Heteronormativity and Social De-Bureaucratized - Case Study Example

Heteronormativity & Social De-Bureaucratized Heteronormativity & Social De-Bureaucratized Q1 Heteronormativity concept suggests that individuals fall in two complementary and distinct genders with each assuming natural roles in life (Booth, Goodman & Kirkup, (2010). p. 153). The term heteronormativity allows separation and hierarchical organization of gender and sexuality. This theory gets support from the presence of heterosexuality only and no other type of sexuality. Understanding this heteronormativity and another sexual orientation is crucial to understanding sexuality (Habath, 2008, p. 2). These social settings made scholars like Connell suggest analysis and have a diversified view of gender. The argument also remains if sexuality is socially constructed or has a basis in the genetics of a person. Some theorists had claims that sexuality has a social basis while other theorists are seeing it from the perspective of genetics. Perpetuation of the heteronormativity continues in a social learning institution against those purported to have deviant sexual characteristics. The concept of heteronormativity has roots in the nineteenth century when sex identities between men and women became critical. In the ancient times, women were seen as an underdeveloped version of men in their body organs and mind (Fulcher & Scott, 2011, p. 165). With the advent of understanding that women were just a different sex from men, then separation and discrimination in the society led to the believe in heteronormativity. Heteronormativity allows intimate relationships only between males and females. The theory also allowed men to dominate over women in the society. Heteronormativity view tends to ignore the possibility of bisexuality and homosexuality in the society. The theory sticks to the idea that each sex has its functions and values in life. An example is that any boy is expected to grow and marry a woman and not have any sexual relationship with men. These expectations met the society requirement during the nineteenth century when the separation of sexes took place. Heterosexuality also protected and maintained marriages in the society. The sexuality of an individual has a basis in the social life of the individual. The society tends to discriminate those considered deviant from the norm by being homosexuals. Most of these individuals find themselves lonely and unsupported. Most of these activities tend to push one in a suggested sexuality that they then become part of. Understanding the possibility of having different categories of sexuality is still a problem due to social culture from the past. Discrimination of the men who are homosexual from the past is worse due to the position of men in the society. The discrimination in the social life of the homosexual men has led to the name ‘gay’ which has lesser weight. The term gay used more openly give the homosexual individual opportunity to interact and feel less discriminated. Learning institutions are trying to promote tolerance to different kinds of sexuality in the society. However, discrimination against homosexuals and bisexual is still common in the social learning institution. This kind of discrimination has led to the perpetuation of heteronormativity. There is despising of a large number of learning students have in one way or another through names suggesting their sexuality as being abnormal. The teacher also meets this problem but lack the skills to deal with it. Some of these discriminated students do not even show homosexual traits. The discrimination against other students always causes the ones with homosexual sexuality to feel left out. This kind of treatment has the effect of causing them to become homosexuals later in their lives. Part of this is due to society beliefs in heteronormativity that is rooted in past life. Such kind of belief were eminent during earlier centuries, and they did hold the social fabric. Any deviation from them amounted to a serious concern that many did not welcome. Heteronormativity is strict about the roles of different sexes that became more prevalent in nineteenth century. Its perpetuation continues today in the learning institution through discrimination of individuals with sexuality other than heterosexuality. The discrimination also affects those who may be heterosexuals but show differing characteristics. Q2 De-bureaucratisation involves the transfer of power to individuals at the lower ranked levels both in the government and in organisations. Bureaucratisation in the organizational level became common in the nineteenth century when the management monitored every workers movement and what they do. Bureaucracy has a main location in the public domain (Sarangi & Slembrouck, 2014, p. 19). The management had the power to control the entire employer, and every order was in hierarchal manner. De-bureaucratisation came as a challenge to the control of the employees. Some of the methods used in the organization found a way of revolving administrative roles. The changes in the society forced many organisations to be de-bureaucratised to adapt to new situations. This de-bureaucratisation of the organization was more appealing to workers; however, it is not applicable to all organizations. Some organisations also still use bureaucracy in a systematic way for the management to get results that they need. De-bureaucratisation involves more flexibility in the dealings and lateral communication within the organization. Usage of de-bureaucratisation usually refers to a professional change in the public sector (Derudder, Faulconbridge, Witlox & Beaverstock, 2012, p. 128). In the start of de-bureaucratisation process, the society was the formation of the organic organisations that were more flexible than the mechanistic ones. These organisations had characteristics that were opposite of the bureaucracy. One of the aims was to achieve the company goals in work rather than carrying out duties. This kind of accomplishment required a different approach to solving problems that the new strategy provided. The changes in this organization were not bureaucratic in being flexible and proper response to demands. These practices by organisations are now common in the society where production is based on the demand. However, this does not mean that organic organisation were superior or better than bureaucratic ones. In the modern society, de-bureaucratisation is also common due to advanced technology that has led to network organisation. In this kind of situation, managers in organisations have less control over the workers. Additionally, production is demand based due to constant communication within the network. The company also does not in some cases employ the workers directly and only use them when there is need. This kind of organisation operates based on the market conditions. This kind of organisation, however, has limited application in some company involved in communication where the worker has to be present in the office. An extension of network organisation is a virtual organisation where everything involves the use of the network. It is suitable for some organisation dealing with information and communication. Cultures in some parts of the world like East Asia show the cultural organisation that are de-bureaucratised. The Japanese workers do not have specific duties in their work that makes the working conditions more flexible. The Chinese in Taiwan also have de-bureaucratisation business organisation run by the family with the father being in the top management positions. The sons will inherit their fathers’ position if he dies. However, these cultural organisations are only suitable in certain regions and not applicable to others. The level of de-bureaucratisation in the East Asia is high and enables sustainability of the business. There were also attempts of de-bureaucratisation in Hong Kong in 1970 (Benson & Zhu, 2011, p. 126). Partially including part of feminism in an organisation is de-bureaucratisation due the strong association of bureaucracy and patriarchy. In the modern society, women are holding top managerial positions in the organisation that shows the high level of de-bureaucratisation. In the nineteenth century, women were never allowed to work at certain managerial levels in organisations. Therefore, there is an increased level of de-bureaucratisation that allows the development of women through managerial roles. De-bureaucratisation has been on the rise in the society since the first challenge in bureaucracy. De-bureaucratized society offers better working conditions to employees and improves outcome. More organisations change their strategy to fit the new requirement in a society that offers flexibility. However, some companies where stable supply is needed use bureaucracy, which is more suitable. Organisation management in some places has skilfully modified bureaucracy and use it to their advantage. Hence, the suitability of using de-bureaucracy depend on some factors although a large part of society has undergone de-bureaucratisation. Bibliography Sarangi, S. & Slembrouck, S., 2014, Language, bureaucracy and social control, New York: Routledge Derudder, B. Faulconbridge, J. Witlox, F. & Beaverstock, J, 2012, International business travel in the global economy, London: Ashgate Publishing Benson, J. & Zhu, Y., 2011, The dynamics of Asian labour markets: balancing control and flexibility, New York: Taylor & Francis. Habath, J., 2008, Thinking ‘straight’: heteronormativity and associated outcomes across sexual orientation, Ann Arbor: ProQuest. Booth, S., Goodman, S., & Kirkup, G., 2010, Gender issues in learning and working with information technology: social constructs and cultural contexts, Hershey, PA, Information Science Reference. Fulcher, J. & Scott, J., 2011, Sociology, London: Oxford Read More