Introduction to Kinship Studies Dr. Jane Granskog CSU Bakersfield OVERVIEW OF TOPICS IN THE STUDY OF FAMILY AND KIN Importance of family and kin in social life The historical development of kinship studies in anthropology Summary points regarding the study of family and kin Importance of family and kin in social life The family has been the most important social unit defining relations between people for most of human history. It is still so today, even though we no longer place as much emphasis upon its importance in the U.S. It is the only social institution other than religion that is formally developed in all societies Importance of family and kin in social life It is the major unit of socialization that critically affects how we look at the world, define ourselves, and form ties and connections with others Significance of world view in perceptions of and meanings attached to the concept of “family” Importance of family and kin Variation in the structure and meaning of “family” How do we define what the family is? – component roles--gender, parental etc and key relationships – key functions the family may perform (economic, socialization, legitimization of offspring, alliances with like units) Importance of family and kin “Traditional” concepts of the family are tied to the “familistic” package of functions it has performed Global revolution in how we think of ourselves & connections we form “family” as a special relationship importance of emotional communication (intimacy) as defining characteristics. Importance of family and kin Extensions of kin beyond the “family” Significance of the contrast between a focus on the individual v.s. the community; definition of the “self” vs “other” Importance of concept of dependency Dependency (Gurian & Gurian) “an inborn tendency which cultural, social and psychological conditions variously shape” “seeking support, identity, security and permission outside the self” “is reciprocal; a life process, a cycle of attitudes and actions” “Positive” vs “negative” dependency positive - “where dependency serves as a continuing support for adequate, non-victimized persons & their partners, family, community” etc .- a balanced reciprocal flow “Positive” vs “negative” dependency negative - “where dependency cripples the ability of the self to be a constructive contributor to partnership, family, or community” Balanced Dependency Features continuity--uninterrupted connection bonding--significant life-link reciprocity--giving & receiving, mutual benefit obligation--honoring commitments trust--emotional “knowing” of secure bonds commitment--supporting others’ needs involvement--taking part in daily roles The 21st Century American Family how current status of the family is understood is affected by assumptions regarding its character assumed universality of the nuclear family assumed parental determinism (re: socialization of children) assumed stable harmonious past perception of families in crisis--impact of triple revolution: post industrial service and informational economy; life course changes; psychological “gentrification” of population Summary Points People in all societies recognize that they are connected to others in a variety of ways -forms of relatedness Key forms of relatedness come from shared substance and its transmission -- bodily transmission (blood, milk, genetic) or spiritual (soul, rebirth, nurturance) or both Kinship -- defines those social relationships prototypically derived from the universal human experiences of mating, birth and nurturance HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENTS IN ANTHROPOLOGY Kinship studies have been one of the most important and well developed areas of social anthropology. Key theoretical developments: – unilineal evolutionists – structural functionalism – processual approaches--alliance theory – ethnosemantics – dialectical holism EARLY EVOLUTIONISTS - MAJOR CONTRIBUTIONS First studied by unilineal cultural evolutionists in the 1800's - McLennan (1865); Lewis Henry Morgan (1870, 1877); Bachofen (1861). Founded the study of kinship Gave us the terminology to study kinship systems Pointed out relationships between marriage and other social institutions EARLY EVOLUTIONISTS - MAJOR CONTRIBUTIONS Kinship systems do change and there are regularities in the process Kinship systems do reflect to some degree, the type of adaptation to the environment PROBLEMS WITH EARLY STUDIES Ethnocentric and culturally biased Kinship systems are not subject to cumulative evolution; can't be ranked as higher/lower etc. Different kin systems are just alternate ways of doing things Kin terms are NOT just an extension of biological relations STRUCTURAL-FUNCTIONALISM Major contributors - A. R. Radcliffe Brown and Bronislaw Malinowski; others: E.E. EvansPrichard, Kroeber, Rivers, Lowie, Murdock social learning approach to kin terms - way behavior is learned defines explanation of behavior itself; Kroeber-linguistic approach concern with kin groups; development of descent theory STRUCTURAL-FUNCTIONALISM static approach - focus on social structure, rules and obligations, contributions to social solidarity kinship terms based on behavior, justified by Murdock’s work (supported R. B.) Murdock--statistical analysis of kinship systems via kin terminology 3 determinants of kin terms (marriage, descent, residence); descent most important PROCESSUAL APPROACH TO KINSHIP Raymond Firth - problems with structural functionalism - focus on social organization, the change principle, networks important Levi-Strauss - emphasis on alliance theory kin groups based on exchange of food, goods, services and women. Marriage is an exchange of women between kin groups cybernetics - emphasis on kin relations via mathematical models ETHNOSEMANTICS emphasis on meaning of kinship from native’s