Faculty of Health, Arts and Design

Unit Outline

SOC20003
Families, Relationships and Sexuality

Semester One 2018

PART A: Unit Summary

Unit Code(s) SOC20003

Unit Title Families, Relationships and Sexuality
Duration Semester One 2017
Three hours per week (Two-hour lectures and one-
Total Contact Hours
hour tutorials)
Requisites:
SOC10004 or SOC10005 or other sociology first year
Pre-requisites
unit of study.
Credit Points 12.5
Campus/Location Hawthorn campus
Mode of Delivery On campus
Class presentation and written paper (15%
+25%=40%)
Assessment Summary
Critical essay (45%)
One quiz, week 12 (15%)

Aims
The aim of this unit is to introduce students to various theoretical, cross-cultural, political
and policy viewpoints about families and relationships from a sociological perspective in
order to encourage their informed, critical engagement in the issues affecting
contemporary families.

Unit Learning Outcomes

Students who successfully complete this Unit should be able to:
1. Demonstrate an understanding of families and relationships as socially and
culturally variable institutions and sets of practices, in keeping with a sociological
perspective.
2. Interpret the main trends in family change and continuity in Australia and
overseas, in light of sociological theories and historical evidence.
3. Describe the manner in which social forces shape personal life in relation to
families and sexuality
4. Apply sociological concepts to their own experience of families
5. Demonstrate an ability to cooperate with and intellectually engage with peers in
discussion.

Content
 Theoretical perspectives on families and relationships
 Same-sex relationships and families
 Love, commitment and marriage
 Families and domestic/paid labour
 Parenting, children and childhood
 Divorce, separation and ‘reconstituted’ families

Key Generic Skills

 The graduate attributes which relate to this unit help to produce graduates who are:
 Capable in their chosen professional, vocational or study areas
 Entrepreneurial in contributing to innovation and development within their business,
workplace or community
 Effective and ethical in work and community situations
 Adaptable and able to manage change
 Aware of local and international environments in which they will be contributing (eg
socio-cultural, economic, natural)

SOC 20003_Outline_ 2018 Page 2 of 18

PART B: Your Unit in more detail
Unit Improvements
Feedback provided by previous students through the Student Survey has resulted in
improvements that have been made to this unit. Recent improvements include:
• Assessments have been streamlined and group project discontinued;
• The essay topic list has been expanded and directly aligned with lecture content
updates
• Quizzes introduced to lecture timeslot to free up more discussion time in tutorials.

Unit Teaching Staf

Name Role Room Email Consultation Times
Dr Peter Robinson Unit Convenor,AS 428 pbrobinson@swin.edu.au Friday afternoons:
lecturer, tutor e-mail for appointment
Dr Farnaz Zirakbash Tutor 400B 109 fzirakbash@swin.edu.au E-mail for appointment

Learning and Teaching Structure

Teaching Period
Activity Total Hours Hours per Week
Weeks
Lectures 24 hours 2 hours Weeks 1 to 11
Tutorials 12 hours 1 hour Weeks 1 to 11

Weekly Schedule
Week
Week Teaching and Learning Activity
Beginning
1 26 Feb Families and relationships: introductory concepts
Tutorial: introductions, key concepts, assessment discussion, sign up
for presentations
2 5 March Theoretical perspectives on families and relationships

3 12 March Cultural diversity in families and relationships

Guest lecturer
4 19 March Fertility, technology and family change

5 26 March Beyond Hetero-relationality

5 EASTER BREAK

6 9 April Love, commitment and marriage

7 16 April Parenting and children

8 23 April Families and labour

9 30 April Violence in families and intimate relationships

Guest lecturer
10 7 May Essay consultations

11 14 May Separation and Divorce

Essay due: 6 pm Friday 18 May
12 21 May QUIZ
No tutorials

SOC 20003_Outline_ 2018 Page 3 of 18

 Assessment
a) Assessment Overview
Tasks and Details Individual or Weighting Unit Learning Due Date
Group Outcomes assessment
task relates to
6 pm 18
Critical essay Individual 45% 1,2,3 May

Quiz Individual 15% 1,3,4,5 Week 12

Class presentation and 15% + 25%
written paper Individual =40% 1,2,3 Varies
b) Minimum requirements to pass this Unit
To pass this unit, you must achieve an overall mark for the unit of 50% or more
c) Submission Requirements
i. assignments must be submitted through the Blackboard assessment
submission system (Turnitin); please attach an Assessment Cover Sheet to
your assignment: copy available on Blackboard;
ii. please keep a copy of all assessments that you submit.

a) Extensions and Late Submission

Unless an extension has been approved by the unit convenor, you cannot submit an
assessment after the due date. If this does occur, you will be penalised 10% of the
assessment’s worth for each calendar day the task is late up to a maximum of five
days. After five days, a zero result will be recorded.
d) Referencing
To avoid plagiarism, you are required to provide a reference whenever you include
information from other sources in your work. Further details regarding plagiarism are
available in Section C of this document. Referencing conventions required for this
unit are Swinburne Harvard.
Helpful information on referencing can be found at
http://www.swinburne.edu.au/lib/studyhelp/harvard-quick-guide.pdf
Textbook
Lindsay, J. & Dempsey D. (2014) Families, Relationships and Intimate Life, 2nd edition,
Oxford University Press, Melbourne. You will find copies of the textbook for sale in the
Swinburne University Co-Operative Bookshop.
Hard-back copies are on reserve in the Swinburne Library which has e-copies as well.
This text contains a good reference list of sources (most of which are available in the
Swinburne library) which will help you research your assignments.
Recommended Reading Materials
The Library has a large collection of resource materials, both texts and current journals.
Listed below are some references that will provide valuable supplementary information to
this unit. It is also recommended that you explore other sources to broaden your
understanding.
The following journals contain articles about families and personal life that are consistent
with a sociological perspective:
Australian Journal of Social Issues (Australian + social policy articles)
Journal of Sociology (mostly Australian content)
Current Sociology
Men and Masculinities (other disciplines + sociology)
Sociology
Sociology Compass
Sociological Review
Sexualities (mostly sociology + other disciplines, good for sexualities & families)
Journal of Family Issues (other disciplines + sociology)
Journal of Family Studies (other disciplines + sociology, good for Australian
content)
The American Journal of Sociology

SOC 20003_Outline_ 2018 Page 4 of 18

PART C: FURTHER INFORMATION

Swinburne’s Current Students web page

http://www.swinburne.edu.au/student/.

