C3: Social differentiation & stratification (AO2/AO3 & exam skills) Flashcards
What are some weaknesses and criticisms of the Functionalist view of social inequality?
The Functionalist view = stratification is a universal feature of human societies as it is both inevitable and functional for society. E.g. Davis & Moore argue that society’s most important jobs need to be more highly rewarded so people will compete for them and the most talented will win through.
- Functionalists may have exaggerated the degree of consensus about pay & rewards. There is substantial resentment in the UK with regard to the salaries earned by groups such as bankers and MPs
- Unequal rewards may be the product of the power of some groups to increase their rewards regardless of so-called consensus.
- Evidence suggests that not all those who occupy top jobs are the most talented (i.e. the UK is not as mertitocratic as this theory assumes)
- There are many occupations that are not highly rewarded that can be seen as functionally essential to the smooth running of society (nurses, sewage workers, refuse collectors etc.)
- Functionalism relies on a circular argument (a tautology) where something is explained by the same thing that it seeks to explain i.e “We know something is functional to society because it exists; it exists because it is functional”
E.I. WHY is there resentment about pay for bankers and politicians? HOW can some people use their power to increase their pay and rewards? WHY might it be argued that meritocracy in the UK is a myth?
What are some strengths and advantages of the Functionalist view of social inequality?
The Functionalist view = stratification is a universal feature of human societies as it is both inevitable and functional for society. E.g. Davis & Moore argue that society’s most important jobs need to be more highly rewarded so people will compete for them and the most talented will win through.
- Even those countries based on some form of communism have in reality been unequal and stratified. E.g. Lenski’s analysis of ‘Communist social systems’ (such as China) suggested that social stratification was still inevitable and necessary in these types of societies
- This theory draws attention to the interdependence of groups in a complex society with a highly developed division of labour
- It highlights the positive functions of social inequality (i.e. its role in enabling effective role allocation and performance)
E.I. - WHY does point no.1 support the functionalist view of social inequality and stratification? WHY is social inequality inevitable in a society with a highly specialised division of labour? WHY do unequal pay and rewards help to ensure effective role allocation and performance?
What are some weaknesses and criticisms of the New Right view of social inequality?
The New Right view = They argue that wealth and income inequalities are a price worth paying as it helps the economy to grow and lift living standards for all (‘trickle-down economics’). They believe that the causes of poverty are connected to cultural factors and dependency on the welfare state.
- It blames the victims of social deprivation and inequality for their own misfortunes.
- Economic growth does not inevitably lead to higher living standards for al
- There is little or no evidence that trickle-down theories reflect what is happening.
- New Right government policies have not improved the lives of the poorest in society. In fact, the atmosphere of hostility towards those on benefits has resulted in the sick and disabled being penalised and increasingly victimised by others in society
E.I. - WHY is this a ‘victim blaming’ explanation of inequality? WHY might economic growth not necessarily go hand in hand with improved living standards for most people in society? WHY is there little evidence of the ‘trickle down effect’?
What are some strengths and advantages of the New Right view of social inequality?
The New Right view = They argue that wealth and income inequalities are a price worth paying as it helps the economy to grow and lift living standards for all (‘trickle-down economics’). They believe that the causes of poverty are connected to cultural factors and dependency on the welfare state.
- New Right social polices (e.g. in relation to the welfare state) are increasingly supported by large sections of the public according to the British Social Attitudes Survey
- It demonstrates how greater equality may damage economic growth and therefore lower living standards for everybody including the poor
E.I. - WHY have the public been increasingly supportive of New Right views? WHY might greater equality damage economic growth?
What are some weaknesses and criticisms of the Marxist view of social inequality?
The Marxist view: The basis of all stratification systems is the ownership and control of the means of production. Within capitalism this leads to society being divided into two main classes: the bourgeoise and the proletraiat (owners and workers).
- The class structure today is more complex than the polarised view of Bourgeoisie versus Proletariat
- Marxism is too economically deterministic. The links between capitalism and class with other forms of inequality (e.g. gender, ethnicity and age) can sometimes seem quite tenuous
- The Communist Revolutions in Eastern Europe did not lead to greater equality and freedom as Marx would have hoped
- Capitalism has proven to be a more resilient mode of production than Marx predicted. It has helped to raise living standards in society
E.I. - WHY does traditional Marxism struggle to account for the rise of the middle class? WHY does Marxism suffer from ‘economic determinsim’? WHY might it be argued that Marxism has been disproved by history?
