Give a comparative, cross-national account of social policy in the field of gender equality and family policies. The WritePass Journal

Give a comparative, cross-national account of social policy in the field of gender equality and family policies. Introduction Give a comparative, cross-national account of social policy in the field of gender equality and family policies. : 1). Feminists’ believe that individuals cannot achieve complete freedom so long as inequality continues to persist and that humanity is therefore unattainable. Regardless of this, the gender inequality that exists within family structures is still being recognised as a global issue and is prevalent both in Germany and France. This is partly due to the cultural practices of these societies as cultural relativism is still being used to condone such inequality (Craven, 2005: 3). In addition, as put by Fraser; existing welfare states are premised on assumptions about gender that increasingly out of phase with many peoples lives and self-understandings (1994: 591). It seems as though inadequate social protection is being provided to women in both countries, although France’s social policy regime does appear more favourable to women than Germany’s. This is evidenced by the fact that Germany holds a strong preference for the typical nuclear family ideal and continues to view males as breadwinners and females as homemakers. It is a common belief throughout Germany that women should not work and that they should instead be stay at home mums. This was identified by Peters when he pointed out that; â€Å"Men’s stereotypical role in Germany is one of the income – earning breadwinner, who leaves the house for work in the morning and comes back in the evening† (2001: 93). Because of the stereotypical role that is still being employed in Germany, women end up performing two roles. This is because contemporary women no longer stay at home to look after children and instead choose to become income earners. Furthermore, th e pay gap between men and women in Germany continues to widen and has been criticised for being much wider than other EU states, including France. The European Justice Commissioner Viviane Reding presented the results from the Eurobarometer on Gender Equality in 2010 and concluded that Germany’s figures were getting much worse: â€Å"In 2007, the gap was 23 percent; in 2006, 22.7 percent† (European Commission, 2012: 1). In a study conducted by Davis and Robinson, however, it was evidenced that much of the gender bias stems from family policies and the ideals that have been created by society. Hence, it was demonstrated that well-educated males are less supportive of reducing gender inequality: â€Å"women with employed husbands are less supportive of efforts to reduce gender inequality than women without a male wage earner† (1991: 72). This prevents women from advancing within society and demonstrates how men are capable of stifling the attainment of gender equa lity in Germany. In contrast to the male dominated ideologies that exist Germany, social policies in France do actually appear to be more akin to contemporary society. This has been illustrated by Rodgers who noted that; â€Å"France has a more conscious, clearly defined concept of family policy, which finds expression in statutory and voluntary institutions whose primary or even sole purpose is to promote the welfare of the family† (2009: 113). Both parents of the nuclear family are also entitled to various statutory benefits as of right, which signifies how gender equality is better attained in France than it is in Germany (Rogers, 2009: 113). France has a significant amount of support for women and has had an extensive policy in favour of families for a very long time. A wide range of childcare services are provided in France as well as an allowance system that is deemed extremely generous (European Union, 2014: 1). Such support is intended to encourage and assist parents in finding a work life balance and is clearly working given that France has higher fertility and employments rates of women with children compared to the rest of the EU’s member states (European Commission, 2014: 1). It has been said that the high fertility rates in France largely result from the consistent family policy in France as well as the good employment prospects provided to women (Del Boca, 2008: 2). One of the key characteristics of France’s family policy is the monetary benefits, also known as family allowance. The monetary benefits that are provided to families under this system include child benefit, flat-rate allowance, family income supplement, family support allowance, birth/adoption grant, basic allowance, supplement for free choice of working time and free choice of childcare, education allowance, back-to-school allowance, daily parental attendance allowance, family housing allowance and moving allowance (Cleiss, 2013: 1). In view of the support women are provided with in