Media Analysis of Gender Essay - 1758 Words

First of all, in The Simpsons, the scene where we get into the actual plot of the story opens with Marge and Lisa walking into a department store that sells dolls. The gender stereotype that girls are only interested in playing with dolls is reinforced here as a huge selection of Malibu Stacy dolls is on display with a throng of screeching, bloodthirsty girls tearing the store apart. Lisa says, â€Å"I’m warning you mom, I might get a little crazy.† and immediately knocks down a girl and snatches another in a choke-hold to be the first in line for the new Malibu Stacy doll. In the very next scene we have the whole family in the car with Homer driving. He is baking a cupcake with an easy-bake-oven that he bought from the mall. Marge advises him†¦show more content†¦The show makes an obvious distinction between how men/boys and women/girls act. Anyway, the episode continues with lisa playing with her doll pretending that Malibu Stacy is giving a speech at the U.N , but Lisa is disappointed when she realizes that the new and improved doll says sexist remarks such as â€Å"don’t ask me, I’m just a girl† and â€Å"let’s buy make up so that boys will like us!†. Lisa goes on a rant about how â€Å"millions of girls will grow up thinking that this is the right way to act! That they cannot be anything more than vacuous ninnies...!†and gets really mad when Bart does not understand why she is so upset. The difference in communication styles is shown here as Lisa is more adept with words than Bart is as Bart can only give Lisa a stupid reply like â€Å"that’s what I was going to say.† This illustrates the stereotype that girls are more expressive and sensitive than boys are. On the other hand, Marge plays the more traditional housewife as her mind never delves into issues that are not relevant to the domestic center; she is not privy to relevant discussions on social issues like Lisa and cannot u nderstand why Lisa is so upset. She said that Lisa had been speaking up â€Å"an awful lot lately.† This suggests that typical lady-like behavior does not include speaking out and that the mother should enforce positive female behavior. Additionally, inShow MoreRelatedEssay on Inequalities as Portrayed in the Media: a Gender Analysis3248 Words   |  13 PagesInequalities as Portrayed in the Media: A Gender Analysis Media plays a big role in conventional Canadian society. It is becoming more and more influential and a bigger part of everyone’s daily lives. Since the invention and spread of the use of the printing press in the mid fifteen-hundreds, societies have been able to produce mass quantities of information available to the general public. Books were printed and made available to a large audience, replacing word of mouth communication aboutRead MorePinterest Boards And Youtube Videos That Deliver Makeup806 Words   |  4 Pagesdeliver makeup tutorials flood social media. Television shows that chronicle cupcake shops and DIY home improvement flourish. As these feminized forms of media thrive in the pop culture of our early twenty-first century, contemporary gender scholars take up the task of analyzing the social, economic, and cultural meaning they create. Does fashion blogging reify certain norms of femininity, or challenge them? What does the act of selling cupcakes have to do with gender? What does the popularity of 50 ShadesRead MoreMedia Based On Social Stereotypes930 Words   |  4 PagesThis paper includes critical analysis of media based on social stereotypes. There are two advertisements used one is based on gender inequality and the other is based on the gender biased and racial inequality. These two advertisement’s provides a good example of how media influences society. Analysis of these advertisement will show how the creator of the advertisement uses social stereotypes. Advertisement 1 analysis Nowadays the representation of gender in media has become very common. It isRead MoreGender Roles And The Media867 Words   |  4 Pagessee women in the media have many roles that men have, such as, police officer, doctor and running to become president, while a nurse and teacher have emerged as both men and women jobs. Over time, the media show how gender role had changed but are what the media is showing the truth about the gender roles in the United States. Historian and scholar had written about this subject of gender roles and how the media affect our view. Thesis statement Reality vs. Fiction Is the media giving the publicRead MoreCritical Discourse Analysis1510 Words   |  7 PagesCritical Discourse Analysis Social communication is increasingly becoming a subject of scientists’ discussions from different disciplines, as well as ordinary language users.  In contemporary social sciences, especially in linguistics, we see a clear shift to discourse.  Discourse allows us to talk about use of the language, as well as the language as a socio-cultural activity.  