Response Paper 8

Chelsea Billek

November 11, 2011

SOC 1000(15)

Response Paper 8

            Though the functionalist and conflict perspectives on gender stratification differ, both have sensible arguments. A dominant example of correlating elements in the two theories is the inevitability of stratification. On one side, functionalists believe that stratification is imperative for a society to operate well. Yet, opposing conflict theorists believe it to cause tension and conflict. From only these basic summaries of both theories’ view, I feel that one could find some sensibility behind each of them.

            When considering the functionalist view, I agree that some sort of gender stratification is important to society. In certain aspects of life, there are times where a man is more qualified for the job as opposed to a woman. That is the undeniable truth, although it does not mean some woman could not do the job just as well. Depending on the job, the same principle could apply for women too.  When hiring a construction worker, it would be more sensible to choose someone physically fit. In general, men are usually stronger than woman so a man might be more suitable for that position. On the other hand, a position for a child sitter might be something geared more towards women. This is because women tend to be better with kids then men because of their motherly instincts.

            With that being said, the conflict theory can also apply as well. When society directs a position towards one sex as opposed to the other, conflict usually follows. There will always be people that believe they are being treated unfairly. Whether this is true or not, someone will always argue decisions as such. They think they are well qualified for the job regardless of what society thinks is best. Given we tends to avoid conflict, it could be beneficial. If someone argues the decision of society, they are not always necessarily wrong. Debate and argument helps us in seeing multiple views of the matter at hand and enables us to address each accordingly. Therefore, everyone’s voice is heard and everybody’s concerns are met.

            I have experienced gender stratification at my place of employment. I work at a jewelry store as a sales associate. Although I sell merchandise, I also take care of many other things including the store’s website and the photography of the jewelry. I have held this position for a little over a year and consider myself a very hard worker. Recently, my manager informed me that for the holidays, our busiest time of year, he would like me to revert to selling silver. Usually, new associates work with the silver being that it is the most inexpensive section of our store. This took me back because there are two new employees, both of which are male, who have started working there since. According to the store’s policy, they should be the ones designated to the silver pieces. My manager noticed I looked rightfully concerned by his decision, and consoled me by explaining why this was so. He said that people in my age group would be buying the most silver, and males my age would be willing to spend more money if I was waiting on them.

            Even though I understand my manager’s motives in designating me to the silver, I do not agree with the way he is going about it. I do not think he should limit me to only selling silver. I have much more experience with all of the jewelry then either of the new people. If anything, he should designate them to only silver and ask me to focus more on silver than other items. This way, I will still be allowed to sell other things, but will mainly be by the silver as he wants me to be. I feel this is gender stratification because if either of the new employees were female, my boss would have asked them to sell silver. But since I was the most recent employee hired who was female, I was asked to do it. I know my concern is supposed to lie in the business’ best interest, but not at the expense of my own justice.