France, it seems as though Germany’s social policies on gender equality should be strengthened. This is especially so in the labour market where this appears to be amongst the worst of all EU member states. Therefore, not only do women in Germany receive significantly lower pay packets to men but they also receive a lack of support from the government (Curra, 2000). There a widespread misconception in Germany that if family friendly policies are implemented to assist working women, this will lead to them having fewer children, which will decrease the population overall (Giddins and Griffiths, 2006). However, it has been evidenced that â€Å"countries with policies that facilitate female employment are those with the highest fertility rates† (OECD, 2008: 15). This resultantly increases the future supply of workers, which inevitably leads to sustained growth (OECD, 2007: 7). Furthermore, the practices being employed in Fra nce appear to discredit the view that the population will be decreased if further support is provided to women, as this has not happened here and the fertility rates in Germany are low as a result of the lack of support for working mothers. This is due to the fact that women in Germany are more likely to postpone childbearing in order to enter the workforce, which stifles economic growth in the long term (Hering, 2007). Women are thus said to be â€Å"facing difficulties to reconcile family, domestic workload and paid work† (WILPF International, 2013: 1). It has been said that the German government is working on this issue at present and has made great attempts to reinforce child daily care (Fraser, 1994), yet it is arguable whether this is proving effective given the cultural relativism that Germany is submersed with. The generosity of France is illustrative of the support that is given to contemporary families and demonstrates how France’s social family policies are workable in attaining gender equality. Not all agree with this, however, and it has instead been argued that; â€Å"although French women receive paid, four-month maternity leaves; tax breaks for having more children; and other family-friendly government subsidies, their country lags behind many other nations in gender equality† (MNT, 2010: 1). This, it has been said, is largely because of outmoded attitudes about the role of women in society (Girling, 2002: 126). Women continue to earn less than men; they are still being viewed as homemakers and also hold few positions of power European Commission, 2013: 10). This is also the case for those women that remain childless (Milj and Okin, 1988), which suggests that although France provides better support to women, gender inequality still persists. Accordingly, women continue to be treated differently to men regardless of what policies are put into practice. It is questionable whether gender equality can ever be fully attained giv en the attempts that have been made to do so over the years. EU law has made significant attempts to ensure men and women receive equal pay for equal work, though it has been difficult for this to be accomplished. Article 141 of the Treaty of Amsterdam (which amended Article 119 of the Treaty of Rome), obliges member states to ensure that men and women always receive equal pay for equal work, yet it is often difficult to demonstrate that this is not being achieved. This is because the burden of proof is on the applicant to show that, on the balance of probabilities, their comparator is doing work of equal value to theirs or like work, which is considerably difficult (Equality and Human Rights Commission, 2010, p. 1). It is therefore clear from these findings that whilst France does provide greater support to women than Germany does, gender inequalities still exist. France’s social policies thereby need to be rectified so that better equality is being attained. The first step would be to close the gender pay gap, yet it remains to be seen whether this would achieve complete equality as the traditional family model will remain prevalent. Functionalism and path dependency to gender equality and family policies Functionalist’s are of the view that an individuals’ mental state is determined by the role in which they have been provided with in society. Functionalist’s therefore view gender inequality as being a product of traditional societal ideologies (Saggers et al, 2009). This is reflected by the inequality that currently exists within Germany and France. Hence, the traditional nuclear family is still being given due consideration despite the fact that modern family structures are widely diverse. Because individuals have always been taught what the traditional roles of men and women are, individuals tend to conform to such requirements. This is still happening today, whether consciously or not, and is one of the main reasons why gender equality is difficult to attain. Consequently, whilst women are provided with better support in France