Nature and Nurture Explanations of Human Behaviour

Nature = biology explains behaviour, Nurture = social factors explains human behaviour.

Last Updated on June 5, 2023 by Karl Thompson

Nature explanations argue that biological inheritance and genetics determine human behaviour; nurture explanations argue that society, culture and social processes such as socialisation explain human behaviour.

While not denying the role of biology in explaining some aspects of human behaviour, sociology very much emphasises the role of society (nurture) rather than nature in explaining human action. The material below forms part of lesson one of an eight lesson introduction to Sociology. 

nature nurture baby

Nature Explanations of Behaviour

In Sociology, we are looking at human behaviour. Human behaviour is the term we use that refers to all of the things that people do. There are many ways of explaining why certain people do things in particular ways.

Some biologists and psychologists think that people behave as they do because they are animals who primarily act according to their instincts. This is known as the “nature theory” of human behaviour. Other scientists and psychologists are researching whether our behaviour is “genetic” i.e. certain types of behaviour are passed down from parent to child. Again, this is a nature theory of human behaviour because it supports the belief that our behaviour is pre-programmed to a large extent. For example, it has been debated whether there is a criminal gene which means some people are more likely to commit crime.

Nurture explanations of behaviour

Nurture arguments focus on the way people are brought up and how their environment moulds their personality and behaviour. Sociologists argue that some people are brought up to be kind and caring, and others are brought up to display very different forms of behaviour.

An individual’s personality and identify are moulded and developed in response to their social environments and the people they meet. They are by taught others around them telling them what is right and wrong, including teachers, siblings and most importantly parents. This is why sociologists study the family and education (the two topics on the AS course) amongst other topics because it allows to investigate how these institutions effect human behaviour.

Nurture explains more than nature

We have two different ways of explaining human behaviour. One uses nature to explain behaviour, the other uses nurture. The question is, which is the best explanation?

If you explain human behaviour as being the same as animal behaviour, that means that humans would all behave in the same way. French cats behave in the same way as British cats. Do British people behave like French people? People in Britain do tend to behave in a similar way. They do similar things and wear certain types of clothing. Do all people all over the world behave in the same way? Sociologists tend to say ‘no’ and use two main types of evidence to prove the point:

  • historical comparative evidence
  • Anthropological (cross cultural) comparative evidence.

Historical Evidence against Nature theories

Nature arguments suggest human behaviour isn’t dissimilar to animal behaviour, which is based on automatic responses and pre-determined modes of behaviour or that our behaviour is pre-determined by our genes. However, human behaviour has changed significantly throughout history whilst animal behaviour has changed only slightly over a very long period of time. This suggests humans interact with their environments in a unique manner, both moulding and being moulded by it.

 

changing gender roles
Rapidly changing gender roles are one example against nature theories of behaviour

Anthropological Evidence against Nature theories

The second argument uses anthropological evidence. Anthropologists are people who study and compare societies from all over the world. If our behaviour was in our genes then people all around the world would behave in the same way. This is because other than the external physical difference between humans, the actual biological difference between people from different parts of the world is tiny. However, anthropologists show that people behave differently in different societies.

 

nature and nurture
Tribal societies with different norms and values are good evidence against nature theories of behaviour

Further evidence against nature theories

The Analaysis podcast below demonstrates the importance of nurture over nature explanations of human action…

I should be a psychopath, but I’m not?” 5:30 – 11:44 http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b010mcl1 (2011)

What was the pattern in the professor’s family history? What genetic pattern did the professor have?What factors does researcher suggest prevented him from becoming a killer, criminal etc?How do the researchers view of genetics vs surroundings explanations of behaviour change?

Nature or Nurture: Conclusions

NOTE – the Nature Vs. Nurture debate is hotly debated topic. No side can claim to provide compelling evidence that entirely disputes the other i.e. neither side can completely disregard nature or nurture in explanation of human behaviour.

Signposting and Related Posts 

I usually teach this material as part of an introduction to sociology module.

Please click here to return to the homepage – ReviseSociology.com

 

Feminist Perspectives on Society – A Summary Grid

Last Updated on August 1, 2019 by Karl Thompson

feminism definition

Topic Area

Summary

A2 Main Ideas

Feminism the Basics:

  • Gender inequality primary lens for analysis

  • Gender is socially constructed

  • Patriarchy is one of the root causes of sex inequalities

  • Feminism is a political movement

Liberal Feminism

  • Socialisation main cause, not structures

  • What change within the system

  • Seek to eradicate discrimination and stereotyping

Radical Feminism

  • The structure of Patriarchy

  • Patriarchal ideology

  • Rape and Violence as tools of control

  • Radical Libertarian Feminists/ Radical Cultural Feminists

  • Political Lesbianism and Separatism

Marxist Feminism

  • Capitalism main source of oppression, capitalists the main beneficiaries

  • Women reproduce the labour force

  • Women take the shit

  • Men more dependent on wages

  • Ideological conditioning

  • Working class and women should work together

Difference Feminism

  • Do not see women as a single homogenous group

  • Criticised preceding feminist theory for claiming a ‘false universality’ (white, western heterosexual, middle class)

  • Sees Feminists theory – essentialist and part of the masculinist Enlightenment Project

  • Look at discourses and the relationship between power and knowledge rather than ‘politics and opportunities’

  • Helene Cixoux – a destabilising theorist

Research Methods Implications

  • Liberal/ Marxist – Prefer quantitative research – trends and bigger picture

  • Radical – mixture of qualitative and quantitative/ also consciousness raising and activism

  • Postmodern – Deconstruction and critique of male language/ researching and celebrating diversity to challenge gender norms.

How they understand family life

  • Liberal – Inequality is primarily to be tackled through improving equality of opportunity in work, politics and education, not the family

  • Marxist – the nuclear family structure and women’s oppression with in it primarily benefits capitalism, and stems from capitalism

  • Radical – The heterosexual nuclear family is one of the main structures through which men oppress and control women – through everything from the dual burden through domestic violence (see Germaine Greer as an example)

How they understand underachievement in education

  • Liberal – The gender gap in education is one of the strongest pieces of supporting evidence for Liberal Feminism

  • Marxist – Gender stereotypes in subject choice still result in a gender pay gap in later life as women go into lower paid jobs

  • Radical – Gender Regimes still make up part of the hidden curriculum – sexual harassment for example often goes unchallenged in schools (Kat Banyard)

Topic Area

Summary

How they understand crime and deviance

  • Hegemonic Masculinity is one of the fundamental drivers of crime (Messerschmitt)

  • Violence against women is one of the primary sources of control of women

  • The courts fail to prosecute and put the ‘victim on trial’ which perpetuates violence against women

  • Cultural norms around sexuality serve to control women – The Beauty Myth and the sexual double standard

Key Studies and Examples to use to illustrate

  • The correlation between economic growth and gender equality in wider society supports Liberal Feminism, and criticises Marxist and Radical Feminism.

  • The Equal Pay Act, Divorce Act, Equality Act and Maternity and Paternity Acts are all good examples of policies which liberal feminists support.

  • The gradual trend towards gender equality in the UK supports liberal feminism

  • The Gender Pay gap – and lack of women in control of Corporations supports Radical Feminism

  • The prevalence of the Beauty Myth supports radical Feminism

  • Stats on anorexia and ‘planet sad’ support radical feminism

  • Stats on Domestic Violence tend to support Radical Feminism

  • Stats on harassment from the Everyday Sexism Project supports radical feminism

  • The link between poverty, sex-trafficking and prostitution supports radical feminism

  • ‘Slutever’ is a case study supporting difference Feminism

  • Documentaries on ‘sex work’ support Difference Feminism

  • Bake off supports difference Feminism (and criticises Liberal Feminism

Evaluations

  • Liberal – Based upon male assumptions and norms such as individualism and competition, and encourages women to be more like men and therefor deny the ‘value of qualities traditionally associated with women such as empathy.

  • Liberal – is an ethnocentric perspective – based mostly on the experiences of middle class, educated women.

  • Radical – The concept of patriarchy has been criticised for ignoring variations in the experience of oppression.

  • Radical – Patriarchal systems existed before capitalism, in tribal societies for example

  • Difference – Walby, women are still oppressed by objective social structures – namely Patriarchy

  • Difference – Dividing women into an infinite number of sub-groups which weakens the movement for change.

Key Concepts

  • Patriarchy

  • Patriarchal ideology

  • Gender scripts

  • Hegemonic masculinity

  • The Beauty Myth

  • Dual Burden/ Triple Shift

Key Studies/ Evidence

  • The global gender gap

  • DV statistics

  • The Everyday Sexism Project

  • Pointlessly gendered products

  • The gender pay gap

  • Only 1/5 MPs are female

Related Posts 

Feminist Perspectives on Society (Summary Sheet)

Feminist Perspectives on the Family

A Liberal Feminist Perspective on the Family

A Radical Feminist Perspective on the Family

A Feminist Perspective on Education

Sociological Perspectives applied to Social Policy

Last Updated on January 26, 2017 by

Social policy refers to the actions governments take in order to influence society, or to the actions opposition parties and ‘social movements’ (Marxism and Feminism) propose to do if they were to gain power.

The barriers to certain social policies getting implemented

  • Electoral popularity

  • Ideological preferences of governments

  • Globalisation

  • Cost/ Funding

Positivism applied to social policy

  • Sociologists should work with governments to uncover objective ‘causes’ of social problems such as crime/ suicide etc.

  • Examples: Durkheim’s study of Suicide

  • Evaluation: Consverative theory which supports the status quo

Social Democratic Perspectives applied to social policies

  • Agree with the above, and generally favour wealth redistribution

  • Peter Townsend’s work on Poverty leading to better welfare provision

  • Evaluation: Welfare breeds dependency

Neoliberal and New Right Perspectives applied to social policies

  • Believe the government should interfere less in social life

  • Believe in policies to encourage competition and are anti-welfare

  • Examples of policies supported: 1988 Education Act, Benefit cuts, Right Realism crime control.

