Post by monica on Dec 27, 2015 17:34:09 GMT
Why was the behaviourist assumption of the standard social science model of human behaviour superficially attractive to feminism and feminist therapists?
The basic assumptions of the SSSM are that:
Humans are born a blank state
The brain is a 'general purpose' computer
Culture/socialization programs behavior
Cultures free to vary any direction on any trait
Biology is relatively unimportant to understand behaviour.
This meant that the differences between male and female behaviour had nothing to do with being male or female so much as how children were brought up and how men and women were expected to behave. Therefore it was all the fault of (predominantly male-organised) society that women were denied certain positions or thought to be unable to do certain jobs. The argument would be - in simplistic terms - that, for example, when boys played with guns and girls played with dolls it was not because there was an inbuilt tendency for males to act out assertive/aggressive roles and for females to act out nurturing ones, it was because this is what the culture expected of them and taught them, so they complied. In theory then it would be possible for the societal norms to change so that boys would be taught that it was appropriate for them to play with dolls in a nurturing role and girls could play out more dominant roles.
The SSSM suggested that change could be effected towards feminist ideals simply if the upbringing of children and the cultural norms of a society were changed in those directions too.
The basic assumptions of the SSSM are that:
Humans are born a blank state
The brain is a 'general purpose' computer
Culture/socialization programs behavior
Cultures free to vary any direction on any trait
Biology is relatively unimportant to understand behaviour.
This meant that the differences between male and female behaviour had nothing to do with being male or female so much as how children were brought up and how men and women were expected to behave. Therefore it was all the fault of (predominantly male-organised) society that women were denied certain positions or thought to be unable to do certain jobs. The argument would be - in simplistic terms - that, for example, when boys played with guns and girls played with dolls it was not because there was an inbuilt tendency for males to act out assertive/aggressive roles and for females to act out nurturing ones, it was because this is what the culture expected of them and taught them, so they complied. In theory then it would be possible for the societal norms to change so that boys would be taught that it was appropriate for them to play with dolls in a nurturing role and girls could play out more dominant roles.
The SSSM suggested that change could be effected towards feminist ideals simply if the upbringing of children and the cultural norms of a society were changed in those directions too.