Traditional social science models of class groups

[divya084]

Traditional social science models of class groups in the United States are based on economic status and assume that women’s economic status derives from association with men, typically fathers or husbands, and that women therefore have more compelling common interest with men of their own economic class than with women outside it. Some feminist social scientists, by contrast, have argued that the basic division in American society is instead based on gender, and that the total female population, regardless of economic status, constitutes a distinct class. Social historian Mary Ryan, for example, has argued that in early-nineteenth-century America the identical legal status of working-class and middle-class free women outweighed the differences between women of these two classes: married women, regardless of their family’s wealth, did essentially the same unpaid domestic work, and none could own property or vote. Recently, though, other feminist analysts have questioned this model, examining ways in which the condition of working-class women differs from that of middle-class women as well as from that of working-class men. Ann Oakley notes, for example, that the gap between women of different economic classes widened in the late nineteenth century: most working-class women, who performed wage labor outside the home, were excluded from the emerging middle-class ideal of femininity centered around domesticity and volunteerism.

It can be inferred from the passage that the most recent feminist social science research on women and class seeks to do which of the following?

a) Introduce a divergent new theory about the relationship between legal status and gender

b) Illustrate an implicit middle-class bias in earlier feminist models of class and gender

c) Provide evidence for the position that gender matters more than wealth in determining class status

d) Remedy perceived inadequacies of both traditional social science models and earlier feminist analyses of class and gender

e) Challenge the economic definitions of class used by traditional social scientists


IMO : E but OA is d

Could someone please explain this?

[nitin_prakash_khanna]

I think we will need additional help here by some instructor. But i will write what ever i could understand, First of all i maked it E as well.
But OA is D , so it has to be D.

I think the point we missed is the overall Passage organization. The passage starts with....

Traditional social science models of class groups in the United States ..........
Which essentialy tells that Traditional social scientists based their model with an assumption that women were entirely dependent on men for their social status.

Then passage introduces
Some feminist social scientists, by contrast, have argued that the basic division in American society ........
The passage introduced another model and a different group of social scientists.

And finally the passage talks about
Recently, though, other feminist analysts have questioned this model,......
Where more recent social scientists have altogether a different view.

Now if you read option D again, it clearly stands out.

[divya084]

Hi Instructors,

Can somebody please help me out here?

[RonPurewal]

I think we will need additional help here by some instructor. But i will write what ever i could understand, First of all i maked it E as well.
But OA is D , so it has to be D.

I think the point we missed is the overall Passage organization. The passage starts with....

Traditional social science models of class groups in the United States ..........
Which essentialy tells that Traditional social scientists based their model with an assumption that women were entirely dependent on men for their social status.

Then passage introduces
Some feminist social scientists, by contrast, have argued that the basic division in American society ........
The passage introduced another model and a different group of social scientists.

And finally the passage talks about
Recently, though, other feminist analysts have questioned this model,......
Where more recent social scientists have altogether a different view.

Now if you read option D again, it clearly stands out.

yes. excellent treatment.

also note that this recent research actually goes back to the idea of economic class as important (notice that they talk about the difference between working class and middle class). therefore, they are doing exactly the opposite of challenging those ideas: they are actually endorsing the idea of economic class. this contradicts choice (e).

[vicksikand]

Recently, though, other feminist analysts have questioned this model, examining ways in which the condition of working-class women differs from that of middle-class women as well as from that of working-class men.

I am not questioning the OA, but it is sort of a stretch: the recent research by feminist analysts like Ann O. talked about the Social (gender) and not the traditional (class) model. However, on reading the next few lines one can infer that Ann compared working class women to the middle class women ( class model ) and she stretched her analysis to include the working class men ( gender-social model )

[RonPurewal]

Recently, though, other feminist analysts have questioned this model, examining ways in which the condition of working-class women differs from that of middle-class women as well as from that of working-class men.

I am not questioning the OA, but it is sort of a stretch: the recent research by feminist analysts like Ann O. talked about the Social (gender) and not the traditional (class) model. However, on reading the next few lines one can infer that Ann compared working class women to the middle class women ( class model ) and she stretched her analysis to include the working class men ( gender-social model )

i think you're looking in the wrong place.
the full treatment is found in the preceding sentence -- the one that starts with "other feminist analysts have questioned...".

ann oakley is only one example (note the words "for example"), so there is no reason to expect that her work, by itself, will encompass all of the goals described in the previous statement(s).

[nasheen_shaikh]

Hi Ron,

What's wrong with answer 'B'
it disputes middle class bias that was considered by earlier feminist i.e. Mary Ryan

[tim]

Frankly I don't see any evidence of a "middle class bias" in the early feminist theories as described in the passage. Sure, there were differences between the working class and middle class, but this is not indicative of any sort of bias in the early feminist research.

[hanqingwu.m]

Hi Ron,

I watched the recording where this question was discussed. Initially, I chose (D), but then I changed my answer due to the phrase "remedy perceived inadequacies...." From my understanding of the passage, she only pointed out the inadequacies and didn't provide any solutions. Where in the passage indicates that the scientist provided a remedy?

Please advise.

Thank you for your time and patience.

[RonPurewal]

Hi Ron,

I watched the recording where this question was discussed. Initially, I chose (D), but then I changed my answer due to the phrase "remedy perceived inadequacies...." From my understanding of the passage, she only pointed out the inadequacies and didn't provide any solutions. Where in the passage indicates that the scientist provided a remedy?

Please advise.

Thank you for your time and patience.

The "perceived inadequacy" was that the older model treated the situations of working-class and middle-class women as essentially identical.

The newer model tried to "remedy" this perceived inadequacy by pointing out differences between the two groups' situations.

--

Note"”we're talking about a perceived inadequacy in the earlier model of class groups. In other words, a perceived inadequacy in the way social scientists addressed these groups.

We're not talking about inadequacies in the actual situations of the women themselves (e.g., voting rights), in case that's where you are going with this.

[akshay.gaur85]

Hi Ron!!

In one of your posts you mentioned that the other feminist analysts are actually endorsing the idea of the traditional social science models. However, the option D says that "other feminist analyst" remedy the perceived inadequacies of both the models.
I am little confused here. Could you please elaborate your point.

[jlucero]

Hi Ron!!

In one of your posts you mentioned that the other feminist analysts are actually endorsing the idea of the traditional social science models. However, the option D says that "other feminist analyst" remedy the perceived inadequacies of both the models.
I am little confused here. Could you please elaborate your point.

Ron't quote is below:

therefore, they are doing exactly the opposite of challenging those ideas: they are actually endorsing the idea of economic class. this contradicts choice (e).

Notice he wasn't saying they were FULLY endorsing the models, but rather endorsing an idea within the model. The first models focused on class, the second models on gender. The most recent models found both models to be inadequate and sort of combined the two to make the best model (note, this is way over-simplifying things, but the idea is that the third group is trying to make a better model than either of the first two groups)