Student Charter
Please familiarise yourself with Swinburne’s Student Charter. The charter describes what students
can reasonably expect from Swinburne in order to enjoy a quality learning experience. As students
contribute to their own learning experience to that of their fellow students, the charter also defines
the University's expectations of students.

Student behaviour and wellbeing

Swinburne has a range of policies and procedures that govern how students are expected to
conduct themselves throughout the course of their relationship with the University. These include
policies on expected standards of behaviour and conduct which cover interaction with fellow
students, staff and the wider University community, in addition to following the health and safety
requirements in the course of their studies and whilst using University facilities.
All students are expected to familiarise themselves with University regulations, policies and
procedures and have an obligation to abide by the expected guidelines. Any student found to be in
breach may be subject to relevant disciplinary processes. Some examples of relevant expected
behaviours are:
 Not engaging in student misconduct
 Ensuring compliance with the University’s Anti-Discrimination, Bullying and Violence and
Sexual Harassment requirements
In teaching areas, it is expected that students conduct themselves in a manner that is professional
and not disruptive to others. In all Swinburne laboratories, there are specific safety procedures
which must be followed, such as wearing appropriate footwear and safety equipment, not acting in
a manner which is dangerous or disruptive (e.g. playing computer games), and not bringing in food
or drink.

Blackboard
You should regularly access the Swinburne Course Management System (Blackboard) available via
http://ilearn.swin.edu.au.

Communication
All communication will be via your Swinburne email address. If you access your email through a
provider other than Swinburne, then it is your responsibility to ensure that your Swinburne email is
redirected to your private email address.

Plagiarism
Plagiarism is the action or practice of taking and submitting or presenting the thoughts, writings or
other work of someone else as though it is your own work. Plagiarism includes any of the following,
without full and appropriate acknowledgment to the original source(s):
 The use of the whole or part of a computer program written by another person;
 the use, in essays or other assessable work, of the whole or part of a written work from any
source including but not limited to a book, journal, newspaper article, set of lecture notes,
current or past student’s work, any other person’s work, a website or database;
 The paraphrasing of another’s work;
Plagiarism also includes the preparation or production and submission or presentation of
assignments or other work in conjunction with another person or other people when that work
should be your own independent work. This remains plagiarism whether or not it is with the
knowledge or consent of the other person or people. It should be noted that Swinburne encourages
its students to talk to staff, fellow students and other people who may be able to contribute to a
student’s academic work but that where independent assignment is required, submitted or
presented work must be the student’s own.
Enabling plagiarism contributes to plagiarism and therefore will be treated as a form of plagiarism
by the University. Enabling plagiarism means allowing or otherwise assisting another student to
copy or otherwise plagiarise work by, for example, allowing access to a draft or completed
assignment or other work.

SOC 20003_Outline_ 2018 Page 5 of 18

Swinburne University uses plagiarism detection software (such as Turnitin) for assignments
submitted electronically via Blackboard. Your Convenor will provide further details.
The penalties for plagiarism can be severe ranging from a zero grade for an assessment task
through to expulsion from the unit and in the extreme, exclusion from Swinburne. Consequently
you need to avoid plagiarism by providing a reference whenever you include information from
other sources in your work.

Student support
You should talk to your Unit Convenor or Student Services, for information on academic support
services available for Swinburne students.

Special consideration
If your studies have been adversely affected due to serious and unavoidable circumstances outside
of your control (e.g. severe illness or unavoidable obligation) you may be able to apply for special
consideration (SPC). Applications for Special Consideration will be submitted via the SPC online tool
normally no later than 5.00pm on the third working day after the submission/sitting date for the
relevant assessment.

Special needs
Sometimes students with a disability, a mental health or medical condition or significant carer
responsibilities require reasonable adjustments to enable full access to and participation in
education. Your special needs can be addressed by Swinburne's Disability Services, who can
negotiate and distribute an 'Education Access Plan' that outlines recommendations for university
teaching and examination staff. You must notify the University Disability Liaison Officer of your
disability or condition within one week after the commencement of a unit of study to allow the
University to make reasonable adjustments.

Review of marks
An independent marker reviews all fail grades for major assessment tasks. In addition, a review of
assessment is undertaken if your final result is between 45 and 49 or within 2 marks of any grade
threshold. If you are not satisfied with the result of an assessment you can ask the Unit Convenor
to review the result. Your request must be made in writing within 10 working days of receiving the
result. The Unit Convenor will review your result to determine if your result is appropriate. If you
are dissatisfied with the outcomes of the review you can lodge a formal complaint.

Feedback, complaints and suggestions

In the first instance you may discuss any issues with your Unit Convenor. If you are dissatisfied with
the outcome of the discussions with the Unit Convenor or would prefer not to deal with your Unit
Convenor, then you can complete a feedback form.

Advocacy
You are advised to seek advice from the staff at the Swinburne Student Amenities Association
(SSAA) if you require assistance with any academic issues.

