new Ads

Gender work

gender equality work
gender equality work

In the anthropological literature of the mid-20th century, the theory of “natural complementarity of the sexes” put forward by American sociologists T. Parsons and R. bales Became widely known. Within the framework of this theory, the differentiation of male and female roles in the family and the public sphere is basic and irremovable in any transformation of society. The reason for gender differentiation is rooted in the “instrumentality” of male behavior and the “expressiveness” of female behavior. No matter how actively a modern woman is involved in social and labor life, her main role is connected with the Affairs within the family (a woman, first of all, a wife, mother and mistress), while a man is always played and continues to play a major role in Affairs outside the home.

This theory is actively challenged by many modern anthropologists. Although many arguments in favor of its justice may seem obvious, let’s try to understand the essence of the case.

There is no doubt that in all societies of hunter–gatherers, early farmers and pastoralists, the male is the primary hunter of large animals, the shepherd (when it comes to cattle), the fisherman and the honey-gatherer. The man also performs the main work of clearing the land for crops. The woman is assigned the role of a collector of plant food, as well as small invertebrates. In the field of crafts for men almost monopolistically secured any work with metals, wood, stone, bone and horn. Men are most often engaged in the manufacture of nets and ropes, as well as the construction of houses. While women are more often than men engaged in spinning, weaving, weaving baskets, sewing clothes. In most societies, women are involved in the preparation of food, water and fuel. In almost all societies, the primary care of children falls entirely on the shoulders of women.

The essence of the problem is not that the man often hunts, and the woman — caring for children, and in giving these activities of different social prestige.

The gender division of labour does not simply mean the division of labour between men and women, it entails a certain stratification of different activities and generates hierarchical differences between the sexes. The essence of the problem is not that the man is more likely to hunt, and the woman — caring for children, and in giving these activities a certain measure of social prestige. In most societies, the relationship between the sexes favours recognition of the greater importance of men and men’s occupations. According to the remark of M. MFA “men can cook, weave, dress dolls or hunt hummingbirds, but if these activities are considered male, then the whole society, both men and women, recognize them as important. If women do the same, such activities are declared less important.”

Gender stratification is manifested to varying degrees in hunter-gatherer societies and in farmers. The differentiation of male and female occupations and the hierarchy of relationships between the sexes depend on the economic activity of society. In hunter–gatherer societies, the power of men over women is attributed to the leading role of men in hunting, and in farmers to the leading role of men in clearing and distributing land. Men’s monopoly on the big hunt involves not only and not so much the greater physical strength of men, but the need to go long distances from home. For women, such movements are hampered by the presence of children.

Where hunting is feasible close to home (AGTA Philippines), women participate on an equal basis with men. Men can cook, weave, dress dolls or hunt hummingbirds, but if these activities are considered male, then the whole society, both men and women, recognize them as important. It is possible that the male monopoly on the clearing of land for crops also is not determined by the necessity of using physical force, and due to the factor of increased risk: new lands often lie on the border of the tribal territory, and there are likely to be exposed to the attacks of enemies increases dramatically. And war in the vast majority of cultures is a purely male occupation.

The gender hierarchy in society depends to a large extent on environmental conditions and the attitudes of men and women to the control of resources and social goods. In societies where women are completely excluded from control, their social status is significantly reduced, and where men and women equally control the distribution of wealth, the status of women is close to that of men. In the book “Child and society” I. S. Kohn gives the following detailed explanation why the gender division of labor is not derived from the biological functions of men and women: the biological functions of women are associated with the conception, birth and feeding of children, and the woman has the main responsibility for their cultivation. However, only society regulates how many children a woman can have, who owns these children, where (in whose house) they will grow up and how long they should be taken care of. It seems to us, however, that it would be fairer to say that the gender distribution of work is not a direct or direct derivative of biological functions, because men cannot replace women in bearing and feeding children. Society does regulate a number of aspects related to childbirth, but, no matter how hard it tries, it has never been able to exercise full control over reproduction in human history.

The society regulates a number of aspects related to childbirth, but it has never been able to exercise full control over reproduction in human history. In many traditional cultures men are given the dominant role, and women look at the background of the downtrodden and disenfranchised. However, this marked inequality often conceals the gender differentiation of the public and domestic spheres of life. In Patriarchal societies, the dominance of men in the public sphere is particularly noticeable, but often in the same societies it is possible to observe an almost complete monopoly of women in decision-making concerning the domestic sphere. The Arab peoples, known for their pronounced male dominance in public life, have a widespread saying: “If the father is the head, the mother is the neck. Neck and shakes the head as you want.”

132 thoughts on “Gender work

  1. Correctamente siempre ha sido asi la mujer por mas actividades que realice a diario y por naturaleza ejecute como ser madre esposa maestra siempre el hombre ha sido tomado en cuenta el hombre es cabeza la mujer es la cola. Increíble pero cierto. Muy a pesar de esta calificación sabemos a ciencia cierta que la mujer jamás la supera in hombre

  2. Yo trabajo en comon que se rodenaria dodo los días de semana y meses año así es. Pero trabajar trabajando mascolino y femenino se emdederea mucho más lindo pero no lo es. Gracias por todo

  3. El patriarcado en la sociedad tubo su participacion muy importate en la historia pero la participacion de las mujeres e incluirlas para la igualdad de genero deja un importante legado para la historia de lucha contra el patriarcado en las diferentes culturas donde solo manda el hombre y no las mujeres en este siglo donde las mujeres emos demostrado que somos tan capases como los hombres en los trabajos que ellos realizan y en la gran mayoria mujeres que cumplen la funcion de padre y madre creo que las funciones se an revertido.
    Las mujeres y los hombres en este siglo trabajamos a la par con igualdad de oportunidades en las distintas ares de trabajo y en el hogar a los hombres les falta un.poco mas incluirse en las lavores del hogar

  4. Soy una persona con gran capacidad de aprender cosas nuevas por eso quiero trabajar con ustedes necesito un millón de dolares para ser prestamistas

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *