Soc. 3251W Race, Class, and Gender

In their articles on the welfare state, both orloff and quadagno find fault in past emphasis on class struggle when understanding welfare states. Orloff focuses on the way that gender relations have influenced policy in welfare states, and how this has in turn affected the state of gender relations. Quadagno also discusses gender inequalities, but also includes some thoughts on how race has influenced and been influenced by the welfare states. Orloff discusses how the welfare state has been responsible for the reproduction of gender hierarchies where the male figure is seen as the head of the household, the main breadwinner, responsible for the economic support of the family. The female figure is seen as the caregiver, responsible for tasks in the home and raising the children. This trend in different welfare states keeps women out of the workforce and increases their dependence on men. Because of the sexist policies of modern welfare states, women experience low participation in the labor market as well as lower rates of wages. Quadagno deals with both gender and race in her article as she uses President Nixon’s Family Assistance Plan of 1969 as a case study. She says some similar things about gender inequalities as Orloff did. She explains that men receive benefits through their participation in the labor market while women gain benefits through their relationship to a male breadwinner. Important to Quadagno’s article is how she confronts the issue of race with regard to the welfare state. She talks about the ways in which welfare has oppressed the black community, and reproduced the legacy of past discrimination. According to Quadagno, due to past discrimination, black workers are not eligible for as much old age insurance as it is determined in relation to previous market earnings. She claims that since the FAP was designed by white males, it would tend to segregate blacks into lower wage jobs, limiting their mobility.

Continue reading "Race and Gender in Welfare" »

Posted by Stephen Anderson at 12:58 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

In 1969, President Nixon began a welfare program titled the family assistance plan or FAP. The feature in this plan that was different from previous plans was that it was designed to help welfare families that helped themselves. In other words, those who qualified for welfare that worked more, were helped more by this plan. Quadagno argues that by giving assistance to low income black males and those females who are giving birth, the family assistance plan is reinforcing male domination over females, and a continuation of white control of the labor force. While Quadagno makes that arguement, she then states that there is evidence that if there is enough of an economic gain through this plan, then it will have the opposite effect. She seems to be somewhat riding the fence on the issue in the introduction.

Quadagno proceeds to spend many pages discussing the three dominant views of the U.S. welfare state. The mass turmoil thesis, in which relief programs are initiated and contracted as the unemployment rate goes up or down. Elite dominance which states that the state acts because the ruling class tells it to. The power resource theory iwhich states that in certain circumstances that working class can use the state to help offset the market inequality.

These statements are all refuted at the end stating that Nixon's failed plan contradicts them. Some feminists believe that welfare plans are a way for continued male domination. The feminists do have a few good points that help confirm that theory in the FAP. By giving aid to working males, and childbearing females, it encourages the view that the men should be in the workforce and the women should stay at home.

Discussion Questions:
1. What parts of the FAP help confirm feminists belief that welfare plans are a way for continued male domination?

2. What are the three dominant theories in regards to the formation of the U.S. welfare state, and how do they differ?

Posted by Joseph Wax at 8:16 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

The first reading "Understanding American Social Politics" by Weir is mainly concerned with U.S. social policies, including welfare, and how they relate on an international scale. Weir begins by pointing out that of all countries today, the U.S. probably has the best means to promote a sound social policy. Whereas the U.S. is above average in educational expenditures, it falls short of most countries in terms of health care and welfare. Yet, as Weir points out, U.S. social policies are still under attack from politicians.

Continue reading "The United States in Comparative Perspective" »

Posted by Dan S at 12:32 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)