueness, it engages biological trait of identity and also the historical fixed truth (Woodward, 1997). For example, how many women are there who been given positions as CEOs in companies or at least in the top hierarchical management? Mostly, the men dominate these positions in corporate world as well as in the public service. Why does this situation occur? It is true that there are women who possess these high statuses but still, it is just the minority. Is it because women’s biological role as mothers which makes them intrinsically more soft and serene (Woodward, 1997) become the grounds for men to suppress women’s right in holding those positions? Feminism might have been fighting for women’s right about this issue since ages. In contradiction within feminism itself, there is also Black civil rights where they defend against the acknowledgment of women’s assumption in the movement categorization of women where that category is seen as white women (Woodward, 1997). Besides, sexual politics gives impact in the life of gay and lesbian as well. As they are perceived as ‘immoral and abnormal’ (Woodward, 1997) by society, it is difficult for those who openly declared their sexual orientation, to be given a particular job fairly or even accepted within peers or colleagues or even worst, in the family itself. In fact, they have to keep their sex orientation a secret and struggling in their daily life not to expose their true identity while the more so called normal heterosexual can easily and openly live their life as opposed to homosexual.

Conclusion

In conclusion, there is no clear-cut definition of what identity is. It can be seen there are arguments from two distinctive points of views in between the essentialism and the non-essentialism. There are two key points from essentialism perspective. First, identity is naturally biological fixed and seen as biology entity one possesses. Second, identity is culturally unchanging across the time within the history that brings the concept of belongingness. Non-essentialism on the other hand argues that identity is more fluid and contingent. Thus, identity is seen more likely to be constructed within the society as an ongoing process. It is the byproduct of many interventions and ‘intersection of different components’ (Woodward, 1997: 28). However as Woodward (1997:28) argues, “Contingent identity poses problems for social movements as political projects, especially in asserting the solidarity of those who belong.” In determining one’s sexuality and gender, it is crucial that every decision made fits within the capability of oneself. That is, the body belongs to whom it possess. It is not in anyone’s position to decide who should become ‘male or female’ but lies within the owner of the body. The consequences of both theories may give great impact in our life. According to Freund’s work (1982, 1990) focuses on the body’s inferior in, “There is evidence to suggest that being in stressful situations, which contradict our sense of who we are, can have neuro-hormonal consequences that adversely affect blood pressure and our immune systems. Overwhelming emotional episodes such as anger and hostility, anxiety and depression, and feelings of hopelessness and helplessness have also been linked to damaging physiological changes – primarily concerned with our nervous and endocrine systems (the latter referring to glands that secrete hormones directly into the bloodstream)” (Woodward, 1997: 85). This, can relate to the case of John/Joan, where he at the end of his life, committed suicide for the burden he carried by going through different phases of gender confusions in his life.

Bibliography
Barker, C. (1999) Introduction: Television, Globalization. In C. Barker. Television, Globalization and Cultural Identities. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Butler, J. (1990) Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. London: Routledge.
Colapinto, J. (2000) As Nature Made Him: The Boy Who Was Raised As A Boy. Great Britain: Quartet Books.
Hall, S. (1996) Who Needs ‘Identity’. In S. Hall and Paul du Gay (eds) Wuestions of Cultural Identity. London: Sage.
Rutherford, J (1990) A Place Called Home. In J. Rutherford (ed) Identity. London: Lawrence and Wishart.
Woodward, K. (1997) Introduction and Concepts of Identity and Difference. In K. Woodward (ed) Identity and Difference. London: Sage.
Barrera, E. In an article He moves about in Wonderland: Theories of Identity and Strategic Essentialism. El Paso: University of Texas.

There have been a number of theories put forward by various Institutions, Organizations, Authors, Scholars, Researchers, and Development practitioners, somehow to explain the problem why the issue of gender varies from region to region and why implementing gender equality, and female empowerment is lower than expected in SSA. Amongst these theories are the Inequality and the Modernization theory used in this project to explain the wide gender problems existing in SSA. Borrowing from the words of John Martenussen, most of these theories have been propounded by Western and North American authors and have been termed growth and development theories. (Martenussen, 1997; p.51) As far as this project is concern, I am going to use the parts of the theories that are relevant to the project.

