What kind of quantitative data would help us measure homogamy across a population?

-       Sociodemographic characteristics (age, origin, gender,…)

-       Education

-       Interests

-       Personality (Big 5, 16 item personality questionnaire)

-       Profession

-       Values

-       Religion

-       Sexuality

-       Language

-       Culture

-       Lifestyle

-       Health

è Compare partners (making statement questions, compare points)

What kind of qualitative data would help us understand the meaning and experiences behind those patterns?

è Interview couples separate

-       How have they met?

-       How long are they together?

-       What they are looking for in a relationship

-       Why the specific characteristics are important

-       When does sameness help or lead to conflict?

-       When does differences help or lead to conflict?

If you were designing a small research project in our class, how would you combine the two approaches?

-       First a qualitative then a quantitative approach and explain the data with the information we gathered from the interviews

Writer: Caroline Kirsch

Presenter: Ellen Jaeth

Week 7

Do you see this pattern playing out in your generation?

Would you say marriage today is becoming more of a “luxury good” for the college-educated?

It is very hard to conclude whether this pattern will play out in our generation. 

On one hand, the rise of cohabiting most likely will continue the decline in divorces. When couples are cohabiting and trying out living with each other for 2-3 years, they are less likely to get divorced when they get married. If you live with a partner before getting married, it becomes like a trial period for their relationship, and then when they decide that they are working well together, they can decide to make it official with a marriage. In this way, cohabiting contributes to a lower risk of couples getting married, and we do not see this pattern diminishing for our generation. 

At the same time a lot of our generation's parents were divorced. This might make them more prone to getting divorced, but also has a chance of declining our generation's overall marriage rate.

A lot of the different variables that our group has been discussing, can limit both the overall marriages and also raise the number of divorces. 

It is therefore hard for us to decide what we think the outcome is gonna be.

We do think that marriage today is becoming more of a “luxury good” for the college-educated. Many college educated people see marriage as a step after achieving key milestones like graduating college, getting a job, and home-ownership. Marriage isn’t seen anymore as a need for survival or dependence. 

More than just marriage, we believe that “marriage stability” is also a luxury good. As we saw, highly educated women (and men) tend to have more lasting marriages. Not only because of a more stable economical status (reinforced through social homogamy, rich and educated people are more likely to end up together), but also because a higher education can lead to a better management of emotional and communications troubles. 

Why? Through which mechanisms might childhood family structure influence the risk of divorce? • How would you conduct a research using what methods?

There are pros in using both quantitative and qualitative data. In conducting research to explore how mechanisms in the childhood family structure might influence the risk of divorce, we find it more interesting to use qualitative data, however it can also be useful to conduct quantitative data. First we want to identify some of the mechanisms in the childhood structure we find most relevant and want to research further. They are listed below. 

Economic status

Parental divorce

parents educational level

Family’s religion/values 

To explore the mechanisms with the quantitative method, we can make a questionnaire. In this way we have a chance to handle a lot of differences, and get a more generalized idea about what mechanism is mostly linked to divorces. However it might be harder to get a deeper understanding of the topic.

We would conduct a research by doing a longitudinal study that observes respondents from childhood into adulthood and records marriage and divorce status. 

It would be a long term qualitative study to try to understand how family’s structures (such as divorced parents, or family’s religions…) impacts the stability of the child’s relationship.

With a quantitive approach In the form of surveys you could ask questions about whether you have similar physical characteristics as your partner but also whether your bagground is similar. For example, do you have the same eye color, hair color, hobby’s, values, family structure, socio economic status etc.

If you want to study it with a qualitative approach, you can have more in depth converstations about for example the motives of choosing the partner. In the qualitative interview you can ask the questions that are not categorical, but require a deeper explanation.

You can combine the two approaches in a reaseach project by starting a quantitative survey to get statistical overview of of homogenized the surveys group is. And then use a smaller diverse sample to get the mechanisms and reasons behind the statistics. To try to figure out the motives behind the numbers by asking questions such as why the chose partners similar to them instead of opposites and so on.

Contribution

Writing: Anne and Hannah

Ideas: Anne, Alicia, Nicolas and Hannah

Presentation: Hannah

- Quantitative: job, occupation, income, SES, race/ethnicity, religion, political ideology, age, gender identity, sex, wanting children or not, physical appearance (height, weight), lifestyle (frequent exercise / going to the gym etc.), geographic location, languages

- Yes or No questions

- Percentages

Interview:

Qualitative: Relationship with family, friends, other social circles or social interactions (feelings, experiences), daily habits, aspirations (similar aspirations and future goals?)

After collecting quantitative data, conducting 1:1 interviews or focus groups

• Random sample from survey population

• General population (not couples)

• Age range (18 - 25 years of age)

- Recording the interviews + transcription and then coding into categories

- Motivations, feelings and experiences behind the categories

- "Did you feel external pressure to marry/date someone in your social circle?"

- "How much influence did your parents have in your early childhood?"

- "How much influence did your parents have in your dating life?"

Writer: 송혜인

Ideas: Salisa Rieger, 이재민, 윤세휘

Quantitative:

-race

-ethnicity

-age

-income

-educational level

-religion

-appearance (ex: height, weight)

Qualitative:

-life style(individual differences)

-family backgrounds

-personal values

-rank differences of quantitative measures among people

Q2.

-Through quantitative investigation, specific elements of homogamy(ex: wage, race and education level etc.) can be measured. Among those who are married based on homogamy, we can examine what kind of differences each couple has by qualitative measurement. (For example, through face-to-face interview, we might find that married couple with similar education level might have the same hobby.)

Writer: 권채은, 김범준

Presenter: 권채은

1. Introduction

• Background: In contemporary society, marriage is not merely a personal choice but is closely tied to economic and cultural conditions. Previous studies suggest that homogamy is related to higher marital satisfaction, and this study aims to examine this relationship more concretely.

• Hypothesis: Couples who share similar economic and cultural characteristics will report higher levels of marital satisfaction.

• Independent variables: Economic background (income level), social status/class, religion, occupation, educational attainment.

• Dependent variable: Marital satisfaction (e.g., overall life satisfaction, communication satisfaction, frequency of conflict, willingness to maintain marriage).

• Participants: Married couples (married for at least three years, including diverse age groups and socioeconomic backgrounds).

2. Quantitative Research

• Method: Questionnaire method (survey using structured questionnaires).

• Independent variables: Economic background, religion, occupation, education.

• Dependent variable: Marital satisfaction, measured on a 5-point Likert scale (e.g., “I am generally satisfied with my marriage,” “I feel emotionally close to my spouse”).

• Analysis: Respondents will be classified into Group A (homogamous couples) and Group B (heterogamous couples). The mean differences in marital satisfaction between the two groups will be compared.

3. Qualitative Research

   
   

   • Method: In-depth interviews.

   • Participants: Selected from both Group A (homogamous) and Group B (heterogamous).

   • Sample interview questions:
     

     • “What is the most satisfying aspect of your marriage?”

     • “When you and your spouse have different values or lifestyles, how do you adjust?”

     • “How do you think differences in economic background or education have influenced your relationship?”

   • 
     

   • Analysis: Interview data will be thematically analyzed to compare the marital satisfaction experiences of homogamous and heterogamous couples.

4. Conclusion

• Quantitative results: If homogamous couples (Group A) show significantly higher levels of marital satisfaction than heterogamous couples (Group B), the hypothesis will be supported.

• Qualitative results: If in-depth interviews reveal that homogamous couples experience fewer conflicts in communication and lifestyle and demonstrate stronger mutual support, the hypothesis will be further reinforced.

Writer: 박가연

Ideas: 김예은 김이안 박가연 송하린

If we wanted to study homogamy—the tendency for people to partner with others who are similar—how could we approach it using both quantitative and qualitative methods?

• What specific characteristics should we measure homogamy (to see whether couples are “similar”)?

[Quantitative data: category]

1. SES

2. environment

3. social roles in family

4. appearance

5. race

6. job

7. major

8. age

9. personality

10. region

• What kind of qualitative data would help us understand the meaning and experiences behind those patterns?

[Qualitative data: interview]

* theory: People will meet with someone who shares similarity.

1) text

*for couples

Q. how they met? (만남경로, 어떤 공통지점에서 호감도를 느끼기 시작했는가를 질문)

+ the married: why they decided to marry? (기혼자의 경우, 결혼 계기)

-> Use as answers to interpret how homogamy works in our society especially in relationships.

*for singles

Q. ideal type(who do you want to date in future?)

• If you were designing a small research project in our class, how would you combine the two approaches?

1. Quantitative data analysis first -> use Qualitative data to find specific route.

+ Set up a comparison group(비교군 설정) – a qualitative study on why the difference exists even A and B shares the same quantitative data but marry(or date) opposite style of partner.

2. Qualitative data analysis first -> Quantitative data next

Using quantitative data as supplementary means to think about the factors behind the answer to qualitative data(interview), the interactions between them (질적 자료(인터뷰)의 대답 이면에 있는 요소들, 그 요소들간의 상호작용에 대해서 생각해볼 수 있는 보조적 수단으로서 양적자료를 이용).

For example, interview seems like the important similarity was personality but by additionally interpreting their quantitative data we can find out actually they share SES, major, or family roles <- which was the main reason why they show similar personality.

Writer(sum up): 정서연

1. Conflict Theory

-Men may show a positive attitude toward women working outside the home, but this is not reflected in household labor sharing.

-If women’s social participation continues to be perceived negatively, it feels unfair: they face difficulties in advancing in society and also bear the burden of housework.

-Thus, men may outwardly accept women’s employment, but in the home, they often frame the situation in ways that still favor men.

2. Social Exchange Theory

-In relationships, fairness is often measured in terms of financial contribution.

-As women contribute more equally to household income, men’s attitudes toward women working become more positive.

-However, this does not necessarily translate into equal housework sharing, as the breadwinner role is still strongly associated with men.

3. Structural Functionalism

-Traditionally emphasized role division: men as breadwinners, women as homemakers.

-While society has changed and women’s participation in the workforce is more accepted, remnants of these old role expectations still remain.

+problem of statistics

Among younger generations (20s and 30s), there is evidence of a more equal division of household labor compared to the past

• Do you see similar patterns in your own family or in your country?

-My father runs a social enterprise that includes women with career breaks (often due to childcare) as priority candidates for hiring.
↔ However, at home, household labor still falls mostly on my mother.
→ This shows that even if the social perception of women’s work is positive, domestic practices still tend to follow traditional patterns.

-old generation tells young women to be socially working person <-> in home, most of the house works are laid to women

-writer: 유연서

To study homogamy, the key point is 'what is the similarity'.

• physical : height, weight, face (chin, eye, nose and etc.)

• emotional : personality (ex. external or internal), favor, values

• socioeconomic : religion, wealth, social status, family form, growing background

Measurement in Quantitative Approach

• all factors of physical similarity

• emotional: MBTI, scales for questions of favor & values

• socioeconomic: religion, tax, family form

• dependent variables: satisfaction or intention

Quantitative Approach

• Interview for emotional similarity or socioeconomic status

• Observation of behavior patterns with partners

• Field research can be conducted by questioning how they feel or want to make relationships with partners they spent time with.

Question 2.

• Quantitative: conducting survey for both independent and dependent variables. Independent values can be factors of similarities above or other factors. Dependent values can be satisfaction or intention of marriage, divorce rate, or the change of children in families.

• Qualitative: interview data about how they have grown up or what they consider in making relationships with their partners, observation for their behaviors. Social experiment can be one of effective ways.

• Mixed approach : quantification of qualitative data

  Sentimental analysis of text-mined data can include respondents' emotions or thoughts, and also can digitize those for proving the thesis.

  Filling some racks of results in quantitative data with qualitative data

Writer: 황태현

Presenter: 황태현

Education popularization and media advocacy have spread the concept of "gender equality." Yet changing reality requires reshaping interests and habits across sectors—like companies offering flexible work, men devoting more time to housework, and society providing greater support—and these changes are slow.

Arlie Russell Hochschild, in The Second Shift, coined "the stalled revolution": women have entered the workforce, but their family care duties remain unshifted. While "gender equality" is widely accepted in attitude, key reforms (flexible work, men’s housework participation, social childcare support) lag far behind in practice.

2. "Invisible" Housework

Many household tasks—planning family meals, remembering birthdays, tutoring kids—are "invisible." They are excluded from GDP and rarely seen as "work."

This invisibility leads people to underestimate their workload, resulting in the rule "whoever is free does it"—and women are usually assumed to be "free."

3. Traditional Gender Roles

In China, many grew up with parents following the "men work outside, women manage home" model. This mindset subtly influences people, pushing women to unconsciously revert to this pattern.

Data from the National Survey on the Social Status of Chinese Women shows: in urban dual-income families, women spend 2–2.4 times more on housework than men and take 63.2%–76.1% of childcare duties. However, a 2025 Peking University Sociology study found that even with this imbalance, couples may still see the division as "fair."