What are some strengths and advantages of the Marxist view of social inequality?
The Marxist view: The basis of all stratification systems is the ownership and control of the means of production. Within capitalism this leads to society being divided into two main classes: the bourgeoise and the proletraiat (owners and workers).
- The proletarianisation of the middle classes supports the Marxist idea of ‘class polarisation’. Braverman argues that many so-called ‘middle-class’ workers have in reality been de-skilled.
- As Marx predicted many small business owners, (the petit bourgeoisie), have been driven out of business by increasingly powerful big businesses, further widening the divide between the two main classes
- In the aftermath of the banking crisis the state is making the poor pay for the economic problems caused by the Capitalist Class. The average guy on the street is getting poorer while the rich are still getting richer (this is linked to Marx’s concept of ‘immiseration’)
- The distribution of wealth and income within the UK is becoming as unequal as it was at the time Marx was writing. (e.g. the poorest 20% own only 0.6% of the total wealth of the country)
E.I. HOW are the middle classes being deskilled’? HOW does point 3 support the Marxist argument about the disproportionate influence of the economic base over the superstructure? WHY is the distribution of wealth and income becoming more unequal?
What are some weaknesses and criticisms of the Weberian view of social inequality?
The Weberian view = sees power as the underlying source of all inequality. ‘Class’ is only one of three sources of power, the other two being ‘status’ and ‘party’
- Difficult to measure the concept of status
- Difficult to measure the power and influence of ‘parties’
- For Marxists, status and political power are subsidiary to class – money buys both
- Marxists would argue that the status distinctions within the working class are often simply encouraged as a means of ‘divide and rule’ by the bourgeoisie. From this perspective Weberian theories do not attach enough importance to the centrality of economic factors and class clonflict
E.I. - WHY is it more difficult to measure status compared to class? WHY is it difficult to measure the power of parties? HOW does money buy both status and political power?
What are some strengths and advantages of the Weberian view of social inequality?
The Weberian view = sees power as the underlying source of all inequality. ‘Class’ is only one of three sources of power, the other two being ‘status’ and ‘party’
- The multidimensional nature of this approach avoids the economic determinism of Marxism
- Weber’s theory can be used to partly explain gender, ethnic and class inequalities since these groups can be described in general terms relating to their market situation, their status and their ability to organise in a party sense
- The Weberian view of class is more complex than the Marxist view as it takes into account property ownership and market situation
- The Weberian view of class has influenced the classification systems used by the British government
E.I. - WHY does Weber’s multidimensional anaylsis of inequality avoid economic determinsm? HOW can Weber’s concepts of market sitaution, status and party help to explain gender, ethnic and age inequalities?
What are some weaknesses and criticisms of the Liberal Feminist view of gender inequality?
Gender inequality = When feminists use the term gender inequality it is used to refer to the ways that women have less access to power and privilege than men
Liberal Feminism = A feminist approach which seeks to use the law and education to enable women to achieve equal opportunities with men, without challenging the system as a whole
- It has been argued that liberal feminists are overly optimistic and positive about the progress that has been made in reducing gender inequality
- Despite changes in the law and attitudes fundamental gender inequalities remain (e.g. there is still a pay gap and women remain disproportionately responsible for care work & domestic labour)
- ‘Equality of opportunity’ is a fairly meaningless concept in a society divided along class lines. Both working class women and men are at a fundamental disadvantage
- Education may not always be an enabler of ‘equality of opportunity’. It may in fact enhance and reproduce social inequality (especially for women and men from poorer backgrounds)
E.I. - WHY might it be argued that Liberal Feminism is a perspective that mainly represents the interests of middle class professional women? WHY might it be argued that this perspective is overly optimistic about the progress that has been made in reducing gender inequality? HOW might education enhance and reproduce social inequality?
What are some strengths and advantages of the Liberal Feminist view of gender inequality?
