It is expected that marriage and childbirth, which often traditionalize relationships, reduce women's power. Changes to lower employment statuses also weaken. It's great that Australia voted yes for marriage equality, but a more heartening sign of progress would be an equal form of partnership for. Relationship advice: The power play in a relationship determines how good or bad a relationship can become. This article explains what happens when there is .
Robert Blood and Donald Wolfe took a macrosystemic view when they presented their resource theory of family power. That is, they looked for associations between power inside the family and power outside the family, and argued that power was apportioned between husbands and wives based on the relative resources that each contributed to the family.
Blood and Wolfe specifically focused on the resources of income, occupational prestige, and educational attainment and, based on interviews with hundreds of white, middle-class wives in Detroit, Michigan, demonstrated that the greater the men's resources in these three areas, the greater the men's perceived power within the family. The resource theory of family power was influential because the idea suggested that men do not become heads of households by divine right or natural biological processes, but because they have more and easier access to educational, financial, and occupational resources in society.
The idea suggested that opening up women's access to resources outside the family could result in a more evenly balanced distribution of power within the family. There has been considerable research support for resource theory in the United States and in Third World countries. Philip Blumstein and Pepper Schwartz conducted a study in the United States and found that when men made substantially more income than their wives, they were more likely to exert greater power in financial decision-making when compared with husbands that made about the same income as their wives.
A study conducted in Mexico by R. Oropesa found that wives with higher education were equal to their husbands in family power, felt more satisfaction with their influence in the family, and were less likely to be a victim of domestic violence. A study of nonindustrialized nations conducted by Gary Lee and Larry Petersen found that the more wives contributed to food production, the more power they exerted in marriage. There has also been substantial criticism of resource theory.
It has been pointed out that income, occupation, and education are only three among many resources that influence family power. Edna Foa and U. Foa suggested that in addition to tangible resources such as money, education, and occupation, intangible resources such as intelligence, physical attractiveness, likeability, love, and comfort impact family power. Actually, any trait or behavior that is valued by others in the family can be a resource that is exchanged for influence and power. For example, in immigrant families it has been observed that the ability to speak the host language can increase one's power if other family members depend on that ability to translate and interpret messages Alvarez Among the Fulani tribes of West Africa, who primarily practice the religion of Islam, family members, especially women, can increase their power in the family by practicing traditional Fulani customs of conjuring the spirits of dead ancestors and others who have passed on to the other world Johnson Most family scientists take a macrosystemic view, first articulated by Constantina Safilios-Rothschildthat the bases of family power are a reflection of culturally defined gender ideologies and gender-segregated resources in the wider society in which a family is embedded.
In practically all societies, this means that males have more power in families because of patriarchal beliefs about male authority.
For example, a Gallup Poll conducted in twenty-two countries found that women are almost universally perceived as more emotional, talkative, and patient than men, whereas men are perceived as more aggressive, ambitious, and courageous than women. Even though there may be little scientific justification for these perceptions, they exert a strong influence in favor of male dominance in families that might be diminished through women's resources, but not completely muted.
Power Processes An examination of power processes reveals that getting one's way in the dynamic interaction of families entails an ongoing set of complex and subtle maneuvers involving communication, commitment, bargaining and negotiation, coalition formation, conflict and conflict resolution, and parenting styles.
Moreover, an examination of power processes reveals that in virtually all cultures, variables like the number of children and where the family lives make family power processes more complex. Willard Waller is credited with first articulating the idea that family power is sometimes affected by commitment: The principle of least interest states that in disputes involving power, the individual who is least interested in continuing the relationship usually has more power than the one who is more interested in continuing the relationship.
Marriage is about power, property and control – it’s time to rethink it
In dating relationships, the threat to break up can level the playing field of relative power. In some cases, an individual who feels "one-down" can make the threat and gain an equal footing if the other wants to stay together.
In worse cases, an individual who is already "one-up" can threaten to break up and gain an even stronger hand in future disputes.
In marriage, the principle of least interest can involve threatening to divorce, or in parent-child relationships, by parents threatening to send a child to foster care, to boarding school, or to live with a relative. Children and adolescents sometimes invoke the principle of least interest by threatening to run away or, in cases where parents are divorced, by threatening to go live with the noncustodial parent.
In order to increase power, however, threats to leave must be feared by those one is threatening. Otherwise, they may say, "Go ahead and leave.
The principle of least interest applies mostly in societies where marriage is a free choice rather than arranged, and where it is possible for men and women to dissolve marriage through divorce. In many cultures, divorce is restricted by social and religious tyranny that makes personal selectivity in one's partner irrelevant to the establishment or continuation of marriage Swidler For example, in societies that are ruled by intolerant legalists or religionists, the courts might allow a husband to obtain a divorce simply because he has lost emotional interest in his wife or because she has done something of which he disapproves.
In the same society, a wife might not be granted a divorce even if she has legitimate reasons, such as her husband's abuse, desertion, criminal behavior, or, in polygamous societies, if he were to take another wife without the permission of the wife or wives he already has. In these societies, family power processes are so structured along gender and generational lines that selectivity has little to do with the establishment and maintenance of marital and family relationships.
Alternatively, selectivity may be applied unfairly, allowing men to make choices that are not accorded to women or children. As previously discussed, family power processes reflect power bases in society: Without power in society, it is difficult to get power in the family.