This perceptual gap comes from internalized traditional gender norms: men view "occasional participation" as "equal contribution," while women develop "adaptive rationalization" after long-term invisible housework.

4. Workplace Penalty for "Mothers"

Society still has implicit biases against working women, particularly mothers—who often lose promotion chances over childbirth or family duties. Under such pressure, some families make "rational" choices.

A 2021 Cornell University (US) survey found 65% of employers think "mothers are more likely to take leave for kids," but only 23% recognize this bias is unfounded. This cognitive bias subjects mothers to double standards in performance evaluations.

서염 범우신

On the quantitative side, we could measure similarity by looking at things like age, education, occupation, income, religion, or even political orientation. Basically, we could create some kind of similarity score to see how close couples are in these characteristics. A short survey or existing datasets would help us see the overall patterns.

But numbers alone can’t really explain why people choose partners who are similar, or what that similarity actually means to them. That’s where qualitative data comes in. We could do interviews with couples, asking them why they feel drawn to certain traits, or how they think being similar affects their relationship. We might also collect personal stories about how family or cultural expectations influenced their choice.

Changes in the institution of marriage: In a society without a state religion, the likelihood of legalizing same-sex marriage will increase, and diverse forms of marriage may be legally recognized.

Shift in social values: Society will move toward valuing individual life choices and autonomy more than institutional marriage.

Practical limitations: With declining birth rates, increasing numbers of people choosing not to marry, and rising divorce rates, the concept of the “ideal family” will become increasingly difficult to realize.

Changing meaning of family: The perception of family as something permanent will weaken, but for some people, the sense of accomplishment in forming a family will remain an important goal.

2. “Would you consider cohabiting before marriage? Why or why not?”

Opposing view

- Cohabitation may make it easier to cross boundaries that should be respected before marriage.

- The distinction between a dating relationship and preparing for marriage can become blurred, leading to confusion.

- Statistics suggest that couples who cohabit before marriage have higher divorce rates.

-Because I value the sense of accomplishment that comes from marriage, I would not prefer cohabitation.

Supporting view

-Since marriage involves significant institutional constraints, cohabitation may be necessary to first adjust to living together in a private relationship.

-Just as living together is different from simply being close friends, couples may need to test their compatibility before entering into a legal institution.

-Cohabitation before marriage can be understood as part of the preparation process for marriage.

Social context

As marriage and divorce rates rise, cohabitation may also become established as one form of social relationship.

3. “Do you think the government should promote marriage? What will you propose?” (Right-wing perspective)

Conservative values: Emphasis on economy, bloodline, and religion.

There is a gap between global conservatism and Korean conservatism, so it is easier to frame this within the Korean context.

Conservative premises in Korea

- Emphasis on reproduction and social stability through the family.

- Marriage is not merely a personal choice but an institutional foundation for the survival of the state.

- Maintenance of the traditional, heterosexual, “normal family” model.

- Reflection of religious and ethical values (especially Christian respect for life).

Policy proposals

- Economic support: Prevent marriage from failing due to financial reasons and provide a stable foundation for settlement — youth housing, tax benefits, and extended support periods based on marriage or pregnancy.

- Parental leave reform: Reduce the burden concentrated on women and encourage men to take parental leave.

- Birth and life-respecting policies: Restrict abortion and protect fetuses to encourage family formation.

⦁ Debate on the concept of life: Institutional frameworks may vary depending on when life is considered to begin.

⦁ Practical issues: If young women avoid child-rearing, children may end up in orphanages.

; Policy implication: Establish life-respect as a social value while also creating institutional measures to reduce the burden of child-rearing.

Social logic

- Marriage is not just a personal choice but an institution of social responsibility and accomplishment.

- Freedom and choice should be guaranteed, but responsibility must be emphasized within that framework.

- Policy balance is needed to prevent excessive concentration of gender roles and burdens on women.

Conservative emphasis

Although these policies may appear to contain progressive elements (such as economic support or easing gender role burdens), in reality they are attempts to preserve and strengthen the traditional family system and existing values and order, and therefore should be understood as a conservative approach.

Writer: 송하린

Ideas: 김예은, 김이안, 박가연, 송하린

Through social exchange theory, with more education and access to jobs, women are able to bring more resources to table, and men may capitalize on that. Do to the fact that social exchange theory does not only rely on money / monetary assets as a tool of power imbalances, social status can be utilised by men in order to justify the unequal distribution of labour, despite women possessing a higher financial status than before.

Germany

• General more open communication about division of housework

• Patriarchal notions of gendered character of housework remains (with women seen as naturally better than men in this department)

In Germany, after full time jobs, women come home and do the houseworks. There's a notion that men are not as good as women in houseworks and use that as an excuse/weaponize that incompetence.

Korea

• In Korea, balance in division of housework is increasing between men and women. Our team's families and parents have divided amounts of housework at home. Although in older generations the imbalance was big, it is getting better.

송혜인, Salisa Rieger, 이재민, 윤세휘

Alicia : We believe that women’s participation in the workforce has become more positively valued thanks to the efforts of feminism. This shift has contributed to reducing inequalities within couples. However, traditional structures such as the nuclear family model, where the mother is expected to act as the primary caregiver at home while the father works outside remain persistent and continue to shape the way men and women behave in the household. In France, similar patterns can be observed. For example, my dad still earns a higher salary than my mother, and she takes on more of the domestic labor. I think France is quite comparable in terms of gender inequalities and tends to follow the model of the traditional nuclear family.

From a structural funktionalistic perspective you can say that the reason that there perspective on women who work have become. More positive because of the stability that double the income brings to a family Is very valued and there are better child care resources that make it possible.

How even though on a macro level the view on women working has changed positively in the individual family there can still be be some patriarchal pressure and ideals.

At the same time there is still a wage gap between men and women who give the men a bigger power in the individual household that they can use to get og of housework.

Hannah:

I have not seen the same kind of spilt in housework in my family in Denmark my parent have a pretty equal division of housework and I think that that in a pretty normal thing in the danish culture as a whole.

Anne:

In the Netherlands there are a lot of women who work part time, due to the expensiveness of child care and the patriarchy decide that then the women should work less because they earn less. However in my family my mom earns more and works more and my father does more household choires. So maybe it just depends on who earns more, and the other should work less and do more household choires. But it should be a discussion between partners and not a given thing that the women always should work less.

The first reason is the continuation of gender roles and stereotypes. Society has long associated women with the home, child-rearing, and household chores, while linking men to work and providing for the family. This mindset has led to the common belief that housework is a "natural responsibility" for women.

Second, there are constraints on time and an imbalance of energy. While women are proactive in their careers, they often face the dilemma of a "second shift." After a full day of work, they are usually expected to come home and continue with domestic duties. This means women invest more time and energy in household labor, which leads to an unequal distribution.

The third point is the workplace environment and the "ideal employee" bias. Despite their positive work attitude, women still have to deal with family responsibilities like childbirth and raising children, which often puts them in a difficult position in the workplace. Society expects them to be both excellent employees and good wives and mothers.

Fourth, there is an asymmetry in economic and social status. In some families, even if a woman works, her income and career status may still be lower than her male partner's. This economic asymmetry can sometimes affect the power dynamics within the family.

In conclusion, the positive shift in women's work attitudes is a sign of social progress. However, the unequal distribution of household chores reveals deeper societal issues, including traditional beliefs, social expectations, workplace culture, and internal family power structures. To truly achieve an equal distribution of household labor, all parts of society must work together to break down outdated gender stereotypes, promote a fairer workplace environment, and encourage men to take on a greater share of family responsibilities.

(1) rising positive perceptions about women working

- People born in modern society where all people can be guaranteed equality of education, getting jobs or more can form their values about equality

- Behaviors to protect their own rights are prevalent in the society, and some ways of them can be to cultivate professionality and career to make one's social status.

- Variation of jobs that women can do, differently from the former society where physical power is the main component for the labor, and the rising perception that women can do better than the men can influence one's values in the life course.

(2) existing inequality of domestic behavior

- agency with structure: the survey was conducted in Korean society, so Korean culture can be seen as the main component for this state. Despite of rising gender equality in modern Korean society, there can be the vestige of patriarchy culture and people could educate it while growing.

- Linked lives: families can be stable due to interconnections among family members. DINK families, a new form of family which means Double Income No Kids, can divide their housework equally and accumulate their career by working. However, one that wants to bear and raise child, parental leave is necessary. However, the lack of policies for families raising their children while keeping their career made the unequal division of housework so that men work outside and women work inside because the duration of parental leave of men is usually shorter than women's. It can be seen as a socially inevitable situation that Korean society needs to solve.

Writer: 황태현

Ideas: 최서영, 최태인, 한지완, 황태현

Q-1.

- Structural functionalism : the provided traditional social norms and roles regarding patriarchy (men do all the works outside and women do house chores) -> feminist theory : getting out of the unequal patriarchal practice (women start to work, unequal division of labor and caregiving is mitigated)

- Actual division problem : cultural lag (e.g. men's parental leave is not legally systemized whereas the thoughts of individuals are following the norms feminist theory proposes, so women are taking the double burdens of doing both house chores and work) -> but 15-29 male contributing more to the housework by 9.6% while men over 60 contributing only about 1.6% more (2019 statistics) : the possibility of enhancement in the future compared to the status quo

Q-2.

- Chaeeun's grandparents : grandmother takes the double burdens (both family finance and houseworks) -> unequal

- Other members : mothers do the laundry or cooking / fathers shop for groceries or do the dishes -> unequal, but only fathers are contributing to the household finance so it can be considered partially equal (as you can see in the graph)

- The percentage of women's quitting their work due to the burdens of house chores was higher than that of men's.

Writer : kr for 김범준 eng for 권채은

Ideas : all members

1. Why do you think attitudes toward women working have become more positive, but the actual division of housework remains so unequal?

• Conflict theory

  Transition period(in South Korea) - despite of shift from collective society(every social members' role of country was fixed, and that caused more imbalances of power in family, such as women took the full charge of housework) to individual society(Social paradigm of country has shifted from collectivism to individualism, and each social members' role has to be extended result from increase of social interaction), the cognition about equal division of housework is still inadequate

• Structural Functionalism

  - Social structure has been changed, and therefore, function that each social member have to contain also does. The phenomenon that positive perspective about women working and unequal division of housework happens simultaneously shows us that changed society structure tries to keep the established role system in family for maintaining the social stability(Men: Social labor / Women: Housework)

• Feminist Theories

  - Every social member has to compete under the circumstance; finite resources. In such situation, married women might be social weak ∵ patriarchy-resulted family&marriage system. Due to above mentioned factors, discordance between positive perspective about women working and unequal division of housework appears

  - Second shift: The term 'working mom' might seems to be contradicted ∵ it could be interpreted that society require women to become both; perfect laborer and perfect breeder.

  - Male's cognition: They might have grown up and watched housework is the main task of female in family, and this family background have influenced them in two ways. They repeat after their parents, or help female to complete their family housework. Either way, there is one thing in common; no awareness about 'equal' division. This indiscretion might be one factor of imbalance in our society.

  
  

  cf) Linked life

  ㄴ To complement the competition under finite social resources, there is another view about this circumstance; instead of confrontation, when man and woman become a family(marriage, partnership, etc.), they share experiences, which can be interpreted as sharing resources. Yet there is a subtle difference between them(major difference could be biological; hormone, physical matters, ... / difference of social expectations, roles, comparative advantage between their cognitive ability...), it can overcome by 'interaction'. This interaction can be formed in various ways; doing same tasks in home such as breeding their child, laundry, washing dishes, preparing meal... These might create a psychological/social similarities, lead man and woman to 'link'. This link of life can be the solution of unequal division of housework, eventually create more positive interaction between every social members that can help everybody find their own way to 'live well'.

  
  

2. Do you see similar patterns in your own family or in your country?

Although role of social member changed, still there is a remaining biases that housework is women's role, and women is 'better(connotes inherent ability and knowledge)' about housework than men. This can be easily found in South Korean family

• ex) tendency that women in double income family sacrifice their social ability before their children gain self-reliance

  
  

• Positive phenomenon that our generation(born in 1990s~2000s)

  - Fluid conversion of role in family(familiy member who affords to participate more in housework does the proper work in house in proper timeline regardless of gender)

  ㄴ This mobility is becoming general form of family of our generation(experienced patriarchy-based family structure, gender-equal education, and extreme gender conflict)

  
  

1. Cultural

   • In korea there is an ideology to take care of your parents, so therefore the daughters stay home longer (confucian values).

   • In Korea, there is still a lot of patriarchal pressure which causes that it is more expected from men to live independent. Moreover, it is more socially accepted for a woman to stay at home.

2. Economic

   • It is hard and expensive to get a house in Korea. Men get hired earlier, because maybe there is some discrimination against women because they can get pregnant. So they can afford a house earlier.

3. Social factors

   • The system supports that children can stay in the home. Which compared to Europe it is not financially supported to stay at home with parents. In Europe it is supported to get out of the house, for example students get money to move out. In Korea women tends to marry later or not at all, so they live at home longer. Sons are more expected to move out after marriage, while daughters have less pressure to leave unless they marry.

