Gender stratification in Historical perspective in the united States Gender stratification Is well-defined as the uneven sharing or dissemination of property/ wealth, privileges authority and presumed worth between the male and female genres. Gender stratification causes a vast degree of social disparities which have a wide reaching effect on the society at large (Margaret L. Andersen). To further demystify gender stratification. The causes should be looked at. The causes will be looked from the materialist theories and the division between domestic and public ark.
The materialist theories aid in explaining gender stratification as an outcome of how women and men are related to the economic organization of the society. These theories emphasize that the management and distribution of highly valued endowments/resources help produce stratification. What the theories point out Is that the woman’s role In society as a mother and also a companion, home maker, although very crucial to the welfare of society ,are degraded and deny the woman access to greatly esteemed public assets.
They imply that gender stratification is egger where a woman’s exertion is fixated to the family only while a man’s toil is focused externally trade and the market. When women go into Job markets, they are normally awarded lower paying Jobs and Junior positions unlike their male counterparts; they also leave occasionally to focus on child bearing duties. Heterocyclic, women have been less educated than men probably attesting to the low pay. The Dillon between domestic and public work Is extremely disadvantageous to women.
For instance, a woman’s reproductive responsibilities for domestic work put a limit to ere interaction with the assets which are highly regarded by society. On the other hand, her male counterpart is free from domestic work, and thus his economic responsibility in the public realm guarantees him of control of the major resources giving rise to male predominance in the society. Gender inequities have been present In many societies since time immemorial. Historically In the united States, more than 7000 years ago, male prevalence has characterized the relationship of genders in the society and their predecessors.
A woman’s place of work was the home and she performed her duties as a wife and a mother. The man’s place was predominantly in the public sphere. Wife beating was never strictly legal in the United States and not much was done to put the offenders to Justice or even put an end to It. The men had legal powers over the women moreover. Patriarchy was central In the society during the 18th Century but at the end of the 19th Century a mass drive to make the women capable to vote was ongoing.
Patriarchy was however backed by religious guidelines that saw it as an institution ordained by God; the woman was to give birth and the man toil for daily bread. Looking at gender transformation in the Unites States from a historical perspective, we’ll look closely at the different spheres that the stratification came about. To begin with the legal rights Issue, way Deter AY, women Ana no ruling to vote or participate In calicles making in a public context. This was so because women were looked at not intelligent or rational enough in thought to participate in a voting process. Their men controlled what they thought and whom they voted for.
Women were not fully political citizens until the 20th century. Also, up until the 1930, married women traveled on their cabanas’ passports and were not allowed to use their own in any circumstance. When it came to Job structures and paid salaries, women took on fewer percentages of the Jobs and were paid less than their male counterparts. For example, during the sass’s, 1. 5% made up women architects, 1. 5% made up women police officers and 2. 4% were female lawyers. This was quite a low figure compared to the males who occupied the bigger percentages. Also, there were fewer women in educational institutions compared to men (Applesauce).
In the work force contribution, only 10% f married women who had at least under six children were included in the paid labor force. This was in the early sass’s. The rest stayed at home. This was the recognized cultural standard back then and was viewed as normal. Women were barely seen taking up positions of power. Be it politically or even economically. Men were vibrant in power spots. A woman was needed to be in the pipeline for promotion in order to make it to the top; but this was not always the case since women were way below making it to a small Job position.
Such barriers made potential women candidates “select themselves” out of the competition. In 1979, the percentage of women in the U. S Congress was 3%, and only 10% women got voted at the state level (Ginsberg). The family structure in historical United States composed of 80% married couples. Many children who were of decent age to depend on their own means also continued to live with their parents. The women stayed in the marriages regardless of being abused or mistreated. This was widely because they were fully dependent on their husbands for the livelihoods of their children and themselves.
And this was the expected cultural standard. Families with single others were extremely rare, statistically, less than 5% of all the child birth was to unmarried women during the period 1940-1960. In 1960 for instance, 6% women of ages between 30-34 had never before been married. The family unit is a central point in which gender stratification is grown and sustained through time. During the middle of the 20th Century, the American families had a clear cut line between the role of the father and the mother. Patriarchy was the order of the day as the father figure being the head and executor of major roles in the family.
Such roles included, Ewing the bread winner, fixing the car, mowing the lawn among other heavy duties. And the mother was viewed as the home maker and her roles revolving around the kitchen and household cleaning. In this way, children learnt the different roles connected to gender and where the power associations came from and were located. Sexuality is another major contributor to gender stratification. Historically in the United States, male prominence was fixated on the issue of female fertility. The men made sure that they were the fathers of their off springs by controlling the bodies of he women who would later on bear them children.
Thus, controlling a woman’s fertility and sexuality was key in the societal progressions that ensured male domination. Sexuality also through sexual violence aided inequality. The violence in marriage or outside marriage is a common element of male authority. This is also prevalent up to today In ten null EAI t states. Women Decode vulnerable Ana t impedes their easy maneuver in public places. In conclusion, the American family in the sass would be seen as one that spearheaded gender stratification because it doted a very organized structure of intertwined, enhancing social ventures for female domesticity.
This as seen above was through stable marriages that encouraged dependency of women on men, blocked work opportunities that made domesticity a more practical alternative, the family wage which ensures the “bread winners” income was sufficient enough for the whole family, cultural sexism which made the woman believe her role was at home and taking care of her husband, last but not least, cultural and communal provisions for domesticity. Today, gender stratification in the United States is looked at differently.
According to a Harvard Business review study, a striking 80% of men and women respond that they are almost certain that there are enormous benefits of gender parity in all levels. These benefits constitute an expansion of the pool of endowed leaders. This can be achieved when there are more women returning to the workforce and being retained in the pipeline for senior position and eventual higher leadership positions. Gender parity also brings forth the likelihood of new innovative ideas, research, policies essential for the positive growth of an economy, Just to mention but a few.