The strength of the symbolic-interaction approach is helping us see how gender plays a part in shaping almost all our everyday experi- ences. Our society defines men (and everything we consider to be masculine) as having more value than women (and what is defined as feminine). For this reason, just about every familiar social encoun- ter is “gendered” so that men and women interact in distinctive and unequal ways. The symbolic-interaction approach suggests that individuals socially construct the reality they experience as they interact every day, using gender-linked traits such as clothing and demeanor (and, for women, also last name) as elements of their personal “perfor- mances” that shape ongoing reality. Gender plays a part in the reality we experience. Yet, as a structur- al dimension of society, gender is at least largely beyond the immediate control of any of us as individuals as it gives some people power over others. In other words, patterns of everyday social interaction reflect our society’s gender stratification. Everyday interaction also helps reinforce this inequality. For example, to the extent that fathers take the lead in dinner table discussions, the entire family learns to expect men to “dis- play leadership” and “show their wisdom.” As mothers do the laundry, children learn that women are expected to do household chores. A limitation of the symbolic-interaction approach is that by fo- cusing on situational social experience, it says little about the broad patterns of inequality that set the rules for our everyday lives. To understand the roots of gender stratification, we have to “kick it up a level” to see more closely how society makes men and women unequal. We will do this using the social-conflict approach. Check Your Learning Point to several ways that gender shapes the everyday face-to-face interactions of individuals.
The strength of the symbolic-interaction approach is helping us see how gender plays a part in shaping almost all our everyday experi- ences. Our society defines men (and everything we consider to be masculine) as having more value than women (and what is defined as feminine). For this reason, just about every familiar social encoun- ter is “gendered” so that men and women interact in distinctive and unequal ways. The symbolic-interaction approach suggests that individuals socially construct the reality they experience as they interact every day, using gender-linked traits such as clothing and demeanor (and, for women, also last name) as elements of their personal “perfor- mances” that shape ongoing reality. Gender plays a part in the reality we experience. Yet, as a structur- al dimension of society, gender is at least largely beyond the immediate control of any of us as individuals as it gives some people power over others. In other words, patterns of everyday social interaction reflect our society’s gender stratification. Everyday interaction also helps reinforce this inequality. For example, to the extent that fathers take the lead in dinner table discussions, the entire family learns to expect men to “dis- play leadership” and “show their wisdom.” As mothers do the laundry, children learn that women are expected to do household chores. A limitation of the symbolic-interaction approach is that by fo- cusing on situational social experience, it says little about the broad patterns of inequality that set the rules for our everyday lives. To understand the roots of gender stratification, we have to “kick it up a level” to see more closely how society makes men and women unequal. We will do this using the social-conflict approach. Check Your Learning Point to several ways that gender shapes the everyday face-to-face interactions of individuals.
Step by step
Solved in 2 steps