This phenomenon is known as the  « kangaroo tribe » in South Korea. As explained above it combines social and cultural factors with economic instability, that pushes to family-reliance. Furthermore, the age-range of the people concerned is not precise on Gen-Z.

To wit, according to the Korea Employment Information Service, around 80% of people 25 to 29 and 53.1% of individuals in their early thirties fall into this group.

However, the gender difference between South Korea and Europe/US could be explained by patriarchal structures, where men can develop themselves more easily than women in South Korea, combined with economic difficulties related to high housing costs.

• There is also a difference in how young men behave in Europe compared to Korea. In Europe young men are in general less motivated to move out. They think it is nice to stay at home and that there parents take care of them. While the society puts more pressure on women to have responsisibilities and be independent. Women in Europe want to proof themselves more then men and be independent and move out of the house. It is more expected for women in Europe to be motivated and know what they want ib life compared to men.

Writer: Nicolas & Anne

Ideas: Alicia, Hannah, Nicolas, Anne

Cultural factors

• Sense of protection over daughters, incentivising families to encourage them to stay at home longer than men

Economic factors

• Gender pay gap: S. Korea having the highest among OECD member states

  • Structural barrier to women's labour participation and independence

Social factors

• Mandatory military service: Increased sense of adulthood and growth in men, enabling them to move out earlier

  • Discipline

  • Taking care of oneself

Europe / U.S.

• Gender roles remain prevalent in society (although noticable decrease)

• Potentially: moving into home of husband's family in Southern European countries might be a reason for sons to stay at their parental home longer

  
  

Cultural Expectations and Gendered Coresidence Patterns

One important explanation for the observed cross-national gender differences in young adults’ residential choices lies in parental expectations for daughters. In many Western societies, parents tend to encourage their daughters to leave the parental home relatively early, as independent living is associated with maturity, self-reliance, and the development of individual capacities. Early departure from the parental household is thus perceived as a crucial step toward adulthood and personal growth.

By contrast, in Korea, parental expectations for daughters are shaped more strongly by family-centered and marriage-oriented norms. Parents often prefer their unmarried daughters to remain at home until marriage, both for reasons of safety and to preserve social reputation. Independent living for unmarried women may still be associated with social risks or stigma, and therefore remaining in the parental household is seen as a way to maintain propriety and prepare for a “good” marital match.

This contrast highlights the broader cultural divergence between Western individualism, which emphasizes personal autonomy and self-development, and East Asian familism, which places greater weight on collective reputation, filial obligations, and marriage as a key transition into full adulthood. Consequently, daughters’ residential trajectories reflect not only economic conditions but also the normative frameworks within which families operate.

• Military service and finances: Because most Korean men complete mandatory military service, they often have a small financial base afterward (at least in recent years).

• Gender wage gap: Women face a larger wage gap, making it harder to save enough to live independently.

• Safety concerns: Women worry more about living alone, as they are more frequently exposed to crimes.

• Western vs. Korean values: Western societies emphasize individualism, while Korea’s Confucian heritage values family ties; in Korea, if someone doesn’t marry, it’s expected they will live with their closest relatives.

• Confucian influence on women: Because of Confucian traditions, there is a stronger expectation for unmarried women than men to live with their parents. Women are seen as “leaving the household” only when they marry.

• Social perceptions of independence: Men who remain with their parents into their 30s may be viewed as immature, while women face less stigma for staying.

• Patriarchal norms: The lingering patriarchal mindset expects men to be independent and enter society as breadwinners.

• Household roles: Due to traditional gender roles, it is more socially acceptable for women to stay home. Parents may also feel less urgency for daughters to move out, believing they are more helpful with housework.

• Relational orientation: Women tend to be more relationship-oriented, placing greater value on close family connections than men.

• Institutional support: Western countries provide stronger institutional support for women who choose to live alone.

• Social attitudes toward women’s careers: Western societies generally view women’s participation in the workforce more positively, which also encourages higher rates of independent living.

  writer: 윤종훈

1. Culture and Family Dynamics

This is probably the biggest factor. There's a strong sense of family duty, often rooted in Confucian ideas. Even though sons were traditionally the main heirs, in practice today, daughters often become the primary caregivers—handling day-to-day stuff and emotional support. The mother-daughter bond is especially close. There's also less pressure for women to move out just to be independent; it's more expected that they'll leave when they get married, not before.

2. The Money Problem

The economy makes it a smart choice, especially for women. Housing in places like Seoul is crazy expensive. On top of that, women often face a tougher job market and a gender pay gap. For a single woman, living alone is a huge financial risk. So staying home is a strategic way to save up for their future, whether for a house, more education, or starting a business.

3. Social Shifts and Practical Perks

People are getting married much later, so that "pre-marriage" stage is longer. There's even a term, "Patter," for adults who live with their parents and help with expenses, which makes it seem more like a mutual agreement than dependence. And honestly, living with parents is often seen as safer and easier than living alone in a small studio.

Q2:

How this compares to the West:

In the U.S. or Europe, you often see the opposite—sons tend to stay home longer. While money is also a factor there, the culture is different. Independence is a bigger value, and there's less expectation to live with and care for your parents. Daughters are often encouraged to be independent earlier, and guys staying home can sometimes have a negative stereotype (like the "failure to launch" trope). In Korea, a daughter living at home is a normal, even strategic, life phase without that stigma.

Write: 범우신 서염

ideal: 사문빙 왕아즈 범우신 서염

In Korea, parenting style and social factors can affect the increase of female kangaroo tribe. Korean parents usually tend to raise their sons freely to hang out outside (ex. playing soccer, hide-and-seek) contrast to daughters to do rather neat behaviors (ex. playing with dolls, playing piano). This style can cause gender difference in the mind of independence, men more independent than women. Also, Korean conscription system makes men separate from their families to grow their independence and raise money by the military installment savings. Also, the social perception of the women’s independence seems a little bit negative because of security rather than men. Furthermore, financial instability of women because of the lack of policies about career break or others, compared to men, can lead them to live with their parents to reduce their financial burden and make balance by supporting their old parents.

writer: 황태현

Ideas: 최서영, 최태인, 한지완, 황태현

Confucian Family Norms: Traditionally, Korea has maintained a patriarchal culture centered on the eldest son. It is socially acceptable—even encouraged—for daughters to stay at their parents’ home until marriage, while sons are still expected to become independent and prepare to be heads of their own households.

Emphasis on Women’s Safety and Honor: Korean society is highly sensitive to women’s safety issues, especially concerning late-night outings and living alone. Living with parents is viewed as protection from such risks, so daughters feel less pressure to move out.

Social cognition: Living alone as a young woman in Korea is not yet fully normalized, and parents often feel it is safer for their daughters to remain at home, given that women are more frequently victims of crime. Taken together, these cultural expectations, economic pressures, and safety concerns help explain why daughters in Korea are more likely to stay with their parents compared to patterns in Europe or the U.S.

Marriage as a Marker of Independence: In Korea, marriage is still widely associated with true independence. It is not considered unusual for daughters to live with their parents until marriage, which is symbolically reflected in weddings where the bride’s family often moves more.

2)Family Gender Roles and Care Expectations

Invisible Care Work: Parents may expect daughters to take on more household chores and emotional caregiving. This expectation leads daughters to naturally stay and help with housework or elder care.

Emotional Closeness: Cultural norms also perceive mother-daughter relationships as closer, making parents more comfortable with daughters remaining at home.

3) various factors (cultural, economic, and social factors)

In Korea, adult daughters are more likely to live with their parents than sons due to a mix of cultural, economic, and social factors. Traditionally, parents see daughters as closer sources of emotional support, while sons are expected to show independence once they finish school or marry. High housing costs also make it harder for young adults to move out, and families often direct resources toward helping sons establish separate households.

Additional discussion points: why adult son remain living with their parents

Demand for high status for men at marriage: When a man and a woman marry, the man's social status is expected to be higher than the woman's. When the man's social status is lower than the woman's, or when the woman's social status is higher than the man's, the marriage is often opposed. Consequently, the barriers to marriage are relatively lower for women than for men.

writer: 박서연

조원: 정서연, 송수현, 박송호

For kr

• • more working women : less child bearing, burdens of housework

• • dangers for women : stalking issues, more exposed to crimes, less chance to be economically independent compared to men

• • Man after military service : obligated collective living style, savings from their wage -> make it more easy for korean men to form foundation to live alone

• • Unmarried fertility rate rise : less than 5% -> should be married to get more child, so independence is delayed (Moreover, housing price and child rearing cost is rising more and more which makes people difficult to get married and leave their home at an early age)

• • Women being independent after getting their cohort partners : living with their boyfriend's house, or having co-living experience before they get married

• • In collectivistic culture, people are feel more obligated to reciprocate + women are tend to be get emotion-focused support + men are obligated to leave their home earlier than women and make money(patriarchal) : women have more tendency to maintain their bonds with parents -> giving back the support they've received by co-inhabiting with their parents, helping with the house chores, providing financial support after the retirement of their family

For western countries

• • partnership system : couples can live together without marrying , can have institutional advantages without legally getting married

• • Men not going to military : increased time living with their parents together

• • different gender roles given : women are encouraged to have family-oriented goals(e.g. leave one's parent early and make her own family), whereas men are encouraged to stay more with their parents and get more financial support [NY Post]

• • Birth rate amongst unmarried couples : more than 65% -> easy to construct their own family and be independent from their parents

Writer : 권채은

Ideas & background info : all members

General trends

-In many European countries and the U.S., sons tend to stay with their parents into adulthood.

-In South Korea, adult daughters are more likely to remain with their parents compared to sons.

According to the statistics, European countries show different range in numbers: large difference in Southern Europe and smaller difference in Northern Europe.

Thus, it is necessary to analyze seprately Northern Europe, including the Scandinavian Peninsula, which are known as welfare states, and the Southern European countries, including the Balkan Peninsula.

In addition, South Korea shares a lot of similarities with Southern European countries:

-Strong community and family bonding

-Relatively weaker social security system

-Low birth rate

-The effects of gender inequality

However, the result regarding the proportion of adults living with parents is different. In Southern Europe, unmarried men are more likely to continue to live with their parents while South Korea shows the opposite result.

After analyzing these two cases, our team brought a presumption: while Southern Europe and South Korea hsare similar community and family values, specific values differ due to various external factors, leading to different living arrangements for unmarried adults.

Southern Europe

-Common traditional family structure ex) Zadruga in South Slavic regions (Serbia, Bulgaria, etc.).

-Family structure based on patriarchy, where the wife joins her husband’s family after marriage

-Married men form a family unit with older generations to continue the family line

-Sons are expected to become the head of the family and maintain the lineage

-Daughters leave their original family and join husband’s family

—> Higher proportion of unmarried men live with their parents compared to unmarried women

South Korea

Background: Rapid industrialization, economic growth, urban concentration have transformed society

Result: Nuclear family formation has been progressing quickly

-Sons are expected to become independent and financially support their families

-Daughters are expected to live with their parents, receiving protection and helping with household chores in community and family oriented culture

-Unlike Southern Europe, women continue to care for both their parents and parents-in-law without fully separating from their original family

-Gender wage gap is huge so that parents expect daughters to fulfill traditional gender roles rather than financial independence

—> Higher proportion of unmarried women live with their parents compared to unmarried men

Although Southern Europe and South Korea share a number of similarities in cultural, social, and economic aspects, detailed value and predicted responsibility differentiate the proportion of adults living with their parents.

references:

KIHASA, GLOBAL SOCIAL POLICY BRIEF, Family Policy in Eastern European Countries, 2016

Iacovou, M., Regional differences in the transition to adulthood. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 2002

Eurostat, Young people living with their parents, 2022

Eurostat, Young people leaving the pareantal household by sex, 2021

writer: 김이안

ideas: 김예은, 박가연, 송하린

• What do you think marriage will look like in 20 years?

We think people will get married later when they are stable. The lateness in marriage will also be because of the focus on individual happiness and mental state as well as the needs of the individual.  We also think that there will be an increase in the alternative couples with the rise of inclusivity. We think that there could also come a decline due to less need to get married and the importance and status of marriage will be lessened.

• Do you want to try cohabitating before marriage? why? why not?

We all agree that we would cohabitate before marriage, because we think that it is a prior step to mariage.  Living together before marriage you get to learn about the living habits of your partner as well as financial priorities. This has historically been reasons for divorce so knowing their habits before your marriage can be a sort of trial run for marriage. it might also help with lowering the rising divorce rate if you are able to cohabitate with your partner since that has been past reasons for divorce.

• Do you think the government should promote marriage?

Not really. We don’t think that promoting marriage as the (only) way of having a family. This can also lead to prejudice gains other forms of family and exclude families who aren’t allowed to be married. Also because you can be a good and loving family without a marriage certificate.