Gender inequality = When feminists use the term gender inequality it is used to refer to the ways that women have less access to power and privilege than men
Liberal Feminism = A feminist approach which seeks to use the law and education to enable women to achieve equal opportunities with men, without challenging the system as a whole
- The Liberal feminist argument that progress has been made can be supported by the research carried out by Sue Sharpe into changing attitudes and aspirations amongst teenage girls (evidence of a ‘genderquake’)
- Liberal feminist ideas have helped to change people’s attitudes and have contributed to the introduction of laws that seek gender equality in areas such as work, education divorce and family planning
- Ann Oakley’s work on gender role socialisation has helped people to see that gender differences are often socially constructed
- It is an inclusive version of feminism as it argues that men, as well as women, can be harmed by rigid gender stereotypes
E.I. WHY might it be argued that significant progress has been made in relation to gender inequality? HOW might men and women be harmed by rigid gender sterotypes?
What are some weaknesses and criticisms of the Marxist Feminist view of gender inequality?
Gender inequality = When feminists use the term gender inequality it is used to refer to the ways that women have less access to power and privilege than men
Marxist Feminist view = the inequality experienced by women is the result of living in a capitalist economy. Women are exploited both as workers and as women
- Radical feminists are critical of the emphasis on capitalist exploitation. They argue that patriarchy is a more significant form of exploitation that predates capitalism
- Liberal feminists have questioned the usefulness and practicality of Marxist Feminism as it relies on a revolution to bring about change and that does not seem to be happening within the UK
- Furthermore Liberal feminists would argue that the experience of women has not been particularly happy in those countries that have tried to implement communism
E.I. WHY does Marxist Feminism suffer from ‘economic determinism’? WHY might gradual reform be better for women than revolutionary change?
What are some strengths and advantages of the Marxist Feminist view of gender inequality?
Gender inequality = When feminists use the term gender inequality it is used to refer to the ways that women have less access to power and privilege than men
Marxist Feminist view = the inequality experienced by women is the result of living in a capitalist economy. Women are exploited both as workers and as women
- It highlights the ways in which economic inequality and exploitation are important features of gender inequality (i.e. Capitalism and patriarchy are interdependent)
- Modern day research into the gender pay gap supports the notion that capitalism may be connected to women’s subordination
- It provides a convincing explanation for the anxieties around the body experienced by many women by linking this to the profitable industries that rely on the worries and concerns that individual women feel about their appearance, health etc.
E.I. - HOW are capitalism and patriarchy interdependent? HOW are anxieties about the body linked to capitalism?
What are some weaknesses and criticisms of the Radical Feminist view of gender inequality?
Gender inequality = When feminists use the term gender inequality it is used to refer to the ways that women have less access to power and privilege than men
Radical Feminist view = They believe that it is patriarchy not capitalism that is the main source of oppression for women. Only radical changes can offer the possibility of female liberation
- Some critics argue that if focuses too much on the negative experiences of women, failing to recognise that some women can have happy marriages for example
- It tends to portray women as universally good and men, as universally bad
- Radical feminists see women as sharing common interests because they are female but it has been argued that social class and ethnicity are important sources of inequality and difference between women
- Liberal feminists would argue that the position of women in society has improved over time and that this is ignored by radical feminists
E.I. WHY might it be argued that social class and ethnicity are important sources of inequality and difference between marriage? WHY might radical feminism be overly pessimistic about the position of women in society?
What are some strengths and advantages of the Radical Feminist view of gender inequality?
Gender inequality = When feminists use the term gender inequality it is used to refer to the ways that women have less access to power and privilege than men
Radical Feminist view = They believe that it is patriarchy not capitalism that is the main source of oppression for women. Only radical changes can offer the possibility of female liberation
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNAiD40KKcg&feature=youtu.be&t=11m40s
- Exposes dark side of family life and the way in which male violence is used to subordinate women (In 2013, the WHO sponsored the first widespread study of global data on violence against women, and found that it constitutes a ‘global health problem of epidemic proportions.’)
- Furthermore Radical feminists have often been actively involved in setting up and running refuges for women who are the victims of male violence
- The Gender Pay gap – and lack of women in control of Corporations supports the Radical Feminism argument that there has not been as much progress as claimed by Liberal Feminists
E.I. - WHY do Radical Feminists argue that changing the law is not always an effective way of liberating women? WHY do Radical Feminists argue that the goal of feminism should be the liberation of women rather than gender equality?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNAiD40KKcg&feature=youtu.be&t=11m40s
What are some weaknesses and criticisms of the Postmodernist view of social inequality?
