The Dynamics Between the History of Marriage and the Current Workplace

The institution of marriage, and its re-enforcement of sexual discrimination towards women, creates social expectations that disadvantage them in the workforce. This paper will investigate some interpretations of history, the social changes that comes with these interpretations, and finally a critique and counter argument of the resulted social changes that dominate women’s culture.

With growing up, in no matter what region of the world, there comes a certain expectancy of standards one must follow according to the criteria they hold. For women, there is a noticeable international pattern of house work, marriage and eventually, child bearing. It is often highlighted both in media and societal conversations when women choose to seek different routes, sometimes met with encouragement of liberties and choosing your own destiny, but more often met with harsh criticisms of unacceptable deviation.

It is important to analyze the history of these (negative) critiques. Where did they come from? And how did they originate? Engels, a German philosopher, devoted his life to creating a revolution that can change society for the better‪. The philosopher's The Origin of Family, Engels explains the evolution of change in family structure, according to each developmental stage. Human history is based on three stages: Savagery, Barbarism, and Civilization. Savagery is when everything was in its natural state, Barbarism was when humans took what was in its natural state and turned it into production, like agriculture. Finally, Civilization, which is the industrialized and more advanced society. Engels argued that each stage has a different form of family‪. In the very beginning, group marriage was the dominant norm in society, with the only barrier being marriage outside of one's generation. The second stage was the Penulian family, where the exclusion of one marrying another out of her/his generation extended to siblings, cousins, and ultimately relatives. Family became separated and as the division increased, so did the creation of private property and wealth. The third stage of family, the Pairing family, comes from the upper stages of Barbarism where polygamy of the man is still common, but for the woman is no longer acceptable as it begins to carry social and legal baggage. But if the husband and wife separate, the children remain with the mother. During this stage we find the Mother Right and communistic household ways begin to deteriorate. Finally, monogamous marriage appears in the civilized society, where male supremacy consists of its base, a woman's legitimacy of child bearing is the condition, and the degradation of women is the result. The Monogamous family‪/marriage derived from economics and inheritance. Thus making male supremacy the first essential factor of monogamous marriage for the man,

Monogamy had become required because of inheritance, the male was to own his wife, children, slaves and house under his private property. Engels sees this owner ship of property as the first clear division of inequality between men and women where the woman becomes inferior to him. Women were no longer allowed to experience the sexual freedom the way men could. Engels saw Monogamy as one step forward to a new societal development, but one step back for inequality in terms of creating pleasure for some and misery for the rest.

The current western idea of marriage is a fairly new phenomenon. The fact that one can no longer sell (in most areas) their daughter for marriage and gain commodities in exchange means that the norms have already deviated from the traditional institutional definition of marriage. Even how, in common society, the size of a wife's ring determines how much her husband paid to have her. And as long as that ring remains on her finger, means that she remains under the mercy of his control.

It was often seen that women did not need to work simply because a man could do it for her. Christian intellectuals often pushed for implementing a "family wage" in the United States so that the male head of the household could be guaranteed a wage large enough that would allow him to care for the family properly, thus maintaining the traditional idea of family and leaving women no option for work outside the home. While many single, widowed, or privileged women continued to argue for the freedom to work and gain a decent salary, those in hiring positions (males) only offered women lower official positions and wages.

It is important to realize not only that a power struggle within relationships exists‪, but also how these dynamics afflict the larger picture for women and men as a whole‪. Simone De Beauvoir‪, a new framework creator of Liberal Feminism and Existentialism‪, and author of The Second Sex‪, analyzed the oppression of women in both its biological and cultural aspects‪. Beauvoir’s book ‪, which was once banned by the Vatican‪, is divided into two novels‪. The first part ‪"Facts and Myths,‪" discusses women from biological‪-scientific‪, psychoanalytic‪, materialistic and anthropological perspectives‪.

The second part ‪"looked into how unequal distribution of power in relationships create structures that navigate the perceived social power to certain members‪. Since we live in a culture that is male dominated and patriarchal ruled‪, the ideas of marriage and power originate from the males‪' perspective‪. With the man‪'s creation of rules that regulate culture‪, he places his existence in the form of ‪"Self‪", while the woman who is bound by these rules, is the "Other". As Beauvoir explains in her introduction, woman “is the incidental, the inessential, as opposed to the essential. He is the Subject, he is the Absolute-she is the Other."