As a MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND WELFARE we would do this to help the declining birth rate In Korea:

We think that there needs to be a change in the welfare structure, this could include daycares for babies and toddlers. This is so the mother especially doesn’t feel as her work carrier is less affected  in the long term and will make it possible for women to get back into the workforce quicker and easier. At the same time setting up classes for fathers to help with daily baby tasks and care might be beneficial as well, due to the rising want for equality in parent roles. we think that education parents as equally responsible and knowledgeable would help with mothers feelings of carrying the childcare and raising alone.

We also want to point out that paying people to become mothers might not be a good solution due to the fact that the in equality in parent responsibilities that is the underlying cause of the issue.  You can change the current financial support structure to also include equal paid maternity and paternity leave for parents.

Writing:

Hannah

Ideas:

Everyone

- Marriage rates may slightly decline due to rising individualism.

- The emphasis will likely remain on love and personal fulfillment, rather than on functional necessity, social status, or parental pressure.

- Household responsibilities are expected to evolve from the traditional “second shift” carried mainly by women toward a more balanced and equitable distribution.

Would you consider cohabiting before marriage?

- Yes, as it is common in Europe and North America.

- Cohabitation provides the opportunity to get to know your partner more deeply and to test whether living together is truly compatible.

NGO declining marriage and birth rates

-       Daycare centers

-       Organizing food for the kids (a meal a day for free, free breakfast/lunch in school)

-       Partnerships for supporting education locally (in Korea itself)

-       Trainings for parents to feel more comfortable to raise a child

-       Therapies for overcoming fears, for partners and the whole family to give stability and support

-       Youth centers to connect with others and can play where someone is watching your kid in the afternoon

-       Homework extra classes, where children get help with their homework after school

In 20 years, I think marriage might become less common because many people will face greater economic pressure, such as high housing and living costs, which can make marriage less attractive. Changing gender roles and expectations may also influence people to delay or even avoid marriage, since individuals are more focused on personal development and equality in relationships. At the same time, people may find happiness and stability in different ways outside of traditional marriage, and many will value personal space and independence more than before.

I believe that traditionally, the essence of marriage has been about compromise, patience, and accepting each other’s flaws. However, in the future, with advances in technology, we might see the emergence of customizable or even artificial emotional relationships that could change the way people view marriage. This could lead to fewer people wanting to go through the effort of compromise and adjustment with another person, as they might prefer more convenient or personalized alternatives to traditional marriage.

2/

When it comes to cohabiting before marriage, there are strong arguments for both sides. On the one hand, I agree with the idea because sometimes people may act differently in public and in private, so living together can show their true personality. It also helps couples understand each other’s daily habits, finances, and even family expectations, which is important because many marriage conflicts actually come from small daily issues piling up over time. Cohabiting can also test whether two people are truly compatible before making a lifelong commitment.

On the other hand, some people disagree with cohabitation before marriage due to traditional cultural values or religious beliefs, which view living together without marriage as inappropriate or morally wrong. In addition, some believe that cohabiting might reduce the sense of commitment, making partners less motivated to work through difficulties. For them, marriage itself is a symbol of responsibility and stability, and they prefer to start living together only after making that official commitment.

3/

The left supports policies like paid parental leave, universal childcare, financial subsidies and tax benefits, promoting gender equality, and improving education and healthcare for children. These measures help reduce the burden of raising children, create better living conditions, encourage marriage and childbirth, and respect diverse family types.

Marriage is projected to continue its trajectory toward partnerships based primarily on personal fulfillment and equality. The average age of marriage will likely continue to increase, reflecting a broader societal understanding that marriage constitutes a deep commitment and shared responsibility, rather than merely a legal formality. This trend is further reinforced by economic pressures, such as the high cost of child-rearing and professional ambitions, leading individuals to prioritize financial stability before marrying. Consequently, marriage may increasingly be viewed as an optional capstone rather than a universal prerequisite for a shared life, with long-term cohabitation becoming a more prevalent alternative. This shift is already evident, as data from 2019 indicates that 59% of American adults aged 18-44 had lived with an unmarried partner.

Q2:

From an analytical perspective, cohabitation before marriage can be viewed as a practical trial period that serves several key functions. It provides a realistic environment for partners to assess compatibility in daily life, including habits, financial management, and conflict-resolution styles—all factors critically linked to long-term marital satisfaction. Furthermore, navigating shared responsibilities and challenges during cohabitation can strengthen a couple's bond and teamwork. For many, this phase acts as a significant buffer, allowing them to evaluate the relationship's viability and potentially avoid the greater emotional and legal complexities of divorce if fundamental incompatibilities are discovered.

Q3:

The question of government promotion of marriage presents a complex policy dilemma. On one hand, there is a rationale for support, particularly in contexts of declining marriage and birth rates. Stable marriages often function as a primary unit for child-rearing and elder care, which can mitigate broader societal burdens on public welfare systems. Fiscal policies, such as tax benefits or housing subsidies for married couples, could alleviate economic pressures on young families and potentially have a positive correlation with birth rates.

On the other hand, government promotion carries significant risks. Initiatives must be carefully designed to avoid coercing individuals into marriage or penalizing those who choose alternative family structures. An overreach of policy could be perceived as an infringement on personal liberty, potentially fostering public resentment and counterproductively reinforcing negative views of the institution.

Left wing：

left-wing family policy focous on three key goals：

1. Boost gender equality: We’ll weave gender equality education into every school grade. We’ll also strictly enforce laws that ban employers from discriminating against pregnant or lactating women.

2. Fix work-life balance for parents: We’ll make paid parental leave mandatory—with costs split evenly by the state and employers. We’ll push for flexible work (like remote options) and require companies to offer on-site nurseries or childcare subsidies.

3. Ease family financial pressure: Every child gets a universal allowance to cover basics (food, clothes, school supplies). For housing, families with kids get priority for public housing, rent caps in family-friendly areas, and interest-free loans for first-time homebuyers. We’ll also set up a fund to cover part of wedding costs, prenatal check-ups, and postnatal care.

Written:서염

Ideal: 사문빙 왕아쯔 서염

• • lowered barriers and various forms : cohabitating, LGBTQ couples

• • Variation to labeling : Mr, Mrs, MS -> many other different forms

• • Exit from the patriarchal system : female may not follow their husband's last name

• • Change in laws/rules : similar to amandment today - based on current trend (e.g. 생활동반자법 논의, 사실혼 재산분할)

• • More before-marriage contract : donald trump for ex, preventing 'fake marriage' for house and other benefits

• • 'Marriage is not a duty but a choice'

• • More international marriage - through agent, 매매혼, upper level/lower level marriage and difference by rural/urban

Q2. Cohabiting before marriage?

• • agree : getting a chance to know each other's lifestyle, not living a legal document (divorce living social stigma)

• • disagree : higher chances of thinking the other partner as having more 'sexual experience

Q3. Government-level promotion of marriage?

• • definitely need : should support the country

• • Promoting non-legal marriage including cohabitating, same sex etc.

Q4. H&W policy suggestion regarding low marriage n birth rate

• • more child-caring classes for both-working parents(돌봄교실) : needs for specialized teacher for the after-classes, more public kindergartens

• • Free vaccination, subsidizing for pregnant women's total care -> truly helpful? // municipal level - consumer coupon for infants

• • Open-price SDM : price can be lowered through competition

• • career related problems : kindergartens within companies w/ over certain amounts of employees, flexible working(탄력 근무) - many options to choose

• • Guarantee ones' 'happy life' : safe environment, more free leisure activities

• • Infertility subsidy : IUI, test-tube baby

> Key matters are money and time

• • Better awareness : celebrity examples(sperm donation, come-out homosexual, adoption family) and campaign

박서연 : Marriage is increasingly individualized, with duties divided like in an “Excel Marriage.” In the future, it will resemble a flexible, renewable contract, with divorce more normalized. Marriage will be seen less as a lifelong institution and more as a flexible, renewable contract-like relationship.

정서연: Despite rising cohabitation, the lack of legal protection keeps marriage important. Future marriages may evolve into customized contracts clarifying finances, parenting, and caregiving.

박송호: Marriage will shift from a human union to a broader connection between beings. Marriage with AI could be one example.

Q2. Would you consider cohabiting before marriage? Why or why not?

송수현 : One perspective sees cohabitation as a useful way to experience each other’s lifestyles and values in real life. It can help couples test the feasibility of marriage and reduce future conflicts, though social stigma or family expectations may discourage it.

박서연 : Another view argues that cohabitation undermines responsibility and encourages breakups rather than commitment. Marriage is a formal promise to work through conflicts, and studies even suggest that cohabitation before marriage can increase divorce rates, making it a risky rehearsal.

박송호 : Others emphasize that living together helps partners understand and adjust to daily habits and differences, fostering mutual understanding as a foundation for shared life.

정서연 : Yes, I would definitely consider cohabiting before marriage. Dating often shows only the “best version” of each person, but living together reveals the everyday realities—like how someone handles chores, manages money, or reacts to stress after a long day. For example, I might discover whether my partner prefers to talk through problems calmly or tends to avoid conflict, which is very important in long-term relationships. Cohabitation gives couples a chance to practice compromise and teamwork in real life, much like a “trial run” before making a lifelong commitment. Of course, it is not the same as marriage, but I see it as a valuable experience that reduces the risk of unexpected conflicts after marriage.And, social perceptions of cohabitation are still often negative. In particular, this tendency is more likely to be stronger for women than for men. This phenomenon can be interpreted as being rooted in Korea’s patriarchal culture.

Q3. Do you think the government should promote marriage?

송수현 : The government should not directly promote marriage, but instead focus on improving living conditions—such as housing stability, childcare support, and accessible care services—that benefit all kinds of families. Forcing marriage promotion could create discrimination or exclusion against those who choose different life paths.

박서연 : Marriage is a matter of personal freedom, and government involvement is an overreach. Past policy attempts, like state-organized matchmaking events, have been ineffective and even burdensome. Promoting marriage risks stigmatizing unmarried individuals as abnormal. Instead, the government should create structural conditions—like job security and housing—that make voluntary marriage possible.

박송호 : The key role of the government is not to push marriage policies but to reconmend various way of social perceptions of choices like marriage and childbirth, ensuring people feel free and respected in their decisions.

정서연 : While marriage should remain a personal choice, it still provides stability, emotional support, and shared responsibilities that benefit both individuals and society. In contexts of low birth rates and rising individualism, supportive policies—such as housing benefits, tax incentives, and work–life balance programs—could encourage family formation without forcing it.

In conclusion, The government does not need to directly promote or enforce marriage. Marriage belongs to the realm of individual free choice, and excessive government involvement risks infringing on personal autonomy while reinforcing social stigma against those who remain unmarried. However, the stability, care, and social safety net that marriage and family provide still hold significant social importance. Therefore, the government’s role should not be to make marriage itself the goal, but rather to establish institutional and structural conditions that allow individuals to freely choose the kind of life they wish to pursue.

Q4. Your group must draft a family policy to address declining marriage and birth rates. What will you propose?( group7-Right political wing)

From a conservative perspective, marriage and childbirth are regarded as essential elements that form the foundation of society. Based on this view, we carried out our discussion.

송수현: To encourage marriage and childbirth, I propose: ① expanded tax benefits, ② housing support, ③ strengthened parental leave benefits and child-based financial support, and ④ marriage and family education programs. Through these measures, we aim to create a society where forming stable families is rewarded.

박서연: From a conservative perspective, marriage and childbirth are not merely individual choices but the essential foundation for the survival of the nation and society. The breakdown of families threatens social cohesion and stability, while low birth rates lead to aging, labor shortages, and heavier welfare burdens. Therefore, the government must actively encourage marriage and childbirth through tax benefits, housing support, family allowances, and educational campaigns. In this view, family policy is not a matter of lifestyle but a national strategy for survival.

정서연: From a right-wing perspective, marriage and family are the foundation of social stability and intergenerational solidarity. However, individual decisions about marriage are strongly influenced by economic insecurity, cultural expectations, and shifting gender roles. Thus, policies should focus on: ① strong financial and housing incentives, ② family-centered community programs, and ③ shared responsibility between men and women. By doing so, we can promote family formation, strengthen intergenerational bonds, and build a sustainable family system based on gender equality.

박송호 : I believe that policies are needed to ensure that vulnerable groups can fully access medical services and facilities during childbirth and receive adequate support. In addition, since declining birth rates may lead to reduced support for obstetrics and gynecology, I think it is necessary to provide financial assistance in advance.

Writer : 송수현

Traditional meaning of marriage can be difficult.

In terms of traditional view, marriage can be achieved as a goal of economic and sociological success. However, in Korea, difficulties in getting job and increase in individualism may cause more consideration about not only emotional exchange but also socio-economical status.

The weight of marriage can be lighter.

Negative perceptions about divorces are declined, and cohabitation as an alternative form of marriage is increasing in these days. Therefore, free perceptions about marriage would be increased, in contrast to the view for the traditional marriage.

“Would you consider cohabiting before marriage? Why or why not?”

-Cohabiting isn’t necessary.

Problems of finance can occur with partners.