than they are in Germany, many of the underlying inequalities women are subjected to remain. This is because societal attitudes towar ds men and women have remained the same, regardless as to what social policies have been implemented, as is also the case in Germany. Hence, it is apparent that whilst gender roles in both societies have changed substantially, traditional arrangement remains in force (Giddens and Griffiths, 2006: 467). Social policy in France has advanced significantly over the years and is very supportive of women, yet gender inequality is still prevalent because of the traditional arrangement that remains in force. This is also the case in Germany despite the fact that less support is provided to women as some attempts to close the pay gap have been made, yet it seems impossible for gender equality to be obtained. Path dependency theoretically explains how past decisions influence future ones, regardless as to whether the circumstances are still relevant. It is therefore clear from this theory that history is an important part of the future and shapes the way individuals behave. This theory is reflective of the gender equality and family policy approach that is being adopted in Germany and France. This is because historical viewpoints are being maintained regardless of the fact that the nuclear family is no longer considered the ‘norm’ in contemporary society. As identified by Skocpol; â€Å"the development trends of social modernization may face legacies of path dependent cultural and institutional organisation† (1992: 8). This affects the advancement of gender equality and restricts the ability to improve the lives of women. Because the emergence of social policy is determined by past influences, the typical family ideal is likely to remain instilled in society. This prev ents the modernisation of social policy, which explains why the traditional family model continues to subsist within social and family policy. Furthermore, as noted by Alexander and Welzel; â€Å"path dependent processes with respect to women’s suffrage policy may affect the potential to increase gender equality in particular societies† (2014: 9). This is why women continue to be paid lower than men in Germany and France regardless of the current changes that are being made to achieve equality. This occurs because of the historical gender inequality practices that were being employed because as was pointed out; â€Å"because of the path dependence of the unfolding human life, gender inequality in the early eighties might equally affect today’s opportunities, choices and aspiration levels† (Bjornskov et al; 2007: 2). Past discrimination thereby affects the way women are viewed in society today and will continue to have an impact in the future. Gender equality is still one of the main fundamental principles the EU continually strives for (Article 14 of the European Union’s Convention on Human Rights), yet despite the various policies that have been adopted women are still being treated unfavourably to men. This was recognised by Radacic who argued that; â€Å"notwithstanding these pronouncements, inequality of women in the member states of the Council of Europe persists† (Radacic, 2008: 841). The EU has therefore been largely impotent in challenging gender discrimination and achieving gender equality and although women and men are becoming more equal over the years, â€Å"a principle of perfect equality† (Mill and Okin, 1988: 1) is still not being established in countries such as Germany and France. Adequate family and childcare policies that allow for gender equality therefore need to be implemented, which could be achieved by employing strategies that; encourage female labour market participation, rem ove the gender bias ideologies, provide adequate childcare, promote children’s education and well being and allow for flexible labour. It is unlikely that much of the gender bias that is currently in place will be removed, though there will certainly be some improvements. Germany should be more supportive of women and France should make further attempts to close the pay gap. Conclusion Overall, traditional ideological practices continue to be adopted in Germany and France when it comes to gender equality and family policy. Because of this, women continue to be treated differently to men. It is questionable whether this can ever be rectified given that gender inequality is viewed as a product of traditional societal ideologies. In Germany, women are given less support than they are in France whose social policies appear to be more akin to contemporary society. In spite of this, however, gender inequality is still prevalent throughout France. This is evidenced by the large gender pay gap and the fact that traditional ideologies are still prevalent across all social policy methods. This illustrates that regardless of what social policies welfare states implement, gender inequality will still persist. Improvements