  • Evaluation: all of the above perpetuate inequalities

Marxist perspectives applied to social policy

  • Policies tend to benefit elites by maintaining wealth inequalities and providing ideological control

  • Examples of Policies criticised: Private schools, 1988 education act, selective law enforcement

  • Evaluation: Many social democratic policies seem to benefitted the working classes

Feminist Perspectives applied to social policy

  • Lib Fem – working with governments to legislate for more equal opps

  • Examples of policies supported – equal pay acts, divorce act, maternity and paternity acts.

  • Radical Feminism argues more needs to be done to tackle Pornification and DV Post and Late modernism applied to global social policy – support all of the above, but more needs to be done.

  • Evaluation: enforcing radical feminist ideas means more interference in private lives

Postmodern Perspectives on social policy

  • Postmodernists generally not interested in social policy (but should be pro-diversity)

  • Examples of policies supported: 2010 Equality Act (possibly)

  • Evaluation: Bit of a cop-out!

Late Modern Perspectives on social policy

  • Late Modernists believe social policies need to adapt constantly to globalisation

  • Examples of policies responding to globalisation: New Labour and New Right education policies, numerous crime control policies.

  • Evaluation: Tend to assume policies are neutral responses to globalisation

Postmodern and Late Modern Sociological Thought

Last Updated on August 1, 2019 by Karl Thompson

A brief summary of post and late modern thought, for A Level Sociology.

Postmodern Thought

Late Modern Responses to Postmodern Thought

Ideas about the economy, politics and society

  • Post-Industrial, service sector, portfolio workers and consumption is central

  • Declining power of the Nation State

  • Disorganised Capitalism/ Liquid Capitalism (Bauman)

  • Culture is free from structure – it is more Diverse and Fragmented

  • Relationships more diverse

  • More Individual Freedom to shape identities

  • Media – more global, two- way, hyper reality (Baudrillard)

Giddens:

  • There is a clear global, modernist institutional structure -Heavy Capitalism still exists, in the developing world, service sector economies are dependent on it.

  • Against postmodernists, Giddens argues that Nation States remain powerful -Nation states are more ‘reflexive’ today – they try to ‘steer’ events in the future in the light of existing and continually updating (imperfect) knowledge.

  • Against Postmodernists Giddens argues that In Late Modern (not Post-modern) Society, there is a ‘duality of structure’- people are not just ‘free’ to do whatever they want – their freedom comes from existing structures

  • In terms of the self – Identity is no longer a given –identity becomes a task

  • Giddens rejects the concept of hyperreality – the main significance of the media is that it makes us more aware of diversity and of the fact that there are many different ways of living.

Ideas about Knowledge

  • Critique of the Enlightenment (Foucault)

  • Incredulity towards Metanarratives (Lyotard)

We need scientific and sociological knowledge to ‘colonise the future’ – to reduce risks from things such as global warming and terrorism for example –

however, knowledge can never be perfect, but we still need to use knowledge in order to ‘steer society’ forwards, thus we just have to do our best to be as objective as possible when doing social and scientific research and to use the most reliable, valid, and representative data there is to try and address social problems.

Research Methods Implications

  • Criticise Positivist research which aims to be objective

  • Deconstruction and Destabilising Theory

  • Foucault researched the history of deviance (transgression) to highlight the arbitrary nature of ‘normal’ and ‘deviant’ categories –

  • Foucault argued that research should be about ‘mining’ history to find ideas which are useful to you personally, and which help you to choose how to live now.

  • Research topics and methods should be diverse and experimental

  • No one is in a position to claim one research topic or method is more valid than any other can be anything the researcher wants or finds personally useful.

  • Research should not attempt to generalise.

There are significant global problems (manufactured risks) which we all face and none of us can escape – e.g. Global Warming. These are real, objectively existing problems, not hyperreal, and they bind us together, even if many of us fail to accept this. The role of Sociology could involve –

  • Doing research to help solve complex global problems (links to Positivism, also see Beck’s Risk Society)

  • Helping people to realise that they are still dependent on ‘structures’ and dispelling the ‘myth of total individual freedom’ (links to Functionalism)

  • – Encouraging people to get more involved with identity politics – (links to Marxism/ Feminism)

Unfortunately grids don’t cut and past that well into WordPress. A much neater version of the above grid can be found in my Theory and Methods Revision Notes, along with summaries of all the other perspectives too…

Functionalism notes

The notes cover the following sub-topics:

  1. Functionalism
  2. Marxism
  3. Feminism
  4. Social Action Theory
  5. Postmodernism
  6. Late Modernism
  7. Sociology and Social Policy

Modernity and Postmodernity – A Summary

Last Updated on August 1, 2019 by Karl Thompson

Technological changes, globalisation and the move from Modernity to Postmodernity

Two key processes which underpin the move from ‘Modernity’ to ‘Postmodernity’ are technological changes and globalisation. The development of satellite communications and transport technologies seem to be the main causes of globalisation, or the increasing interconnectedness of people across the world. Today we live in a truly global economy with many products in the UK produced in other parts of the world, and many British products being exported to other countries. Cultural globalisation has also taken place – with more people moving and communicating with each other across the world. We also face a number of shared global problems – such as new risky technologies and ecological problems. There are many different perspectives on Globalisation, but it is hard to argue that it is happening and that we have moved into a post-modern era as a result

Modernity (1650 – 1970s ish)