One who has cohabited with ex can be seen a little big negative to new one.

-Cohabiting can be considered.

Cohabiting with loved one, conflicts in life after marriage can be prepared in advance in the step of couple. Life patterns of each other can be recognized and differences can be moderated by negotiation.

“Do you think the government should promote marriage?”

In Korea, the government should promote marriage because of low birth rates and economical stability. Consumption in the unit of family can promote financial cycles in the market that can cause financial promotion. Also, national promotion about marriage can solve the problem of social conflicts about individual difference such as education, SES, or gender.

Left political wing’s purpose for family policy to address declining marriage and birth rates

To incline marriage rates, legal extension about forms of marriage can be purposed. If cohabitation and same-sex marriage are admitted legally, new forms of marriage can be perceived positively in the society and marriage rates can be inclined. Also, to let married couples think the birth and infant care isn’t difficult, the reinforce of polices about parental leaving and wage during those periods can be purposed. Also, burdens of reinstatement and keeping careers can be solved by providing companies benefits for serving their employees paid vacation or other things.

writer: 황태현

Ideas: 최서영, 최태인, 한지완, 황태현

2. Would you consider cohabiting before marriage? Why or why not?
Yes, we believe cohabitation before marriage is necessary and acceptable.

• It allows couples to test whether their lifestyles are compatible.

• It provides an opportunity to understand each other’s daily patterns over a longer period of time.

3. Do you think the government should promote marriage?
Yes, the government should promote marriage, since it is essential for the continuity of the nation. However, we also believe the government should expand institutional support for new family forms such as cohabiting couples, as this reflects the direction of contemporary society.

"Your group must draft a family policy to address declining marriage and birth rates." (Right political wing perspective)

• Provide direct financial support and tax reductions for married couples.

• Offer competitive advantages in the market and reduce property taxes for families.

• Encourage childbirth by linking marriage with access to high-quality education (e.g., science high schools, gifted education), so children can have more opportunities to grow into talented individuals.

• Guarantee housing stability by providing special housing for young couples.

• Introduce joint taxation benefits for married couples: “Marriage reduces your taxes.”

• Apply progressive tax credits based on the number of children, with exponentially larger benefits for third and subsequent children.

• Since many women avoid childbirth due to career interruption, require companies to provide job security or reemployment opportunities for women after maternity leave.

• Promote campaigns and education programs through parent schools to emphasize the value of marriage and family.

writer: 원서현

In the references we found shows that there has been a decline in. Divorce in all three counties however France has the biggest decline in divorces. we do think that this trend will continue due to the focus on education, individual financial freedom and personal autonomy.

Also Gen Z is less likely to be married early or at least to make it a priority as it was back then with previous generations, as the tendency of marriage is not the pivotal adulthood entry door anymore. The American author Allison Raskin developed this idea in her book I Do (I Think): Conversations About Modern Marriage : marriage is now an active choice. However, that does not mean that marriage is put away. Just that Gen Z fears divorce as the « baby-boomers » generation has the highest divorce rate among all previous generations : and this precisely, has an impact on how Gen Z sees marriage.

–Would you say marriage today is becoming more of a “luxury good” for the college-educated?

We think that it has become an active choice to enter into such a commitment and many people do to various reasons whether financial religious or political make the choice that is the best for them. At the same time the online lecture with the two sociologist you presented shows that, any young people want to get married and have kids at some point but other things just take a bigger priority so it gets put out and gets taken. Into series consideration.

Q2 / Through which mechanisms might childhood family structure influence the risk of divorce?

We think that you learn social interaction In relationships from your parents and family so if you are around a lot of people getting divorced you have a higher likelihood of getting divorced yourself later in life. A parent’s divorces can also cause uncertainty in financial and living situations which can affect the child educational performance and relationship with money that follows them through their life.

The family structure and beliefs you grow up with is also often replicated in your future family.

we think that an early parents divorce can create a chain of risk which effects the Child for the rest of their life.

We think childhood family structure can really influence someone’s future relationships. When kids grow up seeing their parents argue or separate, it can affect how they deal with conflict or trust others later on. They might see divorce as something normal or just have more difficulty building stable relationships. Also, if the separation caused financial or emotional stress, that can follow them into adulthood and make relationships harder to maintain.

Thus, on the opposite effect ; a stable family with a low risk of divorce, arguing, and stable married parents : the tendency of social reproduction is high. But a healthy family does not explain everything : of course the risk of divorce is higher for an individual that experienced clashes, alternated parenting... but sociology could go beyond this simple reproduction effect.

Actually, children that experienced divorce with their parents on their childhood are capable to paste these learning into their adulthood relationships : where the learning of a children from a stable family could discover clashes and marriage instability later.

–How would you conduct a research using what methods?

Qualitative Interviews - you get deeper insight into the individual families and which structures played a role in the outcome of the persons life, with questions like “How did your parents handle conflicts?” or “How does your childhood affect your relationship today?”

You can also use observations in the participants homes to see the interpersonal dynamics of the families and their rutines. Maybe also focus group interviews so the participants can discuss with each other and get different perspectives and see how they react to other dynamics that te

We think that it could be to studied quantitatively but would be focused on outcome not process due to the very interpersonal focus. however you could ask questions like did your parents get divorced, or did you have to move doe to your parents divorce to look at the commonality of the mechanism. You could also ask about the financial risk that divorces can cause and rather the participants have financial issues now.

Ideas:

Everyone

Writing:

Hannah, Nicolas

Question 1: Do you see the decline in divorce rates playing out in your generation?

Yes, I do see this pattern, but mostly among well-educated and economically stable people. In my generation, marriage has become less of a social norm and more of a personal choice. Many people delay marriage until they achieve financial stability and emotional maturity.

For college-educated individuals, marriage is almost like a “luxury good”—something that requires strong economic resources and long-term planning. They tend to marry later, but also have more stable marriages. In contrast, those with fewer resources often choose to postpone or even avoid marriage altogether.

So, instead of saying marriage is disappearing, I’d say it’s becoming more class-based—a privilege that reflects economic and educational inequality.

⸻

Question 2: Through which mechanisms might childhood family structure influence the risk of divorce?

Childhood family structure can affect divorce risk through several mechanisms.

First, there’s the modeling effect—children learn how to handle relationships by watching their parents. If they grow up in a high-conflict or divorced family, they might develop negative expectations about marriage.

Second, there’s the emotional attachment mechanism. People from unstable families often experience insecurity or fear of commitment, which can make maintaining long-term relationships more difficult.

Third, economic resources also matter. Single-parent families often face financial stress, which can limit children’s educational and social opportunities, indirectly influencing their future marriage stability.

If I were to conduct research, I’d use a mixed-methods approach:

• Quantitatively, I’d analyze longitudinal survey data, like the PSID or national family panel data, using logistic regression to test how childhood family type predicts divorce risk.

• Qualitatively, I’d conduct in-depth interviews to explore how people narrate their family experiences and how these shape their beliefs about love, trust, and commitment.

Divorce rates are declining because people no longer see marriage as necessary. In Europe, especially in Germany and Luxembourg, more people are focusing on independence and freedom, so marriage and divorce rates are declining. We also think that marriage is becoming more of a luxury for college-educated people, so it's more of a "cherry on top".

2. Through which mechanisms might childhood family structure influence the risk of divorce?

All environmental influences impact the risk of divorce, whether macro or micro. For example, direct influences on the child, such as parental divorce, can impact how you deal with your emotions and how you communicate in relationships. Another factor is the financial aspect. For example, if your parents can't afford to give you a good education, you might end up in a lower-paid job, which could lead to arguments in your relationship later on due to financial problems. The different attachment styles also influences your relationships so how you experience different interactions within your family.

2.      How would you conduct a research using what methods?

We would conduct quantitative longitudinal research with 10–15-year-olds, and then with the same group of 55–60-year-olds. We would ask them to complete a questionnaire about their own and their partner's education and relationship status. We would also ask if they had got married. The limitations would be a high dropout rate and distortion regarding IQ. Other limitations would include financial resources and data processing.

Yes,we think this pattern is visible in our generation. People are getting married later and only when they feel emotionally and financially stable. Since, marriage is becoming more selective mostly among those who have higher education ,stable jobs and similar social backgrounds. In that sense,marriage today is turning into a kind of luxury good for the college educated. When marriage is no longer a necessary stage of life but a double investment in emotion and economy it becomes a "high-threshold social luxury".

Q2:

1. Social Learning: Children observe and internalize their parents’ relationship behaviors. If parents have poor conflict resolution or mistrust, children may adopt similar relational scripts.

2. Family experiences shape beliefs about the permanence of marriage and acceptability of divorce. Like, If my parents got divorced and everything turned out okay, I can too.”

3. Relationship Skills: Children from disrupted families may have less exposure to effective communication and difficulty trusting partners or managing conflict calmly can increase the likelihood of marital breakdown.

4. Socioeconomic: Divorce or single-parent households often experience economic strain and higher stress levels, which can affect children’s later relationship stability.

Methods：

Mixed methods (quantitative + qualitative)

Quantitative: use longitudinal survey data → track childhood family structure & later divorce → run logistic regression (education, income, age at marriage)

Qualitative: interviews with adults from different family backgrounds → explore views on marriage, conflict, commitment eg: What does a stable marriage mean to you

Written: 사문빙 왕아쯔

• • The Center for Divorce Education: higher education leads to economic stability, access to resources, high cognitive skills

• • Korean trend: highly educated women tend to delay marriage as they have more chances to deliberately choose -> marriage rate itself declines -> seemingly less divorce is happening (marriage is first required to get divorced)

• • delayed marriage happens due to personal goal achievement -> marriage can be luxury good for those who already achieved their economic success

• • Divorce rate itself declined to the lowest point, whereas gray divorce rate rose 47% last decade

• • Early stage of marriage (1-15y) high risk of getting divorced when women are less educated, while the opposite pattern was observed after 15 years of getting married (after accomplishing their life goals such as marriage and birth delivery -> get divorced feeling like there's no more significant life goals to achieve)

Q2.

• • intergenerational transmission of divorce theory + Life course theory: research suggests that both reduced commitment to marriage as an institution and lower confidence that marriages can remain stable and happy may partially account for the heightened risk for divorce among adults from divorced families(Amato&DeBoer,2001) -> observing parental divorce and learning marriage is impermanent (e.g. Or TV programs like 고딩엄빠, 이혼숙려캠프 might form childhood attachment style in a negative way later in their life)

• • American case: The Two Parent Privilege by Melissa Kearney -> children raised within intact parents are likely to maintain high ses in the future / rise in single motherhood if in low income, black or hispanic case, more likely to get divorced (due to the unequal background, some are less likely to get access to the resources / divorce occurs more commonly in the less privileged people => selection effect on divorce)

• • quantitative may not work as people do not want to reveal their vulnerability / answers might function as self-fulling prophecy (remarried parent's children experienced stigma and felt ashamed)

• • Qualitative : in-depth interviews examining family background, conducting longitudinal study investigating various types of life experiences and its effects (later results may show the difference), counseling center case study (among those ho are already mentally disrupted, finding different causes and other statistical effects)

-the pattern does exist: Educated women tend to have better judgment when they are choosing partners, and their own values are more firmly established → They can clearly distinguish their preferences and dislikes → They are more likely to find a well-matched partner, and they also have their own economic foundation

-In Korea, since going to university has become almost universal, this trend may be less pronounced overall ↔ However, among women who attend top-tier universities, their economic foundation may lead to lower divorce rates

-As marriage rates decline, divorce rates also decrease. The biggest reason women choose not to marry is that they cannot find partners who meet their expectations (relative to their own abilities)

→ Marriage is seen as one of many life values rather than a necessity, and its priority has declined.

→ Highly educated and high-income women tend to prefer “marrying up.” As women’s education levels rise, it becomes more difficult to find suitable partners

-The probability of marriage among women with master’s or doctoral degrees is about half that of women with bachelor’s degrees. (Higher education leads to lower marriage rates, and consequently, lower divorce rates)

•Would you say marriage today is becoming more of a “luxury good” for the college-educated?

-The decline in marriage rates itself shows this pattern → Only those with a certain foundation(education and economic resources) are getting married

-Because family background also plays a role, marriage can be considered a “luxury good.” Parents would want their children to marry someone who matches their economic and social status

2. Through which mechanisms might childhood family structure influence the risk of divorce?

-Social learning theory: Children learn communication patterns by observing how their parents interact at home → This affects how they communicate later in their own marriages

→one said that he has personally experienced that his communication style in romantic relationships resembles how his parents communicated

-Economic background during childhood: In divorced families, since a single parent has to support the household alone, financial instability may reduce opportunities to learn strategies(ex. communication skills, conflict managing) to meet good partners → It can increase the likelihood of divorce at their later life

-Cumulative disadvantage: Experiencing parental divorce at a young age exposes children to stress → affects their academic performance and interpersonal communication styles → influences how they communicate with spouses and family members in adulthood ⇒ These disadvantages accumulate over time and can increase divorce risk

• How would you conduct a research using what methods?

