Exam 1 Soci

docx

School

University of Washington *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

353

Subject

Sociology

Date

Apr 3, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by BaronWolf841

Au1 Emerson Au Haoming Song 3/6/2024 Exam 1 Q12: Gender gap in housework is significant, and there has been consistent calling for men’s increased participation at home. Housework also includes varied tasks. What are the different types of housework? Do men always perform less than women in these types? How has men’s participation changed over the past few decades by these types? Briefly Explain. The gender gap in housework is discussed in the article "Housework: Who Did, Does or Will Do It and How Much Does It Matter?" along with the continual demand for more men to help around the house. It recognizes that housework includes a variety of activities in addition to standard cleaning and organizing. "Changes are concentrated in core housework; women's time in other housework has changed little and men's has increased," (Bianchi 2011: 56) . This suggests that although men might be getting more involved in some parts of housekeeping, like cooking and cleaning, they might still be lacking in other areas, like managing and organizing household funds. The article draws attention to how, over the past few decades, men's involvement in housework has changed. "Men's housework time more than doubled between 1965 and 1998/9," (Bianchi 2011: 56) implying a substantial change in the contributions made by men. But even with this growth, there is still a gender disparity, with women still handling the majority of home duties. The paper also highlights how women's increased engagement in paid labor frequently offsets their decreased time spent cleaning, demonstrating the complex relationship between gender roles in both the household and economic domains. In conclusion, despite a rise in men's housekeeping participation during the previous few decades, there is still a sizable gender disparity in the allocation of home responsibilities. There are many kinds of housework outside just cleaning, and men may still do less in some categories than women. Even with advancements, closing this gap calls for an in-depth understanding of the changing dynamics of gender roles in both home and work environments. Q10: Family sociologists have been studying the relationship between education and divorce for a long time. One important theory to explain the decision to divorce is social exchange theory. Expand on the three components of this theory. Does it overall predict the more educated are more likely to divorce than the less educated? Is the prediction consistent with empirical research from Western and non-Western contexts? Three main factors—the appeals of marriage, the obstacles to divorce, and the existence of substitute attractions—are included in the framework that social exchange theory offers to explain the choice to file for divorce. According to Matysiak et al. (2014: 198-206), social exchange theory proposes that people balance possible divorce barriers like social stigma and

Au2 legal restrictions against the advantages and disadvantages of marriage, such as access to resources and the quality of the relationship. In addition, people could be persuaded to nonmarital attractions like freedom or the possibility of being married again in the future. According to this idea, a variety of complex interactions between factors at the individual and family levels as well as the larger society have an impact on the choice to file for divorce (Song: Week7ThursSlide 8). Empirical research has produced conflicting findings when it comes to the prediction of whether educated people are more likely to divorce than less educated people. Although conventional wisdom may have indicated that education and divorce are positively correlated, new research shows that this trend is reversing, especially in Western contexts. According to research by Matysiak et al. (2014:198), there appears to be a negative educational gradient in divorce, indicating that as education levels rise, so does the likelihood of divorce. However, due to cultural differences and societal conventions around marriage and divorce, the prediction's application to non-Western cultures may vary. Studies on the higher educated populations in Japan and South Korea, for instance, reveal comparable patterns of divorce rates; nevertheless, cultural considerations, such as the stigma associated with divorce and the significance of keeping one's "face" together, may have a different effect on the decision-making process (Song: Week7ThursSlide10). In conclusion, social exchange theory provides insight into the complex dynamics surrounding the choice to file for divorce by considering variables including the allure of marriage, the obstacles to filing for divorce, and substitute attractions. The more educated people are less likely to divorce over time, contrary to the theory's suggestion that they are more likely to get divorced. Empirical research conducted in Western contexts supports this finding. However, cultural considerations and societal conventions around marriage and divorce may have an impact on how this prediction is applied in non-Western situations. Q9: Racial homogamy – partnering within one’s own racial group – is the norm in contemporary marriages. However, emerging evidence shows that same-sex marriages are more interracial than different-sex ones. Borrowing from the three mechanisms in shaping assortative mating, explain why this may be the case. The practice of pairing with someone from the same racial group indicates that racial homogamy is still common in modern marriages. In contrast to same-sex weddings, there appears to be a noteworthy shift in the incidence of interracial partnerships in same-sex marriages. The three factors that influence assortative mating—preference, opportunity, and third-party constraints—can be used to interpret this occurrence. According to Professor Song's lecture (Week6TuesSlide14), choosing a spouse is mostly influenced by preference, with people being drawn to different kinds of social and cultural resources. According to Professor Song (Week6TuesSlide9-14), people may be more receptive to forming interracial partnerships based on shared values and interests rather than strictly adhering to racial homogamy in the context of same-sex marriages, where societal norms and expectations may differ from those in different- sex marriages.

