Skip to main content
Log in

Social Norms and the Feeling of Justice about Unequal Family Practices

  • Published:
Social Justice Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

After briefly retracing the origins of the present day unbalanced division of family work, this paper article summarizes results from three studies conducted with married adults and unmarried young adults from northern Portugal. The data support the idea that (a) unequal family practices do not change because traditional practices are social norms that orientate individuals’ behavior; (b) individuals do not comply passively to these social norms but consider that the normative practices are fair; (c) normative family practices are considered to be fair because women, as well as men, seem to gain benefits from traditional family organization. The social consequences for women of the maintenance of normative family practices are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. As we are interested in the impact of social comparison on family practices, we analyze here only the data obtained from the married respondents, although the study also included the participation of 178 young unmarried adults.

  2. Subjects were asked also to rate the spouse’s participation in ten family decisions.

References

  • Bacon, C., & Lerner, R. M. (1975). Effects of maternal employment status on the development of vocational-role perception in females. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 126, 187–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baudelot, C., & Establet, R. (1992). Allez les filles! Paris: Editions du Seuil.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baxter, J., & Western, M. (1998). Satisfaction with housework: Examining the paradox. Sociology, 32, 101–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chombart de Lauwe, M. J. (1984). La représentation sociale des catégories sociales dominées: Rôle social, intériorisation. Bulletin de Psychologie, 37, 877–886.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doise, W. (1990). Les représentations sociales. In Ghiglione, R., Bonnet, C., & Richard, J. F. (Eds.), Traité de psychologie cognitive (pp. 113–174). Paris: Dunod.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giddens, A. (1982). Sociology: A brief but critical introduction. London: MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giddens, A. (1997). Sociology. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The ambivalent sexism inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 491–512.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (2005). Striking the balance: Women, men, work and family. Discussion paper 2005, Sidney.

  • Kellerhals, J., Troutot, P. Y., & Lazega, E. (1993). Microsociologie de la famille. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larson, R. W., Richards, M. H., & Perry-Jenkins, M. (1994). Divergent worlds: The daily emotional experience of mothers and fathers in the domestic and public spheres. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 1034–1046.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mikula, G. (1998). Justice in the family—Multiple perspectives in the division of labor: Introduction. Social Justice Research, 11, 211–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mikula, G., & Freudenthaler, H. H. (2002). Division of tasks and duties and the perception of injustice: The case of household chores. Psychologische Beiträge, 44, 567–584.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moghaddam, F. M. (1998). Social psychology. Exploring universals across cultures. New York: W. H. Freeman and Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D. T., Monin, B., & Prentice, D. A. (2000). Pluralistic ignorance and inconsistency between private attitudes and public behaviors. In Terry, D. J., & Hogg, M. A. (Eds.), Attitudes, behavior, and social context. The role of norms and group membership (pp. 95–113). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moscovici, S. (1961). La Psychanalyse, son image et son public. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.

    Google Scholar 

  • Müller, U. (1998). The micropolitics of gender differences in family life. In Ferreira, V., Tavares, T., & Portugal, S. (Eds.), Shifting bonds, shifting bounds (pp. 329–344). Oeiras: Celta Editora.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen, J. M. (1990). Sex and gender in society. Perspectives on stratification. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, T. (1964). Family structure and the socialization of the child. In Parsons, T., & Bales, R. F. (Eds.), Family, socialization and interaction process (pp. 35–133). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poeschl, G. (2000). Trabalho doméstico e poder familiar: Práticas, normas, e ideais. Análise Social, 35, 695–719.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poeschl, G. (2003a). Inégalités sexuelles dans la mémoire collective et représentations des différences entre les sexes. Connexions, 80, 101–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poeschl, G. (2003b). Représentations des différences entre les sexes et jeux de pouvoir. Nouvelle Revue de Psychologie Sociale, 2, 77–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poeschl, G., Múrias, C., & Costa, E. (2004). Desigualdades sociais e representações das diferenças entre os sexos. Análise Social, 39, 365–387.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poeschl, G., Pinto, I., Múrias, C., Silva, A., & Ribeiro, R. (2006). Representations of family practices, belief in sex differences and sexism. Sex Roles, 55, 111–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roux, P. (1999). Couple et égalité: un ménage impossible. Lausanne: Réalités sociales.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saraceno, C. (1997). Sociologia da Família. Lisboa: Editorial Estampa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shields, S. A. (1986). Fonctionnalisme, darwinisme et psychologie des femmes. Etude d’un mythe social. In Hurtig, M.C., & Pichevin, M.F. (Eds.), La différence des sexes (pp. 29–61). Paris: Tierce Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sidanius, J., Levin, S., Liu, J., & Pratto, F. (2000). Social dominance orientation, anti-egalitarianism and the political psychology of gender: An extension and cross-cultural replication. European Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 41–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silva, A., & Poeschl, G. (2001–2002). Representações das semelhanças e das diferenças entre os sexos. Cadernos de Consulta Psicológica, 17/18, 153–159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spence, J. T., Deaux, K., & Helmreich, R. L. (1985). Sex roles in contemporary American society. In Lindzey, G., & Aronson, E. (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (Vol. 2, 3rd ed., pp. 149–178). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stohs, J. H. (1995). Predictors of conflict over the household division of labor among women employed full-time. Sex Roles, 33, 257–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stryker, S., & Statham, A. (1985). Symbolic interaction and role theory. In Lindzey, G., & Aronson, E. (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology, (Vol. 2, 3rd ed., pp. 311–378). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wille, D. E. (1995). The 1990s: Gender differences in parenting roles. Sex Roles, 33, 803–817.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yogev, S. (1981). Do profession women have egalitarian marital relationship? Journal of Marriage and the Family, November, 865–870.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gabrielle Poeschl.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Poeschl, G. Social Norms and the Feeling of Justice about Unequal Family Practices. Soc Just Res 21, 69–85 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-007-0057-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-007-0057-5

Keywords

Navigation