SOC 20003_Outline_ 2018 Page 6 of 18

WEEK 1: ‘Families’, ‘relationships’ and ‘personal life’: an
introduction
This week introduces the main themes of the course and the course requirements. This
includes a discussion of important introductory concepts in the study of families and
relationships. There are tutorials in Week 1 and it is important to attend.
In the first tutorial, we will get to know each other, focus on organisational issues with the
course and assessment, choose topics for class presentations, then briefly discuss the
meaning of the often taken-for-granted terms ‘family’, ‘personal life’, ‘friends’ and
‘relationships’.
Essential Reading
Lindsay, J. and Dempsey D. (2014) Families, Relationships and Intimate Life, Oxford
University Press, Melbourne, Chapter One.
Further Reading
Edwards, R., Ribbens McCarthy, J. and Gillies, V. (2012) ‘The politics of concepts: family
and its (putative) replacements’, British Journal of Sociology, 63, 4, 730-746.
Gilding, M. (2010) ‘Reflexivity over and above convention: the new orthodoxy in the
sociology of personal life, formerly sociology of the family’, The British Journal of
Sociology, vol. 61, no.6, pp. 757-777.
Ribbens McCarthy, J. (2012) ‘The powerful relational language of ‘family’: togetherness,
belonging and personhood, The Sociological Review, vol. 60, no. 1, pp. 68-90.
Smart, C. (2007) Personal life: New directions in sociological thinking, Polity, Cambridge,
Chapter One.
Tutorial questions
1. What is a family? What is a relationship? What is a friend? How is a friend different
from a relative?
2. What are the differences between ‘personal life’ and ‘family’ if we think about what is
and isn’t included by these terms?
3. What does family mean to you? How significant for you are family relationships as
opposed to other kinds of relationships, at this point in your life?

WEEK 2: Theoretical perspectives on relationships and

families
This week’s lecture will consider some of the theoretical perspectives and theorists that
have been or are influential in the sociology of families and relationships, along with how
their work has been applied to the study of families and relationships. Broad theoretical
perspectives include functionalism, feminism and individualization. We also explore some
very recent social theory that has developed in response to changing family structures
and practices, namely, Beck and Beck-Gernsheim’s work on ‘world families’.
Essential reading
Lindsay, J. and Dempsey D. (2014) Families, Relationships and Intimate Life, Oxford
University Press, Melbourne, Chapter Four.
Beck, U. and Beck-Gernsheim, E. (2014) Distant Love, Polity, Cambridge UK and Malden
US, Chapter one, ‘Globalization of Love and Intimacy’: The rise of World Families, pp. 4-
19.
Further reading
Baker, M (2001) Families, Labour and Love, Allen & Unwin, Sydney. Chapter 4.
Beck-Gernsheim, E. (2002) Reinventing the family: in search of new lifestyles, Polity
Press, Massachusetts.

SOC 20003_Outline_ 2018 Page 7 of 18

Brannen, J.& Nilsen, A. (2005) ‘Individualization, choice and structure: a discussion of
current trends in sociological analysis’, The Sociological Review, Vol. 53, No. 3, pp. 412–
428.
Kinnear, P. (2002) New families for Changing Times, The Australia Institute, Discussion
paper 47, pp. 22-28.
Roseneil, S. and Budgeon, S. (2004) ‘Cultures of Intimacy and Care beyond ‘The Family’:
Personal Life and Social Change in the early 21st Century, Current Sociology, Vol. 52, No.
2, pp. 135-159.
Tutorial questions
1. What do Beck and Beck-Gernsheim mean by ‘world families’? What kinds of social
changes have brought about the need for their new social theory about families?
2. Why is it important to study theories about family and relationships, as well as
looking at statistical trends?
3. Is feminist theory still relevant to the study of families?
4. What is ‘individualization’? How is it connected to family change?
5. What are some of the main criticisms of individualization? Do you agree?

WEEK 3: Cultural diversity in families and relationships

The significance, meaning and form families take may differ according to ethnicity, the
experience of colonisation by Indigenous Australians, the migration experience, and
socio-economic status. This week we consider cultural diversity in families emphasising
the complexity of the concept ‘culture’. Building on the discussion last week of the rise of
‘world families’, we also consider how transnational families conduct their family lives
using various media technologies to connect across distances.
Essential Reading
Lindsay, J. and Dempsey D. (2014) Families, Relationships and Intimate Life, Oxford
University Press, Melbourne, Chapter Three.
Madianou, M. and Miller, D. (2011) Migration and New Media: Transnational Families and
Polymedia, Introduction and Chapter 5: ‘The Mother’s Perspective’.
Further reading
Babidge, S. (2010) Aboriginal Family and the State, Ashgate Publishing, Surrey, Chapter 4
or Chapter 9 (e-book)
Baldassar, L. (2008) ‘Debating culture across distance: transnational families and the obligation
to care’, in Grillo, R.D. (ed.) Family in Question: Immigrant and Ethnic Minorities in
Multicultural Europe, Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam, Chapter 12.
Baldassar, L., Baldock, C. and Wilding, R. (2006) Families Caring Across Borders:
Migration, Ageing and Transnational Caregiving, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.
Bourke, E & Bourke C (1995), Ch. 3 ‘Aboriginal families in Australia’ in Hartley R (ed)
Families and cultural diversity in Australia, Allen & Unwin in association with the
Australian Institute of Family Studies.
Haebich, A. (2009) Broken Circles: Fragmenting Indigenous families 1800-2000,
Fremantle Arts Centre Press, Fremantle.
Hartley, R. (1995), Families and cultural diversity in Australia, Allen & Unwin, Sydney.
Kang, T. (2012) ‘Gendered media, changing intimacy: internet-mediated transnational
communication in the family sphere’ Media, Culture and Society, 34 (2): 146-61.
Pallotta-Chiarolli, M. & Skrbis, Z. (1994), ‘Authority, compliance and rebellion in second
generation cultural minorities’, Journal of Sociology, Vol. 30, No. 3, pp. 259-272.
Quah, S. (2008) Families in Asia: Home and kin (second edition) Routledge, London and
New York.
Renzaho, AMN, McCabe, M and Sainsbury, WJ (2011) Parenting, role reversals and the
preservation of cultural values among Arabic-speaking migrant families in

SOC 20003_Outline_ 2018 Page 8 of 18

 Melbourne, Australia, International Journal of Intercultural Relations, vol. 35, pp.
416-424.
Tutorial Questions
1. What are transnational families? How have communication technologies
influenced the maintenance of transnational family relationships?
2. What are the main consequences for indigenous Australian families of Stolen
Generation policies and practices?
3. How do families cross-culturally differ from the ‘Anglo’ nuclear family conventions
many take for granted in Australia? Discuss in relation to indigenous Australian
families or a migrant family group of your choice.
4. What is social class? What are some of the ways in which class influences
expectations and experiences in families?

