'Does the nuclear family benefit the bourgoisie?\r'

'The nuclear family can be taken to be deuce parents and their children. Is the nuclear family primarily to get the aright rather than familiarity as a whole can be perceived to be true. This point of view is associated with Marxism and the powerful are the thought class or bourgeoisie. They own the means of merchandise such as land, factories, machines and so on. Marxism is based on an exploitative and un sufficient proportionship between two classes. The proletariats who are the workers are the majority and this is were the family comes in.\r\nThe family is giveled by those who control the economy and they control the family and manipulate the family into benefiting them. In any society the scotch brass (that is, the productive forge involving the creation of goods and services for distri unlession and exchange) is always the most(prenominal) base, fundamental and ultimately most significant aspect because it is only through economic activity that raft can produce th e things they need for their physiologic survival.\r\nMarxists work to see institutions like the family in terms of what they do to jump out the overall construction of capitalist society, their be given inwardly the limit of a particular socio-economic class of economic production. Unlike Functionalist sociology, Conflict sociology tends to view these functions from to a greater extent than one angle (for example, the family as an institution may serve useful endeavors for upper class men, but non for working class women). Eli Zaretsky (â€Å"Capitalism, the Family and Personal support”, 1976) a Marxists believes that the family is a prop to the capitalist society.\r\nThe capitalist system is based upon the domestic grind of housewives who breed future generations of workers. He also believes that family has become a vital unit of consumption. The family consumes the products of capitalism and this allows the bourgeoisie to elapse producing surplus value. In this respect, people are not simply being fondised into â€Å"society”, the culture process is directed towards the integration of people into a specific form of kindly family, one that reflects the fundamental, structural, inequalities of Capitalism.\r\nThe feeling class ideology makes the family as an institution abet to maintain and reproduce basic genial inequalities by presenting them as â€Å"normal” and â€Å"natural” in spite of appearance the enculturation process. This creates a false class consciousness as they are not aware of their true individuality as put-upon workers. The family is a safety valve for peoples foilings whereas the broad majority of males are intercoursely powerless in Capitalist industry, the family coordinate serves the purpose of disguising this powerless condition.\r\nMales within the family have traditionally been powerful figures in relation the females. Marxists contend that this â€Å"illusion of power” w ithin the family serves as a safety value for the build-up of tension and frustration at work. The feminist perspective on the family has tended to air the following ideas. Men oppress women within the family, conscionable as they oppress women within all separate institutions in Capitalist society.\r\nFeminist have tended to depose ides of gender differences based upon supposed biological / genic differences between males and females that serve to lawful male command over women. Women have a role coerce upon them within the family. Women act as â€Å"unpaid servants” within the home. This idea is linked, by Marxist feminists, to the economic relationship between Capital and labour, in the sense that labour is exploited by Capital in the economic aspect just as women are exploited by men within the family. They see family benefiting the powerful who are the men, this is patriarchy.\r\nFunctionalist sociology has tended to look towards the family as the cornerstone of br early(a)ly integration in any society by which is meant the idea that ways have to be nominate to make people feel that they belong to the society into which they were born †to feel and believe that they have or sothing in common with the people around them. The family group represents the primitive institution, in any society, for the initial socialisation of children. In this respect, any institution charged with this responsibility is acquittance to play a significant part in the reproduction of cultural norms and values, therefore family benefits society as a whole.\r\nThe family as a unit of stability, of equal importance to this socialisation function, the family also represents an institution that acts as a stabilising force in society. In this respect, the family is seen to be an institution that is charged with ensuring the maintenance of social order. The basic relationship of the family institution to the whole social structure in society that is proposed by Functionalists is the family is a vital social institution responsible with the basic functions of socialisation and system maintenance.\r\nFletcher a functionalist thinker, identifies the main functions of the family as being: Procreation and Child-Rearing: The family structure provides a legitimate arena for the bearing and raising of children. Given the relative helplessness of children at birth, parental nurture and wish well is seen as vital †and the family provides a solid introduction for such care and support in the untimely years of a childs social development. Regulation of versed Behaviour:\r\nIn this respect, the family structure serves to limit and maintain sexual jealousies and by defining the limits of sexual freedom, the family structure limits the chances of potentially damaging sexual relationships developing. Additionally, the family is a original institution for the provision of sock, care and emotional support for both children and adults. In short, it provides a sense of be and serves to clearly-define role relationships between men and women. Provision of a Home:\r\nThis idea expresses the assumption that people check comfort and security within primary social and sexual relationships. The â€Å"home” not only provides physical shelter, it also serves as the focal point of family existence. I recognise that the family group serves some kind of purpose in any society. Where Marxists tend to disagree with thinkers working in other perspectives, however, is in relation to the temperament of that purpose and, for Marxists, the relationship between the family and the social structure of any society is one of unequal dependence.\r\nFunctionalists struggle that social institutions develop out of the need to satisfy, transact and organise various human social needs. up to now I feel that the primary role of the family is not to benefit the powerful but in some societies it does to an extent conform to this idea. There ar e other functions of the family such as the socialisation of children also providing love and support for its members which does not always benefit the powerful.\r\n'