Reaction Paper
Reaction Paper
The studies reflect that the fact in the Philippines, sons and daughters are raised and treated differently within the family, in accordance with parents’ gender expectations that minor society’s own prescriptions for what is appropriately masculine and feminine.
The studies reveals some of the disadvantages experienced by the girl-child stemming from the restrictions she has to contend with compared to the boy –child. She is also given more responsibilities inside the house because of the expectations that women should learn how to do household work. If society continues to view household work as inferior work, then it might be concluded that the girl-child is socialized to be limited in her future options. And when the girl-child becomes a woman, there is still the double burden that she has to shoulder when she strives to manage a household and career at the same time. On the other hand, the boy-child is also trained, but for a different set of responsibilities, as in work outside the house that prepares and conditions them for a wider range of future vocations.
Child-rearing studies rarely used gender as analytic variable, while on the other hand, studies on gender differences rarely touched on child-rearing to explicate how the gender stereotypes or differences under investigation came to be. There remain many gaps in empirical research in the Philippines concerning the direct link or relationship between child-rearing practices and the formation of gender roles and stereotypes, so investigations in the future should make a conscious effort to include these variables in the planning, conduct, and analysis of research.
Lastly, although the family is very influential in the formation of gender roles and stereotypes, it cannot be denied that other factors should be considered well, including peer socialization and school, church, and media influences. They may strengthen or modify the outcomes of family
The studies reflect that the fact in the Philippines, sons and daughters are raised and treated differently within the family, in accordance with parents’ gender expectations that minor society’s own prescriptions for what is appropriately masculine and feminine.
The studies reveals some of the disadvantages experienced by the girl-child stemming from the restrictions she has to contend with compared to the boy –child. She is also given more responsibilities inside the house because of the expectations that women should learn how to do household work. If society continues to view household work as inferior work, then it might be concluded that the girl-child is socialized to be limited in her future options. And when the girl-child becomes a woman, there is still the double burden that she has to shoulder when she strives to manage a household and career at the same time. On the other hand, the boy-child is also trained, but for a different set of responsibilities, as in work outside the house that prepares and conditions them for a wider range of future vocations.
Child-rearing studies rarely used gender as analytic variable, while on the other hand, studies on gender differences rarely touched on child-rearing to explicate how the gender stereotypes or differences under investigation came to be. There remain many gaps in empirical research in the Philippines concerning the direct link or relationship between child-rearing practices and the formation of gender roles and stereotypes, so investigations in the future should make a conscious effort to include these variables in the planning, conduct, and analysis of research.
Lastly, although the family is very influential in the formation of gender roles and stereotypes, it cannot be denied that other factors should be considered well, including peer socialization and school, church, and media influences. They may strengthen or modify the outcomes of family