In this sense, discourse, on one hand, reflects the social reality, on the other hand, it shapes it, therefore participateRead MoreThe Exploration Of Feminist Theory Essay1536 Words   |  7 Pagestheory is based on the common ideology of feminism within the Communication world. Illustrating gender inequality the feminist theory analysis into the social fields of politics, business, media platforms, and social normalities. Research traditions include socio-psychology and semiotics due to the cause and effect relationships that help create social standards while also the symbolic forms of media that influence how people per ceive and view women. The epistemology foundation used in this theoryRead MoreThe Communications Reinforcement Theory And Its Effects On Society997 Words   |  4 Pagesassumption is that individuals who possess a liking or passion for all forms of media will reinforce this feeling by indulging in media consumption and production. This leads to several hypotheses that may be verified by empirical evidence from college campuses. The overarching hypothesis here is that students who consume one form of mass media, such as T.V., will also exhibit parallel tendencies of consumption to other forms of media such as social networking sites or recorded music. To test this generalRead MoreA Modern Wall Street Journal Survey1537 Words   |  7 Pagesdepicted in advertising in Canada. Methodology In order to address the research propositions of the study, the encore needed a method for mention the types of pistillate portrayals featuring in the context of consumer magazine advertisements. Con tent analysis was chosen for it is the best at providing â€Å"a scientific, quantitative, and generalizable description of communications content† (Kassarjian, 1977, p. For example, the advertisement for Stove Master, a very-cleaning oven quarantine the women as aRead MoreThe Social Of Social Media Essay1529 Words   |  7 PagesSocial Media Checklist. The number and type of social media sites participants utilize will be measured using a social media checklist. The Social Media checklist consists of (e.g. Ask:fm, Facebook, Flicker, Google+ Instagram, Linkedin, Myspace, Pinterest, QQ Reddit, Snapchat, Skype Tinder, Tumblr, Twitter, Vine, WeChat, Youtube). Raters will check all forms of social media utilized. An average social media checklist is of interest. Higher scores indicate increased social media sites usage. LowerRead MoreGender And The Media By Rosalind Gill1596 Words   |  7 Pages Book Review of Gender and the Media by Rosalind Gill Gender and the Media by Rosalind Gill addresses gender stereotypes that are brought onto women and men through the media resulting in objectification and subjectification. Gill discusses how the representation of gender is altered as a result of the media in Western societies. Gender and the Media is aimed to address the rapid transmission of media and how those changes affect the construction of feminine and masculine gender roles in society

Mussolini’s Relationship with Hitler Free Essays

string(69) " the opportunity to spread its power and influence to other nations\." There were many similarities between Mussolini and Hitler even though the two exhibited some differences. Having risen to power earlier, in the 1920s, Mussolini was the senior between the two and had a great influence on Hitler. Hitler saw in him a teacher who helped him shape his policies. We will write a custom essay sample on Mussolini’s Relationship with Hitler or any similar topic only for you Order Now The two however had individual characteristics that made their lives quite different. As much as Hitler went to school and graduated as a fine art student, Mussolini was self – educated (Trifkovic 1993). The latter had a larger than life approach to life and he wanted to be perceived as a superman by the people. In this way he would fake pictures portraying him as a master of various skills including a pilot, wrestler etc. On the other hand Hitler had a less colorful view of life. He was more successful in battle; being able to win majority of the wars that he staged against his enemies. In this way Germany was able to conquer other nations. As much as his friend found it easy to conquer other nations due to his early war experience and the huge army back at home; Mussolini had a difficult time in winning battles. In most of the battles he had to depend on the assistance of the Germans in order to become victorious (Carpi 1994). The two leaders were nevertheless hungry for power and were inclined to totalitarian leadership. They both had been wounded in battle and had almost taken a similar avenue to power (Hayes 1995). There election promise to restore hope and help solve the unemployment problem earned them the support and sympathy from the majority voters. In some way they did not fail as both German and Italy significantly reduced the levels of unemployment in the initial years of their leadership (Cassels 1963). The two had a hot cold relationship. Despite the signing the Pact of Steel, which called for cooperation between the two countries in matters economical, militaristic and on foreign policy issues; still there are times when one of the countries would act without due consultation with the other. Ascension to Power There is great similarity in the manner that the two leaders campaigned for political leadership and got elected to the office. There countries by the time were facing unemployment problems, hopelessness and disillusionment. The citizens were therefore anticipating for someone who would literary save them from the situation. The coming of both Mussolini and Hitler was perceived as a great relieve to the economic situation of the time. There campaign which was fierce propaganda helped to catapult the two dictators into office. This propaganda continued to play a key role in the governments and administration of the day; the citizens were totally unaware of the true information that the government was acting upon. In times of war or when the government made important decisions that directly or indirectly affected the lives of the citizens; there were totally kept in the dark (Weber 1982). The two dictators all had a similar script to help them rule over the people (Flood 1989). They were at a point of establishing a new leadership whereby the individual was the one and only decision maker. This totalitarian government did not tolerate any form of opposition either from an individual or groups. It was therefore common for those who expressed ideas or views that