The Inequality Theory:

The origin of gender Inequality between men and women has been one of the most intellectual debates after the rise of modern feminism. Great thinkers in the history of ideas such as Aristotle and Thomas Quinas suggested speculative interpretation of gender differences. Continuously, nineteenth century evolutionary theorist such as Bachofen and Karl Marx consider various possible evolutionary sequences in organization kinship and gender relations. Some early efforts aimed at justifying existing institutions and others to question them sound like contemporary standard. The argument behind the origin of feminist analyses is the ideological implication of female subordination over the centuries. Also, there have been a high superior prevalence of male status across time, space and social circumstances that are beyond denial especially in SSA. Therefore the pervasiveness of male dominance is the absolute aim of analyzing gender differences. The question that arises is that “how can the apparent universal subordination of female be reconciled with equality in SSA with it strong traditional background? (Robert Marx Johnson 2005 p; 30).

Assumptions of the Inequality Theory:

Firstly, Inequality theory explains the biological difference between men and women which is inescapable, amongst race, class, culture and tradition irrespective of being developed or underdeveloped. According to Linsey 2007, sex is the biological difference between men and women while gender is the social construction of sexes considering race, politics, social, economic, culture and traditional background. This cultures and traditions vary from place to place and from culture to culture. These cultures that are learned change with time within and between cultures. (Linsey 2007, P; 97)

Following this sex distinction between male and female, some advanced societies (Western and North American societies) have tried to narrow down the gender gap by empowering females, by redefining laws and ignoring others to enhance development. That notwithstanding, the distinction still persists and would always be there because no matter all the feminist analyses on sex and gender, humans would never revert nature on this perspective. Research have proven that no amount of theorist thinking can subtle the simple fact of biological distinction, therefore inequality would persistently exist no matter what. The question that ponders my mind is, why Sub-Saharan Africa is still lacking behind to comprehend culture and tradition to reduce the wide gender gap, thereby empowering females to enhance development?.

Secondly, content and expression of this biological difference is exaggerated in the situation in SSA. Tracing back from history until date, most of the hardest and most commanding jobs are carried out by men therefore inequality is bound to exist between sexes. The fact that men are a stronger sex to resist extreme hash conditions makes them dominant irrespective of sex division. Complex cultural societies are build up by institution that keeps men at a dominant position. This make the female sex constantly relegated at the background. The norms and values that govern these complex societies (SSA) procure men at the forefront. By respecting this norms and values women would be hardly seen in the public spheres. (Sushama Sahay, in king and Hill Anne. p; 89)

Thirdly, Inequality theory try to make some kind of biological differences that are sufficient and necessary to persistently cause inequality between sexes and puts men at a commanding and dominant position. There are three imputed biological differences that have received much attention by the inequality view, such as reproduction by females, physical capacity and predisposition toward violence. “Anthropologists largely agree that women have hardly occupied position of higher status or political power than men in any society anywhere, anytime” (Buthler 2006) Some feminist theorist argue that, reproduction everywhere is done by females that subordinates their position to men, others say that men are physically dominant in their actions and activities and set rules that are of their own advantage. Some theorist argue that men are very aggressive than women, that put them at a dominant position thereby creating inequality between the both sexes. (Buthler 2006 P; 78)

Lastly, apart from huge gender inequality and female empowerment sluggishness in SSA, inequality can also be traced amongst races and class. There have been and there are still traces of inequality amongst the white race and black race as well as amongst the upper and lower class group. There are two different kinds of historical inequality, example that can illustrate this point. First of all, I will want to look back at the history of colonialism and neocolonialism in SSA by the west that alone speak volumes of inequality and domination over a continent and makes a particular race dominant over the other. The history of racial inequality amongst the blacks and whites in the United States of America also illustrate an example of inequality amongst races.

On the other hand, there have been inequalities within races and cultures. The upper and noble classes in SSA have been dominant over the lower and powerless group. This means that a superior culture is imposed and forced on to the weaker group that makes them not equal. Just like the history of European nobility over the commoners in Europe. Yet the nobility have remained a powerful and privileged class in most European nations. From biological and racial distinction on the inequality theory, inequality is a fact amongst genders, cultures, class and race, although times have changed and things must change, this pushes us to criticize the inequality theory with changing times.