WEEK 4: Fertility, technology and family change

The 1960s and 1970s ushered in considerable technological change which enabled
unprecedented control over the relationship between sexuality and having children.
Throughout the 1970s, debates focused on access to contraception and abortion. From
the 1980s onward, new reproductive technologies, infertility, paternity testing and the
falling fertility rate took centre stage, although abortion remains a current and
controversial issue.
This week considers the relationship between technology, sexuality and reproduction and
changing fertility patterns. Contemporary fertility issues such as who may access
assisted reproductive technology and the growing phenomenon of ‘reproductive tourism’
or ‘cross-border reproductive care’ are covered as part of this discussion, as well as the
recent renewed focus in Australia on the abortion debate.
Essential reading
Lindsay, J. and Dempsey D. (2014) Families, Relationships and Intimate Life, Oxford
University Press, Melbourne, Chapter eight.
Reich, J.A. (2007) ‘Not Ready to Fill his Father’s Shoes: A Masculinist Discourse on
Abortion’, Men and Masculinities, Vol.9, No. 4, pp. 1-19.
Further reading
Becker, G. (2005) ‘Resemblance Talk: A Challenge for Parents whose Children were
Conceived with Donor Gametes in the US’, Social Science & Medicine, Vol. 61, No.
6, pp. 1300-1309.
Cannold, L. (2005), What, No Baby? Curtin University books, Fremantle, Chapter 5.
Donovan, C. (2000), ‘Who needs a father? Negotiating biological fatherhood in British
lesbian families using self-insemination, Sexualities, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 149-164.
Hertz, R. and Ferguson, I. T. (1997), ‘Kinship strategies and self-sufficiency among single
mothers by choice: post-modern family ties’, Qualitative Sociology Vol. 20, no. 2, pp.
187-209.
Inhorn, M. C. (2012). The new Arab man: emergent masculinities, technologies, and Islam
in the Middle East. Princeton University Press.
Ireni-Saban, L. (2013). Give Me Children or Else I Die: The Politics and Policy of Cross-
Border Reproductive Care. Politics & Policy, 41(1), 5-38.
Tutorial questions
1. What is technological determinism? What would be a technologically determinist
explanation for fertility rates and is this plausible?
2. What is ‘cross border reproductive care’? How is it transforming family formation
and what are some of the potential consequences of this?
3. Should the principle that children have a ‘right-to-know’ their biological origins
underpin social policy on assisted reproduction?

SOC 20003_Outline_ 2018 Page 9 of 18

 4. Why does Cannold (2001) claim that the issue of whether or not abortion kills
does not help us solve whether or not it should be allowed? Do you think abortion
should be every woman’s personal choice? Or should the biological father and/or
society have a say?

WEEK 5: Beyond Hetero-relationality

Various thinkers have critiqued the underlying assumptions from dominant ideas of
romantic, familial and sexual relationships and proposed alternative ways of thinking. As
well as a brief consideration of same-sex relationships and families and the extent to
which they continue and/or challenge these dominant norms, this lecture looks at
broader critiques of dominant norms and explores the concepts ‘families of choice’ and
‘heteronormativity’ including considering asexuality, non-monogamies and other
alternative sexualities, relationships and family models. We also consider the underlying
assumptions about relatedness and the ethics that underpin different relationship ideals
and notions of care and intimacy.
Essential Reading
Lindsay, J. and Dempsey D. (2014) Families, Relationships and Intimate Life, Oxford
University Press, Melbourne, Chapter Seven.
Robinson, P. (2008) The Changing World of Gay Men, Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave
Macmillan, pp. 134-152.
Further Reading
Barker, M & Langridge, D. (2010), ‘Whatever happened to non-monogamies? Critical
reflections on recent research and theory’, Sexualities,
Friedman, M. (1993), What are Friends For?: Feminist Perspectives on Personal
Relationships and Moral Theory, Cornell University Press.
Hopkins, J.J., Sorenson, A. and Taylor, V. (2013) Same-sex couples, families and marriage:
embracing and resisting heteronormativity, Sociology Compass, vol. 7, No. 2, pp.
97-110.
Scherrer, K (2008), ‘Coming to an Asexual Identity: Negotiating Identity, Negotiating
Desire’, Sexualities, 11(5)
Stacey, J. (2004), ‘Cruising to family land: gay hypergamy and rainbow kinship’, Current
Sociology, vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 181-197.
Stelboum, J. (1999), ‘Patriarchal Monogamy’, Journal of Lesbian Studies, 3(2), pp.39-46.
Weeks, Heaphy and Donovan (2001) Same sex intimacies: families of choice and other
life experiments, Routledge, London.
Weston, K. (1991) Families We Choose: Lesbians, gays, kinship, Columbia University
Press, New York.
Tutorial Questions
1. Language constructs as well as describes our intimate and family relationships.
‘Non-heterosexual’ is the term used by Weeks, Heaphy and Donovan to describe
the participants in their study. Discuss the strengths and weaknesses of these and
other possibilities you know about to describe those who live their lives beyond
heterosexuality.
2. What is heteronormativity? How are people in same-sex relationships ‘both
resisting and embracing’ heteronormativity?
3. According to Stelboum (1999, above), what are the origins of monogamy, and is
monogamy still relevant to contemporary society?