to social policy would still benefit the economy, nonetheless, and would develop gender equality further. In Germany, there is a pressing need for greater su pport to be provided to women as well as reducing the gender pay gap, whereas in France the main focus is on the latter. It is doubtful that complete equality would be achieved in light of the fact that the traditional family model remains intact, yet vast improvements could certainly be made. This is supported by the views of functionalists who believe that the traditional arrangement of gender roles remain intact despite the fact that these roles have significantly changed in modern societies. Furthermore, because past decisions influence future decisions, as recognised by the path dependency model, the nuclear family structure will always have a place in contemporary society. References Alexander, A. C. and Welzel, C. (2014) ‘Four Theories Tested on Four Different Aspects of Gender Equality’ Empowering Women, democracy.uci.edu/files/democracy/docs/conferences/grad/alexander.pdf [29 March 2014]. Bjornskov, C. Dreher, A. Justina, A. V. and Fischer, A. V. (2007) ‘SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Economics and Finance’ No 657. Brown, S. E., Esbensen, F., and Geis, G., (2010). Criminology: Explaining Crime in Context. Elsevier, 7th Edition. Cleiss. (2013) ‘Family Benefits’ The French Social Security System, [Online] Available: cleiss.fr/docs/regimes/regime_france/an_4.html [29 March 2014]. Craven, Z, Clearinghouse, ‘Human Rights and Domestic Violence’ Australian Domestic Family Violence, Available: adfvc.unsw.edu.au/PDF%20files/human_rights.pdf Curra, J., (2000). The Relativity of Crime. Thousand Oaks, CA. Sage. Davis, N. J. and Robinson, V. R. (1991) ‘Men’s and Women’s Consciousness of Gender Inequality: Austria, West Germany, Great Britain and the United States’ American Sociological Review, Volume 56, No. 1. Del Boca, D. Pasqua, S. and Pronzato, C. (2008) ‘Market Work and Motherhood Decisions in Contexts’ Discussion Paper Series, IZA DP No 3303, [Online], Available: http://ftp.iza.org/dp3303.pdf [29 March 2014]. European Commission. (2012) ‘Women on Boards: Commission Proposes 40% Objective’ [Online] Available: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/newsroom/gender-equality/news/121114_en.htm [29 March 2014]. Giddens, A. and Griffiths, S. (2006) Sociology, Social Science, Polity. Girling, J. (2002) France: Political and Social Change, Routledge, Political Science. EKU Women Studies., Feminism What is it?, womensstudies.eku.edu/what/ [29 March 2014]. European Commission. (2012) ‘Statistics’ European Union, [Online], Available: http://europa.eu/epic/statistics/index_en.htm [28 March 2014]. European Commission. (2013) ‘Tackling the Gender Pay Gap in the European Union’ Justice, [Online] Available: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/gender-equality/files/gender_pay_gap/gpg_brochure_2013_final_en.pdf [29 March 2014]. European Union. (2014) France: Significant Support for Women and High Monetary Benefits, http://europa.eu/epic/countries/france/index_en.htm [Online], Available: http://europa.eu/epic/countries/france/index_en.htm [28 March 2014]. Fraser, N. (1994) After the Family Wage Political Theory, Volume 22, No. 4. George, V., and Wilding, P., (1985). Ideology and Social Welfare. Routledge, 2nd Edition. Herring, J., (2007). Family Law, Pearson Education, 3rd Edition. Kania, R. E, (1988). Conservative Ideology in Criminology and Criminal Justice. American Journal of Criminal Justice. Volume 13, Number 1. Lewis, D. (2013) ‘Welcome to the Department’ LSE Social Policy, [Online] Available: www.lse.ac.uk/socialPolicy/aboutUs/introduction.aspx [06 April 2014]. Mill, J. S. and Okin, S. M. (1988) The Subjection of Women, Hackett Publishing Co. MNT. (2010) ‘Gender Inequality Persists in France Despite Family-Focused Benefits’ [Online] Available: medicalnewstoday.com/releases/204545.php [29 March 2014]. OECD. (2007) ‘Babies and Bosses – Reconciling Work and Family Life’ A Synthesis of Findings for OECD Countries. OECD. (2008) ‘Gender and Sustainable Development’ Maximising the Economic, Social and Environmental Role of Women. Peters, D. (2001) ‘Breadwinners, Homemakers and Beasts of Burden: A Gender Perspective on Transport and Mobility’ Institute for City and Regional Planning, Sustainable Development International, 93-100. Radacic, I. (2008) ‘Critical Review of Jurisprudence: An Occasional Series: Gender Equality Jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights’, European Journal of International Law, Issue 4, EJIL 2008 19 (841). Rodgers, B. N. (2009) ‘Family Policy in France’ Journal of Social Policy, Volume 4, Issue 2. Skocpol, T. (1992) Protecting Soldiers and Mothers: The Political Origins in Social Policy in the United States, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Saggers, S. Dodd, J. and Wildy, H. (2009) ‘Constructing the ‘ideal’ family for