Creating the framework of Self and Other‪, leads to creation of the project and an object‪. A woman becomes the object of the male‪'s project, embracing new gender discriminatory roles that facilitate her perceived roles as a woman‪, not her true authenticity of what it means to be a woman‪. Beauvoir’s most famous quote‪, “One is not born, but rather becomes, a woman.”

The next part of this paper will discuss how society‪'s interests shape women‪'s interests by elaborating through John Mill‪,; and then will move on to discuss how these interests influence women‪'s realities who do not necessarily have the same interests that society has created by using some of the writings of Virginia Woolf‪.

After understanding the origins of today‪'s cultural activities and mentalities‪, one must wonder why certain negative practices still remain after the passing of so much time‪. Facts of life manipulate and dictate women‪'s lives‪. For example‪, women bear children‪, this is a true statement‪. But the interpretation of this statement creates a myth that dictates one‪'s life‪, leaving women capable of only bearing children‪, rather than acknowledging other capabilities women are able to bear‪, like an education‪, a career‪, a life‪. The concept of child bearing became‪, traditionally but not currently‪, the only viable role in a woman‪'s culture‪. This was a view John Stuart Mill, a British Philosopher and Utilitarian, who tried to make change in society. Mill’s writings, like The Subjection of Women (1969), contributed to the progress of human knowledge, freedom, and well-being. There is a large importance associated with perfect equality and equal standing, because these values better society‪, and the negative effects of their absence is detrimental to society.

Many women will promote marriage and claim that remaining to female associated roles are what creates a better society, disregarding the sexual discrimination within the idea behind marriage, and the disadvantages for women in the workplace, in terms of abiding by traditional roles by society. Looking at the historical background of women's objectification, there was a time not so long ago where marital rape was perceived impossible, where husbands controlled wives’ personal property, and they themselves were considered part of that property, and the children did not belong to the mother. The reason behind this change comes from women whom speak their mind and fight against the wave of tradition. As more women became involved in social institutions like politics, we saw more women taking charge of their legal personhood, thus leading to an independence that allows her to work for herself and create her own living. However, some of these women claim these social institutions to be a benefit for women, but they are also suffering some form of oppression. A woman's experience is what shapes her mind and her mind changes in accordance to associations in the environment. With society's certain expectations of women's roles, a woman's interests are shaped to think in that certain way.

Individuals like John Mill called for a woman's right to vote, own property, and receive an adequate education, all things to be equal of those to men. Mill claimed women to be so shackled by society that one could never say that women were free to choose. With this binding of society, it creates two outcomes: first, it justifies women's current “interests”, even though a woman's best interest is to be free to choose her own interests. Second, it internalizes these beliefs to be real, leaving women at a disadvantage when "choosing" to be married, or justifying the social baggage in the work place. A woman's median annual earnings in 1970 was at 55.5% compared to a man's, and only an increase of 22% is shown by 2010. The first attempt of organized groups that pushed for equal pay for equal work was in 1868, by the National Labour Union who wanted women to be paid the same amount of money that a man made for the equivalent job or similar qualifications. Congress did not pass it as a federal ruling until 1872. However, this right was not extended to the majority of female employees who work for private companies or state and local governments, until the adoption of the Equal Pay Act in 1963. This was the same year that Victoria Chaflin Woodhull, the First American woman nominated herself for president, and Susan B. Anthony was arrested for attempting to vote. The last major law to be signed pertaining to women's rights was in 1978, for the Employment Discrimination Against Pregnant Women Act. What we find after this is a gap between that year and 2009, when P. Obama signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. Is it not rational to think that so much has been improved and that there is nothing left to fix.