EASTER BREAK

SOC 20003_Outline_ 2018 Page 10 of 18

WEEK 6: Love, commitment and marriage
Contemporary Western couple relationships are underpinned by an ethos of love and
intimacy. Marriage is presumed to be the outcome of romantic love, although that is
certainly not the case in cultural settings that favour arranged marriages. This week we
consider some of the ways in which sociologists think about love and ‘coupling up’. We
will look at patterns of partnering, marriage and commitment beyond marriage in
Australia and abroad, and some of the legal frameworks and controversies. We also
familiarise ourselves with Giddens’ notion of the ‘pure relationship’ and consider the
implications and strengths of this concept vis a vis the evidence about commitment
gleaned from social research.
Essential Reading
Lindsay, J. and Dempsey D. (2014) Families, Relationships and Intimate Life, Oxford
University Press, Melbourne, Chapter six.
Robinson, P. (2013) Gay Men’s Relationships Across the Life Course, Basingstoke and New
York: Palgrave Macmillan, chap. 5.
Further Reading

Bowman, J. L., & Dollahite, D. C. (2013). "Why Would Such a Person Dream About
Heaven?" Family, Faith, and Happiness in Arranged Marriages in India. Journal Of
Comparative Family Studies, 44(2), 207-225.
Cherlin, A.J. (2004) ‘The de-institutionalization of American marriage’ Journal of Marriage
and Family, Vol. 66, pp. 848-861.
Donovan, C. (2004) ‘Why reach for the moon? Because the stars aren’t enough’
Feminism & Psychology Vol 14. No.1, pp. 24-29. (the case against same-sex
marriage, written by a lesbian sociologist)
Epstein, R., Pandit, M., & Thakar, M. (2013). How Love Emerges in Arranged Marriages:
Two Cross-Cultural Studies. Journal Of Comparative Family Studies, 44(3), 341-360.
Giddens, A. (1992), The transformation of intimacy: sexuality, love and eroticism in
modern societies, Stanford University Press, Stanford, Chapter 4 ‘Love,
commitment and the pure relationship.’
Shulman, Julie. L., Gabrielle Gotta, and Robert-Jay Green. (2012) ‘Will Marriage Matter?
Effects of Marriage Anticipated by Same-Sex Couples’, Journal of Family Issues 33
(2): 158-181.
Tutorial questions
1. What have been the most dramatic changes in marriage, divorce and partnership
formation in Australia in the past 50 or so years?
2. What does Giddens mean by the ‘pure relationship’?
3. Is romantic love the best basis for marriage? Discuss the different assumptions about
love underpinning arranged marriages as opposed to the ‘love’ marriages we tend to
take for granted in Australia.
4. Some same-sex attracted people are not in favour of marriage despite the fact that
gay community activism in support of same-sex marriages has increased throughout
the Western world. Why might this be so?

SOC 20003_Outline_ 2018 Page 11 of 18

WEEK 7: Parenting and children
Despite delayed fertility and a low fertility rate in Australia and other Western countries,
many men and women continue to have children and very much look forward to
becoming parents. At the same time, parenting continues to be a gendered phenomenon,
and mothers continue to take far more day-to-day responsibility than fathers for the
‘hands-on’ care of young children. The transition to parenthood is often a time in which
great disparity can be observed between men’s and women’s paid work/family
responsibilities. This week we look at the contemporary meaning of having children,
changing notions of childhood and key debates about parenting, motherhood and
fatherhood. We take a sociological perspective on childhood, in comparing assumptions
and experiences of children in historical and cross-cultural perspective. We explore the
changing value and meaning of children in consumer society, the debate about
sexualisation, and changing assumptions about what constitutes ‘good parenting’.
Essential Reading
Lindsay, J. and Dempsey D. (2014) Families, Relationships and Intimate Life, Oxford
University Press, Melbourne, Chapter nine. And
Robinson, P. (2013) Gay Men’s Relationships Across the Life Course, Basingstoke and New
York, chap. 4.
Further reading
Beck, U. & Beck-Gernsheim, E. (1995) The Normal Chaos of Love, Polity Press,
Cambridge, Chapter 4 ‘All for the love of a child’.
Craig (2006) ‘Does Father Care mean Fathers Share’? A Comparison of How Mothers and
Fathers in Intact Families Spend Time with Children’, Gender & Society, Vol. 20, No. 2,
pp. 259-281.
Lupton, D. & Barclay, L. (1997) Constructing Fatherhood: Discourses and Experiences,
Sage, London, Chapter 4.
Maher, J.M. & Saugeres, L. (2007) ‘To be or not to be a mother: Women negotiating
cultural representations of mothering, Journal of Sociology, Vol 43, No. 1, pp.5-21.’
Miller, T. (2011) ‘Falling back into gender? Men’s narratives and practices around first-
time fatherhood’, Sociology, Vol. 45 (6): 1094-1109.
Stacey, J & Biblarz, T.J. (2001), '(How) does the sexual orientation of parents matter?'
American Sociological Review, 66, (2): 159-83.
Wyness (2013) ‘Global standards and deficit childhoods: The contested meaning of
children's participation’, Children's Geographies, 11:3, 340-353,
Tutorial questions
1.Why do so many fathers continue to take less ‘hands-on’ responsibilities for
childrearing than mothers? In contrast, why do so many mothers continue to take up
responsibility for childrearing in intensive ways? If these are concerns, what might be
some solutions?
2.How might the contemporary construction of parenting support and/or constrain gay,
lesbian, bisexual, transgender, or intersex parents? In what ways could this affect
experiences inside and outside their home for children and young people in these
families?
3.What does it mean to say childhood is socially constructed? What do you think are the
important issues affecting the rights of Australian children today compared with children
growing up in non-Western contexts?