Postmodernity 1970s – Present Day

Industrial and Economic Contexts

  • Industrial economies – Production is central – jobs for life

  • Nation State, most people vote and are in trades unions

  • Organised/ Heavy Capitalism and the Welfare State

  • Post-Industrial, service sector, portfolio workers and consumption is central

  • Declining power of the Nation State

  • Disorganised Capitalism/ Liquid Capitalism (Bauman)

Features of Society

  • Culture reflects the underlying class and patriarchal structures

  • Nuclear family the norm, marriage for life

  • Identities shaped/ constrained by class position/ sex. (*)

  • Media – one way communication, reflects ‘reality’

  • Culture is free from structure – it is more Diverse and Fragmented

  • Relationships more diverse

  • More Individual Freedom to shape identities

  • Media – more global, two- way, hyperreality (Baudrillard)

Attitudes to Knowledge

  • Enlightenment – Science/ Objective Knowledge

  • Truth and Progress

  • Critique of the Enlightenment (Foucault)

  • Incredulity towards Metanarratives (Lyotard)

The role of Sociology

  • Positivism/ Functionalism – doing research to find how societies function and gradually building a better world

  • Marxism/ Feminism – concerned with emancipation – freeing individuals from oppression.

  • Narrative histories (Foucault) done on an individual basis

  • Deconstruction (Lyotard) and Destabilising Theory (Judith Butler)

Unfortunately grids don’t cut and past that well into WordPress. A much neater version of the above grid can be found in my Theory and Methods Revision Notes, along with summaries of all the other perspectives too…

Functionalism notes

The notes cover the following sub-topics:

  1. Functionalism
  2. Marxism
  3. Feminism
  4. Social Action Theory
  5. Postmodernism
  6. Late Modernism
  7. Sociology and Social Policy

Social Action Theory – A Summary

A summary of Webers’ Verstehen Goffman’s Dramaturgical Theory, Symbolic Interactionism and and Labellling.

Last Updated on August 19, 2021 by

Unlike structural theorists, social action theorists argue that people’s behaviour and life-chances are not determined by their social background. Instead, social action theorists emphasises the role of the active individual and interactions between people in shaping personal identity and in turn the wider society. In order to understand human action we need to uncover the individual’s own motives for acting.

Social Action Theory

This post provides a summary of the key ideas of Social Action Theory for A-level sociology students studying the theory and methods topic in their second year of study, AQA focus.

Max Weber: Verstehen, and Social Change

  • Observation alone is not enough to understand human action, we need empathetic understanding. Gaining Verstehen is the main point of Sociology.
  • Understanding individual motives is crucial for understanding changes to the social structure (as illustrated in The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism).
  • Weber still attempted to make generalisations about types of motive for action – there are four main types of motive for action – Instrumentally rational, value rational, traditional action and affectual action
  • Different societies and different groups emphasise the importance of different types of ‘general motive’ for action’ – so society still affects individual motives, but in a general way.

Symbolic Interactionism

  • People’s self-concepts are based on their understanding of how others perceive them (the looking glass self).
  • We act towards others on the basis of how we interpret their symbolic action, the same action can be interpreted differently by different people – we need to understand these specific meanings to understanding people’s actions.
  • We ‘are constantly ‘taking on the role of the other’ – thinking about how people see us and reacting accordingly, this is very much an active, conscious process.
  • Each of us has an idea in the back of our minds of ‘the generalised other’ – which is basically society – what society expects of us, which consists of different norms and values associated with different roles in society.
  • These social roles are not specific or fixed; they can be interpreted in various different ways.

Goffman’s Dramaturgical Theory

  • People are actors on a ‘social stage’ who actively create an impression of themselves
  • When we act in the social world, we put on a ‘front’ in order to project a certain image of ourselves (call this part of our ‘social identity’
  • To create this front we manipulate the setting in which we perform (e.g. our living room), our appearance (e.g. our clothes) and our manner (our emotional demeanour).
  • Impression management involves projecting an ‘idealised image’ of ourselves,
  • We must be constantly on our guard to practice ‘expressive control’ when on the social stage.
  • Acting out social roles is quite demanding and so in addition to the front-stage aspect of our lives, we also have back-stage areas where we can drop our front and be more relaxed, closer to our ‘true-selves’
  • Most acting is neither fully ‘sincere’ nor fully ‘contrived’ and most people oscillate between sincerity and cynicism throughout the day and throughout the role they are playing.

Labelling Theory

  • Focuses on how the definitions (meanings) people impose on situations or on other people can have real consequences (even if those definitions are not based in reality)
  • People in power generally have more ability to impose their definitions on situations than the powerless and make these labels have consequences compared to working class youths. Labelling theory
  • We still need to understand where people are located in the power-structure of society to fully understand the process of labelling and identity construction.

