The article calls into question one of the main assumptions of the hierarchical paradigm, i.e the principle of reciprocity as something which dominates relationships between working class men and women. Claiming that there is an undue homology between this interpretative model and the feminine ethos, it argues that structural tension pervades the relationship between the genders. This tension can be synthetically phrased as an opposition: feminine permanency vs. masculine impermanency. The article asserts that these disparate symbolic dispositions underlie the construction of each gender within this particular moral context and that they are a constitutive part of the system. The article draws on Bateson's concept of complementary schismogenesis both to illuminate the dynamics of this tension as well as to speculate about factors that hinder the escalation of the schismogenic process, thus preventing the total breakdown of the system. The paper concludes by stating that structural tension between the genders should be placed on the same level of analytical relevance as the principle of reciprocity.
Urban working class; Inter-gender tension; Family relations; Matrifocality; Wholistic paradigm