Gender through the framework of Social reproduction

During our class discussions and while going through the readings, I made constant connections with the material we were seeing and the framework of the social reproduction theory. Social reproduction theory explains how structures of inequality reproduce themselves in the world. This occurs due to the structure of power relations and symbolic relationships between classes. The structures in place are normalized by the individuals in that environment, and these individuals in the future act in accordance with the norms set. Social reproduction, explains why social norms and customs are internalized. The theory also explains why it is difficult for a situation to move from its status quo.

Education taught in schools reproduce structures of inequality. The structure of the classroom creates an environment in which there are preconceived expectations of a student’s ability to succeed. Families from different social classes differ in the competences (cultural capital) and dispositions (habitus). This influences their children’s education, whether it is class differences in the knowledge and skills parents pass on to their children, or class differences in parents’ understanding of the complexities and nuances of the educational system. The youtube video below illustrates the theory well:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ShJqEBcyiBg

When applying this theory to gender, it is true that education contributes to the reproduction and legitimation of a cultural system that reinforces masculine privilege and shapes the gendered identities and perceptions of citizens. There is a gendered division of labor, for example with care-giving and service work being roles generally assumed by women, especially in the past. Traditionally, there is a gendered hierarchy of occupations and professions in the labor market. Gender segmentation is internalized and occurs culturally and is reproduced and structurally embedded. It is believed that there is a segregation dynamic, which is primarily grounded in two deeply entrenched logics of gender essentialism and male. Gender essentialism considers character traits as naturally or typically feminine, and other traits as masculine, while male primacy holds that males are more authoritative and status-worthy.

Just as class location can influence individuals’ perceptions of which pathways are more or less realistic, so too can gender. The gendered nature of habitus is a consequence of the different possibilities that women and men perceive are available to them. These gender disparities in the opportunity structure are reflected in the differing messages internalized by boys and girls and come to inform their habitus in important ways. 

                These are all traditional roles that are important for all individuals to be conscious of, so that we may tackle the problem of inequality at its root. By ignoring these ideas, we may be blinding ourselves of a point of view and possibly hindering communication.

                Smith, Candida and Maitrayee (1990) book, A guide to Gender Analysis, explains a number of frameworks that can assist development practitioners in developing a framework that to help them to be inclusive of different factors. Social reproduction is a framework that enables an individual to view the situation through a different lense.

References

Smith, Ines, Candida March, and Maitrayee Mukhopadhyay. 1999. A Guide to Gender Analysis Frameworks. Oxford: Oxfam.

Bourdieu, Pierre. 1998. "On male domination" Le Monde Diplomatique, Oct. 10, 1998

Dumais, Susan. 2002. Cultural capital, gender, and school success: The role of habitus. Avaliable on: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3090253?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents.

Edgerton, J. D., Peter, T., & Roberts, L. W. (2014). Gendered Habitus and Gender Differences in Academic Achievement. Alberta Journal Of Educational Research, 60(1), 182-212.