Positive Evaluations of Social Action Theory

  • Recognises that people are complex and active and have their own diverse meanings and motives for acting
  • Overcomes the determinism found in structural theories such as Marxism which tend to see individuals as passive
  • Goffman’s dramaturgical theory seems especially useful today in the age of Social Media
  • Labelling Theory recognises the importance of micro-level interactions in shaping people’s identities, and the fact that people in power are often more able to ‘define the situation’.
  • In-depth research methods associated with social action theory often have high valid

Criticisms of Social Action Theory

  • It doesn’t pay sufficient attention to how social structures constrain action – for example, material deprivation can have a real, objective impact on your ability to well at school, thus failure is not just all about labelling.
  • Tends to ignore power-distribution in society – it can’t explain patterns in class, gender, ethnicity.
  • If people are so active, then why do so many people choose to be so normal?
  • Labelling theory can also be criticised for being deterministic
  • The small-scale methods associated with this theory can equally be criticised for lacking reliability and

Signposting and Related Posts 

Social Action theory is usually taught as part of the social theory aspect of the second year A-level sociology module in theory and methods, typically in contrast to the two structural theories Functionalism and Marxism, and is followed by (and in some ways is a pre-cursor of ) Postmodernism.

This post on teacher labelling and the self fulfilling prophecy, taught as part of the first year Education module provides a lot more depth on the micro-interactions which make up the whole process of labelling.

You might also like the following two posts which expand on other aspects of the notes above:

Max Weber”s Social Action Theory

A Summary of Erving Goffmans’s Presentation of Self in Everyday Life

Liberal, Marxist and Radical Feminist Perspectives on Society: An Introduction

covering views on causes of inequalities, solutions, key thinkers and evaluations.

Last Updated on June 30, 2023 by Karl Thompson

Liberal, Radical and Marxist and Feminism are the three main types of feminism, with different explanations for sex and gender inequalities and related strategies for social change.

This distinction between the three main types of feminism is common in A-level sociology and first year degree social studies, and it is also usual to add a fourth type which is postmodern (also known as difference) feminism.

Most contemporary feminists would balk at the idea of generalising Feminist theory into three (or four) basic types because part of Feminism is to resist the tendency towards categorising things, but for the purposes of A-level sociology, these three/ four are types what you need to know!

Liberal, Radical and Marxist Feminism: Simplified

  • Liberal Feminism – aims to achieve gender equality between men and women through social policy reforms, within the system.
  • Marxist Feminism – argues capitalism structures patriarchy, bringing down capitalism is the main goal.
  • Radical Feminism – patriarchy exists in all institutions. All women share common interests against all men, brining down patriarchy is the goal.
Mind map summarising liberal, marxist and radical feminist theory

There follows below more detailed accounts of each of these three feminist theories with links as appropriate.

You might also like this summary post on FOUR types of feminism (including difference/ postmodern feminism) which bullet points the information below.

Liberal Feminism

Liberal Feminism is the original form of Feminist theorising and activism, dating back to the time of Mary Wollonstonecraft. 

The central aim of liberal feminism is to improve and defend women’s rights through identifying inequalities between men and women and reforming these inequalities. 

Liberal Feminists believe that the main causes of gender inequality are ignorance and socialisation. They do not believe that social institutions are inherently patriarchal and believe in a “March of Progress” view of gender relations. They believe that men and women are gradually becoming more equal over time and that this trend will continue.

As evidence liberal feminists point to legal reforms they have campaigned for which have successfully promoted equality such as winning the vote for women and the sex discrimination act (1970).

Liberal Feminists are especially keen to emphasise the beneficial effects which women going into paid work has had on gender equality over the last 50 years especially: the pay gap is nearly 0 for women and men aged between 18-34 and dual earner households are now the main type of household in the UK and this is correlated with increased gender equality in other sectors of social life such as education and the family.

Within education, boys used to outperform girls, but now girls outperform boys in nearly every subject and at every level of education and within the family, evidence shows men are doing a greater share of domestic labour (housework, childcare), decision making is becoming more equal and that male and female children are socialised in a much more similar manner with similar aspirations.

Liberal feminists are the most likely to prefer positivist, statistical methods and have a tendency to measure progress towards gender equality using quantitative indicators such as the pay gap between men and women, educational achievement gaps and the proportions of men and women in parliament. 

Liberal Feminists believe research can be value free and freed from malestream bias with sufficient care. 

Solutions to remaining gender inequalities

Liberal Feminists do not seek revolutionary changes: they want changes to take place within the existing structure. 

Greater equality for women is to be achieved through reform of the mainstream liberal democratic capitalist order and reform is mostly sort through official, legal means, especially through campaigning for equality legislation. 

Examples of the reformist political campaigns that liberal feminists have focused on include:

  • Winning voting rights for women. 
  • Equal pay legislation 
  • Increasing financial independence for women. 
  • Cultural changes which promote mutual respect. 

Thus from a liberal feminist perspective, all the major barriers to gender equality have been broken down over the last century and since women now have equal opportunities to enter the workforce and politics, we have effectively achieved legal gender equality in the UK and there is very little else that needs to be done.

Only relatively minor changes need to be made to advance gender equality further, it’s a matter of tweaking social policy rather than radical and drastic systemic level changes.

We find Liberal Feminism embedded in mainstream political institutions such as the Equal Pay Commission and a major current focus of contemporary liberal feminism is the ‘glass ceiling’ as legislation hasn’t yet effectively narrowed the promotion prospects or differences in pay and bonuses between men and women at the higher end of professional life.

