During the 1950’s Parsons and Bales’ study did not consider key external forces. For example, their study is based on a booming and stable labor market for men. This is one of assumption is what has affected women’s lives today because most households cannot rely on one job to support their family. Parsons also ignored the limitations of the domestic role such as; power imbalances, isolation, and depression (Parsons and Bales 1955 [Kelsey excerpt]:22). Many of their study is based off perfect family scenarios but, in reality women are working jobs and also picking up the second shift because of these gender specialization norms. This leaves women feeling overwhelmed causing them to feel depressed and isolated. This also made them feel overlooked causing instability within their adult relationships. Not only did Parsons and Bales’ ignore certain key external forces they also assumed that many of these factors would not …show more content…
The pieces of these roles from the modern families constructed a view of women that belittled them and forced them to be viewed as the domestic household workers. Today, due to this ideology women are no longer just fulfilling the domestic due to the economic, social policy, and culture changes since the 1950’s. Women are now taking part in the labor market and are having to juggle taking care of the household and family. Women continue to fulfill this second shift due to the lingering cultural ideologies that are prevent today. According to Hochschild, mom’s try to be “supermoms”, but they face consequences such as; lack of sleep, stress, loss in leisure and a reduction of their needs (1997). These has created instability within the adult relations causing many marriages to fail or be unhappy. In order to be successful in restoring marriages and family’s cultural ideologies must change. These gender specialization norms have only made things more unequal for women who are being overlooked and