The Postmodernist view = systems of stratification have fragmented and weakened. Social class, gender, ethnicity and age are of declining significance as sources of identity, and have been replaced by growing individualism, consumerism and individual choice. E.g. Pakulski and Waters argue that stratification is now based more on a status ranking of freely chosen consumer lifestyles, and people can redefine their position and the image they project to others by changing their consumption patterns and lifestyles
- Marxists argue that postmodernism ignores the objective constraints on people’s behaviour caused by class inequalities in wealth and income
- Only the most well-off members of society have real consumer choice and the means of freely establishing their position through consumer lifestyles in the consumer based stratification
- People are not always able to freely project any ideas they choose, as their plausibility to others is affected by social expectations and stereotypes surrounding, for example, gender, ethnicity and age
E.I. - WHY has the recent financial crisis restricted people’s opportunities to create an identity based on consumerism? WHY might it be argued that people’s identities continue to be affected by social factors?
What are some strengths and advantages of the Postmodernist view of social inequality?
The Postmodernist view = systems of stratification have fragmented and weakened. Social class, gender, ethnicity and age are of declining significance as sources of identity, and have been replaced by growing individualism, consumerism and individual choice. E.g. Pakulski and Waters argue that stratification is now based more on a status ranking of freely chosen consumer lifestyles, and people can redefine their position and the image they project to others by changing their consumption patterns and lifestyles
- It higlights the growing importance of consumer society and people’s increasing interest in constructing and changing identity
- It is useful in highlighting the fragmentation of group identities based on things that used to more clear cut e.g. social class and gender
E.I. - WHY might it be argued that work nowadays is more of a source of income than a source of identity? HOW have class and gender identities fragmented?
How do I answer the twenty mark question on Section A of the C3 exam paper?
►Remember that this is the most predictable question on the paper. The question will normally ask you to focus on either class, gender, age or ethnic inequality (CAGE) in two areas of life in the contemporary UK. If the question just says ‘inequality’ you can choose to focus on whichever type of inequality you want (class, gender, age or ethnicity)
If you prepare 4 excellent model answers and test yourself you should be able to get maximum marks.
► Watch the following screencast for a full explanation of how to get maximum marks for this section of the exam:
What are the main sociological explanations of ethnic inequalities in the UK?
Ethnic inequalities = Differences of wealth, power and status between ethnic groups
Minority Ethnic Group = A social group that shares a cultural identity which is different from that of the majority population of a society, such as African Caribbean, Indian Asian and Chinese ethnic groups in Britain.
- Functionalists argue that the early ethnic inequalities experienced by immigrants were the product of their cultural difference and relatively low level of skills. Functionalists are optimistic that ethnic nequalities will decline as immigrants adopt the norms and values of mainstream society
- For example, the host –immigration model adopted by Patterson (1965) suggested that there were three causes of ethnic inequality. Firstly, the host culture’s fear of the cultural difference of the immigrant ‘strangers’ and the social change they would bring to society; secondly, the host culture’s resentment of having to compete with immigrants for scarce resources such as jobs and housing; finally, the failure of immigrants to assimilate i.e. to become totally ‘British’ and integrate
- Like Functionalists, the New Right argue that the reasons that some ethnic minority groups experience disadvantage can be cultural. For example, Tony Sewell believes that peer group pressure and an ‘anti-academic’ street culture, rather than institutional racism, are the main causes of the underachievement of black school pupils
- Some Marxists argue that racial differences – and racism itself – are the creation of capitalism. E.g. Cox argues that early capitalism went hand in hand with colonialism. As European nations conquered other areas of the world, they were able to exploit the workforce in those colonies and they justified their actions through racism, by claiming that white Europeans were superior to other races.
- In another Marxist study of immigrant workers in Britain, Castles and Kosack (1973) argue that the existence of racial discrimination acts to ‘divide and rule’ the working class. Minority ethnic groups are used as scapegoats to blame for problems that are not their fault. In addition, ethnic minorities are used as a reserve army of labour - to be hired and fired as the fluctuating fortunes of the capitalist economy dictates.
- Weberians, such as Parkin, argue that ethnic inequalities stem from status inequality. Status and power are in the hands of the majority ethnic group, making it difficult for ethnic minority groups to compete equally, e.g. for jobs and housing
- For example, according to Barron and Norris, ethnic minorities are less likely to gain primary sector employment because employers may subscribe to racist beliefs about the unsuitability of Black people and practise discrimination against them when applying for jobs or deny them responsibility and promotion
- Rex and Tomlinson, argue that ethnic minority experience of both class and status inequality can lead to poverty – which is made more severe by racism. Consequently, a Black underclass may exist which lacks any power to change its situation, and which feels alienated and frustrated.