Evaluations of Liberal Feminism

On a positive note, Liberal Feminist ideas have probably had the most impact on women’s lives. It is hard to deny that gender equality has improved in many countries through reform rather than the more radical changes Marxist and Radical feminists argue we need.

Criticisms

One easy criticism of the liberal feminist view is that it is ethnocentric – it only really reflects the experiences of white, middle class women.

Liberal feminism tends to treat gender differences as sex differences. Liberal feminists campaign for equal rights between biologically female women and biologically male men, it has little or no interest in campaigning for greater gender equality in the broader sense of equality for people across sexualities or sexual identities. It focuses on biological sex, not issues of gay or trans equalities.  

Liberal Feminism uncritically accepts male-centred constructions of the existing social order including definitions of what it means to be a human being. It accepts deeply held malestream concepts and divisions such as male/ female and sex/ gender divides, something which postmodernist feminists in particular object to.

Marxist Feminism

Marxist Feminism connects Marxist notions of the relations of production to social relations of biological reproduction, focusing on the way childbirth and child care have economic ramifications. 

Marxist Feminists see the exploitative social relations of production as the main focus. Capitalism subordinates and exploits both the working classes and all women, both upper and lower class females. 

The most exploited group is working class women who are exploited by the whole of the ruling class and working class men and a working class housewife’s work is exploited by both her husband and the broader forces of the capitalist economy. 

In the mid twentieth century women were relatively marginalised from the public sphere (work and politics) and relatively confined to the private world of domestic work. Under capitalism the type of labour associated with the domestic sphere such as cooking, cleaning and tidying was not recognised as work at all, leading to the widespread view that women were merely consumers, dependent on the income from the ‘real work’ of their husbands. 

A main focus for marxist feminists in the 1970s was ‘housework’ which was seen as the intersection of class and gender based modes of exploitation. 

Housework was not regarded as real work, and thus unpaid, because of the structure of the capitalist system. It was primarily women who did this work for free, never pausing to think that they might even be paid for it. While male breadwinners benefited directly from the free labour of their female partners, the main beneficiary was the capitalist economy: women provided for the domestic needs of men so they could keep serving the needs of the system through doing paid work. 

Essentially capitalism required that all women be put into the housewife role and be exploited, but this was disguised by an ideology that saw housework as naturally women’s work. 

For further information see the marxist feminist perspective on the family.

The increasing amount of women going into work is not interpreted as liberation from ‘domestic tyranny’ by Marxist feminists, but rather capitalism seeking out cheaper forms of labour to exploit. 

Women are often found in low-paid, low-skilled, part-time, insecure work and the existence of a class of all women who are disadvantaged is a structural necessity for capitalism, so the relative disadvantages women face at work compared to men can’t be solved by legislation as liberal feminists claim. 

Marxist Feminism: Key thinker

Fran Ansley (1972) argued women absorb the anger that would otherwise be directed at capitalism. Ansley argued women’s male partners are inevitably frustrated by the exploitation they experienced at work and women were the victims of this, including domestic violence. She famously coined the phrase ‘women as the takers of shit’ to describe their domestic roles.

(The Roots of Marxist Feminism)

Marxist (or more broadly socialist) feminism can trace its roots back to the late nineteenth century and has had a complex relationship to communist and socialist movements over the last century and a half. 

Engel’s (1978/ 1884) pioneering work is the starting point for further attempts to formulate a materialist feminism that sought to apply Marxist concepts to understand the nature of sex and gender based exploitation. 

Engels initially argued that throughout history women have been both economically and politically subordinated by men. Successive modes of production have been structured to control women in terms of their work and their reproductive capacities. Women have been exploited differently to men because of their capacity to give birth. 

Marxist Feminism – solutions to gender Inequality

For Marxist Feminists, the solutions to gender inequality are economic – We need to tackle Capitalism to tackle Patriarchy. Softer solutions include paying women for childcare and housework – thus putting an economic value on what is still largely women’s work, stronger solutions include the abolition of Capitalism and the ushering in of Communism.

They are more sensitive to differences between women who belong to the ruling class and proletarian families. Marxist Feminists believe that there is considerable scope for co-operation between working class women and men and that both can work together.

Evaluations 

Marxist feminism is too narrowly focused on issues of the economy and work and downplays issues which are not economic in nature. 

Marxist feminism is reductionist in that it subordinates gender exploitation to economic exploitation within capitalism. One obvious criticism of this idea is that women’s oppression within the family existed before capitalism and in communist societies.

Postmodernist feminists argue that there are more complex issues feminism needs to deal with surrounding gender and culture which Marxist feminists dismiss as just ideologies of capitalism.

Radical Feminism

Radical Feminism began to be influential in the late 1970s and argued that the focus of feminism should be on patriarchy, defined as a social order wholly and primarily structured around the interests of males. 

For radical feminists patriarchy runs through multiple social institutions simultaneously: from politics through work, education and the family.

Patriarchy was seen to have its root in both physical and symbolic violence against women. Domestic violence was seen not as an accident arising from the dispositions of particular men, but a structural feature of the current family set up, and pornography was seen as a symbolic expression of a society centred around control of and hatred of women.