SOC 20003_Outline_ 2018 Page 12 of 18

WEEK 8: Families and labour
This week we look at women’s and men’s experiences of paid and unpaid work in
Australia and abroad, with a focus on how gender and sexuality influence divisions of
labour within families and households. Share households and same-sex relationships are
considered in this discussion. The key concepts ‘doing gender’ and ‘emotion work’ are
elaborated.
Essential Reading
Lindsay, J. and Dempsey D. (2014) Families, Relationships and Intimate Life, Oxford
University Press, Melbourne, Chapter ten.
Robinson, P. (2017) Gay Men’s Working Lives, Retirement and Old Age, Basingstoke and
New York, chap. 3.

Further Reading
Baxter, J. (2002) ‘Patterns of change and stability in the gender division of household
labour in Australia, 1986-1997’, Journal of Sociology 38(4): 339-424.
Bittman, M., England, P., Folbre, N., Sayer, L., and Matheson, G. (2003) ‘When Does
Gender Trump Money? Bargaining and Time in Household Work’, American Journal of
Sociology, Vol. 109, No. 1., pp. 186-214.
Bowman, D. (2007) ‘Men’s Business: Negotiating Entrepreneurial Business and Family
Life’, Journal of Sociology, Vol. 43, No. 4, pp. 385-400.
Carter, M. (2003), ‘It’s easier just to do it all myself’: Emotion work and domestic
labour, paper presented at the 2003 TASA conference, University of New England,
4-6 December.
Connell, R.W. (2005), ‘A really good husband’: work/life balance, gender equity and social
change, Australian Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 40, No. 3, pp. 369-383.
Hochschild, Arlie (2003/1983) The Managed Heart: Commercialization of Human Feeling,
Berkeley: University of California Press.
McMahon, A. (1999) Taking Care of Men: Sexual Politics in the Public Mind, Cambridge,
Melbourne.
Natalier, K. (2001) ‘I’m not his wife’: doing gender and doing housework in the absence of
women, Journal of Sociology, 39 (3): 253-269.
Tutorial Questions
1. How men and women engage with paid and unpaid work is often characterised in
terms 'choice' or 'preference'. What are some factors that influence the choices we
make about divisions of paid and household labour and do you think we have
achieved gender equality in this area of family life ?
2. Describe the three main theories provided in Lindsay and Dempsey (2009) about
the persistence of gender differences in domestic and paid and labour. Which do you
find more persuasive and why?
3. What is ‘emotion work’ (Hochschild’s concept)? How useful is it in explaining
gender disparity in domestic labour?

WEEK 9: Violence and abuse in families and intimate

relationships
Poor quality and harmful relationships are also a fact of contemporary family and
intimate life. This week we consider how violence in family and intimate relationships is
experienced and understood in very different ways in sociological, feminist and
psychological perspectives. We will identify important differences in assumptions and the
legal and cultural frameworks in which these occur. Women and children experiencing
family violence are often threatened with homelessness as a consequence, which is the
topic of Angela Spinney’s research.
Essential Reading

SOC 20003_Outline_ 2018 Page 13 of 18

Lindsay, J. and Dempsey D. (2014) Families, Relationships and Intimate Life, Oxford
University Press, Melbourne, Chapter twelve
Spinney, A and Zirakbash, F (2017) First to know, first to act: Assisting universal
community service providers to identify and respond appropriately to family
violence, Melbourne: Wesley Mission Victoria and Swinburne University of
Technology.
Further Reading
Cavanagh, K. (2003) ‘Understanding Women’s Responses to Domestic Violence’,
Qualitative Social Work, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 229-249.
Flood, M. (2006) ‘Violence Against Women and Men in Australia: What the Personal Safety
Survey can and can’t tell us’, DVIRC newsletter, No. 4, Summer, pp. 3-10.
Kimmel, M. (2002), ‘Gender symmetry in domestic violence: a substantive and
methodological research review’, Violence Against Women, Vol. 8, No. 11, pp.
1332-1363.
Phillips, R. (2006) Undoing an activist response: feminism and the Australian
Government’s domestic violence policy, Critical Social Policy, Vol. 26, No. 1, pp.
192-219.
Ristock, J. L., (2002), No more secrets: Violence in lesbian relationships, Routledge,
London.
Rothenberg, B. (2002), ‘The success of the battered woman syndrome: an analysis of how
cultural arguments succeed’, Sociological Forum, Vol. 17, No. 1, pp.81-103.
Smith, C. (1999), ‘Violence within relationships: what young people have to say’, Youth
Studies Australia, Vol. 18, No. 3, pp. 18-24.
Totten, M. (2003), ‘Girlfriend abuse as a form of masculinity construction among violent,
marginal male youth’, Men and Masculinities, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 70-92.
Tutorial Questions
1. What is ‘hegemonic masculinity’? How useful is this concept in explaining violence
in the home?
2. What are some of the social as opposed to psychological factors that influence
why women stay in abusive relationships?
3. What is the ‘gender symmetry’ thesis regarding violence in intimate relationships?
Evaluate the arguments for and against this viewpoint.
4. Husband and male partner abuse by women is given much less attention in the
literature than violence by men towards their girlfriends, wives and children. Is
this fair? How can we explain the disparity?

WEEK 10: Essay consultations: no classes

If you want to discuss your essay plan with your tutor, please make an appointment by e-
mail to see her/him.

Tutors do not read drafts but will discuss essay plans.

Essay consultation works best if students come prepared and read out (a) the question
you want to answer, (b) the readings you have consulted and the main ideas/arguments
you got from them, (c) the structure you propose to follow when writing, and then, (d)
any help you need.