were opposed to the leader to either face prosecution without trial or they were simply liquidated. The two leaders had an unquenchable thirst for power. This trait seemed to have cemented their relationship as they tended to see oneself in the character of the other. Hitler had been able to learn from Mussolini the way to govern a nation with the full authority centered on one individual. In mastering the way Mussolini carried out the affairs of the nation and particularly the conduct of the military; Hitler was eventually able to come up with his own style of leadership (Flood 1989). He was however very critical to avoid the mistakes that his friend had made. So in imitating his manner and way of leadership, he was also aware of the pitfalls that come with overindulgence more so exhibitionism. Foreign Policy It is because of the thirst for power and having the same style of leadership that the two dictators had to settle for an agreement such that they will support one another in case of war. This agreement otherwise referred to as the Pact of Steel was more in favor of Hitler’s Germany that is was for Italy (Corrado 1993). There was an unquenchable thirst for power on the part of Mussolini – for he had seen a powerful ally in Germany – that made him sign the deal. Later on it came to Italy’s realization that Germany was too aggressive in a bid to try and expand its influence thus fought a number of war expecting the cooperation of Italy. At least in two instances Italy declined to get involved in the wars despite the agreement. In both the 1939 and 1940 war, the former being the German’s invasion of Poland, there had been no cooperation between the countries. In the latter case the hesitation came since Mussolini had seen the possibility of Germany benefiting entirely from the invasion. The foreign policies of both Mussolini and Hitler were primarily addressing the expansion of their empire. The two would not squander any opportunity to try and spread there influence. For instance the involvement of Italy in the Spanish war was basically as a result of hunger for power by Mussolini. In this civil war that proved to be quite unpopular in Italy; was a way to get another member to the club of dictators. Already Hitler and Mussolini had perceived themselves as the most powerful nations in Europe. The two come up with an axis to which the other European countries revolved. According to Mussolini Italy would not miss the opportunity to spread its power and influence to other nations. You read "Mussolini’s Relationship with Hitler" in category "Papers" In this stance Italy was backed by Germany and together they rallied their support for Franco. The two were in favor of another establishment of a Fascist dictatorship in Europe. In this war there combined force succeeded in having Franco joining the club of dictators. The effect of this war was a further alienation of Italy from the rest of Europe. It implied that the only option and way that was open to Italy was to augment its friendship with Germany. The Military The military might of Germany was not only one of the best but also the biggest. It was said to be five times more that the limit set by international standards. The significance of the great numbers of the officers was apparent. The nation went and fought many wars and was able to be successful in most of them. The military had been well equipped with sophisticated weapons and personnel that made it difficult to be defeated by any other nation. The two leaders were so much fascinated by the army such that even they themselves would always be seen in the army uniforms. In these military activities the leaders also were able to influence one another in one way or another. For instance the Nazi salute came from a direct imitation from the Mussolini army. Similarly there are a number of ideas that Mussolini borrowed from Hitler after he had visited his country and allowed to see the military. On seeing the military might of the Germans he made up his mind to maintain friendship with Hitler. Mussolini knew little about the military hence it was always divided and fragmented. There seemed to be no way to make the factions stick together and be loyal to their commander-in – chief. For a period of a decade or so Mussolini tried to consolidate and manage the military effectively. He could achieve but little success in this regard as his military exhibited weakness due to the internal divisions. This can be contrasted to his friend whose military was so compact and their loyalty was not compromised. The military was more of a cult than a professional body meant to safeguard the security of the nation. The German soldiers were simply dehumanized such that they were like automatons to follow orders that were given by their superiors. Together in Fascism Fascism seemed to have glued the two dictators together. They both found great relieve and prestige in holding absolute power. Fascism is regarded as unmasked capitalism since it has as its core value the idea of big business (Weber 1982). The two dictators were beneficiaries of the big business helping them ascend to leadership positions. It was therefore there prime role to ensure that the idea does not die with their coming into power. Fascism therefore continued to appeal to the emotions of the masses as it took on symbolism such as the hand salute, flags and creeds. Both Hitler and Mussolini exhibited these qualities and also the tendency towards racism, nationalism and sadism. Fascism detested so much the status quo and this has been the defining trait of both the dictators. Mussolini ensured that all political parties were dissolved. This gave him absolute power to rule over the state of Italy. He got to control each