In reading and analyzing these two articles, I continued to reflect on the date of these pieces. These articles span decades and decades of time between them and a clear reflection of how the ideology of family, gender, race, nation and space have evolved. I would take this analysis a step further and argue that even the more current piece by Patricia Hill Collins does not take many aspects views on family that were prevalent at the time that the piece was written. The Marx reader seems very period appropriate with slanted although typical views for the time in which it was written.
I found the Marx reader extremely difficult to read. Concepts were put forth in the context of the period but for a modern day reader, you would almost need a translation to decipher. I struggled. A lot. The history discussed in the piece was something I was familiar with. The study and evolution of human society, the make-up and functions of the family unit and men, women and children’s roles in the structure of family have been studied extensively. Obviously this work evolves with time and changes as society does.
In Collins piece, she started off with the use the of the term “family values” from the Dan Quayle speech in 1992 (Collins 1998). I was a 21 year old newly married mother of two at that time. I do remember the seemingly firestorm that ensued around that term. Various groups arguing for these so called “family values” and those who were arguing for such platforms as gay rights or a woman’s right to choose abortion, were in the heat of battle. Traditional family values are the corner stone of our society yet over time what a family looks like has changed. The idea that society embraces is that the “norm” is a family consisting of a father, mother and children where the father is the breadwinner and supports the family financially. The woman’s role is to care for the