SOC 20003_Outline_ 2018 Page 14 of 18

WEEK 11: Divorce and separation
This week we consider the implications of divorce and separation for the experience of
family relationships. A key question is whether the ‘divorce-extended family’ offers more
or less support for children, and under what circumstances. The rise of the Fathers’
Rights Movement is considered as part of the discussion.
Essential Reading
Lindsay, J. and Dempsey D. (2014) Families, Relationships and Intimate Life, Oxford
University Press, Melbourne, Chapter eleven.
Amato, P. R., Kane, J. B., & James, S. (2011). Reconsidering the “Good Divorce”. Family
Relations, 60(5), 511-524
Further Reading
Baker, M (2001) Families, Labour and Love, Allen and Unwin, Sydney. Chapter 8.
De Vaus, D. and Gray, M. (2005) ‘Family transitions among Australia’s children’, Family
Matters, No. 63, pp. 10-17.
Flood, M. (2004) ‘Backlash: Angry Men’s Movements’ in Rossi, S. E. (ed.) The Battle and
Backlash Rage On: Why Feminism Cannot be Obsolete, Xlibris, New York.
Furstenberg, F. and Keirnan, K. (2001) ‘Delayed Parental Divorce: How much do children
benefit? Journal of Marriage and the Family, Vol. 63, May, pp. 446-457.
Gartrell, N., Bos, H., Peyser, H., Deck, A., & Rodas, C. (2011). Family Characteristics,
Custody Arrangements, and Adolescent Psychological Well-being After Lesbian
Mothers Break Up. Family Relations, 60(5), 572-585.
Kinnear, P. (2002) New families for Changing Times, The Australia Institute, Canberra,
Chapter 4 ‘Living in new families’. (good for parenting post-divorce)
Ribbens McCarthy, J., Edwards, R. and Gillies, V. (2000) ‘Moral Tales of the Child and the
Adult: Narratives of Contemporary Family Lives under Changing Circumstances’,
Sociology, Vol. 34, No. 4, pp. 785-803.
Smyth, B. Caruana, C. & Ferro, (2005) ‘Father-child contact after separation: profiling five
different patterns of care’, Family Matters, Vol. 67, pp. 20-27.
Tutorial Questions
1. Do you agree couples should stay together ‘for the sake of the children’, and, if
so, under what circumstances? What is the research evidence?
2. Can there be such a thing as a ‘good’ divorce?
3. Why do you think women are more likely to initiate divorce than men?
4. How is the high divorce rate related to the emergence of the international Fathers’
Rights Movements?

WEEK 12
End of semester quiz 10.30 am in lecture theatre.
No tutorials this week.

SOC 20003_Outline_ 2018 Page 15 of 18

MORE ABOUT THE ASSESSMENT

(1) Quiz (15%)

The quiz will test your cumulative knowledge of the unit and will take place of the lecture
in Week 12. Half an hour will be allocated to it. There will be a combination of multiple
choice and short-answer questions in the quiz which is worth 15 marks.
A note on tutorial participation and attendance: Although there is no formal mark
awarded for attendance or overall performance in tutorial discussions, students who are
on borderline grades at the end of semester will have their tutorial attendance and
performance record taken into account in deciding whether to promote them to the
higher grade. For example, if your overall semester mark adds up to 69C, you may be
promoted to 70D if you have an excellent tutorial attendance and participation record.
Your tutor will make this decision.

(2) Class presentation and written paper (15% + 25% = 40%)

Doing the class presentation
Objectives:
Develop an interesting and informative presentation, based on your textbook
material and library research;
Demonstrate that you can apply a sociological perspective and argument to
your reading about families and relationships;
Practise communicating your ideas effectively to an audience;

In one week of the semester, you will give a presentation to your tutorial group
based on one of the tutorial questions for the week. Presentations should be no
longer than 5 minutes. A sign-up sheet for presentations will be circulated at
the first tutorial. And presentations will begin in Week 02.

Pay particular attention to the following in developing your presentation:

1. Use your imagination: The presentations are opportunities for us to
interact with and learn from each other’s research and life experiences.
2. Research your presentation. The presentation must be based on
library research, in addition to the information available in your textbook. Use
your textbook and this unit outline to find a selection of suitable references (6
minimum) or do a key word search in one of the on-line databases in the library.
3. Use visual aids to enhance the clarity of your communication:
make PowerPoint or overhead transparencies or handouts/objects for the class to
look at, to make it easier for them to follow what is being said.
4. Make it interesting with an anecdote or artefact: You might like to
contribute anecdotes or artefacts from your own family history but only if you feel
comfortable to do so. It should always be explained how the anecdote/artefact is
relevant to the question and the broader presentation.
5. Have a clear introduction and argument: Outline your question and
argument clearly. Also explain near the beginning of your presentation what
argument you are making about the topic.
6. Focus on two or three main points only to make the most of the
time you have.
7. Use at least one of the key concepts in the textbook in
developing your presentation content and argument. Make sure you
explain these concepts well in the presentation itself.
8. Finish of well: Summarise key points or emphasise your strongest
point.

Your mark out of 15 for the oral presentation will be posted on BB before the end of the
week.
Criteria for marking oral presentations:
1. Organisation (intro & conclusion);
2. Abilitiy to convey information effectively;
3. Argument.

SOC 20003_Outline_ 2018 Page 16 of 18

 Writing the individual paper
The week after the presentation, please submit a written paper of 1000 words
based on the oral presentation. Your paper will be marked out of 25. Comments and
mark will be available on BB no earlier than two weeks after submitting it on Turnitin.
Marking criteria for the written paper are on the last page of this unit outline.

Objectives:
To illustrate what you have learned through the presentation process.
To demonstrate that you have conducted some research on the topic.
To discuss the issues in greater depth than can be achieved in a short
presentation.
Pay attention to the following in your written paper:
 Include an introduction that outlines your question and argument
 Make sure all your paragraphs link together in a logical fashion and are relevant to
your argument.
 Include a conclusion that summarises main points and ends on a strong note.
 Reference list formatted according to Swinburne Harvard style. You should include
at least six references. This can include one newspaper or magazine article and
one of the text book chapters.