and everything in the country; the most powerful ministries were placed in his hands. These include defense, home and foreign affairs and corporations. Similarly he employed a lot of propaganda machinery such that the citizens are kept out of the picture. Everyone was made to believe that Fascism was the one and only system that could work in the 20th century (Griffin 2000). The other forms of government such as democracy and liberalism were to be shunned since they were outdated and could not be adopted. This manner of leadership was much akin to that of Adolph Hitler, just like his friend, he accomplished most of his goals through propaganda. A student of Mussolini, Hitler perfected the art of propaganda (Sternhell 1994). He was able to persuade the entire nation to support his goals and ideals in order to achieve a common purpose. Hitler had an entire ministry allotted to propaganda. Initially Mussolini held the policy of privatization of industries to the satisfaction of the financers. This was however a short term measure as the policy was reversed such that the government took on the control of the industries (Seldes 1935). As Mussolini struggled to ensure economic and financial independence of Italy – it was vital the country to have enough resources. This was not the case with Italy which struggled with limited resource allocation. To some extend Hitler had the resources to sustain his economy. He was able to solve the unemployment problem in the country and meet the demands of the huge army. Though the nation had been sidelined by other nations due to its aggressive behavior, still the economy did not flounder. This success story did not last for long as there were many obstacles on the way of achieving the goals that the leaders had set in mind. The Fascism ideology failed in its endeavor to bring some substantial changes in the human person and the society at large. First the two major personalities that stood for the idea actually met the most miserable of deaths. No one really wants to remember the actions of the two dictators. Similarly the goals of Fascism namely to come up with a society and human beings that are heroically moral were never to be realized. At first both Mussolini and Hitler were revered and admired by the citizen as they seem to have brought the changes that were badly needed by them and the society as a whole (Trifkovic 1993). This did not last long more so for Mussolini whom everyone soon realized his true character. The alienation of the two individuals by the civilized nations of Europe show how they were affected by their policies. However one cannot simply dismiss Mussolini as a failure who brought nothing but misery to his country. On the contrary Mussolini has been noted to have established the most stable government ever. It is as a result of his government that the nation of Italy can boast of a stable foundation. Similarly the good infrastructure of the country traces its roots back to the leadership of Mussolini. This is not to approve of his character or Fascism as a form of leadership. Any leader can take advantage of any form of leadership. In the case of Mussolini and Hitler the two used the power that had been bestowed on them to ensure that no one opposes their leadership. They systematically eliminated the individuals or groups that were not in favor of their policies. Common Tendencies Since Mussolini and Hitler were regarded as friends they were prone to show similarities in their actions. In some of their actions however the two lacked straight forwardness and tended to be some aspect of distrust. Germany and Italy both left the League of Nations, the former in 1933 while the latter – incensed by the imposition of sanctions by the league after invading Ethiopia – left in 1939. This shows how closely the two leaders influenced the behavior of one other. The attempt to try and occupy Albania by Mussolini had been noted as being synonymous with Hitler’s invasion and later occupation of Czechoslovakia and Austria. This attempt, unlike that of Hitler, did not bear any fruit as the Italian forces were defeated and forced to withdraw from Albania. The foreign policy of the two dictators were therefore similar to a greater extend but the political and military might of Germany was far much superior compared to that of Italy. It is for this reason that analysts were concerned that Mussolini was in fact simply a puppet of his comrade. The foreign policies of Mussolini and Hitler were meant for the achievement of power and status. There were both in favor of the expansion of their empires. To achieve this purpose the dictators employed force and diplomacy. For instance in 1935 take over of Ethiopia, Mussolini had to use force. Similarly Hitler had to threaten with the use of force in order to occupy Austria. In this way the two dictators exhibit the same manner of approach in an attempt to gain power. In brief the two fascist dictators were cut in the same cloth (Trifkovic 1993). There character though seemed to show some variation it was nonetheless the same. Everything that the two dictators did could be brought down to the thirst for power. This was mostly accomplished through wars. The Wars The civil war in Spain that lasted for three years saw the exhibition of new weapons and brought to the fore rivalries between the nations. The war simply showed who is who in the world. There were democracies on one hand comprising of countries such as Belgium, Britain, France and Holland. One the other hand there were the totalitarian regimes which included Russia, Italy and Germany. The might of these nations was to be exhibited in Spain during the civil war. Countries such as France and Britain however did not want to get involved in