family-centred practice: challenges for delivery’ Disability and Society, Volume 24, Issue 2. WILPF International. (2014) ‘Racism and Gender Inequality in Germany’ Peace Freedom, [Online] Available: wilpfinternational.org/racism-and-gender-inequality-in-germany/ [29 March 2014]. Cases Abdulaziz, Cabales and Balkandali v. UK (1985) Series A, No. 94 at para 78 Leyla Sahin v. Turkey [GC] Reports 2005 – at para. 115 Give a comparative, cross-national account of social policy in the field of gender equality and family policies. Abstract Give a comparative, cross-national account of social policy in the field of gender equality and family policies. : 1). During this period, certain groups of society viewed males as being the breadwinners, whilst women were considered the homemakers. Because of this conception, a lack of financial support was provided to women by the welfare state as it was believed that women could rely on the income of their husbands (Herring: 2007; p. 262). Women were far less likely to leave their husbands as a result of this, which could be one of the main reasons why there has been a huge increase in the divorce in recent years (Benson, 2013: 1). It was apparent by many that social policy changes were needed to rectify this imbalance and thus provide women with better protection against inequality (United Nations, 2013: 1). Some feminists believed that ideology was the cause of such inequality and that unless all nation states adopt effective gender equality social policies, women will continue to be treated unfavourably in society (George and Wilding: 1985; p. 122). Some feminists argue that unless equali ty within family structures is addressed, women will never be completely free regardless as to what social policies have been implemented by the welfare state (Craven, 2005: 3). This was recognised by Fraser who was of the view that the policies of existing welfare states are based on assumptions about gender that are increasingly out of phase with many peoples lives and self-understandings (1994: 591). It cannot be said that women are being provided with sufficient protection within society, yet gender inequality is still one of the most important principles that is contained in the human rights law of the European Union (EU). The EU continues to make   progress in the tackling of gender discrimination, as exemplified by Article 14 of the European Convention of Human Rights, though it cannot be said that all nation states adopt the same approach as the EU. Consequently, unless gender equality is being instilled into the frameworks of all welfare states, gender discrimination will be likely to remain. Regardless of the EUs gender equality policies, nonetheless, women continue to be treated less favourably than men and as it has been recognised by Radacic; that despite the pronouncements of gender discrimination, inequality of still persists (2008: 841). It cannot be said that EU policy has had much of an effect in establishing complete equality between the genders,   though it i s questionable whether it ever will (Mill and Okin, 1988: 1). Hence, it has been pointed out that although the EU has paved the way for more equal gender rights in areas such as marriage and employment, inequality persists when it comes to domestic violence, pay and the division of labour (Pascall, 2000: 240). It seems as though the EU has made great attempts towards the attainment of gender equality, yet these have not proven sufficient. Further changes therefore need to be made to ensure that women are not being treated unfavourably to men. Gender Equality and family policies in West Germany Social policy in Germany appears largely to reflect ideological principles, in that males are considered breadwinners, whilst females are considered homemakers. The German people are generally of the view that women should not go out to work and that they should instead stay at home to look after the childrenHence, as illustrated   by Peters; â€Å"Men’s stereotypical role in Germany is one of the income – earning breadwinner, who leaves the house for work in the morning and comes back in the evening† (2001: 93). Although this may be a common belief throughout Germany, it does not provide a true reflection of the gender roles. Women are frequently choosing to work as opposed to staying at home, yet the gender pay gap is also increasing. Germanys pay gap has thus been widely criticised for being one of the largest in the EU and the EU Commission suggest that this is getting worse (European Commission, 2012: 1). Davis and Robinson believe that much of this gender bias is caused by the policies that are being held by families and societal ideals. does seem to have some validity, and social policies still need to be reformed in Germany so that gender equality is being addressed appropriately. Arguably, if effective policies are implemented in Germany, it is likely that this will cause the policies held by families