FREE ESSAY ON THE REDEFINING OF SOCIAL INSTITUTIONS

THE REDEFINING OF SOCIAL INSTITUTIONS

The Redefinition of Sociological Institutions
So long as there are economic fluctuations, homogamy amongst subcultures worldwide, and
the willingness of people and researchers to multi-laterally communicate towards
achieving the quality of life desired by all groups, there will remain the possibility of
"re-defining" sociological institutions. To name a few from the wide spectrum of
possibilities, two institutions that have been significantly "redefined" by time are the
American family culture and co-housing communities throughout the United States.
American family culture in the 1700's consisted of a style of living called the extended
or "connected" family. The idea arose that the extended family style had been "damaged",
therefore deserving a more critical look into the issue. In a "connected" family, the
economic value of family members far outweighed their personal family freedoms. Entire
families of people would be living and working together in a group to gain economic
stability. Women's interests were thought to be insignificant by society, and children
were bred freely as to increase the family's labor capital. The extended family style was
one of mutual support and complementary value between family members. Women and children
worked long hours on their farms and were denied of any freedoms whether they are
personally or politically empowering. The women then finding a "second shift" (household
duties and child rearing) when they retired from working that day.
The in-depth look at the structure of the extended family raised new ideas on increasing
the quality of life for all existing "connected" models. Views about women's empowerment,
freedoms, gender equity, and self-sufficiency were established along with 
Clark2
those of child welfare and proper upbringing. This experimental family style was
considered an early form of the nuclear or "non-connected" family style. Mother's
relationships with their children grew more significant and women were allowed more and
more access to new child-rearing technologies and focused more on "child turnout" than
economic growth. By acting to liberate and equate the interests of women this movement
molded the "spheres of influence" and traditional roles of the existing "connected"
family model. Thus, kin-direct motherhood styles quickly became obsolete due to the
sudden increase amongst women in modern thinking and technology. The "new" nuclear family
was one full of individual freedoms that were foreign to most families, in that they only
knew of the traditional family practices. That explains how "American family life" as a
social institution has the ability to be re-defined via modern sociological theory and
concept.
To further prove the power of sociological research, the co-housing to NEL model
transformation occurred. The co-housing model was established in the late 1960's strictly
for the purpose of reforming some of the undesirable characteristics of 1950's family
life for those residing. It emphasizes "interdependence" of neighbors in a community,
whereas residents can even have "cross-household" responsibilities within their
neighborly setting, and both children and adults become integral parts of their immediate
social web. These responsibilities were mainly those of involvement in other's
child-rearing, without any distinct political or social agendas. It is not an attempt to
revolutionize family life or public policy, so much as it was a "comfort zone" for
structure-desiring families.
Clark3
Idealist beliefs were established by those who felt as though they understood the
structure of society and its' functions. This vision called "utopian realism" was usually
a distorted reality that was based around existing fact and theory. This new concept
fathered the modernized co-housing based community know as the New Everyday Life. Unlike
the co-housing model, the NEL model was equipped with social and political agendas
towards the promotion of women's empowerment. It was generally assumed that all people
would benefit in this discreet structure, and that gender alliance was to be agreed on.
The NEL model advocated freeing women from the threat of violence, enhancing their
negotiation capabilities with men, wage employment, and social empowerment. The principle
of neighbors supervising the lives of those next to them, and becoming involved in
other's personal business became an issue of controversy among these communities. A
system of "virtual democracy" or "commonplaces" was formed to carry out NEL objectives
and make decisions in the community's best interests. The NEL was ultimately a very
modernized and advanced version of co-housing with a feminist agenda, and served the
community's needs as well. Modernized thought again took a social institution
(co-housing) and overturned its' traditional roles to expand and improve the quality of
life.
Ultimately, the two previous comparisons are legitimate examples of traditional role
change and the "re-definition" of social institutions as the modernization of concept and
thought occurs over time. Sociological research, economics, and other forces are
accountable for the bettering of social institutions, and for being capable of changing
existing traditions, even those with long-standing histories.