the crisis and therefore kept off the battlefield. This war was therefore fueled by external forces with little participation of internal forces. In participating in the war, Mussolini was acting against the will of a significant number of Italians. The war was not popular with the majority people since it was simply meant to quench the thirst for power of an individual. Mussolini wanted to have another dictator to join in Europe to join him and Hitler. In this endeavor together with Hitler they recorded huge success after General Franco won the war. Italy had been reluctant to join the First World War due to domestic policies that favored a liberal stance. By then Mussolini was allied to the socialist party thus held to the principles of the party. He later on changed his mind and joined Hitler’s faction on the battlefield. This angered the socialist party leadership thus resulting to his expulsion from the party. Similarly in the Second World War Mussolini was reluctant to join his friend as he was unsure on which side to fight. He was later to make up his mind after he had witnessed the progress in the war. Despite the fact that Hitler was more successful in war compared to Mussolini, the wars kept their relationship close and tight. The invasion of Italy to both Greek and Ethiopia – the former due to the supposed killing of her soldiers while the latter just a revenge mission on an occurrence that happened many years back – led the country to face sanctions from the League of Nations. This was very disagreeable to Mussolini thus making him withdraw from the league. He, just as his friend Hitler had come to the realization that the league could not stand on the way to acquisition of colonies. In order to understand the two leaders one has to place their actions in their respective context. It was the time when the nation’s exalted wars and there was much honor and prestige in conquering another nation. The philosophy of the time was mostly in the favor of the Germanys. This is notably Fred rich Nietzsche whom it is said to have influenced both Hitler and Mussolini with his idea of the superman. This idea was later to become the obsession of Mussolini. He wanted everyone to believe that he had extraordinary qualities. In his approach to many issues and problems that faced his country, Mussolini lacked a realistic approach. Betrayal In one way or another friendship between Mussolini and Hitler has not been smooth running. There have been ups and downs; sometimes they did cooperate while other times the two were totally on different paths. In most cases Mussolini was the victim of the betrayal as he was the lesser of the two in the relationship. In the Pact of Steel for instance the two were to stand by one another in case one declared war on another country. This was not to be as Italy was reluctant to join Germany in its attempt to invade Poland; an incidence that caused the Second World War (Trifkovic 1993). In failing to join his friend in war despite the deal that had been made earlier on, Mussolini was declaring his independence. There is also the possibility that the army was not prepared to fight at the time. The failure to abide by the Pact of Steel can also be as a result of the feeling that Hitler was opportunistic. His military was in fact more aggressive compared to that of Italy. This meant that Italy will serve as the puppet to be manipulated by Germany. Considering the character of both Mussolini and Hitler, none would be willing to accept such a demeaning position. Even with the apparent friendship between Mussolini and Hitler, the latter was said to have recommended Hitler for excommunication to the pope. This action, considering the closeness of the two, had two implications; one is that in essence it sounds factual and quite obvious. On the other hand it is shocking for the suggestion to come from ones friend. The two had cooperated in many things and continued to do so. In fact when everyone else seemed to turn his back against Mussolini, it is Hitler that came to his rescue. The incidence is therefore quite shocking as it is interesting. For no one really knew the true character of these individuals. Not even there closest friends. Nevertheless the two did cooperate in many spheres of life. If it were not for the support of the Germany military, then Mussolini will not have achieved some of the victories that were pegged to his name and regime (Cassels 1963). The most significant aspect of the relationship is the rescue that was carried out by the German soldiers. Mussolini having been arrested and imprisoned in the mountain top; it took the world by storm to see that the German soldiers were able to rescue him (Trifkovic 1993). This was a true display of friendship between Hitler and Mussolini. In fact after the rescue Mussolini was reported to have anticipated his friend’s assistance. Likewise Hitler could not afford to do nothing considering that the friend has been kept in prison. Conclusion It is apparent that for anyone to effectively discuss the actions of Mussolini he will not avoid to mention Hitler. The two cooperated in a number of ways and in carrying out the affairs that badly affected the world. Among the things that fascinated the two principles were war and the military. The obsession with both the military and war made them to always show up in the public in full military uniforms. Nothing however is more notable of the two than their thirst for power. It is primarily for the want of excessive power that the two Fascist dictators saw a similarity in one another bringing them closer together. Even though Mussolini had pioneered in totalitarian leadership, it is Hitler that perfected the practice. He learned from the failures of Mussolini thus able to avoid the pitfalls. In brief, the relationship between Mussolini and Hitler had been a friendly one till when death set them apart. How to cite Mussolini’s Relationship with Hitler, Papers

