This chapter describes the current trends toward greater gender equality in couple relationships, what keeps old patterns of gendered power alive, and why equality is so important for successful relationships. Relationship vignettes like the ones just described are common. Sharing family and outside work more equitably is only part of the gender-equality story. Gender ideologies are replicated in the way men and women communicate with each other and influence the kind of emotional and relational symptoms men and women present in therapy. Stereotypic gender patterns and power differences between partners work against the shared worlds and egalitarian ideals that women and men increasingly seek. The concept of relationship equality rests on the ideology of equality articulated in philosophical, legal, psychological, and social standards present today in American and world cultures. The four dimensions of the relationship equality model are relative status, attention to the other, accommodation patterns, and well-being.
Your search for all content returned 14 results
This chapter explores the relationship between gender and power. Gendered power in couple relationships arises from a social context that has given men power over women for centuries. When practitioners fail to take account of social context, however, they may run the risk of inadvertently pathologizing clients for legitimate responses to oppressive experiences. The term gender is a socially created concept that consists of expectations, characteristics, and behaviors that members of a culture consider appropriate for males or females. Consequently, an individual’s ideas about gender may feel deeply personal even though they are a product of social relationships and structures. Strong social forces work to keep social power structures, including gender inequality, in place. The continued presence of gendered power structures in economic, social, and political institutions still limits how far many couples can move toward equality. Today, ideals of equality compete with the institutional practices that maintain gender inequality.
This chapter examines the cultural and relational contexts of postpartum depression. Postpartum depression (PPD) is a debilitating, multidimensional mental health problem that affects 10"-15” of new mothers and has serious consequences for women, children, families, and marriages. Although women’s experience of postpartum depression has been the subject of considerable recent study, nearly all of this work has been interpreted within a medical or psychological frame. The chapter looks at a social constructionist lens to this body of research through a meta-data-analysis of recent qualitative studies of PPD. Though hormonal changes as a result of childbirth are related to depressive symptoms after childbirth, biological explanations alone cannot explain postpartum depression. A social constructionist approach to postpartum depression focuses on how the condition arises in the context of ongoing interpersonal and societal interaction. Climbing out of postpartum depression is an interpersonal experience that requires reconnection with others.
This chapter explains a set of guidelines to help mental health professionals and clients move away from the gender stereotypes that perpetuate inequality and illness. Identifying dominance requires conscious awareness and understanding of how gender mediates between mental health and relationship issues. An understanding of what limits equality is significantly increased when we examine how gendered power plays out in a particular relationship and consider how it intersects with other social positions such as socioeconomic status, race, ethnicity, and sexual orientation. To contextualize emotion, the therapist draws on knowledge of societal and cultural patterns, such as gendered power structures and ideals for masculinity and femininity that touch all people’s lives in a particular society. Therapists who seek to support women and men equally take an active position that allows the non-neutral aspects of gendered lives to become visible.
This chapter provides insight into the dilemmas couples face when ideals of equality intersect with societal structures that maintain gendered power. It examines how Iranian couples construct gender and negotiate power within their culture, political structure, and Islamic values. Gender equality may express itself differently in a culture such as Iran that not only emphasizes collective goals and achievements, strong feelings of interdependence, and social harmony. Collectivism typically maintains social order through a gender hierarchy. Contemporary Iranian couples draw from diverse cultural legacies. Although some couples seemed to accept the traditional gender hierarchy and a few others appeared to manage relatively equally within it, other couples were quite aware of gendered-power issues and attempted to address them in their personal lives. Some couples describe trying to maintain an equal relationship in their personal lives despite men’s greater legal authority.
This chapter examines how 12 White, middle-class couples negotiated the issue of equality in their relationships during their first year of marriage. The social context both supports and inhibits the development of marital equality. To be included in the present study, complete transcripts with both the husband and wife present had to be available, both members of the couple had to express ideals of gender equality, and both had to express commitment to careers for wives as well as husbands. Most of the couples classified as creating a myth of equality, spoke as though their relationships were equal but described unequal relationship conditions. The other couples classified in the myth-of-equality category described similar contradictions between their ideals of gender equality and their behavior. Gender-equality issues raise political and ethical concerns for all of us who are family practitioners and teachers.
This book draws on in-depth research of couples in different situations and cultures to identify educational and therapeutic interventions that will help couples become conscious of and move beyond gendered power in their relationships so they can expand their options and well-being. Sharing family and outside work more equitably is a part of the gender-equality story. The book is divided into five parts. Part I of the book lays out the theoretical and methodological issues of gender equality that frame the book’s research projects and practice concerns. Chapters in this section frame the concept of gender equality and its role in promoting mutually supportive relationships. The second part examines the relational processes involved in equality between intimate partners. Traditional couples need help in defining the meaning of relational equality for themselves within external definitions of male and female roles. A chapter in this section is about same-sex couples and explores what happens when gender does not organize relationships. In Part III, two chapters look at how gender legacies and power influence mothering and fathering among parents of young children with a third showing how idealized notions of motherhood heighten and maintain postpartum depression after childbirth. The fourth part shows both similarities and cultural variation in power issues in different cultural settings. While one chapter considers how racial experience increases the complexities of gender and power in couple life, another discovers the considerable diversity in Iran by showing how couples work within a male-dominant legal and social structure that also includes a long cultural tradition of respect for and equality of women. Part V draws on the previous chapters to offer a guide for mental health professionals.
