Families provide a number of different functions to both individuals and units of society. There are a number of different highly stratified, select theories that contrast different notions of what is important to the function of the family. A synthesis of some of these viewpoints elucidates the fact that dealing with reality and providing a means of economic sustenance are important functions of the family.
¶ … Murdock (4 functions family) Paragraph 2 - Describe evaluate Parsons (2 functions
When attempting to identify the various different functions that the family provides to both individuals and to collective groups in society, it becomes necessary to illustrate the principles of a number of different vantage points on this subject. This document will consider those of functionalists, Marxists, radical feminists and interpetivists in attempts to reach a consensus opinion.
George Murdock was one of the principle functionalists, and advanced the viewpoint that the family provides four vital functions for individuals and units within society. He believed that the family was a basic social unit that lived in a single residence that consisted of at least a pair of adults of both sexes and at least one child. One of the four main functions that Murdock believed the family provided for individuals was a means of having a sexual relationship that was approved by society at large (Reiss 1965). Men and women could respectably have sex with one another in a family. Murdock also believed there was an economic component to the function of a family, which allowed individuals to pool their resources. Thirdly, the author believed the family was a means by which human reproduction could occur and fourthly that children could be suitably socialized in.
Some of Murdock's notions were shared by Talcott Parsons, who championed the ideas that the two most important functions a family provided was a means of socializing children and stabilizing the personalities of adults from a social perspective (Haralambos 2008). This latter function was actualized in two different respects, the first of which allowed for adults to have a degree of emotional security by involving themselves in the stable environment that the family provided. Secondly, the author posited that this function also helped adults to reenact or live out their childhood fantasies. The means of socializing children was of immense value because Parsons believed that the family was the primary means of transmitting social values to young people.
An interesting aspect about conventional Marxist views regarding the function of the family is that it addresses many of the same concepts advanced by the aforementioned functionalists, yet views them in a decidedly negative light. Marxists essentially believe that the family functioned as a means of reinforcing capitalism, which was widely conceived of as the primary problem with the world. Men such as Engels believed that the family structure reinforced paternity and paternalism, due to the practice of primogeniture which allowed for the continuation of private property. Marxists also believed the family functioned as a means of economic sustenance that ultimately reinforced the capitalist system by repressing women, capitalizing of their unpaid labor and that of children, while also providing a way for workers to replenish themselves after a difficult day's labor and begin their jobs again, refreshed, the next day (McLellan & Chambre 2012).
Some of the more salient points of the Marxist view of the function of the family helped to influence the perspective of radical feminists such as Delphy and Leonard. The principle distinction between their conception of the function of the family and that of Marxists is that the former attributed all of the ills of this function to the paternal order of male dominance in place, as opposed to capitalism. Whereas Marxists believed that the bourgeoisie and capitalist exploiters were the ones to benefit from the family functions, radical feminists believed that men were by capitalizing on women's free domestic labor, as well as their sexual 'work'. This viewpoint of the function of the family contends that essentially the family functions merely to exploit and capitalize off of women and their labor (Delphy & Leonard 1988). This theory was supported by virtually all aspects of the lives of women, such as the fact that when they did obtain a typical job outside of the home they were still expected to do housework as well as flatter and appease their husbands when they returned to their domiciles.
You’re 72% through this paper. Sign up to read the full paper.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.