Au3 Furthermore, because of local marriage markets and geographic conditions, there may be a greater chance of interracial couples in same-sex marriages. According to Professor Song, assortative mating is influenced by the quantity of possible mates as well as the characteristics of local marriage markets. Individuals in same-sex relationships may be more exposed to partners of different racial backgrounds in places with a larger LGBTQ+ community or more diverse population, which raises the possibility of interracial pairings (Song: Week6TuesSlide13-15). Lastly, compared to same-sex marriages, third-party limitations like family and community influence may function differently in same-sex marriages. Even though there may still be social conventions around interracial partnerships, same-sex weddings may not be as fraught with familial and community pressure, giving people greater freedom to choose their spouse. Because there is more freedom and openness to choose partners based on personal compatibility rather than societal expectations, there may be a higher incidence of interracial partnerships in same-sex marriages. This could be explained by the reduced influence of third- party constraints (Song: Week6TuesSlide14). Q8: You are invited by NYT to write an Op-ed on remarriage, broadly defined. They are very interested in remarriage as an incomplete institution as discussed in Cherlin’s (1978) piece. Could you explain what does Cherlin means in his original statement? What were some examples given to support the statement? Does this statement still hold true in 2024? The idea of remarriage as an "incomplete institution," which captures the notion that remarried couples lack the institutionalized support and guidelines that are often present in first marriages, is explored in Cherlin's (1978) key essay on remarriage. Cherlin believes that one of the main causes of the challenges faced by remarried couples and their families is the absence of societal institutions and established norms that are particular to remarriage, especially following divorce. According to him, "The lack of institutionalized support for remarriage after divorce from language, the law, and custom is apparent" (Cherlin, 1978: 643). This claim draws attention to the lack of explicit rules and expected behaviors in remarried households, which causes uncertainty and strife among family members. Cherlin gives instances to highlight the difficulties brought on by the partial institutionalization of second marriages. One illustration is the dearth of terms related to kinship that are acceptable for people who get remarried, such as the vague term "stepparent"(Cherlin, 1937: 637) and the lack of terms defining the relationship between stepchildren and their parents' new spouses. Another illustration is how family law is insufficient to handle the dynamics of remarried families, such as concerns about debt responsibilities, inheritance rights, and custody agreements. The intricacy of remarried life and the lack of institutionalized answers to typical issues encountered by remarried couples and their kids are highlighted by these cases. Cherlin's claim that remarriage is an unfinished institution is still somewhat accurate as of 2024. The core issues raised by Cherlin are still present, despite changes in society and a growing understanding of the mechanics of remarriage. Remarried couples still must negotiate intricate family structures and deal with problems for which there are no set rules or regulations. The experiences of remarried couples and their children in modern society are greatly influenced

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

Au4 by the absence of institutionalized assistance, despite considerable advancements in understanding the requirements of remarried families. Q7: Jamaila was certain that marriage causes better health outcomes. After taking SOCI 208, however, she realized that this may not be the case due to selections into marriage. Explain marital selection and marital causation in terms of health. If marriage indeed brings better health, what are some mechanisms that contribute to better health? List and explain. After completing SOCI 208, Jamaila's preconceived notions about marriage and its positive effects on health are called into question. It is during this course that she discovers the idea of marital selection. The theory known as "marital selection" postulates that those who are in better health are more likely to marry and remain married, which may give the impression that marriage improves one's health. According to the lecture, "in general, if we take a snapshot of a national population, married people enjoy better health than the unmarried"(Week7TuesSlide5). This correlation does not, however, always imply causation. The essay emphasizes how crucial it is to consider factors like correlation, time order, duration, direction, defined mechanism, and the lack of competing theories (confounding) when establishing causality. Jamaila's initial belief that marriage improves health outcomes was called into question after reading "What Do We Know About the Link Between Marriage and Health?" Numerous research has backed the idea that marriage improves health, however the complexity of marital choosing raises issues with this oversimplified perspective. According to the article, "there is evidence to suggest that marriage is associated with reduced depression, particularly for both men and women who remain married" (Koball, 2010: 1026). This association suggests a possible causal relationship between changes in mental health and marital status. It also emphasizes the need to take selection biases into account; those who are wealthier or healthier may be more likely to get married and stay married, which would complicate the apparent causal relationship. Therefore, even if marriage may help people have better health outcomes, understanding this relationship requires breaking down the underlying mechanisms and appreciating the complexity of marital selection. Q6: PBS is shooting a documentary series on LGBTQ+ families and wanted to interview you, a renowned family sociologist, to detail some striking facts on same-sex couples. List two such facts, cite empirical evidence, and explain why you think they may defy narratives perpetuated in the media. As a well-known family sociologist, I would want to draw attention to two startling statistics concerning same-sex couples that go against popular perceptions. First, contrary to the idea that same-sex families are uncommon or unusual, empirical data from the lecture notes emphasizes the growing incidence of same-sex families. The notes make reference to statistics from the UCLA Law School's Williams Institute, which shows a marked rise in same-sex pair formation over time. This information exposes the reality of same-sex couples' increasing visibility and existence in society, challenging the media myth that they are uncommon or nonexistent. (Song: Week5ThursSlide5-10)