Anthropologist Janice Stockard analyzed the power processes of married couples in four cultures and found that parent-child alliances had a strong impact on family power. For example, girls of the! Kung San tribe of South Africa were traditionally married around age 10, usually to men who were much older.
Marriages were arranged by the girls' parents, who expected the bridegroom to live with them for a few years following the marriage and help out by hunting for food. Although one might think that these young girls would be powerless in relation to their older husbands, the fact that brides and grooms lived with the girls' parents permitted the girls to maintain strong alliances with their parents.
Power - FAMILY RELATIONSHIPS, MARITAL RELATIONSHIPS
These strong alliances tended to equalize power between husbands and wives, to the degree that! Kung San girls had strong veto powers over the marriage arrangement, which they often exercised. In sharp contrast, girls in traditional Chinese societies were required to abandon alliances with their parents, grandparents, and siblings following marriage.
On her wedding day, a traditional Chinese girl would be transported to live with her husband's family, where her mother-in-law would hold authority over her. The restriction of Chinese girls, who seemingly were not permitted to make many personal choices about their lives, was rationalized with the understanding that they would be compensated in later years by gaining rule over their own daughters-in-law.
Because young girls were temporary participants in their families as they were growing up, it was difficult for Chinese girls to form deep, lasting alliances with their parents, grandparents, and siblings. In Western culture, Theodore Caplow hypothesized that powerful male heads of households might find themselves at a power disadvantage in families with older children and adolescents because mothers and children might form coalitions to neutralize and override the fathers' power.
A study conducted by Brian Jory and his colleagues found substantial support for coalition theory by observing the power processes of middle class families in the midwestern United States in moderately stressful problem-solving situations. In these families mothers were five times more likely to form power alliances with adolescent sons and daughters than with their husbands.
These fathers, who were mostly in high power occupations, were at a clear disadvantage in family power negotiations. The importance of gender in family power processes was evident in another way: The study found that adolescent boys were more active in communication and bargaining than adolescent girls, and mothers offered more supportive communication to adolescent sons than daughters.
Diana Baumrind studied the balance between power and support in the childrearing behavior of parents in the United States and identified three parenting styles. The authoritarian style of parenting emphasizes obedience, giving orders, and discipline.
Parents who exercise this style relate to their children with little emotional warmth because they view the child as a subordinate whose primary need is discipline. Children raised by authoritarian parents often feel rejected because their ideas are not welcomed, and these children may have trouble in tasks that demand autonomy, creativity, and reflection. The permissive parenting style de-emphasizes parental control of children in favor of absolute acceptance and approval of the child.
Permissive parents encourage children to make decisions on their own and to exercise creativity and independence in whatever they do.
In the absence of parental guidance and limits, children raised by permissive parents may feel neglected and may struggle with tasks where focus, self-control, and perseverance are required. The authoritative style of parenting combines a balance of parental control and parental warmth and support. Authoritative parents set limits on acceptable behavior in children, yet do so in an affectionate environment that encourages autonomy, values expression of opinions, and encourages participation in family decision-making.
In reviewing a number of studies, Lawrence Steinberg and his colleagues demonstrated that children raised by authoritative parents—whatever their race, social class, or family type—develop better moral reasoning, do better academically, have less anxiety and depression, feel that their families are happier, are more self-confident, and are less likely to become delinquent.
A study by Brian Jory and his colleagues discovered that, in families with adolescents, power is not limited strictly to parental behavior, but is a property that affects the family system as a whole in terms of communication, bargaining, how affect is expressed, and how solutions to problems are generated.
Are falsehoods such as staying in control and holding the reigns of power to be blamed? Who holds power in a marriage? The study of the dynamics of power in relationships has resulted in many different points of view. Multiple theories of power in marriage and relationship state that money is power and for a woman to stay powerful in a marriage or relationship, she needs to remain in control of finances, sex, children, the household, food, entertainment, her body, etc.
Others believe that the power in marriages needs to be surrendered to the man, as he is naturally the leader of the family. The man needs to be the narcissistic, brainiac, and the wife the soft, quiet, subservient follower.
Machiavellianism This concept states that in relationships similar to leadership, power is more important than love has also been associated with being a male. In the same spirit we have had many traditional relationship gurus, philosophers and believer alike within a year span, which believe that in order for a relationship between a man and a woman to be successful, the woman has to surrender her power to the man and allow the man to be the center of attention.
In fact it has been said in the bible that a wife needs to be led by her husband and obey him at all times.
The Power Card In Marital Relationships | klokkenluideronline.info
Wives, be subject to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord. Husbands, love your wives and do not be embittered against them. If he has committed misdeeds, she should not directly correct him, but rather conceal her thoughts and intentions that she wishes he would act differently but to rather patiently accept the misdeeds.
Here are a few of his 48 laws: Law 3, Conceal Your Intentions. Law 6, Court Attention at All Costs. Guided by centuries of Machiavellian advice like the above, many have come to believe that attainment of power requires force, deception, manipulation, and coercion. Power is effective when used responsibly Well, a new science of power would reveal that this is not further from the truth.
Individual s whom are accustomed to being connected and engaged with the needs and interests of others, are most trusted and hence most influential.