How the family changed over time free essay sample

How the family has changed over time? The institution of the family has changed dramatically over last 50 years and the main sociological perspectives, functionalism, Marxism, feminism and interactionism have described this changes in terms of family structure, divorce rates, marriage rate and gender roles. Defining family in Britain is problematic as until 1960’s few sociologists questioned the importance of the benefits of the family. Family is a group of people living together related by blood or marriage who support themselves economically and emotionally. It was assumed that the family was evolving with the change in Britain. From the 1960’s , with increasing divorce rates, living together before marriage, single parent families, one person households , separation and migration, family traditionally seen as nuclear (based on two adults and children) became harder to define. Sociologists have concluded that the family has become harder to define in the more traditional sense. A family can now consist of any group of people living together and/or bringing up children. We will write a custom essay sample on How the family changed over time or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page This could separate due to divorce and another family created through remarriage or cohabitation, with the introduction of step children or children born to the new parentage resulting in another family unit although the first one still technically exists. There are two basic types of family structure: extended and nuclear. Functionalists say industrialization changed the function of the family. In pre-industrial society the extended family was most prevalent. Families lived and collaborated in engendering goods and crops to live from, taking the surplus to market. In industrial society, the nuclear family becomes ascendant. Status for an individual in pre-industrial society was ascribed. Talcott Parsons (1956) presumed that in industrial society an individuals status is achieved by their prosperity. The nuclear family is the best way to achieve prosperity as individuals. Family structure adapts to the changing circumstances. Changes in economic, political, and moral approach led to the transformation of the family structure. Postmodern times in which we live in a time of tolerance, emancipation of women, legalization and acceptance of homosexual relationships. All these changes meant that more and more people moved away from the traditional model of the family, universal fifty years ago. Statistics indicate an increasing number of households about 9. 2 million since 1961 but that is due to the increase amount of the divorce, migration, remarried people, single people and increase in length of life. At the same time the increase amount of households decreased their size and the average number of children due to widespread access to the contraception, abortion, aging population and costs associated with children’s maintenance. More women are also delaying having children because they focusing on work and education seeing role of the mother as a barrier. It is related to ‘child centric’ model of the family, which learn society to treat children’s as the most ‘precious’ , whom one must completely conform their lives to them . Most mothers deciding to give a birth at age 30-34. Although, life style changes have also caused decrease in married couples amount which is also related to religious approach, because from 1981, when only 49% of all marriages were civil marriages, at 2010, already 68,2 % of all marriages where civil marriages. However, married couple are still the most common type of the family. The functionalist view of the role of the family in society is that it maintains social order for benefits of all. The family is a tool for primary socialization and a key social institution in sustaining the value consensus (Harambolos 2008).Murdock (1949) claimed that family was universal. It is defined as a social group characterised by common residence, economic co-operation and reproduction. A family lives in the same home, has economic co-operation usually through the division of labour where the man will take on the instrumental role and provide for the family while the woman will adopt the expressive role and take care of the home and family members. Unfortunately, that’s the most common image of division of labour for as much, men, are more likely to help at housework or child care presently, it still seen as a responsibility of women. Marxists would contest this viewpoint, arguing that the division of labour is capitalist dogma used to control the labour force and stop them from developing class consciousness. Marxism looks at the methods of control of the ruling class (bourgeoisie) in determining the way society is organised. The family is seen as part of the structure of society and is one of a number of social institutions which helps maintain the capitalists system. Marxists state that it is the requirements of the system that has come to shape the family in modern societies. From this perspective view, society revolves around the infrastructure and social superstructure. The family helps to maintain this system. Friedrich Engels (1884) provides a basis for the Marxist view of the family were strongly linked to the evolution of the capitalist system. He also explored the concept of monogamy and argued that the monogamous nuclear family developed with the emergence of private ownership of the ‘means of