One of the arguments in support of the traditional nuclear family structure, and of the different adults in it having different roles, is based on the fact that it is an institution. So let’s delve into this argument.
The Argument
Think about a local businesses or community organization that exists near you that has several people working for it. Now, you wouldn’t expect everyone within that organization, that institution, to have the exact same job as everyone else who works there, would you? Chances are high, in fact, extremely high, that most people who work within that institution’s structure have a different role, and do something different within that organization.
You might have a secretary who’s good at writing letters and emails to customers or donors. You’ll have the IT person whose job it is to make the website, keep it maintained, and keep the database systems working properly. You’ll have the writer-editor, whose job it is to write newsletters, and keep customers or donors in the loop about the organization. You’ll have the marketing expert, who’s good at bringing more customers or donors in. You’ll have many other people who have other roles to play within the organization, and which allow it to be an effective and functional one.
I could make the argument that all of these people, even though they have different roles inside their organizations, are all equally needed. If you take away one or more of the roles that make the organization effective at what it does, it will still work, but not as well. In fact, you could get to the point where, because the organization doesn’t have all the vital roles filled, that the organization becomes dysfunctional, and can’t do its job well at all.
The same argument goes for the family. It may be a much smaller institution than a business or community organization, and have less people, but to assume that everyone in it must have the same role, or that having different roles makes the different people fulfilling those roles unequal, or that one member having a leadership position makes them superior to the other members, is just plain wrong. An organization works much better when each member in it contributes in the ways that they’re best at, and then, by working together, it allows all the different members to work together in a complimentary, if not a synergistic, way. If everyone had the exact same role, the benefit the institution got from the people in it would be limited – the effectiveness of that institution would be minimized, not maximized.
The best thing that the members of any organization or institution could do is to recognize each other’s unique differences, and then embrace and celebrate those differences. Let each member come to the table with their unique abilities, and use what they have to offer, together in a synergistic way. If, for example, in the family, one of the members is good at protecting, and keeping secure, the family, let him use his abilities for that. If, on the other hand, one member is good at nurturing and emotionally connecting with the others in their family, let her use her abilities for that. That doesn’t make one member of this family institution, the father or husband, superior to the other adult member of this two-adult institution, the mother or wife – both adults in this family structure are equal and contribute to the well-being of this institution, the family, using their own unique strengths.
Having a Head
And, there’s one more element you might not have thought of, but that we need to bring to the table, and that is the fact that these larger organizations, these institutions, almost always have leaders or heads, such as a business owner, or president, or CEO, or whatever you want to call that person that leads that organization.
What you’ll discover, if you look around, is that in effective business and community organizations, there’s effective leadership. And what does effective leadership do? It helps guide and direct the energies of all the different members of that organization towards a common purpose. Leadership helps make sure that everyone is working together towards a common purpose. If there wasn’t effective leadership, that organization would cease to be effective, even becoming dysfunctional.
From this standpoint, there’s nothing wrong with someone having a leadership position in an institution. In fact, if no one held that position, and did that role, the members of that organization would not very easily work together towards a common purpose – they might use their abilities in ways that are at odds with each other. This leader will also, if they’re doing their job right, talk to the other members of that organization and find out what they need to more effectively do their roles, and work to provide those solutions.
Remember, the purpose of the leader, in this case, is to serve the people he or she leads – if the leadership role is done right, it’s not about using and controlling the people under their leadership for his or her own selfish purposes; it’s about serving them by helping guide them so that they can more effectively work towards a common purpose, and to help the various members, with their various roles, to be who they truly are.
The same goes for the family. If, for example, in the traditional family, the man, the father, the husband, is the traditional head, or leader, of the family, his job is not to use his family, and take advantage of them, and abuse them, for his own selfish reasons and purposes, as is so often portrayed in many Hollywood movies (not so much so in Bollywood movies, thank God!), but his job is to help guide and direct the energies of the family towards a common purpose, which, if understood properly, is the well-being and benefit of all the members of the family. From this standpoint, all the members in the family unit are to look out for each other, and work towards each other’s benefit and well-being, and the whole point of the head of the household is to help better guide the family’s energies toward that common goal. The head is to stop one member from taking advantage of another member, and using them to his or her advantage, at the other member’s expense.
From this perspective, the man being the head of the family in the traditional family structure, if done right, doesn’t make him superior to the woman, his wife. He is equal to his wife, and the children, and is just “doing one of many roles” that are needed for the greater well-being and functionality of the traditional family structure.
You should notice, too, that the best leaders are not ones who arrogantly think they have all the answers, but who have enough common sense and humility to know that they don’t, and so they find “wise counsel,” and surround themselves with these people of intelligence and wisdom, in order to be a more effective leader. In the same way, in the traditional family structure, where a man might traditionally be called the “head” of the family, you’ll notice that, if they are wise, they will not arrogantly think they have all the answers, but will work with their wives, who they look at as “co-counsel.” In other words, one of the many roles for the wife, the mother, in the traditional family structure is to give good advice, and wise counsel, to her husband, who is seen as the head.
From this perspective, although the husband might be traditionally and officially seen as the “head,” the effect in real life is that both the husband and the wife are equals and work together to help lead the family. Those that attack the traditional family as patriarchal don’t seem to understand that, when the traditional family structure is operating properly, there’s nothing really patriarchal about it in the ways they incorrectly think there is.
Summary
So, in summary: having the man and woman in a traditional family do different roles from each other, based on each person’s unique abilities to contribute to the strength of the family, fits more within the lines of common sense, and the ability for that family to maximize their effectiveness. It works in larger institutions within society; it works in the institution of the family as well.
Having a head, a leader, to help guide the energies of the different roles towards a common goal, rather than working at odds with each other, does not make the head superior to the other members, but is just a role that benefits everyone, if done right.
These are my conclusions.