E.I. - HOW can some of the explanations above be criticised? W/HY do we need to be cautious when generalising about ethnic groups?
What are the main sociological explanations of age inequalities in the UK?
Ageism = discrimination or unfair treatment based on a person’s age. It can impact on someone’s confidence, job prospects, financial situation and quality of life. It can also include the way that older people are represented in the media, which can have a wider impact on the public’s attitudes
- Functionalists such as Parsons have argued that differentiating between age groups is important in the acquiring of social roles (e.g. the expectations of a person by society – and vice versa – can be made clear through the age that person is)
- Functionalists believe that age inequalities are an inevitable part of modern societies and have a valuable function in ensuring that the most able workers get the best jobs and opportunities. Those that are too young are kept out of the labour market through laws restricting the employment of children, while those that are too old are kept out by policies such as mandatory retirement ages and pension plans
- Henry expanded on this Functionalist approach to the treatment of older people, using the concept of disengagement. It is necessary that old people are encouraged to ‘disengage’ from society (through withdrawing from the labour market and other prominent areas of society) in order to provide more opportunities for young people
- Marxists argue that inequalities based on age are linked to capitalism and social class. For example, the young provide a cheap pool of flexible labour that can be hired and fired as necessary
- Marxists, such as Phillipson, suggest that the logic of capitalism is incompatible with the needs of the elderly. Consequently, they are neglected by the capitalist system because they no longer have the disposable income or spending power which is so attractive to capitalists. Moreover, as Kidd notes, because their labour power is no longer of any use to capitalism, the elderly are seen as a drain on resources through their use of welfare and health provision
- As might be expected, feminists suggest that males and females have different experiences of old age and that women are more likely to be the victims of poverty due to low earnings and dependency on men throughout their adult working lives
- The Weberian dual labour market theory is useful to consider in relation to the young in particular. It argues that there is a secondary sector in the labour market of people who take short term, low skill work, with no prospect of promotion or training. The young are vulnerable to being offered this type of work
- Postmodernists argue that age is a meaningless concept. Blakie points out that it is now so individualised that it impossible to use age as a measure of a person. For example, many 80 years olds still behave as they did in their 30s, while others may better fulfil the traditional stereotype
E.I. - HOW can some of the explanations above be criticised? WHY do we need to be cautious when generalising about age groups? WHY was ‘age’ a significant factor in the 2017 General Election?
What are the contributions of feminist theories to our understanding of patriarchy in the UK?
Patriarchy = refers to social systems in which power is primarily held by adult men
- Feminist theories see modern capitalist societies as patriarchal. They argue that the social institutions that make up society function to bring about a social system in which men dominate economic and social power while women mainly dominate subordinate positions.
- There are 3 main feminist theories which aim to explain patriarchy: Liberal Feminism, Marxist-Feminism & Radical Feminism
- Liberal Feminists argue that patriarchy is caused by two main factors: 1. Oakley argued that gender role socialisation means that parents may influence male and female children into believing males are superior to females. 2. Men’s domination of the worlds of work, politics etc. means that males were able to build barriers which prevent women from achieving equality
- Liberal Feminists suggest that patriarchy is becoming less of a problem nowadays. They argue that women have made great progress in terms of the acquisition of economic power through careers, improvements in equal opportunities legislation, political power through greater representation in government, and social power through contraception and divorce
- Marxist Feminists link patriarchy to capitalism. Women’s subordination plays a number of important functions for capitalism. For example Benston argues that women reproduce the labour force for free and can also be drawn into the labour force themselves when needed (reserve army of labour)
- Radical feminists claim that all societies whether they are capitalist or not, are patriarchal. They argue that men and women constitute different classes that are in fundamental conflict with one another. They believe patriarchal ideology is used to control women for the benefit of men and that when ideology fails; males use violence to control women
E.I. - HOW can these explanations of patriarchy be challenged and criticised?
What are some of the arguments that support the view that stratification/inequality is functional for society?