point of view, meaning in context ethnoscience - look at sociological meaning of terms to get at nature of kinship system DIALECTICAL HOLISM Yanagisako & Collier - point out need to re-examine anthropological work in gender and kinship studies assumptions about gender lie at core of kin studies just as ideas about kinship are central to analyses of gender DIALECTICAL HOLISM kinship is “rooted in biology because, by our own definition, it is about relationships based in sexual reproduction” (p.30) “we assume that the activities “that create human offspring are heterosexual intercourse, pregnancy, and parturition” and “these constitute the biological process upon which we presume culture builds social relations such as marriage,” etc. (p.30) Yanagisako & Collier “There are no “facts,” biological or material, that have social consequences and cultural meanings in and of themselves. Sexual intercourse, pregnancy, and parturition are cultural facts, whose form, consequences and meanings are socially constructed in any society as are mothering, fathering, judging, ruling.. Similarly, there are no material “facts” that can be treated as precultural givens.” (p.39) •Analyzing Social Wholes - 3 Facets cultural analysis of meaning - the socially meaningful categories people use, symbols & meanings underlying them systemic models of inequality - how do ordinary people pursuing own ends realize the structures of inequality that constrain them historical analysis - change over time, dialectical processes thru which practices & meanings have unfolded, affecting present and future Summary Points Kinship systems are a response to various recognized pressures within a framework of biological, psychological, ecological, and social limitations -- importance of context Problem of biases - cultural; sexual (presumptions about gender roles); using folk concepts of sex etc. as the basis of biological & thus universal differences Summary Points Note problems of categorization - definition of what is (now vs. later), kin systems are constantly evolving norms vs statistical realities vs emic (native) definition of realities It is not what the definition says, but what people do with those definitions (social uses to which they are put) that matters IMPACT OF SEXUALITY ON FAMILY AND KIN Sexuality - means of understanding how possibilities & constraints of biology help shape family and kin organization Topics to Be Covered – – – – Insights from non-human primates Impact of culture on sexuality Premarital sexual relations & restrictions on them Variant attitudes toward sexuality and homosexuality Insights from Non-human Primates only humans have female-male pair bonding and multi-male, multi- female groups; continuous female sexual receptivity, rare in animal world; sex for meat hypothesis (bonobo chimps) Impact of Culture on Sexuality All cultures channel sexuality and pose restrictions on who, when, and under what conditions sexual behavior may be expressed before marriage, outside of marriage, within marriage and after marriage Restrictive rules regarding childhood and premarital sexual expression correspond to similar attitudes regarding extramarital and postmarital sexual expression Impact of Culture on Sexuality Despite the diversity of cultures, are 2 bases for commonalities in sexual expression: – potentialities & limitations of biological inheritance; – the internal logic & consistency of a culture which shapes expression of sexuality in culture via socialization of young Childhood Sexuality considerable variation in attitudes expressed many have a tolerant attitude toward masturbation, and even relations between adults and children we are born as sexual beings capable of orgasmic expression major issue is how adults label such activity Premarital Sexual Relations (Frayser) more societies allow premarital sex for one or both sexes than do not where there are restraints, are more likely to apply to premarital vs extramarital sex double standard operates in only one direction (restrict women more than men) Societies with Restrictions on Premarital Sex Societies where property and other rights pass thru males (patrilineal descent) and where married couples live with or near husband's parents (e.g. Circum-Mediterranean) Societies with emphasis on dowry (money and goods given by bride's family) Complex, stratified societies likely to restrict premarital sex Variant Attitudes Toward Sexuality permissive -- tolerant attitude (Mangaia, Trobriand Islands) restrictive -- Inis Beag, very negative attitude toward all forms of sexual expression Attitudes toward Homosexuality if permitted for girls, almost always for boys are different types of male homosexuality institutionalized male bisexuality (Melanesia) Werner - societies with evidence of population pressure on resources, reason to limit reproduction, more likely to tolerate male homosexuality mentorship homosexuality part of a larger syndrome reflecting strong male power and authority Societies Where Sex is Dangerous societies where sex is viewed as dangerous, are often where men fear sex with women; are often coupled with menstral taboos marrying enemies, emotional distance between husbands and wives may exaggerate boys unconscious sexual interest in mother, frightening because of incest taboo IMPACT OF GENDER ON FAMILY & KIN Biological Influences Definition of Terms Regarding Gender Factors influencing Sexual Behavior Gender Role Identity - Impact of Socialization Division of Labor by Gender Gender and Contributions to Subsistence Status of Women Areas of Biological Influence on Gender physiology emotional characteristics mental (visual/spacial perception) Biological Influence on Gender physiology - Males: physically stronger; Females: greater endurance, resistance to disease & stress etc. emotional - Males: emphasis on physical aggressiveness (far more responsible for incidents of homicide); Females: emphasis on nurturant capabilities Biological Influence on Gender mental (visual/spacial perception) - Males: field independence, can abstract elements from context, greater lateralization in brain; Females: field dependence, relational emphasis, elements perceived in context, use both sides of brain more (related to tight parental control, emphasis on conformity Biological Influence on Gender Feedback between biological processes and the environment is extremely complex, is a moot question as to where biology leaves off and culture begins; emphasis is on significance of socio-cultural factors. Definition of Terms Regarding Gender core gender identity – secure sense of maleness or femaleness, affected by cultural interpretations, being comfortable w/ one's body; usually well established by age 3 (18-36 months; requires internalization of cultural rules defining gender) Definition of Terms Regarding Gender gender role – learned behavior patterns defined by society and subject to change over time and space (characterized by masculinity and femininity) gender role identity – identification with those behavioral expectations considered appropriate for a given gender Understanding Sexual Behavior, Key Factors Individual gender role identity - perception of what it means to be male or female in a society and how that perception is reflected in behavior degree to which gender roles constrain individual behavior Nature of the relationship between the sexes interpretation of attributes of gender roles, activities carried out by each sex, attitudes toward males by females & vice versa Key Factors in Understanding Sexual Behavior Socio-cultural context - how interpretation of sexual identity and the relations between sexes are expressed in different arenas of life and in terms of norms of society; importance of kinship, separation of public and domestic spheres of activity as well as socio-historical forces affecting norms etc. Components of Socio-cultural Context Ecosystem - type of ecological adaptation ( technology) & associated degree of societal complexity Socio-economic and political organization differentiation & relative importance of public vs domestic sphere; type of family & kinship system, type of status groups present, etc; relative gender role differentiation present and importance Components of Socio-cultural Context Role of ideology (values & norms) evaluation of sexuality is based on cultural perception - herein lies the importance of attitudes which are instilled via socialization Development of Gender Role Identity There are a number of cross-cultural similarities in the socialization & personality development of females vs males (based on article by Chodorow in Rosaldo & Lamphere, 1974, Woman, Culture and Society) Cross-Cultural Similarities in Socialization Females: activity and manners acquired in natural continuity; Males: taught to be men, discontinuous role, separation from domestic sphere necessary in order to learn role Females: integrated w/ female kin vertically (mo-da); Males: integrated horizontally, importance of peer relationships in childhood activities Cross-Cultural Similarities in Socialization Females: membership in groups not questioned - age determines status (ascribed); Males: membership in groups achieved and open to question, based on personal characteristics Cross-Cultural Similarities in Socialization Females: growing up, experience others as individuals, emphasis is on informal roles (have flexible ego boundaries) - roles defined in relation to domestic sphere; Males: learn manhood as an abstract set of rights and duties, status brings formal authority, emphasis is on formal institutional roles (public roles) Cross-Cultural Similarities in Socialization Similarities in socialization of females vs males reflected in puberty rites note three stages in all rites of passage separation, transition, incorporation rites are usually more public, more marked, more severe and more important for males than for females. Division of Labor by Gender male strength theory compatibility with child care theory economy of effort theory expendability theory Gender and Contributions to Subsistence need to consider primary (food gettinggathering, hunting, fishing, herding, agriculture)and secondary (food preparation and processing subsistence activities calories - men usually contribute more total work time including processing in home - in horticultural and intensive agricultural societies women work more hours per day than men Gender and Contributions to Subsistence women contribute as much as men to primary subsistence in many agricultural and especially horticultural societies contribution to primary subsistence and nature of child care, closely linked where women contribute more to subsistence, more say about aspects of their sexuality Gender and Contributions to Subsistence political roles and leadership patterns - male political power may stem partially from male predominance in war (strength, compatibility and expendability theories) increase in societal complexity reflected in less formal leadership for women; emphasis on informal roles, indirect influence Status of Women At best women are more or less equal to men, in no known society do women clearly have more status than men Whyte - 52 cultural traits affecting status staus is multidimensional, high status in one area does not mean high status in another Predictors of Status of Women female-centered social structure (matrilineality and matrilocality) - more control over property, more authority in home more equal sexual restrictions, more value attributed to lives level of societal complexity - greater complexity (e.g., intensive agriculture) lower status.