Au5 Second, I would want to highlight the stability and well-being of same-sex families, based on the article "Marriage and Family: LGBT Individuals and Same-Sex Couples." The data referenced in the article contradicts popular preconceptions that same-sex relationships are fundamentally unstable. Research has repeatedly demonstrated that same-sex couples enjoy relationship satisfaction and commitment levels that are on par with heterosexual couples. I would contest the media's propensity to sensationalize or pathologize LGBTQ+ relationships by providing empirical data on the resilient outcomes and positive outcomes of same-sex couples, fostering a more accurate and nuanced knowledge of their dynamics and contributions to family life (Gates, 2015: 79-80). Q5: What do family sociologists mean by the “deinstitutionalization of marriage”? Expand on the social class and racial variations in the “deinstitutionalization of marriage” since the 1970s. Use empirical data to support your answers The phrase "deinstitutionalization of marriage" describes how traditional marriage-related conventions, expectations, and laws are becoming less and less prevalent in modern culture. Week 5, "Have highly educated women opted out of marriage or 'leftover'?" draws attention to this topic by pointing out that marriage declined across a range of demographic categories during the 1970s. However, depending on one's race and social position, this retreat takes different forms. While overall marriage rates have decreased, some demographic groups show differing trends, according to the lecture from Week 5. In contrast to their less educated, lower-income, and non-white peers, empirical data, such as that from the IPUMS census and nationally representative polls, indicates that white Americans, those with better incomes, and those with greater education are still more likely to get married. This suggests that not all facets of society have deinstitutionalized marriage equally. (Song: Week5TuesSlide5) The lecture also emphasizes how socioeconomic issues influence the patterns of marriage. For instance, marriage rates have declined because of wage labor's drop over the previous 40 years, particularly young women's relative income stagnation. This illustrates the important influence that economic shifts have on the behaviors of married couples. Overall, family sociologists contend that cultural changes and structural injustices have a complex role in the deinstitutionalization of marriage, with notable differences between racial and social class groups. Q4: In Sassler and Miller’s (2017) book, the authors interviewed cohabiting couples from middle-class and service-class in Columbus, OH. Expand on one of their major arguments. Is this finding consistent with national-level evidence from Manning (2020)? Compare and explain. One of the main points of contention in Sassler and Miller's (2017) book is the importance of cohabitation as a precursor to marriage, especially for couples with college degrees. They emphasize how many middle-class couples use cohabitation as a stepping stone to marriage, with the majority eventually making the move. This research emphasizes how important cohabitation is to this group of people as a normative relationship pathway, where