Critique of the Inequality Theory:

There have been a lot of theorists to critique speculative accounts on gender differences and female empowerment in SSA which creates inequality, but very little progress have been made to prove one theory over the other in their speculative analyses on gender issues. To a large degree, inequality theories have not gained grounds because societies have distinctively evolved and disproved the speculative ideas of inequality theorist. In SSA today, traditional institutional arrangement have distinctively changed in respect of both genders not too much subordinating women like in the past. Looking at a typical traditional African society, where farming is the only source of income, the man do the clearing of the farm while the woman do the planting and if harvest is good the subsistent crops are sold to maintain the family and educate their kids, both live in complementary way without gender distinction. Although traditional institution still exist and persist today in SSA, but most if not all operate in the interest of both genders.

Scholars argue that theories sometimes formulate persuasive speculative accounts which might fit what we already perceive or know. Therefore we must depend on the biological evidence provided by the inequality theory based on the reconstruction of inferences in well known societies to argue the inequality theory. Critics of Inequality theory also argue that, professional speculations of postmodern feminist by generalizing theories and with the political confusion by giving equal weight to every woman irrespective of race, class, sex orientation, culture and historical background makes origin of inequality theory to lost it attraction.

The biological distinction of sex and gender roles as ascribed by the origin of the inequality theory is almost becoming baseless in SSA societies today. My argument is that inequality theory relies on female reproduction, the strength of men and the predisposition of men in violence situation as a prerequisite of being unequal. This was true to an extent tracing the origin of the theory, but today societies have evolved with changing times, no society in the history of mankind is static. Reproduction have just become a female experience and also a sex difference which has little impact on gender roles today. In the other hand, today in SSA men are only dominant in specific jobs as that they are specialized in, not that specific jobs are ascribed for men although the both sexes co-exist in a traditional way, but there is rational distribution of resources and labor so that girls and women can be empowered in this communities and families.

The problems that arise sometimes are how to comprehend this inconsistent inequality that continues to persist with changing times. Theoretical efforts must be accepted to a certain degree and also the theory can only predict the future and to a larger extent crudely reconstruct the origin of inequality. There is evident that the system of inequality like any other social institution is becoming self sustainable today in most SSA societies. “Individuals are born sexed but not gendered; they have to be taught to be masculine or feminine. One is not born; but rather becomes a womanaˆ¦aˆ¦, it is civilization as a whole that produces this creatureaˆ¦aˆ¦, which is described as feminine” (Simone de Beauvoir 1952 p; 267)

The idea of inequality between men and women is created in the gender process following the way cultural institutions are arranged. Therefore inequality in itself does not exist between sexes but created in the act or reaction in each society. Butler 1990, argues that “gender as a process creates the social difference that defines “man” and “woman” in social interaction through their live, individuals learn what is expected, see what is expected, act and react in expected ways, thus simultaneously construct and maintain the gender order in each society” (Butler 1990 p; 145) In a typical African society, though still primitive and traditional the inequality do not actually exist but it is the gender roles that differ from family to family and from community to community. Take for example within the Muslim religion or culture in SSA; women are actually distinctive in their socially constructed roles ascribed by the religious laws. This does not mean that they do not live in a complementally as opposed by the inequality differences basing on sex division. I therefore argue that the issue of gender is a matter of understanding within families and communities, who should do what at a given time irrespective of the sex backed by norms and laws of that community. West and Zimmermann, holds that “in humans there is no essential femaleness or maleness, femininity or masculinity, womanhood or manhood, but once gender is ascribed, the social order constructs and holds individuals to strongly gender norms and expectations”. (West and Zimmaman 1989, P; 146)

The origin of the inequality theory have been attacked by it critics seriously in recent times. Recent studies also indicate that inequality would eventually lose it content as time evolves. The debate is centered on race and class subordination of inequality that existed in the past, but is currently loosing it value. It is clearly evident that racial inequality is gradually disappearing between and within races and class. I will like to illustrate this point on the colonial history of SSA. Africa have longed been colonized by Europeans to maintain a superior race and keep the African race subordinated under their control just like gender and sex. But because inequality is gradually loosing it originality in history, racial inequality have gradually faded away with changing times. Although some traces of racial inequality persistently exist between races. (Gramsci 1971, P; 165)

Another example that has made inequality lose it originality have been between whites and black Americans as well as European nobility. Whites and blacks have faced a long history of racial segregation in the United States, but because of time factor and new institutional arrangement the racial differences have almost disappeared. In the other hand, European nobility class use to be a more armed, politically and economically powerful class to the commoners in Europe but with the coming of decentralization of leadership and democracy this superior class have gradually disappeared thereby melting away the idea of inequality and subordination of commoners since everybody have an equal opportunity.

