Marriage. Is a legally recognized union between two people, generally a man .. Ex: what are you getting out of the relationship? love, companionship, power, increase traditionalization of the division of responsibilities between spouses. in the society and economy. subsystem A system that is part of a larger system, spend in various activities. total marriages Rare type of marriage relationship in degree. traditionalization Process whereby couples become more traditional work spillover The effect that employment has on time, energy, activities, and. making method is to contract a mine marriage and to get as much out of the husband as soon . "Traditionalizing" Urban Marriage: The Urban African Courts.
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.
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.
Power - FAMILY RELATIONSHIPS, MARITAL RELATIONSHIPS
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.
The Power Card In Marital Relationships | sexygf.info
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.
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.
The Power Card In Marital Relationships
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.
The study found four types of family locus of control. In families with individualistic locus of control, power resided in individuals who looked out for themselves.
In these families, communication was egocentric and calculated, affect could turn negative or aggressive, and individuals sought solutions that benefited themselves at the expense of others. In families with authoritarian locus of control, power was located in the parents, particularly the father whose role as head of household was pronounced.
Communication in these families was directed one-way from fathers to mothers and mothers to children, affect was stilted, and bargaining was nonexistent as solutions to problems took the form of parental pronouncements, exclusively by fathers. In families with external locus of control, nobody in the family was viewed as having power, and control seemed to be located in circumstances, fate, or the control of others. Communication in these families was chaotic, affect was directed towards others outside the family, and solutions to problems were sought from authority figures and others who were viewed as having control.
In families with collaborative locus of control, communication was systematically elicited from each family member, ideas were valued, affection was warm, supportive, and caring, and great effort was dedicated to find solutions to problems that had the least negative impact on individuals and would benefit the group as a whole. As each of these studies shows, power processes in families involve a large number of complex cultural and family-related variables, many of which are yet to be discovered by family scientists.
Making matters more complex, those variables that have been discovered are subtle and difficult to measure.
For example, keeping secrets—an intentional withholding of information—is a form of communication that affects power in families. Withholding information takes away the power of others to make reasonable decisions because they lack pertinent information. How does a scientist measure secrets?
This reveals the scientific challenge of studying power in families, but also the importance. Power Outcomes Power is an underlying dimension of every family relationship and virtually every family activity, and its importance lies in the fact that having a sense of control over one's life is necessary for the health and happiness of humans, including children, adults, and the elderly.
In the studies already discussed, it is evident that power should be fairly apportioned to every family member, from the youngest infant to the most elderly person. If every member of a family has a sense of personal control, balanced with family control, the family can be a source of power and strength through its guidance, support, and care.
When someone in the family abuses power, however, the damage to trust, loyalty, and freedom can have long-term negative effects for everyone in the family. In the last quarter of the twentieth century, Western society began paying attention to the dark side of family power. A new set of concepts developed that are common in the language of the twenty-first century: In a volume entitled, The Public Nature of Private Violenceeditors Martha Fineman and Roxanne Mykitiuk assembled a number of articles by scholars who suggest that our discovery of family abuse has created a new conception of the nature of family life for the twenty-first century.
The old conception that families are guided by a higher moral law or a natural order of compassion has been replaced by a more realistic conception that, for many, the family is a place of anguish, worry, pain, and trauma. These scholars argue that the abuse of family power is not simply a private matter, but is a public matter that needs to be part of the public agenda to be addressed by policy-makers, police officers, judges, social workers, clergy, teachers, physicians, and counselors.
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.
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. The many years of research studying power and leadership suggests that empathy and Emotional Intelligence are vastly more important to the attainment and exercise of power than force, deception, or terror.
So going back to the question of what makes perfectly good relationship fall apart after marriagewe believe lies in the concept of power plays in the relationship after marriage.
- Looking for a Therapist?
- Citing this material
- Top Cities:
There is something about the position of power that becomes all about winning and not necessarily about achieving the greater good. Once couples are married, often times, they feel entitled, comfortable and secure in that the other person is there to stay and hence an entire myriad of controls begin to get formulated and roles begin to get installed in the relationship.
For instance, studies have found that people given power in experiments are more likely to rely on stereotypes when judging others, and they pay less attention to the characteristics that define those other people as individuals.
One survey found that high-power professors made less accurate judgments about the attitudes of low-power professors than those low-power professors made about the attitudes of their more powerful colleagues. Hence, it seems, the skills most important to obtaining power becoming a husband or a wife and leading a family effectively are the very skills that deteriorate once we have power.