-Qualitative methods: Divide individuals into two groups(those with divorced parents and those with non-divorced parents) and conduct observations

→Compare the total number of divorces relative to the number of marriages between these groups

-Create two groups(those who have maintained their marriages and those who have divorced) and use interviews to ask about their childhood parental relationships

-Conduct surveys on the economic conditions of divorced families(quantitative) and observe whether children from these families show a higher tendency to divorce as adults(qualitative)

-Divide participants into two groups(those who experienced parental divorce in childhood and those who did not) → measure their stress levels through a longitudinal study, especially on critical periods → Identify where the stress comes from, and divide stress into interpersonal relationship stress or academic stress → examine how these factors affect their social relationships later in settings like university

writer: 유연서

Ideas: 송수현, 박서연, 박송호, 정서연

Writing: 정서연

Financial stability would be more important than the college-education. In Korea, most people can get college-educations somehow. There would be qualitative differences among universities or colleges, but people can learn what they want or need. More financially stable ones can see marriage as ‘luxury goods’ because they don’t need to move their SES by marriage and can live well by their own ability. In this view, marriage isn’t ‘luxury goods’, but ‘unnecessary and unwanted thing’. In contrast, unstable ones see marriage ‘luxury goods’ or not. Their burden from daily expense is bigger than the stable, but double-income with spouses can solve their problems. However, this unstability can let those think that marriage and child-caring is luxury in their finance.

3. Parental divorce would make chains of risk in lacks of affection and child’s learning about conflict solution. Divorced parents have responsiblities to send money for child-caring until their children become adults, so financial stability would less available to be chained. However, in the childhood, their children would be influenced by their continued conflicts and family dissolution as the solution. The child would learn how to cope with conflicts in the family, and they can have tendencies to avoid and endure or to cope wildly. Lack of affection and one side (mother or dad) can cause depression by social comparison. If they are grown up and get married, they can still have lacks of affection and they can easily regard the divorce as a easy solution for conflicts. However, the opposite can exist because they don’t want their children to experience same lacks.

4. how to research

1) Quantitative: survey (independent: age at parental divorce, dependent: attitude in divorce, mental health, financial stability)

Independent variables can be categorized from numerical data to infancy, childhood, adolescent, and adulthood. Linear regression can be conducted to see the causal relations among variables. For an example, the earlier parents are divorced, the weaker their mental health can be.

2) Qualitative: Interviews with the divorced middle-aged, the young adult under divorced parents and the young adult under normal parents to see and compare how they act in solving conflicts or how different their lifestyles are.

Ideas: 최서영, 최태인, 한지완, 황태현

Writer: 황탷녀

파일이 열리지 않으시면 박가연에게 아이캠퍼스 메시지 부탁드립니다!

In contemporary Korean society, raising a child is increasingly perceived as a "luxury good"

—a costly and status-linked choice rather than a universal life course expectation.

1) How might this shift influence dominant parenting styles (e.g., authoritative, intensive mothering) in Korea?

정서연: When child-rearing is perceived as costly and status-linked, intensive parenting forms such as “intensive mothering” become more entrenched. In Korea, it is increasingly common for children to enter early private education (e.g., “English kindergartens,” private tutoring) creating an environment where parents feel they must invest large amounts of time, money, and emotional labor.

- The authoritative parenting style (warmth + control) adapts: in this context, control increasingly emphasizes ‘performance monitoring’ (test scores, private lecture attendance, extracurriculars) rather than balanced autonomy.

- Father involvement is rising (e.g., men’s parental leave uptake increasing) but the qualitative gap remains: while fathers may be more present, the burden of micromanaging a child’s success still largely falls on mothers.

송수현: As raising children becomes seen as a “luxury good,” Korean parents—especially mothers—may feel increased pressure to engage in intensive, achievement-oriented parenting. Middle- and upper-class families invest heavily in private education, enrichment programs, and emotional management, while lower-income families are left unable to keep up. This dynamic reinforces ‘intensive mothering’ as a marker of class privilege, while undermining more balanced or ‘natural growth’ parenting styles that emphasize autonomy and self-directed development.

박서연: In Korea today, intensive mothering is emphasized so strongly that it often feels like only one parent — usually the mother — is expected to sacrifice everything. Society praises “devoted mothers” who give up their careers and personal time, but rarely questions why fathers aren’t expected to do the same.

As a result, parenting becomes unequal and exhausting, not because parents don’t love their children, but because the system assumes that love must come through sacrifice — and that sacrifice must come from mothers.

2) What are the broader implications for gender inequality, family formation, and child well-being?

정서연: (1) Gender inequality: As the “good parent” ideal demands significant investment, women are more likely to bear the bulk of the labour—leading to career interruptions, reduced work hours, stress, and burnout. In Korea, this dynamic reinforces the motherhood penalty and glass-ceiling effects.

(2) Family formation: When child-rearing is expensive and competitive, many young adults delay marriage or childbirth (or opt out entirely). Korea’s ultra-low fertility is tied in part to the perception that children require such large investments.

(3) Child well-being: While high investment can yield benefits (e.g., resources, enrichment), it may also impose heavy performance pressure, reduce free play, increase stress, and limit autonomy. In Korea’s intensely competitive educational environment, children may suffer from anxiety, sleep deprivation, or reduced mental health.

2-1) How does class inequality shape who can afford to “intensively mother”?

정서연: (1) Families with higher socioeconomic status (SES) can afford the tuition, extracurriculars, private tutoring, living in neighbourhoods with better schools, early enrichment, and may have more flexible work arrangements. This gives them a head start and allows “intensive mothering” to be practiced more easily.

(2) Lower‐SES families may lack the money, time (due to longer or insecure working hours), or social networks to fully engage in such parenting. As a result, children from lower‐SES families may receive comparatively less of these intensive investments.

Thus, the luxury-good framing intensifies the gap: parenting investment becomes stratified by class.

송수현: Seeing childrearing as a “luxury good” deepens gender and class inequality in Korea. “Good parenting” is still associated with maternal sacrifice, so mothers bear most of the emotional and educational labor while fathers’ involvement remains limited. Only middle- and upper-class women can afford intensive mothering because it requires money, time, and emotional energy. Working-class mothers often face guilt and exhaustion for not meeting those ideals.

박서연: I once saw a video of a mother crying after leaving her child at kindergarten, and I thought, “Why isn’t the father crying?” It made me realize how our society still connects emotions and childcare mainly to mothers.

A “good mother” is expected to feel guilty for working and sad for leaving her child, while fathers rarely face the same pressure. When mothers cry, it’s called love; when fathers stay calm, it’s seen as normal. That’s how emotional labor becomes a gendered burden.

This shows how deeply care and guilt are tied to women’s roles in Korea today. As raising a child becomes a “luxury good” — expensive and demanding — the inequality grows. True change will come only when both parents can share not just the work of care, but also the emotions that come with it.

2-2) What are some hidden costs (emotional, financial, time) of “good” parenting in Korea or your countries?

정서연: (1) Financial cost: Private tutoring, early childhood English kindergartens, cultural/arts programs, extracurriculars, etc. In Korea, total private education spending reached record levels (about 29 trillion won in 2024).

(2) Time cost: Getting children to and from schools/academies, homework supervision, research into admissions, weekend classes—these reduce leisure or rest time for parents and children.

(3) Emotional cost: Parents feel pressure to keep up with “other parents,” guilt if they cannot, stress about their child’s future, anxiety about performance, and conflicts about balancing work and parent roles. This can affect parental mental health and family relationships.

(4) Opportunity cost: For the parent (often the mother), time and energy spent on intensive parenting may reduce career advancement, social activities, personal rest, which in turn affects life satisfaction and income potential.

송수현: The hidden costs include stress, burnout, and delayed or avoided marriage and childbirth. Children also experience pressure from competitive parenting. In this way, “good parenting” reflects and reproduces Korea’s existing social inequalities.

박서연: In Korea, being a “good parent” often means spending endless time, money, and emotions to keep up with social expectations. Parents pour their savings into education, give up rest for tutoring schedules, and feel guilty whenever they fall behind.

The emotional cost is constant anxiety and competition; the financial cost is endless private lessons and housing pressure; and the time cost is the loss of personal life. In the end, parenting becomes a test of endurance rather than love. “Good” parenting, in this sense, is quietly exhausting.

3) Are we seeing a growing parenting gap between socioeconomic classes? How?

정서연: Yes. The evidence suggests that at younger ages the inequality in parenting investment is increasing. Higher-SES families engage in earlier, broader enrichment (books, cultural experiences, overseas programs) while lower-SES families focus on more basic needs or have fewer resources/time for enrichment.

Over time, these early differences compound: children from high-investment backgrounds gain educational and social capital advantages, thereby widening the class gap in outcomes. Because parenting itself has become more resource-intensive, the “parenting gap” mirrors the broader class gap.

In Korea, with heavy competition for university entrance and early childhood preparation, children whose families can afford the earliest and most intense investments are likely to have higher chances of success—thereby reproducing stratification.

송수현: Yes, the “parenting gap” in Korea is widening. Higher-income families have greater access to early education, bilingual environments, and psychological counseling, while lower-income families struggle with basic childcare and time scarcity. This gap reproduces educational and emotional inequalities across generations, creating a cycle where children’s opportunities increasingly depend on their parents’ class.

박서연: I think the parenting gap between socioeconomic classes is growing in Korea. Wealthier families can afford private education, safe housing, and cultural experiences, while lower-income parents struggle just to secure basic childcare.

It’s not that poorer parents care less — it’s that they have less time, money, and energy to compete in a system that rewards intensive parenting. Over time, this gap shapes not only children’s education but also their confidence, health, and future opportunities. Parenting has become another form of inequality.

• How might this shift influence dominant parenting styles (e.g., authoritative, intensive mothering) in Korea?

Since having a child in Korea has become something mostly for people who can actually afford it, the few children who are born tend to be raised in a kind of “luxurious” way. Parents want to give them the best of everything: the best education, experiences, and care, because they can, and because it feels like their child represents all their effort and success. But this also means that in many families, one parent, usually the mother, might stop working to focus completely on the child. Since they’re financially stable enough to do so, it often feels like the “right” or even expected thing to do. As a result, gender inequality can get stronger again, with mothers taking on the full emotional and practical workload of raising the child. This brings back the idea of intensive mothering, where the mother is supposed to do everything for her child.

• What are the broader implications for gender inequality, family formation, and child well-being?

  
  

  If the parents adopt an authoritative parenting style with a great attention on their child : gender inequalities gap will be massive as this systematic pressure to take care of the child would be put on the woman, accepting to quit her job, letting the husband keeps his patriarchal role : giving more energy in adopting an intensive mothering role. Hence the family formation will be affected by this structure but mostly on socioemotional aspect. According to Bzostek SH, Berger LM. Family Structure Experiences and Child Socioemotional Development During the First Nine Years of Life: Examining Heterogeneity by Family Structure at Birth. Demography. 2017, parenting is not only affecting the structure of gendered roles within the family or inequalities but also the socioemotional integrity and well-being of children from their birth to their 9 years old.

  
  

  Regarding the structure of the family : breakup parents, married parents but instable, single parental figure, or married and authoritative parenting : the socioemotional development of the child results from the structure and situation of their parenting. Thus, in Korea, with an authoritative parenting : and unequal gender roles : education has tendency to repeat itself later, with strong patriarchal roles. However regarding the stability that goes with this couples that can afford to have children, it is often a stable situation, positive for child emotional and social development.

  • How does class inequality shape who can afford to “intensively mother”?

    
    

    As explained in An, B.P. and Fiori, F. (2024). Social-class parenting practices and their influence on educational outcomes in the United States and Scotland, class inequality shapes intensive mothering by providing more resources and flexibility to wealthier families, allowing them to dedicate significant time and money to their children's development through organized activities and education and often with a less gendered role, where high education does not mean a traditional work/home separation as before, with strong patriarchal society and parental style.

    
    

    In contrast, lower-income parents often face greater economic stress, which can influence parenting styles and limit their ability to provide the same opportunities, as they may lack the flexibility, paid leave, or income needed to support intensive parenting practices.

  • What are some hidden costs (emotional, financial, time) of “good” parenting in Korea or your countries?

    
    

  In France, as it is the best illustration I have, I would say, hidden costs have shifted from really traditional roles, as patriarchal reparation of parenting, to more hidden and implicit costs : as parenting in a society that is changing, apparently progressing in a gendered perspective but actually still unequal as mothers need to sometimes quit their job but often ask for more sacrifices from men in parenthood : as they need to quit their job, make efforts in society to accomplish their « expected roles » : so I think for women, emotional costs in France and elsewhere are still very present and sometimes painful.

  
  

  And to me, in other countries too, patriarchy, even though paradoxal in parenthood, is a serious issue that we need to fix in order to make the emotional costs more equal between men and women in parenting.

  
  

• Are we seeing a growing parenting gap between socioeconomic classes? How?

Yes, there is a clear parenting gap between socioeconomic classes.

