Comparing and contrasting week 5 and week 6 of Block 2, identify and discuss similarities and differences in the discussion of home and housing.
Home has different meanings to different people, it can be a house or a postcode, a city or a playground, a place, homeland or a person etc. the idea of home is familiar as well as novel from so many point of views, in some ways it is about housing both public, social and private as well as country, forms and lands. The home and housing are both, interesting setting that social changes and social divisions can be observed through theme of inequality. Moving home, changing jobs, living in poor or rich environment and the links of it with crime, distribution of chores between genders, occupation of …show more content…
There are many causes which divide and change societies over time, in both home and housing social change can be explained through the composition of households including family extension, the decision of bringing children and haw many, relationships, marriage and increase in separation. Other reasons to consider include life expectancy, luck of housing stock, debt levels, unaffordability of home and housing can also affect the changes in society. The structure of household and families changed over the generations which raises social concern for different reasons i.e. demand on housing, health services, child state benefit, social segregation and steadiness between working and the retired people. Table1.1 the number of single person household in 1949 was 5 percent while in 2013 it increased to 29 percent which shows more than a tripling in 64 years or Table 1.2 the number of two person in a household (all ages) was 22 percent in 1949 however in 2013 it increased to 35 percent. Moreover, sociology and social policy both approach inequality in the home and housing through social division such as class, gender and age which explain a big range of similarities between them. Technology also play major role and has direct relation to divisions of age, generation and gender equally in the home …show more content…
It can control many aspects in the social world, for example a rich family can provide better state of living for their children, ie education, accommodation, health etc. The Churchhill family of six own a big house which contain variety of rooms, the house provides separate bedside flat for each member of the family, they have designated area for family meetings and even a female cleaner is employed to do the house work. However, a poor family can barely fulfil the demands for their members, which creates division between the social groups. Shaw and McKay (1931, 1942). Explain the disparity between rich and poor residential places. Socially organised part of the town normally resides by settled and well of part of the society, whom generally own their homes. Because of this stability thy have social control over their environment, whereas socially disorganised part of the city has no control over the neighbourhood. Residence in these areas are generally poorer and transient and they only rely on housing through private rent or short-term tenancy. Shaw and McKay argued that the level of crime and lawbreaking in the poorer neighbourhood is likely to be more than other places in the society. (Debora H. Drake and Garner, S, 2015, p. 60 –
Home has different meanings to different people, it can be a house or a postcode, a city or a playground, a place, homeland or a person etc. the idea of home is familiar as well as novel from so many point of views, in some ways it is about housing both public, social and private as well as country, forms and lands. The home and housing are both, interesting setting that social changes and social divisions can be observed through theme of inequality. Moving home, changing jobs, living in poor or rich environment and the links of it with crime, distribution of chores between genders, occupation of …show more content…
There are many causes which divide and change societies over time, in both home and housing social change can be explained through the composition of households including family extension, the decision of bringing children and haw many, relationships, marriage and increase in separation. Other reasons to consider include life expectancy, luck of housing stock, debt levels, unaffordability of home and housing can also affect the changes in society. The structure of household and families changed over the generations which raises social concern for different reasons i.e. demand on housing, health services, child state benefit, social segregation and steadiness between working and the retired people. Table1.1 the number of single person household in 1949 was 5 percent while in 2013 it increased to 29 percent which shows more than a tripling in 64 years or Table 1.2 the number of two person in a household (all ages) was 22 percent in 1949 however in 2013 it increased to 35 percent. Moreover, sociology and social policy both approach inequality in the home and housing through social division such as class, gender and age which explain a big range of similarities between them. Technology also play major role and has direct relation to divisions of age, generation and gender equally in the home …show more content…
It can control many aspects in the social world, for example a rich family can provide better state of living for their children, ie education, accommodation, health etc. The Churchhill family of six own a big house which contain variety of rooms, the house provides separate bedside flat for each member of the family, they have designated area for family meetings and even a female cleaner is employed to do the house work. However, a poor family can barely fulfil the demands for their members, which creates division between the social groups. Shaw and McKay (1931, 1942). Explain the disparity between rich and poor residential places. Socially organised part of the town normally resides by settled and well of part of the society, whom generally own their homes. Because of this stability thy have social control over their environment, whereas socially disorganised part of the city has no control over the neighbourhood. Residence in these areas are generally poorer and transient and they only rely on housing through private rent or short-term tenancy. Shaw and McKay argued that the level of crime and lawbreaking in the poorer neighbourhood is likely to be more than other places in the society. (Debora H. Drake and Garner, S, 2015, p. 60 –