Well as much as SSA is concern there have been inequality in class division irrespective of the gender differences. Inequality have been gradually disapproved since the old traditional institutions are disappearing and new wants sees everybody the same. In SSA, apart from gender inequality, there have been upper and lower class inequality as well as people from the royal fondoms, are always seen differently with high esteem. The upper class have been people who generally enjoy high social amenities in the big cities of SSA, they have little or no gender differences between their families since almost everybody have a good education as compared to the rural poor who cannot even provide for a daily meal. They are not much educated so definitely they believe in traditional laws that puts the men at the forefront. But with changing times and the fight for global poverty reduction, development in these local areas in SSA is gradually improving making gender inequality to extensively disappear. On the other hand, Fondomites in SSA have maintain an extensively unequal powers in every aspect in SSA, this is because most traditional laws do respect and give special consideration to everyone from the fondom. But with the coming of democracy and the respect for human right and dignity, this traditional superiority is extensively disappearing there by making the class values to loss it weight. Today whether from the fondom or not, everybody is the same because of democracy. Though there have been a mixture of traditional laws to democratic values to combat the aspect of inequality amongst fondomites and common citizen. (Foucault 1972, P; 223)

Importance of the Inequality Theory to the project:

To begin with, inequality theory is essential in this project because it explains the origin, history and persistent pre-domination and domination of males in almost all aspects of life in SSA. Through this theory, I understand that socialization, tradition and biology are interwoven to explain the persistent male domination in most SSA societies. To better understand the importance of the theory to this project, I will like to examine each role played by each of these concepts to understand the role of inequality theory to the project.

“Men and women yesterday and today think and act differently and achieve differently in the varying regions in SSA” (Banque and Waren 1990, P; 90)

Connecting inequality theory to socialization, it helps me to distinguish between the upper and lower class socialization in SSA. To understand the importance of socialization in this project, it has to be treated differently with divergent identities and expectations. Socialization has helped me to understand why there is little or no gender inequality and more female empowerment in the urban than rural families in SSA. I have used socialization to compare inequality in urban and rural areas, which further makes me to understand class division in the two areas. It is certain that gender equality and female empowerment is higher in urban than rural milieus, because in the urban areas, generally, individuals and families are exposed to high social amenities and high standard of living. Social interaction is generally more modern than in the local interior in SSA. The upper wealthy class is found in urban areas while the lower poor and primitive class is found in the local areas. Therefore, as a result of this social division, inequality theory through socialization has helped me to distinguish and understand this phenomenon in details and further explains why there is persistent inequality in class and socialization in SSA.

Connecting inequality theory through tradition, it has helped me to understand why there is still a wide gender gap and low female empowerment in typical traditional SSA societies today. “People honor traditional established ideas and teach them to their children. But what is the source of the gender traditions by which women are made everywhere subordinate”. (Drage 2003, P; 23) From the origin and history of inequality theory, men have established ideas and institutions that have always kept them dominant letting females at a subordinated position. The theory is therefore important in this project because it lets me understand why some primitive ideas are still led down from generation to generation in sub-Saharan Africa. Take for example, in most local communities in SSA, male inheritance have been a long established traditional belief and have been passed down to generations for centuries. These practices have become stronger so much so that even a male unborn child is celebrated before delivery. Women are regarded as properties and sold out for marriages, since bride price is been paid on them. Females have also been considered as products because they are forced into early marriages to reduce poverty since they are been bought by paying a bride price to their parents.

Tradition is held at high esteem and has been a led down idea and still exists today in most of the local communities in SSA. By believing that only a male child can inherit property, has placed male sex dominant over females. This established idea have retarded development because resources are not rationally distributed by both sexes thereby making the female sex subordinated. As a result of this established believes, inequality persistently exists in this primitive areas that are reluctant to accept new changes because of illiteracy and poverty. Inequality theory is therefore important in this project because it has deepened my understanding of the continuous male domination because of these established ideas that have been passed down to generations. Inequality theory is also relevant because it explains these beliefs in such ideas and goes a long way to increase gender inequality and reduce female empowerment in SSA.