How does it manifest :

First, through time and engagement. Indeed, wealthier parents are more likely to have the time and resources to spend quality time on activities like reading with their children, sign in them for lessons. In contrast to lower-income parents who may work multiple jobs and have less time for these activities.

Second can be financial resources. Wealthy parents can buy high-quality childcare and private education, while working class parents depend on cheaper or public options. This means children’s chances for success depend more and more on family income.

Moreover, economic disadvantage is linked to higher stress which can negatively affect constant parenting and emotional support.

This gap also affects marriage. Low-income men are less likely to marry, which increases social inequality. Over time, these differences reproduce inequality between generations.

• Are state policies or paternal involvement helping to reduce this burden—or reinforcing it?

• I think that many policies aim to try and reduce the burden especially the financial policies in Korea set put to reduce the financial burden on parents. Which in turn could also even out the possible SES gab there could be during pregnancy and early motherhood.  However other social differences that can be attributed to classes as well are overlooked which will keep the parenting gap where it is.

  
  

  The increased demand for paternal involvement would also lessen the emotional and time cost of parenting due to it being spread to both parents and not just the mother. This can also help bridge the gap due to an increase in resources in the household and an extra set of hands to help. This can also cause a loss in financial resurses because of the decrease in work hours from both parents.

  
  

  I do think that for both the policies and parental involvement to work in reducing the gap there needs to be options for social support given outside of the family structure, e.g. daycares, low income households can return to work quicker and have less of a financial burden due to their children.

4) Are state policies or paternal involvement helping to reduce this burden—or reinforcing it?

정서연: (1) Policies helping: The Korean government offers cash/voucher programmes (e.g., “First Meeting Gift Voucher” at birth, early childhood care subsidies), and has expanded paternal leave and attempted to encourage fathers’ participation in care. These help reduce immediate financial burden or shift gender norms.

(2) But reinforcing burden: Because educational competition and housing/schooling pressures remain structural, policy supports often get channelled into higher parental investment rather than alleviating it. Also, parental leave uptake is still higher among stable, high-income jobs—so policy benefits are uneven and may reproduce class advantage.

In short: policy and paternal involvement ‘have potential’ to reduce burdens, but without broader structural change (education system, labor market flexibility, housing & school competition) they may inadvertently reinforce, rather than reduce, inequalities.

송수현: While Korea has expanded parental leave and childcare subsidies, these policies often reinforce traditional gender roles by assuming mothers as the primary caregivers. Paternal involvement remains limited, as workplace cultures discourage long parental leaves for men. Without cultural and structural change, policies may inadvertently increase the burden on mothers rather than alleviate it.

박서연: I think both state policies and paternal involvement are slowly improving, but they still reinforce inequality in practice. Government childcare programs and parental leave look good on paper, yet they mostly benefit stable, full-time workers in big companies.

Many fathers still face social pressure not to take leave, and mothers end up using most of it. So while policies aim to share the burden, they often end up confirming the idea that mothers are the main caregivers. Real change will happen only when both the system and culture support fathers’ equal participation.

• How might this shift influence dominant parenting styles (e.g., authoritative, intensive mothering) in Korea?

- Giving birth is more symbolic as an achievement status than before. There should be capital to raise children at home. As a basic premise, low birthrates dominate society, and economically upper-class people give birth to only one or two children, so there will be more ways to raise children that can be affectionate and invested economically. Although the parenting method in Korean society is still mother-centered, those who can afford it can hire nannies, so the parenting method can change to entrusting them with difficult childcare work and providing emotional support. On the other hand, material support for children may be more than emotional support, assuming that dual-income families have more financial leeway.

• What are the broader implications for gender inequality, family formation, and child well-being?

• How does class inequality shape who can afford to “intensively mother”?

-In the case of the older generation, the economically affordable class can be an intensive mother, but if they cannot afford it economically, it is highly likely that the traditional intensive mother will not be possible because the mother also has to work on the side or contribute to a living. Based on the social and cultural capital of Bourdieu, the social fact that parents are highly educated and children are highly educated shows that each class has different parenting methods. In the case of the current generation, if they can afford it economically, they are likely to all leave good school and have a good job. As a result, the number of parents focusing on their careers will increase and the number of inclusive mothers will decrease in contrast to the older generation.

• What are some hidden costs (emotional, financial, time) of “good” parenting in Korea or your countries?

-To be a good parenting method, you have to have a lot of emotional exchange and spend time with your child, but to be able to do this, you have to sacrifice your career to some extent. Your solid career and the resulting economic capital are the hidden cost as an opportunity cost.

• Are we seeing a growing parenting gap between socioeconomic classes? How?

- Through parents, they learn how to make most of their lives. Parents in high financial positions can teach their children how to make money, but low-income families cannot. According to cultural capital, how children cope with psychological problems is also determined by their parents' SES. There is a difference in what parents can do from the time their child is born. Since the difference is different from the starting point, the difference accumulates and the gap is large when the child becomes an adult.

• Are state policies or paternal involvement helping to reduce this burden—or reinforcing it?

-It is helping to reduce the burden. Policies are being materialized in narrowing the education gap, such as providing Internet lecture tickets to low-income families. However, the degree to which the economic and socio-cultural status is inherited under the capitalist system is greater than the degree to which the policy complements childcare.

작성자: 윤종훈

•How might this shift influence dominant parenting styles (e.g., authoritative, intensive mothering) in Korea?

We think that the shift of having a child becoming a luxury good, will mean that more dominant parenting style will be the intensive mothering. The reason for that is because this style of parenting demands a lot of resources, and when having a child is also linked with a sense of status, we think that the parents would use a lot of resources in raising the child. Having children can be seen as a project that does require a lot of investment.

•What are the broader implications for gender inequality, family formation, and child well-being?

The broader implications of gender inequality might be that women tend to take most of the domestic labor and childcare within the household. This leads to a big sacrifice in a woman's personal life, where she gives up a big part of her own life for her child. In this way, mothers usually care more for their child's well-being and don't reflect on their own well-being since it is not as important.

•How does class inequality shape who can afford to “intensively mother”?

Since marriage is becoming more of a luxury good, families with higher incomes will tend to have children and create families. This will change the structure and way of intensive mothering. Intensive mothering is partly built on mothers spending money on their children. When the class inequalities are getting bigger, and more high-income families start to have families, intensive mothering will get more money based. “Luxury families” will have the option to raise their kids with intensive mothering, and the lower-income families will not have that option. Although the lower-income families might shift the way of intensive mothering. When money becomes the main factor, the lower-income mothers might focus more on being strict and listening to an expert's advice. In this way, class inequalities might lead to a shift in intensive mothering rather than it disappearing for one group in society.

•What are some hidden costs (emotional, financial, time) of “good” parenting in Korea or your countries?

“Good” parenting in Korea can be very stressful. Parents, especially mothers, often feel emotional pressure to make their children succeed in school, since they feel responsible for their children's future. Many experience a lot of stress from constantly managing schoolwork and expectations. Financially, private education and tutoring are very expensive, so a lot of parents spend a big portion of their income on it. Also time is a hidden cost, since parents spend a lot of time supporting and monitoring their children's studies. In Western countries there are also hidden costs, however, the focus lays more on supporting children emotionally, teaching them independence and providing a balanced lifestyle, instead of academic success. Financially, most parents will spend a part of their income on activities for the children instead of private schools and tutoring and they spend more time on managing their children’s schedules when it comes to appointments and activities instead of supporting with homework or tutoring.

One of the hidden costs we have noticed in Europe is a specific part of emotional costs. Of course parents want their children to succeed in whatever they are doing, but also for more selfish reasons. If their kids perform well in school or in sports, a lot of parents seem to feel they gain status. Parents might compare their kids to others, and transfer their performance in different settings, into a competition between the parents. There has been a lot of focus in Denmark about kids quitting sports because of too much pressure from the parents. And the status of your kid performing well is seen as one of the reasons why.

In a more hidden way the idea of “Good parenting” in Europe also involves the way parents feed their children. Indeed, for example, when coming to lunch, we feel like the type of food that the child brings acts as a parenting quality indicator. On the one hand, bringing homemade quality lunches with vegetables and organic food reflects good parents who care about their children's health and find the time to cook for them. On the other side a simple sandwich with industrial bread and a sweet reflects “bad parenting”. But this whole vision hides financial and family inequalities, no matter how much you love and care about your child, organic food can be very expensive and not everyone has the time to make homemade food everyday (especially, for example, single parent households).

•Are we seeing a growing parenting gap between socioeconomic classes? How?

Yes we are. When having children is perceived as a luxury good, it is suddenly necessary to have a lot of resources to have children. It will be more difficult for people with lower SES to have kids, because they might not have the required amount of finances or time needed. The intensive parenting style makes it even harder for people with low SES. These factors add to the parenting gap between SES classes, and makes it more applicable for people with high SES to have children.

•Are state policies or paternal involvement helping to reduce this burden—or reinforcing it?

Both paternal involvement and state policies could be good solutions to reduce women's burdens when it comes to marriage and parenting. On the one hand, state policies such as bigger paid maternal leave, or the institution of affordable healthcare and childcare could reduce mothers' economic anxiety. On the other hand, paternal involvement could also be a key instrument to reduce women’s burden. By spending more time with their children or by sharing housework, fathers could reduce the “second shift” and, thus, allow women to live their motherhood without self-sacrificing themself.

This shift may make ‘intensive mothering’more elitist, as only affluent families can afford the time, money, and resources required for this parenting style, while authoritative parenting may become more rigid as parents feel pressured to ensure their children's success in a competitive environment.

2.What are the broader implications for gender inequality, family formation, and child well-being?

Gender inequality: It reinforces traditional gender roles, as women are still expected to bear the brunt of the costs and responsibilities of intensive parenting, while men face less pressure to be actively involved in child-rearing, thus widening the gender gap in domestic and parenting duties.

Influence on children's personality: 1. In the process of growing up, they are planned and controlled for a long time. It is difficult to be highly self-disciplined but nervous. They can complete tasks on time and get excellent results, but they can't relax and are always worried about making mistakes.2. Excessive pursuit of control, because they are controlled too much in the process of growing up, and they internalize the belief of "control = security".

This leads to anxiety and fear of uncertainty as an adult. Highly sensitive to failure.Small mistakes can also cause strong self-blame or emotional collapse. This is a typical "low fault tolerance mentality". Emotional expression inhibition.Because since I was a child, I have been taught that "I surround you every day", "all my hopes are on you", "make my parents proud", facing my mother's excessive expectations, and inner guilt. Children learn to suppress negative emotions and try to satisfy their parents. After adulthood, it is easy to have "emotional internal consumption" or "emotional loss".

Family formation: as individuals and couples perceive having children as an unaffordable luxury, thereby transforming the traditional family structure.

Child well-being: There is a growing disparity in child well-being between socioeconomic classes, as children from wealthy families have access to better educational, healthcare, and developmental resources, while those from less affluent backgrounds struggle to receive the same level of support, hindering their overall growth and opportunities.

3.How does class inequality shape who can afford to “intensively mother”?

Only upper- and middle-class mothers can afford the financial, emotional, and time costs of intensive parenting. Working-class mothers lack the resources or flexible jobs needed for such involvement. And high-quality childcare, as well as the time commitment required for intensive mothering , while lower-class families, due to financial constraints and the need for both parents to work full-time, cannot engage in intensive mothering, making it a privilege of the wealthy.

4.What are some hidden costs (emotional, financial, time) of “good” parenting in Korea or your countries?

Emotional costs: Parents, especially mothers, experience high levels of anxiety and stress over their children's academic performance, social status, and future success, leading to mental health issues such as depression and burnout.

Financial costs: Beyond obvious expenses like education and healthcare, there are hidden costs such as the opportunity cost of a parent (usually the mother) leaving the workforce to care for children, and the constant pressure to spend on products and services marketed as essential for “good” parenting.

(In China, driven by the social consensus that "education changes fate" and the competitive admission system, parents' educational anxiety persists throughout their children’s learning journey—from preschool to college entrance exams)

5.Are we seeing a growing parenting gap between socioeconomic classes? How?

Yes. Rich families invest heavily in education and child development, while poorer families cannot. This widens the parenting gap and reproduces social inequality across generations.

6.Are state policies or paternal involvement helping to reduce this burden—or reinforcing it?

Current policies and limited paternal involvement often reinforce the burden by assuming mothers are the main caregivers. More inclusive welfare and active father participation could help reduce it.

사문빙 왕아쯔 범우신

• less authoritative : once parenting was considered as a 'duty', however, luxury good have the implications of parenting being a 'choice.' So, our expectations are that people who have more emotional and financial resources to fully support their children will 'choose' to have a child. Researches have shown that the notion which parents should support their children behind rose from 70.1% to 72.9%, whereas on the opposite (leading parents) declined from 29.9% to 27.1%.

Q2.