Stratification = refers to the division of society into a pattern of layers made up of a hierarchy of unequal groups based on factors such as social class, gender and ethnicity (i.e. how groups are ranked in society)
- The functionalist Talcott Parsons argues that stratification is functional because it helps society to organise and coordinate its activities. In modern societies with a highly specialised division of labour some members will specialise in organisation and planning while others will follow their directives
- The functionalists Davis & Moore argue that stratification is beneficial to society because it allocates all individuals to an occupational role that suits their abilities and motivates people to perform their roles conscientiously. It also gives an incentive for individuals to undertake the training needed for highly regarded jobs
- To summarize, Davis & Moore regarded social stratification as a functional necessity for all societies. They saw it as a solution to a problem faced by all social systems, that of ‘placing and motivating individuals in the social structure.’
- New Right writers such as Saunders argue that capitalist societies have raised the standard of living for all members of society and therefore stratification and inequality are a small price to pay for such prosperity. Saunders argues that capitalism has to offer wealth incentives to those with talent, otherwise the technological progress that we have seen in the quality of consumer goods would not happen
E.I. - HOW does inequality encourage people to be entrepreneurial and WHY might this benefit society?
What are some of the arguments against the view that stratification/inequality is functional for society?
Stratification = refers to the division of society into a pattern of layers made up of a hierarchy of unequal groups based on factors such as social class, gender and ethnicity (i.e. how groups are ranked in society)
- The dysfunctions’ of stratification are neglected by Functionalists and the New Right. In their book ‘The Spirit Level’, Wilkinson and Pickett argue that countries with high levels of income inequality are more likely to have social problems (e.g. crime, mental illness)
- The Davis & Moore thesis assumes that modern capitalist societies are meritocratic. Marxists argue that this is a ‘myth’ and that there are very limited opportunities of upward social mobility from the poorest sections of society
- Tumin argued that Davis & Moore ignored the influence of power on the unequal distribution of rewards. Differences in pay and prestige between occupational groups may be due to differences in their power rather than their functional importance
- The view that ‘stratification/inequality’ is functional’ is simply an ideology that legitimates inequality and the position of rich people in society
- Feminists would argue that gender inequalities have only benefited men rather than society as a whole
E.I. - WHY might high levels of income inequality cause social problems? WHY are their limited opportunities for social mobility? WHY might differences in pay and prestige between occupational groups be due to differences in their power rather than their functional importance?
What are the arguments that support the view that ‘women continue to be unequal to men because we still live in a patriarchal society’?
Patriarchy = refers to male dominance in society. The view that this is the cause of gender inequality (such as the wage gap, glass ceiling and horizontal segregation) is the view of feminist thinkers
- Liberal feminists would agree that patriarchal assumptions that women should be the carers in a family lead to women being unequal in the workplace and in wealth creation.
- Liberal feminists see social policies as the way to achieve gender equality and reduce patriarchy. Many of their ideas regarding paternity leave and anti-discrimination legislation for the workplace have led to some movement towards gender equality
- Radical Feminists such as Firestone, Millet and Dworkin would argue that changes in social policy do not change the norms and values of a patriarchal culture enough. More radical reform is needed in order to oppose patriarchy such as freeing women from the role of pregnancy and banning all forms of sexual objectification of women in the media.
- Marxists Feminists would agree that women are still unequal with men due to patriarchy but that this is not the only cause. They argue that patriarchy works with capitalism to create gender inequality.
E.I. - WHY might equal opportunities legislation not always be the answer to gender inequality? HOW does patriarchy work with capitalism to create gender inequality?
What are the arguments against the view that ‘women continue to be unequal to men because we still live in a patriarchal society’?
Patriarchy = refers to male dominance in society. The view that this is the cause of gender inequality (such as the wage gap, glass ceiling and horizontal segregation) is the view of feminist thinkers
- Biological theories of male domination would challenge feminist thinkers as they would see it as more functional for men and women to specialise in different roles (e.g. women = home centred, men = paid workers). E.g. For Parsons, this was an efficient specialisation of gender roles that are an extension of the biological differences between men and women
- Hakim would argue that the idea we live in a patriarchal society is one of many “feminist myths” and claims that social reforms such as employment laws, access to contraception and childcare support have freed women from the patriarchy of the past. Women now have the level of agency to make patriarchy redundant. Hakim explains that any evidence of a glass ceiling or wage gaps is due to the choices that women make: they choose to prioritise family life over career development
- Some writers argue that feminist attacks on patriarchy have gone too far. They argue that the disadvantages experienced by men and boys are in need of addressing including underachievement in schools, poorer health and higher suicide rates
E.I. - WHY might there be a biological basis to gender inequality? WHY would many sociologists criticise the biological view of gender inequality?
