Family life is one of the essential conditions for people’s wellbeing, which correlates with happiness. However, the societal circumstances frequently suggest that success in this area can be unattainable for some population groups. In this regard, Diana Gittens and Bonnie Thorton Dill discuss the obstacles to having healthy relationships for different categories of citizens and examine social forces, which determine the challenges in achieving forgiveness, humor, and order.
Both authors present well-thought arguments in their corresponding chapters to underpin their opinions. Thus, Gittens claims that the nature of families is more complex than researchers consider it to be since common residence, economic cooperation, reproduction, and sexuality imply patterns, which are difficult to predict. In turn, Dill states that the specific needs of minorities were historically neglected, and this fact explains the violation of their women’s rights and injustice in general. Hence, these two stances complement one another by discussing the multi-faceted nature of households.
Another similarity between the readings is their focus on the impossibility to achieve the ideal family characteristics specified above while the reasons for it differ. In Gitten’s chapter, they are related to the neglect of deviations from the perceived norms by scholars and the lack of clarity regarding the actual needs of people. Meanwhile, for Dill, the obstacles, in this case, are the historical oppression of women of color, which complicates their situation compared to their white counterparts.
In conclusion, Gitten and Dill provide comprehensive information concerning the societal characteristics preventing families from reaching wellbeing. Their arguments in this respect are oriented on excessive generalizations and historical injustice. As for the circumstances serving as obstacles to forgiveness, humor, and order, they include the failure to accept differences between individuals and the unfavorable position in society of women from minorities. Thus, they contradict the provisions corresponding to happiness and thereby violate citizens’ rights.