Internalizing one's oppression from inside the home results in oppression outside of it, therefore transforming women’s ideas of inferiority in the workplace. 49 years after the first Civil Rights Act was signed, it is important to continue diversifying the work place in order to eliminate sexual discrimination amongst employers and employees. While some gains have been made throughout the years, there are still differences in the treatment of genders, and how one's race and background affect their earnings and position. When preferences begin to change and new practices begin to take place, it is often met with backlash. Positions in management, leadership, business, politics, medicine, art and science were all perceived to be male dominated. What happens if a woman decides she would like to join in such sectors, despite her knowledge of the gendered nature of it? The first block that comes in the way, is whether an opportunity to pursue such an interest is even possible. She should expect to be castigated, possibly laughed at, and shunned. Societal ideals are of a woman who belongs in the house, not in a career. The second block will come from family and relatives' strong disagreement and disapproval. The feelings of shame and guilt then follow by the pessimists. If Shakespeare had an imaginative, intelligent and adventurous sister, would she still have equivalent chances her brother had to thrive and excel in her talents? During our time today, possibly. But back then, this was not thinkable, let alone achievable. Even though Virginia Woolf's essay, A Room of One's Own (1929), refers to an argument of both a literal and figural space for women writers in a time where women were banned from the library, it can still be compared in other patriarchal societal aspects where women are banned from pursuing interests considered to be male oriented.

According to the National Partnership for Women & Families, in their publication of WOMEN AT WORK: LOOKING BEHIND THE NUMBERS, the total number of sex discrimination charges filed have increased by 12% since 1992. Sexual harassment claims had increased 29% from 1992-2004. One may assume that these numbers are increasing because there are higher numbers of women entering the work force every year. But why is it that in a place where women (and all human beings) should be honored and respected for their work and productivity, they are instead bothered and made to feel uncomfortable for being present. Some men still cling onto the traditional ideas of a woman, that she is his right to do with as he pleases, and may get away with it too. It also comes with the idea of agency and competency, both of which have non-existing capabilities of those of a man. Many women do not challenge discrimination due to a number of reasons. First, there is a fear of a potential impact on their jobs. Second, the high financial and personal costs that are associated with this type of case. Finally, the uncertainty about how receptive the courts will be to their claims.

One can argue both a positive and negative side to this paper‪'s findings. First, although I argue for the unfairness in the distribution of power and wealth, due to the flaws of the institution of marriage, ultimately‪, this institution serves as a functioning tool that can offer opportunity and increased social power to both sides‪. No system is immune to bruises‪, but no system is immune to perfection either‪. Perhaps new marital and economic systems can be formed in which it does not necessarily need to equally distribute the power, as long as the distribution of money and opportunity are equal.

Second, having monogamous institutionalized marriage arises from economic causes, is it possible for it to disappear if those causes do? One might think it would be the case, but nothing is certain as the possibilities of the next form of social human development are limitless Engels claimed the social revolution will demolish all types of inequalities that he saw society suffer from. In one sense, Engels was a liberal Feminist for wanting equal opportunity for both men and women in their role of providing for the household and society. In another sense, Engels can be considered a radical Feminist for arguing that only a revolution can make these inequalities go away. Engel’s main interests in economics, class struggle and philosophy shaped his opinions and questioning of the monogamous family, economic systems‪, and power distribution in the social class.

Finally‪, caution must be taken when looking at social expectations‪. While some expectations are set forth to protect and respect women‪, many are simply out to destroy them. One must only allow for the expectations they are willing to create their reality out of. While no woman may wish to be paid less for having a different body part in-between her legs‪, no woman should be denied opportunities to choose how she lives in a non-‪ discrimatory, manner under the social institutions set up for her‪.

The creation of regulations were for the purposes of limiting women's capabilities‪, rather than expanding their abilities‪. This paper discussed how traditions, lack of political voice‪, and seeing the woman as the Other and man as Self, contributed negatively towards the institutions of marriage and oppressive practices against women in the work force‪. Eliminating oppression can happen by‪, first‪, changing social norms‪. This is not easy or quick by any means‪, but one must constantly make an effort for a better tomorrow‪. Second‪ly, is to eliminate even the necessary oppression‪, i‪.e‪: hunger‪, physical pain‪. We are in less of a position to be objectified and categorized when we are free to expand our capabilities beyond our oppressive boundaries‪. As Beauvoir addressed‪, that by imposing your perception of my identity‪, you limit my authenticity‪.

http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/Files/Documents/Timelines/WomensRightstimeline.pdf
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0882775.html
http://dailybruin.com/2011/02/07/igender_discrimination_in_the_workforce_should_be_fixed_with_more_comprehensive_policy_actioni/ http://www.nationalpartnership.org/site/DocServer/WPF_Women_at_Work_40_years_July_2004.pdf?docID=590 http://www.diversityinc.com/legal-issues/poor-workforce-diversity-practices-result-in-gender-discrimination/