Au6 couples see it as a logical step toward formally committing to one another.(Miller & Sassler 2017: 3–14) In Sassler and Miller’s (2017) book, the authors interviewed cohabiting couples from middle- class and service-class in Columbus, OH. Expand on one of their major arguments. Is this finding consistent with national-level evidence from Manning (2020)? Compare and explain. In-depth experiences of cohabiting couples from various socioeconomic origins are explored in Sassler and Miller's (2017) book, with a focus on middle-class and service-class couples in Columbus, Ohio. One of their main points of contention is that these two groups have quite different reasons for wanting to live together. They believe that middle-class couples typically see cohabitation as a prelude to marriage, frequently with the goal of determining compatibility before making a marital commitment. Service-class couples, on the other hand, frequently see cohabitation as a more practical arrangement, motivated by a lack of good options and financial necessity. This suggests that cohabitation motivations are influenced by socioeconomic level. (Miller & Sassler 2017: 7–16) This result is consistent with national-level data from Manning (2020), especially when it comes to the varying reasons why people from different socioeconomic backgrounds choose to live together. The variety of cohabitation experiences and the intricate interactions between relationship dynamics and socioeconomic issues are highlighted in Manning's study. The regional and individual-level subtleties noted in localized research such as Sassler and Miller's are frequently validated by data at the national level. Manning's research offers greater context and support for the results from localized studies because it focuses on assessing cohabitation trends and comprehending their ramifications. The significance of taking socioeconomic issues into account when analyzing cohabitation patterns and reasons is highlighted by both sets of studies. (Manning 2020: 800-804 & 814) Q#3: Hookup and online dating are gaining tractions in the US. Hookup culture is now pervasive on campus, while online dating has become the most popular way of meeting future partners. However, participation in both hookup culture and online dating varies by socio-demographics, such as age, gender, sexuality, race, class, and nativity. Choose two of these variations (e.g., gender, race), describe variations, and expand on its potential causes. There has been an evident shift in the way people seek out and participate in romantic and sexual relationships in the US, as seen by the rise of hookup culture and the popularity of online dating. Participation in these phenomena is significantly shaped by sociodemographic characteristics including race and gender. There appear to be significant gender disparities in hookup views and behavior, according to studies. For example, research shows that men report more casual sex encounters than women do, which is consistent with established gender norms and expectations about masculinity and sexuality (Laumann,2004: 1002). This may be explained by cultural views that link a man's sexual capability to prestige and appeal, while women may experience greater social shame if they engage in casual sex because of persistently held misconceptions about female sexuality (Garcia & Reiber, 2008: 1002 & 1006).

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

Au7 Furthermore, involvement in online dating and hookup culture is also influenced by race. Studies have indicated that people with varying racial backgrounds might engage in these acts in different ways. Racial minorities, in particular Black and Hispanic people, may encounter distinct difficulties and experiences when navigating the hookup culture, such as racial stereotypes and fetishization (Wade, 2017: 1016-1020). Furthermore, how people from different racial groups engage in online dating and hookup culture can be influenced by racial disparities in access to opportunities and resources as well as cultural variations in relationship norms and values (Feliciano et al., 2009). These variations demonstrate how sociodemographic factors intersect to shape people's experiences and behaviors in the modern dating and hookup environments. #2: What does Cherlin mean by public and private families? What are some major differences in their functions and challenges? How does Cherlin’s conceptualization of family compare to the definition of family in the respondents of Powell’s “Counted Out” study? Briefly explain. According to their responsibilities and functions in society, public and private families are distinguished by Andrew Cherlin. The public family approach, according to Cherlin, is centered on how families contribute to the wellbeing of society by offering necessities like childrearing and elder care. According to Cherlin, "one or more adults who are jointly caring for dependents, and the dependents themselves"(7) constitutes the public family. On the other hand, the private family viewpoint places more emphasis on the closeness and emotional ties that exist within family relationships. "Two or more individuals who maintain a close, emotional relationship and a commitment to each other" is how Cherlin defines the private family (Cherlin: 9). The roles and difficulties that separate private and public families are the main distinctions. The main goals of public families are to raise the next generation and take care of their dependents in order to satisfy society demands. They have to deal with issues including making sure that caregivers receive enough funding and stopping people from taking advantage of other people's labor. Private families, on the other hand, prioritize giving its members affection, emotional support, and personal fulfillment. Their principal concern is continuing to be cohesive social institutions in the face of shifting social mores and a variety of interpersonal dynamics. In terms of inclusivity and flexibility, Cherlin's definition of family is different from that of Powell's "Counted Out" study participants. Powell's research indicates a more inflexible and conventional view of the family, in contrast to Cherlin, who recognizes the diversity of family structures and stresses the significance of both private and public facets of family life. Powell's respondents define family more narrowly, usually referring only to married heterosexual couples with kids. Cherlin's method takes into account how family relationships change over time and emphasizes the importance of emotional attachments and caring duties outside of traditional nuclear families. (Powell; Cherlin)

Au8 Citations: Bianchi et al 2021 Housework.pdf Matysiak et al 2014 The Educational Gradient.pdf SOC208_DrSong_Wk7_Thurs.pdf SOC208_DrSong_Wk6_Tues.pdf Gates 2015 "Marriage and Family".pdf Cherlin 1978 Remarriage as an incomplete instituion.pdf Koball et al 2010 What do we know about the link between marriage and health?.pdf SOC208_DrSong_Wk7_Tues.pdf SOC208_DrSong_Wk5_Thurs.pdf SOC208_DrSong_Wk5_Tues.pdf Manning 2020. "Young Adulthood Relationships in an Era of Uncertainty".pdf Sassler & Miller 2017. CH 1 "Cohabitation Nation.pdf Cherlin, Ch 1, pp 1-11.pdf

Exam 1 Soci

Related Documents