All these do not act independent from each other. Studies try to analyze and explain how they work together “how they mutually construct one another” (Collins et al 62). My goal in this paper is to try explaining the article and the different ideas being portrayed.
As noted earlier, the article presents us with the insight of how race and gender are socially put together out of dysfunctional definitions of “the family”. Generally, gender and race are socially built groups rather than important and biological groups. Collins shows how these groups are formed and how idealized and often the dysfunctional images of “the family” project a hierarchy that functions in the best interest of everyone. The idealized family needs a breadwinner who is able to protect and maintain the other family members, a wife who is a stay at home mother, and obedient children. This means the public of economics and politics have no impact or influence what so ever on the private domestic sphere of women and children. But this is becoming unrealistic especially in the present day, for it is difficult for survival value for the women and the children who solely depend on the man as the provider.
Discrimination on the lines of gender and race is real in the modern society as individuals use an imagined image of a certain group to create a hierarchical categorization. We use the family images to view our nation and use it in the definitions of policies. As matter of fact, the assumption that a few wealthy white men are capable of not only protecting the whole national family but also acting to the best interest of the society comes from accepting the hierarchical categorization. Deviance or protest of any kind to this assumed fact makes one ungrateful and thus conservative politicians expect that women and people of color should not only be submissive
According to Collins there were six different dimensions which will be explained in terms of gender, race