to also change (Seeleib-Kaiser, 2007: 2). This alone will not be sufficient to bring about gender equality, and attitudes will also need to change. It has been suggested by Davis and Robinson that women with employed husbands are less likely to be supported than women with unemployed husbands. This is because, husbands in employment are unlikely to be supportive of efforts to reduce gender inequality (1991: 72). This suggests that women are less likely to advance in society if they receive a lack of support from their husbands. This shows how men can impact the achievement of gender equality. The social policies that exist in Germany should therefore be amended so that gender equality can be improved. At present, women do not receive adequate support from   the government (Gelb and Palley, 2009: 368), though as noted by the OECD some are of the view that if greater support is provided to women, they will be less likely to have children which will have an overall impact upon the German population (OECD, 2008: 15). Conversel y, it was in fact found by the OECD that countries with policies that facilitate female employment are those with the highest fertility rates† (2008: 15). Instead of reducing the population, further support would in fact increase it which is considered integral to economic growth (OECD, 2007: 7). Arguably, the limited support for working   mothers in Germany has resulted in women postponing childbearing so that they can instead enter the workforce in order to financially support themselves. This has an effect upon economic growth (WILPF International, 2013: 1), though it has been said that social policy in Germany is a work in progress and that attempts to reinforce childcare is being made (Spiegel, 2012: 1). Gender Equality and family policies in France In comparison with Germany, social policy in France does actually appear to reflect the ideas of contemporary society, and is thus more favourable to women. This was identified by Rodgers when it was noted that; â€Å"France has a more conscious, clearly defined concept of family policy, which finds expression in statutory and voluntary institutions whose primary or even sole purpose is to promote the welfare of the family† (2009: 113). Statutory benefits in France are also provided, as of right, to both parents. This demonstrates how gender equality is more adequate in France than it is in Germany (Rogers, 2009: 113). This is due to the support women receive in France by the French government and the favourable family policies that exist. Significant support for childcare is also being provided by France and their allowance system is particularly generous (European Union, 2014: 1). The support that is provided to women is thus intended to allow a work-life balance to be achie ved. This approach does appear to be working given the high fertility and employments rates of women with children (European Commission, 2014: 1). Hence, it has been argued that the high fertility rates in France is due to Frances consistent family policy and the excellent employment prospects women are said to have (Del Boca, 2008: 2). Monetary benefits are a key feature of Frances family policy (Cleiss, 2013: 1). This generosity has been considered necessary in supporting women and removing gender inequality in France. Yet not all agree with this approach and it has instead been argued that whilst women in France receive a number of different benefits such as; paid, four-month maternity leaves; tax breaks for having more children; and other family-friendly government subsidies, their country lags behind many other nations in gender equality† (MNT, 2010: 1). This suggests that although a number of social policies have been established in France that intend to provide greater support to women, not all believe that gender inequality is eradicated and instead argued that outdated societal attitudes regarding women are still prevalent (Girling, 2002: 126). Nevertheless, Frances benefit system does appear to be a lot more generous than Germanys, which might be suggested leads to greater equality between the sexes. However, it seems as though complete equality is still not being attained.   There still appears to be a gender pay gap between men and women in France, and women continue to be treated differently in general (European Commission, 2013: 10). Arguably, it is clear from these findings that social policies may not actually remove the gender inequalities that persist within society and that the attitudes of individuals also need to be changed. Functionalist and path dependency to gender equality and family policies Functionalism has been described as a philosophy of mind in that a particular mental state will be dependent on the role it plays on the cognitive system in which it is a part of. In effect, functionalists view the identity of mental states as being determined by its casual relations to sensory stimulations, behaviour and other mental states (Stanford, 2004: 1). Functionalism is clearly prevalent within the approaches that are being employed in both Germany and France since functionalists view gender inequality as a product of traditional ideology within society (Isajiw, 2013: 129).   