Belief in the Workplace, Essay Example

Abstract

In modern marriages the division of power often pits faith against custom and wife against husband. The personal, social, and religious interpretations of the roles of each partner continue to evolve, leaving an unanswered question: Are religious leaders caving to increasing social pressure to acknowledge the marital rights of women or are social evolutions widening the religious perspectives through which interpretation occurs? Even as each interpretation shifts the expected role of the modern wife, progress remains slow. The developing interrelationship of these perspectives on marital and gender roles yields new answers to old questions.

Keywords: marriage, women, gender, roles, social, religious

A State of Lawlessness

This is where the body of your paper begins. Note that the title of your paper appears at the top of your introduction even though other sections begin with headings like “Method”, “Results” and so on.  The rest of the text in this template provides hints about properly generating the parts of your APA-formatted paper.  Notice that there is no extra spacing between the paragraphs or sections.

The major components of your paper (abstract, body, references, etc.) each begin on a new page. These components begin with centered headings at the top of the first page.  (You can see how major components of text get divided in this freely available sample document: http://www.apastyle.org/manual/related/sample-experiment-paper-1.pdf ).  Some papers have multiple studies in them so the body could have multiple sections and subsections within it.

Sections can have subsections with headings.  For example, a Method section might have Participants, Materials, and Procedure subsections. The sixth of the APA manual, unlike earlier editions, tells you to bold headings (but not the title above or anything on the title page). Below are examples.

Personal Perspective

The topic of women’s lesser status in marriage continues to be of interest to society as a whole but most seem satisfied to state that women deserve equal rights and mention no concrete cause or plan of action. Today, a paradox of denial exists. Feminism continues to gain support, especially as more women occupy powerful position within government and religious office, yet the role of women cannot change as long as the role of men stay fixed. While some women prefer their career status to that of caregiver for husband and children, women simply occupy more roles. Typically men either refuse the caregiver role or buckle under the pressure to fill a patriarchal stereotype which intertwines with their faith. A submissive man- or one who prefers domestic roles- finds himself at odds with religious viewpoints which existed in different cultures for thousands of years.  However, churches once preached the righteousness of segregation; a religious tradition can be wrong. Everyone talks about a fashionable topic, such as women’s rights, but few care to go beyond an easy judgment and armchair philosophy to facilitate real change.

Social Perspective

Monin and Clark (2011) compared personal and medical well-being of married and unmarried men and women, and, in such a side-by-side comparison, women experienced fewer benefits resulting from their marriages. The authors list interpersonal reasons for the unequal division of power within modern American marriages—their list includes the general dominance of men in confrontational situations, the greater support of women within the marriage, and the greater push for women to provide healthy dietary cooking and a clean lifestyle for the family as a whole (p. 321).  Cherlin (2004) claims that the upheaval of the traditional roles within marriage overturns social norms. American society “must negotiate new ways of acting, a process that is a potential source of conflict and opportunity” (p. 848). Thus, the social norms of women’s lesser status in marriage have been largely set aside but no element of progress has been introduced in its place.

This discussion of gender and relationship roles focuses on the heterosexual status quo for marriage. Nonetheless, it bears mentioning that the discussion applies also to homosexual couples- since partners typically occupy different gender roles despite their shared biological genders, and the inclusion of same-sex couples in the discussion of marriage further illustrates the erosion of social norms associated with the institution of marriage. Cherlin predicts that each state will continue to self-determine policy on same-sex marriage and increasingly argue on the issue (2004, p. 851). It has been said that “A house divided cannot stand”, and the issue of marriage promises to be as divisive as that of segregation.

Religious Perspective

As marriage became more and more deeply involved with religious tradition, the importance of the roles of wives and husbands became a matter of greater debate and a regular Sunday theme. Church involvement increased as marriage evolved from a “completely secular act” with few exceptions in the early days of Christianity to a “ritual framework for a contractual process that remains strictly under the control of the families involved” (Mayeski, 2011, p. 93). The lower religious status of women largely stems from the late medieval tradition of blame placed on Eve in Genesis. She became a symbol of the birth of sin. The topic of sex- even in marriage- became one of heated debate (p. 95). As a symbol of both sin and fertility, the church began to place women on a level with the snake- intellectually, spiritually, sexually, etc. Cherlin (2004) discusses the importance of cohabitation in the continuing development of the informal attitude toward marriage as an institution. From this reading, one understands that the benefits of marriage- time together, sex, procreation, etc.- may be experienced before marriage; cohabitation cheapens the greatest personal and social benefits of marriage, rendering it necessary only in the religious perspective. Many Americans no longer subscribe to Christian or other religious beliefs. Shrage (2013) sees the freedom of sexuality as a significant step away from the legacy of obsession with a woman’s physical and figurative purity and describes women’s roles as a product of politicization (pp. 109-110).

Discussion

These three perspectives seem to have little in common. My personal perspective emphasizes denial, the social perspective emphasizes confusion, and the religious perspective emphasizes tradition. These concepts relate. Since religion once formed the foundation of American society, the church traditions cling to literal interpretations of the Bible, which were fashionable at the time. The Bible is not fallible, yet its readers are only human. We cannot know the mind of God with certainty. Does the Bible not command both partners to respect and love each other? Does a Biblical command to submit to one’s husband justify the tyranny of traditional marriage roles?

Monin and Clark suggest that modern men still generally benefit more from marriage than women unless studies embrace an open-minded attempt “to understand those processes…and, very importantly, how they fit…together and interact” (2011, p. 321). Social change must also embrace this attempt as an urgent problem, as the role of marriage and family continues to negatively affect adults and children alike. Cherlin argues not against the rights of women but against the erosion of family-oriented values which are frequently associated with the domestic roles of women (2004, p. 848). Even in the absence of modern American norms for marriage and the family, Monin and Clark emphasize the developmental importance of customs and close relationships within the family, remarking that childhood magnifies the importance of early role formation (p. 322).

Conclusion

The state of modern marriage exists in lawlessness. Personal, social, and religious laws of behavior for marriage vary so wildly that new norms cannot bridge these gaps. Cherlin writes that such evolution of social norms provides both conflict and opportunity. Men can and should occupy many of the roles which have been considered feminine. The sacred virtue of marriage lies in its ability to create a balance between two very different people and establish stability in the relationships between them, society, God, and their family. These perspectives all place pride, i.e. “being right”, above the bond that God offered us through marriage. In the workplace, in the home, and in the church, the average American rails against the status quo but reinforces it without question. All three perspectives need to question truth, action, and consequence as separate from the ego. Marriage depends upon it.

References

Cherlin, A.J. (2004). The Deinstitutionalization Of American Marriage. Journal of Marriage and Family, 3(2), 848-864.

Mayeski, M. A. (2009). “Like A Boat Is Marriage”: Aelred On Marriage As A Christian Way Of Life. Theological Studies, 70(1), 92-108.

Monin, J.K, & M. S. Clark. (2011). Why Do Men Benefit More from Marriage Than Do Women? Thinking More Broadly About Interpersonal Processes That Occur Within and Outside of Marriage. Sex Roles, 65(5/6), 320-326. doi:10.1007/s11199-011-0008-3.

Shrage, L. (2013). Reforming Marriage: A Comparative Approach. Journal Of Applied Philosophy, 30(2), 107-121. doi:10.1111/japp.12012.