Although there have been some changes in this traditional beliefs, but these changes mostly affects exposed families that is families that have acquired good education and have been exposed to more valuable cultures. Inheritance in these situations goes with responsibility and how you can manage the resources irrespective of being a male or female, though most often it ends up with problems from males since it has always been like that in most of the societies in SSA. Giving authority or property to a female is just like depriving a male from his traditional right. But with continuous realization on how these have been affecting the societal development, I personally think it is going to disappear with changing time. Thanks to the inequality theory that I am able to explain this primitive belief in most of SSA families and societies.

Connecting inequality theory through biology, it is relevant in this project because it has made me understand male domination in biological distinction of both sexes. This is because women and men are physically different in ways that make men to feel dominant. Through biological distinction in inequality, I came to understand why there is inequality in labor division. This is so because the theory persistently insist on the physical strength of men to occupy certain jobs. That is why there has been persistent gender discrimination in organizations and job opportunities because men think that some jobs can be physically carried out by them. For instance in SSA, it is hard to hear that a woman is a military general, bus driver, engineer, carpenter, technicians and or family head. Biological explanation also emphasize on the predisposition of men in extreme dangerous situation so to speak. In SSA men have always been involved in warfare and critical traditional decisions that involves sacrifices are carried out by men. Therefore, as a result of this, inequality is bound to exist and that is why I have employed it in my project to understand this in greater details.

However, with the advent of feminist theorist, and changing time, biological arguments for inequality in gender is gradually fading away. Technological improvement have made most jobs to be operated by machines and intellectual based not physical fitness. Therefore, both males and females can be trained to manipulate these machines to have a gender balance in job markets. However, since traditional African societies are still very backward and have not yet attained some level of technology, most jobs are still based on physical strength to acquire them. That is why biological explanation of the origin of inequality in gender is still very visible in SSA. Inequality theory is therefore useful to this project to understand the biological explanation of persistent inequality in physical strength, predisposition of men in dangerous situations and the reproduction of females that have made them subjugated and subordinated position since the beginning of time immemorial.

The modernization Theory:

According to (Deutsch 1961; Rostow 1960; Ruttan 1959), “modernization theory evolved from two ideas about social change developed in the nineteenth century: the conception of traditional vs. modern societies, that viewed development as societal evolution in progressive stages of growth” (Deutch 1961, Rostow 1960, Ruttan 1959) Following a modernization tradition, problems that have held back the development and empowerment of females in SSA have been irrational allocation of resources. Modernization theorist believe that for traditional African societies to become developed, there should be a rational distribution of resources for both sexes and the elimination of traditional, institutional and organizational roadblocks that have made Sub-Saharan African societies underdeveloped. Therefore, the society must pass through transformational stages to become modern.

General Assumptions of the theory:

Following Rostows modernization assumption, there have been five circular stages a society must pass through to become modern such as traditional society, precondition for take-off, take-off, the drive toward maturity and the age of high mass consumption (Rostow 1963, p; 127)

The stage of traditional society is characterized by primitive technology, pre-Newtonian science and spiritual behaviors in the material world. There is traditional gender inequality and no idea of female empowerment since the society is too primitive and recognizes male superiority. The traditional economy depends soly on primitive methods of farming and limited productivity. There is limited mobility in the traditional society and most agricultural lands are owned by men limiting the female powerless and have absolutely no say in land ownership. That is why development is still imbalance today in SSA because resources are irrationally distributed and there is no female inheritance of property. Since it is a linear pattern, for a society to move to a pre-takeoff stage it has to do away with some ideas in the traditional stage so that there should be a regular growth. (Peet and Hartwick 1999, P; 81)

The pre-take off society stage is characterized by development of modern technology and it application to agriculture and industry. Gender inequality is very high and there is little or no female empowerment because most machines were believed to be operated only by men. The idea of modernity was seen to develop sectors like educations, banking, commence, manufacturing and investment. This means that there was still very high gender discrimination in education and labor in SSA. Traditional African women could not own accounts according to traditional institutions and cannot be exposed to the public spheres. This was injected in a society that was still is primitive. (Ibid)

The take-off stage as assumed by the modernization view as the stage for technological expansion, socio-political structures of society including gender rules in the distribution of labor in most urban areas in SSA. There is a little economic growth and a period to begin industrialization. In this stage, the discourse on gender and empowerment to modernize and enhance development increases in the urban and still very dormant in the rural sectors of SSA. (Ibid)

The drive toward maturity stage is characterized by the spreading of technological expansion on economic activities and also there is sufficient entrepreneurship to practically fabricate heavy machines and equipment resulting from heavy industry. In this stage, the discourse on gender and participation have somehow gained grounds in most advanced societies and some prominent African cities. Women get more and more involved, the fight for economic growth and political dialogues and participation increases. (Ibid)