production’. Engels stated that this system is maintained by the socialisation of capitalist social norms and values. Marxists do not see this as benefitting the family at all, only the system, and therefore this helps support their theory that family exists as a largely negative institution. Both of these sociological perspective see the role of the family in the opposite way, but in the meantime both of them describing family as a unit of socialization. On the other hand functionalists assume that the family is a positive and beneficial institution in which family members receive nurturing, care and unconditional love which helps keep society functioning well. However, this is not always the case, when it comes to domestic violence, divorce and child abuse. All couples and families who were nuclear families or had potential to be were being ruined each day, providing that the functionalist’s view of a beneficial family was much overestimated. In comparison, Marxists state that family helps to maintain class differences in society as the rich can afford to give their children a better start in life than the poor, such as. pay for a better education, and get them a good job either in their own business or their friends business. Marxists believe the family socializes the working class to accept that it is fair that the classes are unequal. A different view on the family, presented by Feminists, focuses also on socialization but sees its effects in division of labour and gender role stereotyping. They states that family is bad for women. Girls and boys learn their different gender roles within the family through socialization. Girls copy their mothers, doing housework, whilst boys copy their fathers, doing DIY. They then learn that this is how male and female roles should be. Feminists believe that the family is male dominated- the term for this is patriarchal. Their theory is still relevant nowadays, because although more women are having careers it’s still expected from them to take care of children’s and home. Perceptions of roles is so deeply rooted in society that, despising the false image of a woman liberated, having range of capabilities which can freely pursue her dreams when in the end ,is still required from her to perform, in the meantime, the role of housewife. In contrast, interactionist state that the family assists in the construction of the identity for the social individual and looks at the society at a micro scale. In this perspective the family, through interaction helps the social individual to understand ‘self’ when feminists could argue that vision of how one should look like and behave originates from socialization. They also believe that family helps the social individual identify her/his social role without considering how institutions, class conflict and gender stereotyping influence on creation of those roles. In Great Britain the family is built on the concept of marriage with children had a very well-established position but during last century divorce rates increased 200%. Which is also reflected in the number of separations reported annually by 150,000 to 200,000 pairs per year. Some researchers place the cause of increased divorce on higher expectations (Fletcher, 1966). And given the rates of remarriage it is not the institution of marriage, or the ideology picturing lifelong happiness that is rejected, but an insufficient partner. (Denny1984) regards western style marriages based on romantic love as fragile because they are only held together by emotional ties. Another reason why divorce rates increased is that now considerably less social stigma and blame is attached to divorce. One of the main reasons for this phenomenon are changes in divorce law making it much easier to divorce now then for example 50 years ago. Statistics show that the number of children in divorcing couples declined from 153,000 to 104,000. However, this data does not take into account cohabitating couples whose separation is not recorded. The amount of cohabiting couples has increased significantly in recent years. In the majority of relationships still the most important are children’s. The average time spent with children nowadays by mothers is 2h 32 minutes and by fathers 2h 16 minutes when 50 years ago that that was only 25 minutes per day for both parent. Currently fathers are more involved in bringing up children, and the belief in the society that children are an extension of us and their success is our success modernized power image of the families. Is widely spread on the increasing number of single fathers to 178,000 from  60,000 from 1670. This shows how evolved the role of the father in the family. Increasingly, we find also reconstituted families where the connection partners cohabitation or marriage jointly raise children from a previous relationship. That happens because of the increased amounts of divorce and remarriage trends. Humans as far didnt create any more successful structure than fami ly. But is nowadays family a well-functioning institution ? Very big influence on how present family looks like has mass media which are creating image how does family should look like which society is fallowing. Traditional family model become a consumption unit which glorifies children and parents are responsibility to make them happy and fulfill their all desires. All values and norms changed dramatically over time and people lost respect to institution like marriage. In conclusion family is still a basic part of the society but it evolved creating new forms of it. References: Haramolos, M Holborn, M (2008) 7th Ed. Sociology, themes and perspectives, Harper Collins: London Scott,J. Marshall, G (2009) Oxford dictionary of sociology , Oxford University Press: Oxford