(3) Critical essay (45%)

This essay takes the place of an exam. You must organise your essay around an
argument about the topic, and make use of relevant readings, concepts and theories
introduced in the course to explore the question. The marking criteria for the essay are
on the back page of this outline.
Word limit: 2000 words (+/- 10%)
You must attach a signed cover sheet to your work
You must supply in-text citations and a reference list (8-12 references, as a
guide. Start with the relevant essential and further readings and expand from the
references cited in these works or your textbook.)
Your topic must not overlap with or duplicate work completed for the class
presentation and written paper. Check with your tutor if unsure.

Choose one of the following essay topics:

1. ‘You can choose your friends but not your relatives’. How accurately does this saying
reflect contemporary family or personal life? You may focus exclusively on same-sex
relationships and families if you want to.

2. What are the main social challenges transnational families face in maintaining family
relationships? You may focus on nuclear families separated by the need for mothers
or fathers to work abroad, or extended families in which different generations are
separated by migration.

3. How have assisted reproductive technologies such as donor insemination, surrogacy

and IVF influenced or transformed conventional family relationships?

4. ‘It begins when you sink into his arms and it ends with your arms in his sink’. So goes
a rather pessimistic feminist saying about love and marriage. In what ways is married
life still very much a gendered experience and why is the gendered division of labour
so persistent? Make sure you use sociological evidence to support your argument. You
may focus on either parenting or other aspects of domestic/paid labour, if you want
to.

5. Is polyamory a sustainable basis for families and/or relationships?

SOC 20003_Outline_ 2018 Page 17 of 18

Sociology marking criteria for written assignments

PASS CREDIT DISTINCTION HIGH DISTINCTION

(50-59%) (60-69%) (70-79%) (80-100%)
BASELINE All work is expected to meet these baseline criteria.
CRITERIA
Presentation The work is well presented with a properly completed and signed ‘Sociology Cover Sheet’ showing the exact word count of the
submission. It is typed on one side of the page and double spaced, with standard 2.54cm margins and page numbers unless
specified otherwise in the unit outline for the specific unit of study. The work meets the required word limit.
Meets basic presentation Generally well presented. Very well presented. Excellent presentation.
requirements.
Expression The work is well written and ideas are clearly expressed. The work is free of grammatical, punctuation and spelling errors. Attention
is paid to paragraphing and essay structure.
A genuine attempt has been The work is well-written. The work is very well-written This is a fluent and succinct
made to write clearly but Expression enables a clear and clearly conveys the piece of writing of a very high
expression at times may presentation of the author’s author’s meaning. academic standard.
obscure the author’s meaning. meaning.
Referencing Referencing words and ideas to their source is achieved accurately and consistently. The work acknowledges sources in-text and
links them to a reference list that is free of errors and inconsistencies.
Referencing is accurate and All sources are adequately All sources are acknowledged. There are no referencing
consistent. There may be a acknowledged. Correct and Correct and consistent in-text errors in this work.
few minor referencing errors. consistent in-text referencing referencing is used
is used throughout. throughout.
MAIN CRITERIA These are key criteria that are fundamental to achieving higher level grades.
Conceptual Key concepts have been Key concepts have been Key concepts have been Key concepts have been
understanding identified and deployed. There identified and deployed. There identified and deployed. There identified and deployed. There
is evidence of a basic is evidence of a good is evidence of a very good is evidence of a highly
understanding of relevant understanding of relevant understanding of relevant developed and nuanced
concepts although there may concepts. Developing fluency concepts. Fluency in use of understanding of relevant
be minor issues. Fluency in in use of conceptual language conceptual language is concepts. Fluency in use of
use of conceptual language is present. developed. conceptual language is
may be limited. excellent.
Research Effort The amount and level of The amount and level of The amount and level of The amount and level of
research undertaken in the research undertaken in the research undertaken in the research undertaken in the
preparation of this work is preparation of this work is preparation of this work is very preparation of this work is
adequate. The work evidences good. A solid attempt has been good. The work evidences the excellent. The student has
adequate understanding of the made to access pertinent use of good research skills in drawn from diverse academic
basic issues relevant to the sociological literature beyond accessing quality academic sources that are directly
topic. basic texts. papers. relevant to the question.
Quality of There is a genuine attempt to The work addresses the The work fully addresses the The argument is sophisticated
argument understand and respond to the required task. The argument is required task. The argument is and persuasive. Writing is
question. There has been a generally clear but there may clear, logically developed and clear, logically developed and
genuine attempt at structuring be some minor issues in convincing. The writing is well convincing. The argument is
an argument (introduction, relation to continuity. A structured with a structured within a theoretical
cohesive paragraphing and capacity to evaluate scholarly demonstrated capacity to framework. The approach
conclusion). The work arguments is apparent. The evaluate and synthesize the demonstrates flair and insight
demonstrates a capacity to integration of argument and arguments from scholarly and the integration of
recapitulate arguments from evidence is generally clear sources. The integration of argument and evidence is
scholarly sources. and developed. theory, argument and excellent.
evidence is very good.
Quality of Evidence and examples are The argument is adequately The argument is well The work demonstrates a
evidence used sporadically in support of supported by evidence and supported by examples and a capacity to evaluate and
the argument. The evidence examples. The evidence and broad evidence base. The synthesize ideas from a broad
and examples need to move examples used in this work evidence and examples used range of scholarly sources in
beyond the use of basic texts are verifiable and from robust in this work are verifiable and order to support the writer’s
and readings. sources. from robust sources. main argument.

SOC 20003_Outline_ 2018 Page 18 of 18