In essence many marxist concepts were reworked by radical feminists: social structural explanations, ideology and highlighting the hidden nature of oppression.

Against Liberal Feminists they argue that paid work has not been ‘liberating’. Instead women have acquired the ‘dual burden’ of paid work and unpaid housework and the family remains patriarchal – men benefit from women’s paid earnings and their domestic labour. Some Radical Feminists go further arguing that women suffer from the ‘triple shift’ where they have to do paid work, domestic work and ‘emotion work’ – being expected to take on the emotional burden of caring for children.

Rape, violence and pornography are also methods through which men have secured and maintained their power over women. (Andrea Dworkin, 1981). For evidence of this, Radical Feminists point to the ‘dark side of family life’ –  According to the British Crime Survey domestic violence accounts for a sixth of all violent crime and nearly 1 in 4 women will experience DV at some point in their lifetime and women are much more likely to experience this than men..

Rosemarie Tong (1998) distinguishes between two groups of radical feminist:

  • Radical-libertarian feminists believe that it is both possible and desirable for gender differences to be eradicated, or at least greatly reduced, and aim for a state of androgyny in which men and women are not significantly different.
  • Radical-cultural feminists believe in the superiority of the feminine. According to Tong radical cultural feminists celebrate characteristics associated with femininity such as emotion, and are hostile to those characteristics associated with masculinity such as hierarchy.

Key Thinker: Kate millet

Kate Millet’s sexual politics (1) is one of the most famous works of this period in which she analysed the existence of patriarchy in eight different ways:

  • ideological
  • biological
  • sociological (social, such as in the family)
  • class
  • Economic and educational
  • Force (violence)
  • Myth and religion
  • psychological

Radical Feminism: Solutions to gender inequality

Radical Feminists argued there was a universal sisterhood of all women because women had common interests against all men and engaged in consciousness raising so that individual women could see how patriarchy really worked. 

Radical Feminists see the traditional nuclear family as particularly patriarchal, and advocate its abolition and the establishment of alternative family structures and sexual relations.

The various alternatives suggested by Radical Feminists include separatism – women only communes, and matrifocal (female centred) households. Some also practise political Lesbianism and political celibacy as they view heterosexual relationships as “sleeping with the enemy.”

Radical feminists have often been actively involved in setting up and running refuges for women who are the victims of male violence.

Evaluations of Radical Feminism

It Ignores the progress that women have made in many areas e.g. work, controlling fertility, divorce.

The power of men is overstated primarily because of a failure to recognise differences in power between men, for example class based differences. 

They failed to recognise the role of money in some forms of exploitation: pornography for example.

Postmodern Feminists criticise the idea that there is a universal sisterhood of all women with shared interests.

Signposting and Related Posts

I usually teach this as part of my introductory block in the very first two weeks of A-level sociology.

Students should read this introduction to Feminism post first of all.

Sources

Inglis, D (2015) An Invitation to Social Theory

Kate Millet (1969) Sexual Politics

Wealth and Income inequality in the UK

The richest 10% are 133 times wealthier than the poorest 10%. This post explores statistics on wealth and income inequalities in the UK

Last Updated on August 3, 2023 by Karl Thompson

The wealthiest 10% of households in the UK are 133 times richer than the poorest 10% of households (1).

The disposable income of the richest 20% of households is 4.5 times greater than the poorest 20% (2).

Wealth Inequalities in the UK


In 2018-2022:

  • The richest 1% of households had a median wealth of more than £3.6 million.
  • The richest 10% of households had a median wealth of £1.9 million.
  • The poorest 10% of households had a median wealth of just  £15,400. 

This means the wealthiest 10% of households were 130 times richer than the poorest 10% of households. The wealthiest  10% were 233 times richer. 

Components of wealth 

As measured by the ONS wealth is made up of four main components:

  • Pensions 
  • Property
  • Other physical assets 
  • Cash savings 

For the wealthiest households, private pensions make up a more significant portion of wealth. Pensions as a proportion of wealth becomes less significant the poorer the household is. 

In middle-wealth households, property is the most significant proportion of wealth. 

This probably means that for the ‘middle wealthy’ they are not as affluent as may appear. Most of these people will live in those households, no income is derived from that portion of their wealth. In contrast, pension wealth, which wealthier households have a lot more of, yields an income.  

Trends in wealth distribution

The wealth of the richest 10% of households has decreased in the very long term. In 1900, the top 10% controlled over 50% of wealth. This declined to a low of 26.5% in 1970, but then increased to 38.7% in 2013. The proportion of wealth controlled by the top 10% has declined slightly over the last decade (3)

In 2021 the top 10% controlled 35.7% of wealth, compared to the bottom 50% who controlled only 20.4% of wealth.

According the Equality Trust, by 2023, the richest 50 families in the UK held more wealth than half of the UK population, comprising 33.5 million people.

Income inequalities in the UK 2022

Median equivalized disposable income for the richest 20% of households was £66002 in 2022, compared to £14508 for the poorest 20% of households (2).

This means the richest 20% of households had an income 4.5 times greater than the poorest 20% of households.

Disposable income is income after taxes and benefits. Equivalized means income is adjusted to take account of household composition because costs are different for single people, couples and families.