Ã‚  Ã‚   Given that gender inequality is still prevalent within both Germany and France it might be though that social policies cannot change traditional ideology. Pre-existing notions of the ideal family will be likely to remain and individuals will thus conform to the roles that have been provided to them by society. Whilst gender roles have changed substantially in contemporary societies, functiona lists believe that traditional arrangements remain in force (Giddens and Griffiths, 2006: 467). This is what appears to be happening in France because although social policy has been advanced, gender inequality still exists as a result of traditional arrangements. Furthermore, whilst social policy in Germany is not as supportive of women as it is in France, the same applies here and traditional arrangements continue to prevail. Path dependency is a term that is used to describe the idea that history matters and that we are today a product of what has happened in the past (Margolis, 1996: 1). Path dependency is also reflective of gender equality in Germany and France in that past decisions influence future decisions. This is so regardless of whether the circumstances are still relevant (Arthur, 1994: 33). Historical viewpoints are therefore being maintained despite the fact that this no longer provides a true reflection of reality and as put by Skocpol; â€Å"the development trends of social modernization may face legacies of path dependent cultural and institutional organisation† (1992: 8). Gender equality is affected by this and improvements to the lives and wellbeing of women is stifled. Alexander and Welzel argue that; â€Å"path dependent processes with respect to women’s suffrage policy may affect the potential to increase gender equality in particular societies† (2014: 9). Again, this demonstrates why women continue to be paid less than men in both Germany and France. This results from the historical gender inequality practices because as stated by Bjornskov et al; â€Å"because of the path dependence of the unfolding human life, gender inequality in the early eighties might equally affect today’s opportunities, choices and aspiration levels† (2007: 2). This will continue to affect the way women are treated in the future and it is arguable whether discrimination against women will ever be eradicated. Conclusion Overall, it has been argued that ideological beliefs will continue to influence the ways women are treated in society, and regardless of the social policies that are implemented by welfare states, gender inequality will continue to persist. This is because the traditional roles of males and females will continue to be prevalent within all aspects of life as women will continue to take on the role of a homemaker, whilst men will continue to take on the role of a breadwinner in certain groups of society. Ideology is largely responsible for these inequalities and women will continue to be treated differently to men as a result. This is evidenced in both Germany and France regardless of the fact that their social policy strategies are different and demonstrates how ideology will continue to dominate contemporary society. Thus, women in Germany are treated far less favourably than the women in France, yet both countries are similar when it comes to gender inequality. An example of this ca n be seen in relation to the gender pay gaps which are widespread amongst both nation states. Nevertheless, despite the fact that gender inequality is likely to persist regardless of what policies are implemented, it is manifest that improvements can certainly be made. Further support should be provided to women in Germany, whilst the gender pay gap should be reduced in France. This is unlikely to provide complete equality because, as recognised by the functionalist and path dependency models, the traditional arrangement of gender roles will continue influence society. References Alexander, A. C. and Welzel, C. (2014) ‘Four Theories Tested on Four Different Aspects of Gender Equality’ Empowering Women, [Online] Available: democracy.uci.edu/files/democracy/docs/conferences/grad/alexander.pdf [02 April 2014]. Benson, H. (2013) What is the Divorce Rate, The Marriage Foundation, [Online] Available: marriagefoundation.org.uk/Shared/Uploads/Products/5357_MF%20-%20What%20is%20the%20divorce%20rate%20-%20060213.pdf [02 April 2014]. Bjornskov, C. Dreher, A. Justina, A. V. and Fischer, A. V. (2007) ‘SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Economics and Finance’ No 657. Brown, S. E., Esbensen, F., and Geis, G., (2010). Criminology: Explaining Crime in Context. 