• reasons behind those who choose to 'make a choice'

• Class inequality factor : For youth who chose and hesitated 'not to have a child' even though they felt like lower fertility rate is a critical social issue, major reasons were the burdens of child rearing and educating cost and housing affordability. (Less psychological and individual issues but more focus on societal issues)

• gender inequality : Among some significant others who are not married, there were different answers between men and women: men felt the burdens of being the breadwinner and women felt that living alone would be happier- which in turn means there are still remaining norms of patriarchy and intensive mothering

• hidden costs? : Usually, fathers fell strongly obligated to make a lot of money to be a good parent -> costs of lessened emotional interaction time w/ his wife and child -> Now mothers are striving to reduce the emotional gap between their children and husband.

Q3.

• gap between those who already have children : Lower SES have stronger kin ties- as they lack resources to handle problematic situations compared to the higher

• Gap between those who choose 'to' or 'not to' : not to- decades ago there were different types of opportunities that can lead to social class elevation, but nowadays we don't (we lack further resources to move into upper classes)

Q4.

• helping effects exist but in a mere way : for the case of paternal leave, unlike mothers - it is not legalized and social notions are prevalent especially among those who occupy important social roles (maybe males around their 50-60s) - they have performed the breadwinner role most of their life - are more likely not to empathize with the social needs for parental leave=> moreover there are some unequal treatments after parents get back to work (stagnant wages, less paid vacation days etc.)

Research findings : 김범준

Opinions and writings : 권채은

This perception makes parenting in Korea more elitist and competitive.

Parents—especially mothers—feel pressured to adopt intensive mothering and authoritative parenting styles that require significant emotional, financial, and time investment.

Education has become a central way to display family status, leading to an overheated private-education market.

As a result,

• Upper-class families can afford high-quality education and enrichment programs.

• Lower-income families may feel excluded or even choose not to have children.

Parenting thus becomes a status symbol, reinforcing consumerism and class division within Korean society.

2. What are the broader implications for gender inequality, family formation, and child well-being?

This trend deepens gender inequality.

Despite social progress, Korean mothers still bear the main caregiving responsibility.

The social ideal of the “good mother” forces many women to sacrifice their careers, resulting in career breaks and the motherhood penalty in the labor market.

For family structure, the effects are clear:

• Marriage and fertility rates decline.

• Single or child-free households increase.

• Childbearing becomes concentrated among economically privileged families.

For children, it widens inequalities in early opportunities—wealthier families provide richer learning and cultural environments, while poorer children face structural disadvantages from birth.

This process reflects Bourdieu’s concept of social reproduction, where social inequality persists across generations.

3. Are we seeing a growing parenting gap between socioeconomic classes? How?

Yes. A widening parenting gap is evident in Korea.

Parenting differences are not only about money but also about time, emotional labor, and access to social networks.

• Upper-class parents can afford quality daycare, extracurricular activities, and use social capital to secure their children’s future success.

• Working-class parents often struggle with unstable jobs and limited access to public childcare.

Consequently, being a “good parent” has become a class privilege, and children’s life chances increasingly depend on family background rather than effort—reducing social mobility.

4. Are state policies or paternal involvement helping to reduce this burden—or reinforcing it?

Although the Korean government provides cash subsidies, parental leave, and childcare programs, these measures have limited effectiveness.

They mainly address short-term financial needs but fail to tackle structural problems such as housing insecurity and job instability.

Moreover, workplace culture still discourages men from taking parental leave, and middle-class families often benefit more from these policies than low-income groups.

If fathers’ participation remains symbolic, mothers continue to carry most of the emotional and physical burden.

In this sense, current policies often reinforce, rather than reduce, gender and class inequality.

To truly ease the burden, Korea needs to:

• Expand universal, high-quality public childcare;

• Promote real paternal involvement in childcare;

• Integrate childcare policies with housing and labor reforms to support young families.

Conclusion

The perception of child-rearing as a luxury good reflects structural inequality in modern Korea.

Economic resources, cultural capital, and gender norms jointly define who can afford to be a “good parent.”

Unless deeper social and policy changes occur, parenting will remain a privilege of the middle and upper classes—rather than a shared life choice accessible to all.

Ideal standards can be made by the socia thought that parents should raise their children well by investing their money. Perceptions about good education and achievements can be stacked up, and there can be the tendency for parents to be proud of their children if others evaluate their children “good”. Therefore, to make their children fit to socially ideal standards, authoritative mothering can be maintained in their children’s adolescence although intensive mothering can be done in their childhood.

•What are the broader implications for gender inequality, family formation, and child well-being?

Family formation would be maintained as a nuclear family but grandparents or babysitter can participate in the family formation while raising children.

Gender inequality would be maintaiend because of the social perceptions that children must get parental childcaring. In this situation, the role of mother would be more reinforced, because their children are luxury enough to get more management. In the same time, the father’s role to earn the wage can be also reinforced despite of decrease of breadwinner.

In terms of child well-being, the danger of obesity can be increased and mental instability or anxiety can be made from their parents’ expectations about their achievements or other’s evaluations.

•How does class inequality shape who can afford to “intensively mother”?
Upper-class: affordable because of maintaing their class and other’s evaluation

Middle-class: more affordable than upper-class because of the way to move upward by raising their children to one in socioeconomical upper class.

Lower-class: natural born because their prior objective is to keeping their life

•What are some hidden costs (emotional, financial, time) of “good” parenting in Korea or your countries?

Emotional cost: burden for qualifications as parents, and evaluation of step –parents about raising children.

Time cost: decreased time to accumulate career because of parental leave for being good parent, and division of time for childcaring and working.

Financial cost: financial burden because of one side’s retirement.

•Are we seeing a growing parenting gap between socioeconomic classes? How?

Parenting gap in terms of education are increasing, and growth experiences can be shaped differently by high achievements by self-study or hagwons.

Also, in terms of spending lesuire time with children, upper classes can have more various and valuable experiences from their childhood although lower classes can’t have capability for leisure time because of working.

Emotionally, children from upper classes can be emotionally stable but dependent, although the opposite side can be unstable but independent.

•Are state policies or paternal involvement helping to reduce this burden—or reinforcing it?

Stae policies are necessary because it allows paternal involvement and distribution of childcaring and household labors. Paternal involvement can be helpful in childhood experiences, but also in sharing energy costs with spouses.

-       We are shifting away from authoritative parenting

-       Not a norm anymore, maybe becoming status symbol in the future (like marriages got the ultimate status symbol)

What are the broader implications for gender inequality, family formation, and child well-being?

-       Gender: In general, were more focusing on gender equality and same workload for both parents and husbands being more involved in housework and childcare. In the context of intensive mothering, it fosters gender inequality, as the mothers have to give up their careers for it

-       Family formation: beanpole families, not as much extended kins

-       Child well-being: increasing as there is more financial and social support as well as time

How does class inequality shape who can afford to “intensively mother”?

-       When the child is still young only high class can do intensive mothering, as it requires a lot of time and woman then cannot work. Many families rely on dual income

-       When the child is in their teens being in school until for example 4 pm it is for more families possible to do intensive mothering as less time is required

What are some hidden costs (emotional, financial, time) of “good” parenting in Korea or your countries?

-       It takes a lot of time to take care of all the work as well as spend enough time and play and be present in the situation.

-       Emotional burden increases with for example the third shift laying on the mothers mostly

Are we seeing a growing parenting gap between socioeconomic classes? How?

-       The parenting gap is growing wider, as parents out of the higher classes can afford private tutoring, healthcare and intense child support.

Are state policies or paternal involvement helping to reduce this burden—or reinforcing it?

-       State policies in Germany are reducing the burdens for parents/mothers, due to free education, free daycare, and financial support. Studying can be financially supported by the government as something similar to a loan you lend for paying the education fees.

1. How might this shift influence dominant parenting styles (e.g., authoritative, intensive mothering) in Korea?

   • The intensive mothering style will likely become dominant, as those with greater resources are the ones who can fully engage in parenting. They will devote significant energy to education and developmental support in order to pass down their advantages to their children.

   
   

2. What are the broader implications for gender inequality, family formation, and child well-being?

   • As parenting increasingly becomes viewed as a luxury good, fathers are likely to adopt even more authoritative behaviors to elevate their children’s value and future prospects. This will intensify the traditional pattern of paternal authority that already exists. In contrast, mothers are expected to take on even more intensive parenting roles, closely monitoring and managing their children like “helicopter moms.”

     
     

3. How does class inequality shape who can afford to “intensively mother”?

   • As raising a child becomes perceived as a luxury good, higher-class families engage in intensive mothering to ensure close and concentrated care, aiming to pass down their high social status across generations. Moreover, because this is a costly choice, only those with sufficient economic resources can afford to leave the workforce and devote themselves fully to childcare after having a child.

     
     

4. What are some hidden costs (emotional, financial, time) of “good” parenting in Korea or your countries?

   • In childhood, activities such as regularly traveling abroad or attending arts and sports academies provide opportunities for children to build cultural capital. These experiences involves considerable hidden costs in terms of financial spending, parental time, and emotional investment.

   • In early childhood, increasing parent–child interaction (such as taking extended parental leave or transitioning to a job that allows working primarily from home) also requires hidden costs. Parents must dedicate more time, take on a greater emotional load, and accept economic sacrifices.

     
     

5. Are we seeing a growing parenting gap between socioeconomic classes? How?

   • Children in higher-SES families receive greater emotional and financial support from their parents and gain access to a wider range of experiences. In contrast, children in lower socioeconomic classes have fewer opportunities due to limited support, and emotional interactions between parents and children are often reduced as parents must focus on earning income.

     
     

6. Are state policies or paternal involvement helping to reduce this burden—or reinforcing it?

   • our group defined the word “burden” as the parenting burden caused by 'inequality'.

   • Pros(it will reduce the burden): Financial support policies could be helpful; by providing monetary assistance, families could access new cultural experiences and reduce the financial strain on parents.

   • Cons(it will reinforce the burden): cultural support costs may also reinforce existing inequalities. To fully enjoy cultural activities, a certain level of cultural knowledge (cultural capital and a foundational base) is required. If families simply receive money without this foundation, it may be difficult for them to actually enjoy culture as intended. In lower-SES households, cultural policies related to parenting may instead feel like an additional duty imposed on them.

writer: 김예은

ideas: 김예은 김이안 박가연 송하린

• Potential increase of intensive mothering and authoritative parenting styles

  • With the number of children couples likely decreasing over the years, the amount of attention and resources that is "put into" children might thereby increase as well

What are the broader implications for gender inequality, family formation, and child well-being?

• There is likely going to be an increase in gender inequality as combined with the concept of intensive mothering, the pressure to produce "good" children increases as well as motherhood and having children is now associated with status, prestige, and reputation

• Family formation is going to be much more selective and the resources of the partners will be taken into consideration

• Child well-being will also be impacted, with an increased sense of pressure to perform well in school and find a good job

How does class inequality shape who can afford to "intensively mother"?

• Class inequality shapes the ability of parents to spend time and form bonds and connections with their children

  • Time and energy the parents have after getting off work (corporate / white collar jobs vs. manual labour / blue collar jobs)

  • Financial resources to "self-sacrifice" and stay at home (as families of lower SES will most likely not be able to afford having one parent permanently stay at home and not work)

What are some hidden costs (emotional, financial, time) of "good" parenting in Korea or your countries?

Korea

• Big emphasis on educational attainment and possession of material goods

  • What grades your children have

  • What university they go to

  • Which job they have and at which company

  • The material goods your children possess (house, apartments, cars etc.)

• So "good" parenting in Korea involves a high amount of financial costs for private tutoring and after school activities and also time resources to pick up your children from school and bring them to those tutoring institutions

Germany

• Big emphasis on teaching children independence and self-sufficiency

  • The age at which your children move out

  • Working part-time jobs outside of school and university

  • Earning a living early on and being independent

  • Being able to do a lot of administrative tasks on your own / taking care of things by yourself (taxes, getting a drivers license and driving yourself places, getting your own place etc.)

  • Emphasis on raising children to be well-rounded individuals

• So "good" parenting in Germany involves a high amount of time and emotional costs for teaching a lot of the fundamental life skills and preparing your children for adulthood

Are we seeing a growing parenting gap between socioeconomic classes? How?

• We think that there is a growing parenting gap

• It already starts with the amount of time parents are merely able to spend with their children due to their socioeconomic class

• Highly educated parents with jobs that have regular hours are generally able to spend more time with their children

  • Although when it comes to a lot of corporate jobs with high workloads and constant need to be available for work, there can also be a trend of highly educated parents with high-stress, time-demanding jobs in big corporate forms, not being able to spend a lot of time with their children as well

Are state policies or paternal involvement helping to reduce this burden - or reinforcing it?

• State policies are reinforcing this burden

  • Lack of paternal leave, paid leave when children are sick, aims of reducing universal basic income or social welfare benefits for low-income families, rising costs of living, housing, public transportation, rising competition in education systems forcing the need to hire private tutors, high costs for childcare, maternal health services, childbirth etc. reinforce the burden that jobs and socioeconomic class have on parenting style and availability of parents to their children