The stage of mass consumption is characterized by the production of durable consumer goods and services. The rate of production of goods and services surpasses the need of consumption and employment is very high at the urban milieu in SSA. At this level there is little gender gap and female empowerment is high in most urban centers. This means that most families are exposed to western education and enjoy high standard of social amenities in the big cities. There is capability to invest in social welfare and social security on both genders, therefore cultural values comprehend modernity. (Ibid)

Research have proven that most traditional African societies are at the take-off stage and at this level of development gender inequality is still very high at the rural sector and the society is very reluctant to any social and developmental changes. This means that the society is still very traditional, primitive and reluctant to social and development changes due to strong traditional and cultural beliefs. Also the theory explains why development has not made any significant progress in SSA especially in the rural communities where there is still a very wide gap between gender and female empowerment in SSA.

Modernization theory can be seen as the legacy of the ideas of progress developed in Europe in the eighteen century. This means that progress and evolution was viewed as an irreversible, natural and systematic path toward modernity. The idea of traditional vs. modern society propped up in the different stages of growth and development in each society. This evolutionary progress of society was seen as a transformational stage from the simple to the complex. Therefore SSA being in the third stage according to the modernization vision, female empowerment and gender equality is very low, since the society is somehow very primitive and

pre-occupied by male domination. Traditional beliefs which support female subordination is very high at this stage of development. (Latham 2000, p; 37)

According to Nick Cullather, the idea of natural pattern of progress and development, as assumed by the modernization theory is a set of ideas and discourse used as a strategy by US to try to differentiate the US from former colonizers in their actions toward third world countries. (SSA). It was in the interest of the US as they also think that it was in the interest of the third world countries (SSA) to elevate third world countries to engage in the transformational steps toward modernity, this means that both sexes were to be involved in the stages of development thereby reducing the gender gap and empowering women in the process of development. The American idea could help assist third world countries avoid “wasted steps” in transition. This was seen as the Americanization and westernization of third world countries which was not more or less than the policy of assimilation by the French. (Black girls could eat and dress like French girls in French colonies to be assimilated and modern) (Nick Cullather, 1997; 94)

The modernization theory advocates two fundamental concepts universalism and linear process. Both concept had and have huge impact on gender and female empowerment in SSA. This means that girls and women in Sub-Saharan Africa have the same cultural and identical background to move from a traditional stage to a modern stage in universal and linear order of development. (Redfield quoted in Cullarther) Supported by the same vision, all societies in SSA were seen as taking the same pattern toward modernity through recognizable stages, without considering other historical background, origin and geographical conditions. In the same light, following a modernization vision, all cultures were seen in a trajectory way. Therefore the theory never considered cultural institution, tradition, and customs and viewed as obstacles to female empowerment and gender equality. (Cullarther). By classifying the society in a one pattern way of development, the theory was therefore criticized by other prominent development theories such as the dependency theory, power theory and the rise of feminist thinking in SSA.

Critique of the theory:

“Modernization theory has received criticism in recent years from political scientists and political economists since it neglected cultural, historic, and socio-structural factors in it analysis” (Chirot,1986; Black, 1991; Wallerstein, 1980) The modernization theory has witnessed a lot of critiques from varying development theories to scholars, researchers, institutions and other development practitioners. Most prominent development critique of the modernization theory hold that cultural values would still continue despite the shift from a traditional to a modern society. Therefore the argument is that despite the modern values of the modernization theory to transform traditional African societies to become modern by reducing the wide gender gap and encouraging female empowerment, African values still persist despite the values of modernity to enhance development in SSA. “There is evidence that the broad cultural heritage of a society leaves imprints on values that endure despite the forces of modernization in other words cultural change depends on a societyA?s cultural heritage.” (Inglehart 2000c)

Sub-Saharan Africa is made up of diverse cultural backgrounds, origin and history of migration. Though jointly colonized by the West, the fact that the society is culturally divided in origin and history, the values of modernization cannot hold at the same pace in the African societies respectively. This means that linear and universalism of the modernization theory could not work effectively in SSA and considering the fact that societies give different respects to their cultural heritage as considered by the modernization theory as an obstacle for development. Take for example the Islam religion, practices and beliefs is very strong in the Muslim society in SSA, therefore the issue of gender and empowerment of Muslim women can be a serious disorganization of religious rights since the later is very stiff in it traditional religious claims. The modernization theory had never taken traditional religious beliefs into consideration as ascertain by many of it

Sigmund Freud was an Austrian neurologist and the founder of the psychoanalytic school of psychology. I intend to explain Freud’s theory about the libido and how it changes its object, a process designed by the concept of sublimation. He argued that humans are born “polymorphously perverse” (AROPA, 2010), meaning that any number of objects could be a source of pleasure.

