Essay Topic..

[halfracedrift]

Well.. This is more of a place to give opinions... I want some ideas/comments for writing my essay on this topic... (This is the actual question..)

Describe how our society would change in the future -- in the home, school, and worksplace, for example -- if all children were raised in families that discouraged traditional gender-typing [definition: Gender typing is what society deems a male as a male, and a female as a female (This is the definition from my textbook anyway..)] and distinct gender roles [roles in society in which each gender has to take up]. Consider the advantages or disadvantages of such changes while you develop an argument as to whether you would or would not recommend the development of that kind of society.

I'm not asking you to do my homework... Because I already did mine.. here:

Society would go through many drastic changes if traditional gender typing [ that is, what society defines male as male and female as female] was abolished. There may be a few advantages, but overall, society would drastically change from what we know it as of this moment, as gender typing has existed since the dawn of civilization. If gender typing was abolished, no longer will women and men be bound to certain tasks. This also means the abolishing of distinctive gender roles [a set of expected behaviors for males and females] (such as repairing <male>, buying<female>, cooking<female>, etc). While this is a good thing, as both males and females could share the same workload, the child in the family might be influenced. The effect which the parents have on the child might go as far as to the point where the child feels that they should act the same way that the opposite sex does, because they do not have a typical father or a typical mother image to follow. This is quite a negative effect of abolishing gender roles and gender typing, as the child might turn out to have gay or lesbian tendencies. This could also cause a global decline in population, as there may be less heterosexual couples producing offspring. Thus, it is very important to keep gender typing and gender roles, because without them, our society, or even worse, the entire human race, could be wiped away.

Comments or suggestions for modifying this? This is for Psychology by the way..

 

[Tacet_Blue]

Wow..there is so many things wrong with that answer, I don't know where to start

Objectively speaking, you need to start an essay with some background, look up some facts, then explore the advantages/disadvantages, giving examples, then maybe inject a little of your own opinion, and finally sum up with a conclusion, based on the points you raised earlier in the essay.

You answer here is 90% opinion.

There may be a few advantages, but overall, society would drastically

You mention "few advantages" but don't go on to say what they are. Examples would be good

Now, from my point of view this essay says more about your own attitude than the effects of gender typing on society.

such as repairing <male>, buying<female>, cooking<female>

Well, there are some fine women engineers and I think 90% of top chefs are men. This will without a doubt lose you marks if it is being marked by a woman! You might as well say women should stay at home and cook.

abolishing gender roles and gender typing, as the child might turn out to have gay or lesbian tendencies.

This has never been proved, and will lose you marks with some examiners as it is inflamatory.

Where I live, there are almost no gender boundaries, women are Doctors/Pilots/Welders/Politicians/Truck Drivers/Surgeons/Soldiers/Priests etc.
I think you should mention that a society without gender typing is a modern society and shows how already we have moved from stereotyping with fewer and fewer boundaries existing. One of the advantages you could mention is that it encourages and promotes the idea of equal rights.
The is the 21st century guys, you can still open doors for women, but we should pay them the same for doing the same job. That is where gender typing is still in evidence, a woman will earn up 33% less for doing the same job.

Hope some of that helps

I would encourage you to rewrite it, and shouldn't it be a bit longer

 

[halfracedrift]

I guess so. Now that I look at it, there's so many flaws. Time for rewriting!

I should have clarified. It's more of a paragraph response rather than essay.

 

[Danoff]

That is where gender typing is still in evidence, a woman will earn up 33% less for doing the same job.

Not that you can't go get evidence to back up this claim more concretely but I'd like to point out that this means very little. I'm going to assume that you meant to say "earn up [to] 33% less for doing the same job".

I'll be you could say that guys earn up to 33% less for doing the same job too. Because the lowest earning rate in any given job is far lower than the highest.

Also, I'd like to know if this comparison has the same amount of experience for both men and women. Many of the people in our workplace have been there for over 30 years. They happen to be the top earners (most experience) and were put in their jobs at a time when sexism was much more prevelant. So for the same job title you can't just compare the average guy's salary to the average woman's salary and say that if the woman's is lower it means there is currently sexism. It may mean that there used to be sexism and that the people from that era have not retired.

Anyway comparing two people with the same amount of experience would help. It would also help with issues like women taking time off to have kids - which reduces the number of times they get raises and so on.

 

[Tacet_Blue]

I'm going to assume that you meant to say "earn up [to] 33% less for doing the same job".

Yeah up to whoops

At the time of writing I was thinking of top level jobs, where they had compared the salary of men and women. CEO's chairmen/women and executives. It is still "old school" on the board of directors in many companies. Even a woman with as much experience and a better track record was paid less. Also it is much harder for a woman to reach these positions, at promotion opportunities they are often overlooked and the company may favour their male colleagues.

So for the same job title you can't just compare the average guy's salary to the average woman's salary and say that if the woman's is lower it means there is currently sexism.

I totally agree, averages are very misleading and there is no such thing as the "average person", but these were jobs in the same company, and there was no other reason for the discrepancy based on experience or performance. I think there is much less sexism now, (which is not strictly what gender type means) but it still exists...especially in golf clubs

Edit: Whilst we are talking averages, the 33% was not the average but the extreme cases. The average is around 10% and these cases were looking at Salary, not hourly rates, but as we've both said, averages are pretty meaningless, until you look at their context and the sample used.