Income inequality and poverty

The government’s own measurement of households in poverty is set at 60% of median income, which was £32349 in 2022.

60% of this median income is £19409 which means that every single one of those households in the bottom quintile is in poverty, as are around half of the households in the second quintile.

It should be no surprise based on the above distribution that 13.4 million people or 20% of the population were living in poverty in 2020/2021.

The Joseph Rowntree Foundation also has measures of deep poverty, set at 50% of median income at £16174 a year and very deep poverty, at 40% or just under £13 000 a year.

Poverty has deepened in recent years, with more people falling into deep and very deep poverty. Based on the above distribution for example every household in the bottom quintile is in deep poverty, some will be in very deep poverty!

A more detailed income distribution

The Institute for Fiscal Studies has developed an online calculator where you can enter your income to see where you fit in to the distribution in the UK.

If you enter your income and costs you will show up as a red bar. (My screen capture below doesn’t show a red bar as I entered a fake high income, so my bar is off the scale to the right!).

What the graphic below shows is how many millions of people earn roughly what weekly income. Each bar represents an increase in income of around £7.

I put two arrows in to demonstrate that most people receive between £200 and £550 per week.

You can also see from the above bar chart that there are more people clustered towards the middle-left. Relatively few people have very high incomes!

The different shades of green are just to make the graphic easier to read.

All of the people in the first light shade of green to the left will classify as being in very deep poverty, with incomes of less than £190 a week.

Trends in income inequality

Disposable income inequality has increased considerably since 1977. As measured by the Gini Coefficient, income inequality has increased from 24.5% in 1977 to 34.7% in 2022 (4).

The Gini coefficient takes values between 0% and 100%, with higher values representing an increase in the level of inequality. A value of 0% indicates complete equality, a value of 100% complete inequality. A 100% score would mean one person (or household) has all the income.

Signposting and related posts

Poverty is a concept that is often linked with wealth (you might crudely say that poverty is the opposite of wealth).

Wealth and income inequalities are closely correlated with social class, although economic measurements are just one indicator of social class, which is a broader concept, also encompassing social and cultural capital (if we are going to use the latest social class survey – see here for an introduction to the concept of social class.

Have a look at evaluating the usefulness of official statistics and consider which strengths and limitations apply here.

Sources

(1) Office for National Statistics (ONS), released 2 January 2022, ONS website, Household total wealth in Great Britain: April 2018 to March 2020

(2) Office for National Statistics (ONS), released 25 January 2023, ONS website, statistical bulletin, Household income inequality, UK: financial year ending 2022

(3) The Equality Trust (accessed August 2023) The Scale of Economic Inequality in the UK

(4) Office for National Statistics (ONS), released 25 January 2023, ONS website, statistical bulletin, Household income inequality, UK: financial year ending 2022

An Introduction to AS and A Level Sociology

Last Updated on August 8, 2016 by

Good Resources to explore further

Assessment Objectives and Key Skills in A Level Sociology

knowledge, understanding, application, analysis and evaluation!

Last Updated on January 20, 2023 by Karl Thompson

There are three key skills you need to demonstrate in A level Sociology:

  • AO1: Knowledge and Understanding
  • AO2: Application
  • AO3: Analysis and Evaluation

AO‘ stands for ‘Assessment Objective’.

Knowledge and Understanding

This means knowledge and understanding of sociological theories, concepts and evidence

Application

This means applying sociological theories, concepts, evidence and research methods to a range of issues. It also means being able to apply material from the items that are attached to some questions!

Analyse and evaluate

You need to be able to analyse and evaluate concepts, evidence and research methods in order to:

  • present arguments
  • make judgements
  • draw conclusions.

Analysis means being able to pick apart arguments and evidence in a nuanced way and showing that you know the logic behind arguments, and how all the pieces of a theory fit together.

Evaluation means showing the strengths and limitation of research studies and theories.

Developing Skills in A-level Sociology

Below are eight specific ways you can demonstrate these skills in relation to sociological concepts, theories and evidence. They get progressively harder, sort of.

Knowledge and Understanding

AO1 – Define/ explain the theory or Concept
AO1 – Give examples to illustrate this theory or concept

Application

AO2 – Apply the theory or concept – How far does the theory/ concept help you understand different aspects of social life?
AO2 – Analyse – What are the key foundational ideas of the theory or the concept?
AO2 – Analyse – How does the theory/ concept relate to other theories/ concepts – which are the most closely related, which the opposite?

Analysis and Evaluation

AO3 – Evaluate from other PERSPECTIVES – What would other perspectives say about the theory/ concept? (obviously this overlaps with no/.5 above
AO3 – Evaluate – HISTORICAL CRITICISM – Is the theory/ concept dated? When was the concept developed? Is it still relevant today, or has society changed so much that it is no longer relevant? Has society changed in such a way that some aspects of the theory are now more relevant?
AO3 – Evalaute – POWER/ BIAS/ VALUE FREEDOM? Who developed the concept/ theory – whose interests does it serve?

You also need to be able to evaluate research methods – but more of that later!

Signposting and Related Posts.

For more information on A-level sociology exam skills and exam advice please see my page on exams, essays and exam advice.

To return to the homepage – revisesociology.com