Lawrence Kohlberg is known for writing “The Six Stages of Moral Reasoning” (Crain, 1985, pp. 118-136). These stages are planes of moral adequacy conceived to explain the development of moral reasoning and why these stages can lead to deviant behavior. I intend to scope all six stages and explain them in detail. In the end, from my explanation, one should be able to identify certain behaviors and where they stem from.

Cesare Lombroso popularized the notion of the born criminal through biological determinism, claiming that criminals have particular physical attributes or deformities. If criminality was inherited, then the born criminal could be distinguished by physical atavistic stigmata. I intend to explain this theory in detail along with a few other concepts in order to properly broaden the topic so one can grasp its true meaning.

Robert Merton’s theory on deviance stems from his 1938 analysis of the relationship between culture, structure and anomie. Merton defines culture as an “organized set of normative values governing behavior which is common to members of a designated society or group” (Crain, 1985 pp 118-136). I intend to relate this theory to other theorists related to this field of study. I will define how one can become deviant through his/her surroundings.

Each theorist has stated that “deviance provides a way in which some individuals and groups can introduce their agendas to the rest of society, and elevate their own personal status while doing it” (AROPA, 2010 pp 1-2). If that is the case then deviance is a violation of a norm; while crime is defined as a violation one specific type of norm, a law. By definition then, it would seem that society considers all crime to be deviant behavior. However, members of society may not consider a specific crime to be deviant at all.

Sigmund Freud

Stages of Development

Freud advanced a theory of personality development that centered on the effects of the sexual pleasure drive on the individual psyche. At particular points in the developmental process, he claimed, “a single body part is particularly sensitive to sexual, erotic stimulation” (Stevenson, 1996 pp 2-3). These erogenous zones are the mouth, the anus, and the genital region. The child’s libido centers on behavior affecting the primary erogenous zone of his age; he cannot focus on the primary erogenous zone of the next stage without resolving the developmental conflict of the immediate one.

A child at a given stage of development has certain needs and demands, such as the need of an infant to nurse. “Frustration occurs when these needs are not met; overindulgence stems from such a meeting of these needs that the child is reluctant to progress beyond the stage. Both frustration and overindulgence lock some amount of the child’s libido permanently into the stage in which they occur; both result in a fixation” (Stevenson, 1996 pp. 2-3). If a child progresses normally through the stages, resolving each conflict and moving on, then little libido remains invested in each stage of development. However, if he/she fixates at a particular stage, the method of obtaining satisfaction which characterized the stage will dominate and affect his/her adult personality.

The Oral Stage

The oral stage begins at birth, when the oral cavity is the primary focus of libidal energy. The infant preoccupies themselves with nursing, with the pleasure of sucking and accepting things into the mouth. The infant who is frustrated at this stage, because the mother refused to nurse him/her on demand or who ended nursing sessions early, is characterized by “pessimism, envy, suspicion and sarcasm” (Stevenson, 1996 pp 4-5). The overindulged oral character, whose nursing urges were always and often excessively satisfied, is “optimistic, gullible, and is full of admiration for others around him/her” (Stevenson, 1996 pp.4-5). The stage ends in the primary conflict of weaning, which both deprives the child of the sensory pleasures of nursing and of the psychological pleasure of being cared for and mothered. The stage lasts approximately one and one-half years.