This chapter demonstrates how transforming gendered power helps couples experience new, more egalitarian possibilities that support the well-being of each partner. Although gender equality is seldom the only important issue in couple therapy, it can be a fundamental basis from which other change can be mobilized. The chapter explores the essential elements of mutually supportive relationships and shows how unequal power derails them. It focuses on an in-depth case example to illustrate how gendered power differences can damage the emotional foundation of intimate relationships. Gendered power differences come into couple relationships in very subtle ways. Both women and men may fear that expressing aspects of self not consistent with gender stereotypes may be unacceptable and result in not being loved. Cultural gender expectations have left many men without good relationship skills. Stepping beyond gender stereotypes can make both partners feel uncomfortable.
This chapter presents a framework from which to assess how individuals approach relationships based on power, gender, and the social context. It addresses how to conceptualize individuals in terms of their orientations to relationship. Four relational orientations are described: position directed, rule directed, individuality directed, and relationship directed. Relational orientations are internal ways of experiencing oneself in relation to others. Relational Assessment demonstrates how relational orientations are context-specific and also shows that it can be valuable to help clients distinguish between their preferred orientations and what may actually be happening. The Contextual framework can also help family therapists keep relationships central and bridge the gap between individual and systems/relational assessments. The framework raises issues regarding our ethical responsibility when gender and power push relationships out of balance. Another set of ethical concerns involves who does the assessment and who sets the clinical goals.
This chapter examines how emotions related to romantic attraction evolve out of specific cultural discourses about gender differences, male dominance, individuality, and equal partnership. It explores cultural discourses in the attraction stories as told by young heterosexual couples in Orange County, California. Attraction lies within cultural discourses of gender difference in which men are attracted to women who fit feminine stereotypes, and women are drawn to “masculine” men who provide strength and security. Discourses of gender create circumstances in which women and men are attracted by complementary gender discourses. When couples organize their attraction experience around the gender-difference discourse, they see their partners as essentially different from themselves. The couple does not recognize or attend to implicit power differences in what they consider natural gender behavior. Practitioners will need research on and models of equality to guide them as they work with couples whose goals include mutual well-being.
Qualitative methods help researchers examine the nuances and complexities in relationship processes. In developing grounded theory, researchers are able to explore the systemic interactions between partners and identify and explain variations in the ways in which couples respond to each other and to the larger society. Grounded theory researchers begin with sensitivity to the research topic, but start with no predetermined hypotheses. Using gender equality as a sensitizing lens provides a framework through which to address this question, helps explain the meaning and nuance underneath the surface of couple interaction, and helps us explore the link between what couples do in their lives together and the larger social context. The lens of gender equality that we bring to our studies of couple life involves the four interrelated aspects of relationships such as relative status, attention to the other, accommodation patterns, and well-being.
This chapter explores how gender equality is related to the relationship processes that construct two different models of motherhood. It examines how the experiences and meanings of motherhood are created and maintained within the context of ongoing interactions among mothers, fathers, and children. The idea of “mother” was frequently raised by both women and men in interviews in the Contemporary Couples Study (CCS), even though interview questions did not specifically ask about motherhood. Mothering is inextricably linked with ideas of femininity and gender which vary across history and cultures. Our goal was to accurately understand how our interviewees viewed mothering and to identify the interpersonal processes that account for variations in meanings as they relate to gender equality in couple relationships. Traditional couples consciously believe that mothering young children is a gendered talent and deliberately divide family responsibilities following the model of separate-sphere parenting.
This chapter examines the conditions under which women and men give each other care when at least one partner has diabetes and explores the ways in which care, as well as the health status of both partners, is often influenced by gendered power structures. It offers clinicians and health care professionals suggestions for how to identify and address this potential gender disparity. Stereotypical gender relations appear to increase levels of stress, especially for women. Little attention has been given to the impact of gendered power on the daily acts of care and attending that intimate partners give each other in the course of routine life. Gender training thus shapes how partners respond to diabetes care. The gendered power structure organizing couple relationships limits men’s involvement in providing care. For many couples, response to illness triggers and maintains automatic gender patterns and hierarchies without conscious thought or deliberate choice.
Risman posits a tension between an individual’s interest in relationship equality and a social system still imbued with gender expectations and assumptions. Given the growing evidence that equality enhances relationship satisfaction and stability, the author’s are interested in what processes or situations help couples move in the direction of greater equality. Couples vary widely in the extent to which gender is central to their family organization, but three fairly distinct patterns emerge: postgender, gender legacy, and traditional. The institutional tensions between gender hierarchy and the ideal of marital equality described in the scholarly literature on family are articulated frequently by couples. Three factors stimulate a move toward equality in couples are awareness of gender issues, dual commitments to family and work, and situational pressures. Traditional couples need help in defining the meaning of relational equality for themselves within external definitions of male and female roles.