7th Edition, London: Elsevier. Cleiss. (2013) ‘Family Benefits’ The French Social Security System, [Online] Available: cleiss.fr/docs/regimes/regime_france/an_4.html [02 April 2014]. Craven, Z, Clearinghouse, ‘Human Rights and Domestic Violence’ Australian Domestic Family Violence, [Online] Available: adfvc.unsw.edu.au/PDF%20files/human_rights.pdf [02 April 2014]. Curra, J., (2000). The Relativity of Crime. Thousand Oaks, CA. Sage. Davis, N. J. and Robinson, V. R. (1991) ‘Men’s and Women’s Consciousness of Gender Inequality: Austria, West Germany, Great Britain and the United States’ American Sociological Review, Volume 56, No. 1. Del Boca, D. Pasqua, S. and Pronzato, C. (2008) ‘Market Work and Motherhood Decisions in Contexts’ Discussion Paper Series, IZA DP No 3303, [Online], Available: http://ftp.iza.org/dp3303.pdf [02 April 2014]. Eagleton, T. (1991) Ideology: An Introduction, London: Verso. European Commission. (2012) ‘Women on Boards: Commission Proposes 40% Objective’ [Online] Available: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/newsroom/gender-equality/news/121114_en.htm [02 April 2014]. Giddens, A. and Griffiths, S. (2006) Sociology, Social Science, Polity. Girling, J. (2002) France: Political and Social Change, Routledge, Political Science. European Commission. (2012) ‘Statistics’ European Union, [Online], Available: http://europa.eu/epic/statistics/index_en.htm [02 April 2014]. European Commission. (2013) ‘Tackling the Gender Pay Gap in the European Union’ Justice, [Online] Available: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/gender-equality/files/gender_pay_gap/gpg_brochure_2013_final_en.pdf [02 April 2014]. European Union. (2014) France: Significant Support for Women and High Monetary Benefits, [Online], Available: http://europa.eu/epic/countries/france/index_en.htm [03 April 2014]. Fraser, N. (1994) After the Family Wage Political Theory, Volume 22, No. 4. Foghlam Alba. (2012) Womens Rights and Suffragettes [Online] Available: educationscotland.gov.uk/scotlandshistory/20thand21stcenturies/womensrights [05 April 2014]. George, V., and Wilding, P., (1985). Ideology and Social Welfare. Routledge, 2nd Edition. Herring, J., (2007). Family Law, Pearson Education, 3rd Edition. Kania, R. E, (1988). Conservative Ideology in Criminology and Criminal Justice. American Journal of Criminal Justice. Volume 13, Number 1. Margolis, S. E. (1996) Path Dependence [Online] Available: http://wwwpub.utdallas.edu/~liebowit/palgrave/palpd.html [07 April 2014]. Meer, S. (2013) Struggles for Gender Equality: Reflections on the place of men and mens organisations, Open Debate, Online] Available: osisa.org/sites/default/files/sup_files/open_debate_2_-_reflections_on_the_place_of_men_and_mens_organisations_in_the_struggle_for_gender_equality.pdf [02 April 2014]. Mill, J. S. and Okin, S. M. (1988) The Subjection of Women, Hackett Publishing Co. MNT. (2010) ‘Gender Inequality Persists in France Despite Family-Focused Benefits’ [Online] Available: medicalnewstoday.com/releases/204545.php [03 April 2014]. OECD. (2007) ‘Babies and Bosses – Reconciling Work and Family Life’ A Synthesis of Findings for OECD Countries. OECD. (2008) ‘Gender and Sustainable Development’ Maximising the Economic, Social and Environmental Role of Women. Pascall, G. (2000) Gender and Social Policy: Comparing Welfare States in Central and Eastern Europe and the former Societ Union Journal of European Social Policy, Volume 10, Number 3. Peters, D. (2001) ‘Breadwinners, Homemakers and Beasts of Burden: A Gender Perspective on Transport and Mobility’ Institute for City and Regional Planning, Sustainable Development International, 93-100. Radacic, I. (2008) ‘Critical Review of Jurisprudence: An Occasional Series: Gender Equality Jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights’, European Journal of International Law, Issue 4, EJIL 2008 19 (841). Rodgers, B. N. (2009) ‘Family Policy in France’ Journal of Social Policy, Volume 4, Issue 2. Saggers, S. Dodd, J. and Wildy, H. (2009) ‘Constructing the ‘ideal’ family for family-centred practice: challenges for delivery’ Disability and Society, Volume 24, Issue 2. Seeleib, M. K. (2007) Innovative ways of coping with old and new challenges: Enterprises as actors of family policy, Family Policies in Britain and Germany, [Online] Available: socialpolicy.ed.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/10108/Family_Policy_in_Britain_and_Germany_Midpoint_Conference171107.pdf [02 April 2014]. Skocpol, T. (1992) Protecting Soldiers and Mothers: The Political Origins in Social Policy in the United States, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Stanford. (2004) Functionalism [Online] Available: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/functionalism/ [07 April 2014]. Sudha, D. K. (2000) Gender Roles, New Delhi: APH Publishing. WILPF International. (2014) ‘Racism and Gender Inequality in Germany’ Peace Freedom, [Online] Available: wilpfinternational.org/racism-and-gender-inequality-in-germany/ [02 April 2014].