Anal Stage

At one and one-half years, the child will enter the anal stage. “The act of toilet training becomes the child’s obsession with the erogenous zone of the anus and with the retention or expulsion of the feces. This represents a classic conflict between the id, which derives pleasure from expulsion of bodily wastes, and the ego and superego, which represent the practical and societal pressures to control the bodily functions” (Stevenson, 1996 pp 5-6). The child will meet the conflict between the parent’s demands and the child’s desires in one of two ways: Either he puts up a fight or he simply refuses to use expel the waste. The child who wants to fight takes pleasure in expelling maliciously, often just after being placed on the toilet. “If the parents are too lenient and the child manages to derive pleasure and success from this expulsion, it will result in the formation of an anal expulsive character” (Stevenson, 1996 pp 5-6). This character is generally messy, disorganized, reckless, careless, and defiant. However, a child may choose to retain feces, thereby disobeying his/her parents while enjoying the pleasurable pressure of the built-up feces on his/her intestine. “If this tactic succeeds and the child is overindulged, he will develop into an anal retentive character” (Stevenson, 1996 pp. 5-6). This character is neat, precise, orderly, careful, stingy, withholding, obstinate, meticulous, and passive-aggressive. This stage lasts from one and one-half to two years approximately.

Phallic Stage

From ages three to six, the setting for the greatest sexual conflict happens in the phallic stage. With the genital region becoming the weapon of choice, as the phallic stage matures, boys experience the Oedipus complex whereas girls experience the Electra complex. “These complexes involve the inherent urge to remove our same-sexed parent so to possess our opposite-sexed parent” (Psychosexual, 2010 pp 1) In boys, the father stands in the way of the increasingly sexual love for his mother. What controls this urge to eliminate the father is the fear that his father will remove their common appendage, the penis. The easiest way to resolve castration anxiety of the phallic stage is to imitate the father, which in the long-term acts as a voice of restraint in his adult life. The female counterparts in the phallic stage suffer from penis envy. The female child holds her mother accountable for not sharing the appendage that her brother wants to remove from their father. Unlike the male counterparts, Freud remained unclear how the phallic stage is resolved.

“Fixation at the phallic stage develops a person who is reckless, resolute, self-assured, and narcissistic and is excessively vain and proud. The failure to resolve the conflict can also cause a person to be afraid or incapable of close love; Freud also hinted that fixation could be a root cause of homosexuality” (Psychosexual, 2010 pp 1).

Id, Ego, and Superego

Freud saw the human personality as having three aspects, which work together to produce all of our complex behaviors. These are described as the t Id, the Ego and the Superego. All three components need to be well-balanced in order to have reasonable mental health. However, the Ego has a difficult time dealing with the competing demands of the Superego and the Id. According to the psychoanalytic view, “this psychological conflict is an intrinsic and pervasive part of human experience” (Wilderdom.com, 2008, pp. 1-2). The conflict between the Id and Superego, negotiated by the Ego, is one of the normal psychological battles all people face. “The way in which a person characteristically resolves the instant gratification vs. longer-term reward dilemma reflects upon their character” (Wilderdom.com, 2008, pp. 1-2).

The id can be described as the functions of the irrational and emotional part of the mind. This part of psychology is very self-serving and uncaring towards others’ needs. This is very true of an infant since their only desire to be satisfied and served. In addition, this phase can be applied to childhood since children are also very self-serving and seek constant gratification.

The Ego functions with the rational part of the mind. The Ego develops out of awareness that one can’t always receive what they desire. The Ego operates in a world of reality. The Ego realizes the need for compromise and negotiates between the Id and the Superego. “The Ego’s job is to get the Id’s pleasures but to be reasonable and bear the long-term consequences in mind.” (Wilderdom.com, 2008, pp. 1-2) The Ego denies gratification but the ego must cope with this conflicting force. “To undertake its work of planning, thinking and controlling the Id, the Ego uses some of the Id’s libidinal energy” (Wilderdom.com, 2008, pp. 1-2). Typically, adults fit into this category since maturity also aides in recognizing reality and compromising. However, if the ego is too strong one can become well-organized and rational but extremely boring and cold.

The Superego is the last part of the mind to develop. It is often called “the moral part of the mind” (Wilderdom.com, 2008, pp. 1-2). The Superego becomes a structure of parental and societal values by storing and enforcing rules. It constantly strives for perfection and its power to enforce rules comes from its ability to create mental anxiety.

“The Superego has two subsystems: Ego Ideal and Conscience. The Ego Ideal provides rules for good behavior, and standards of excellence towards which the Ego must strive.” (Wilderdom.com, 2008, pp. 1-2). The Ego ideal is basically what the child’s parents approve of or value. So, a parent’s proper guidance is greatly needed for one to possess these values. Therefore, these values will serve as their conscience throughout life. However, if one’s superego is not balanced may feel guilty most of the time and feel the need to be perfect beyond reality.