From Obeying Father to Questioning Men

Introduction

I grew up in a household where my father’s opinion carried more weight than anyone else’s. My mother had a stable and respectable job, earning almost as much as him, yet at home she shouldered nearly all domestic responsibilities. Once, she told me she would not dare to travel to another city alone to visit me, unless my father came along. This puzzled me: how could a capable woman, financially independent, still feel so bound to a man’s presence?

This personal discomfort became the seed of my sociological questioning. Over time, I learned to distinguish between critical thinking as a general academic skill, and critical approaches in the social sciences that investigate how power works in everyday life.

Critical Thinking vs Critical Approaches

A helpful description I once read explained that critical thinking often means probing arguments, checking evidence, and not accepting claims at face value—what the author called a “common-sense-plus” practice. It is a habit of mind valuable across disciplines.

Critical approaches in the social sciences, however, go further. They focus on power, hierarchy, and inequality. They ask: who benefits, who is silenced, and how are norms sustained? This is the level of analysis I needed to understand my mother’s choices—not just contradictions in her statements, but the cultural system that made dependence seem natural.

The Sociological Imagination

Here, C. Wright Mills’ idea of the sociological imagination is crucial. Mills urges us to connect personal troubles with public issues. My mother’s hesitation to act alone was not simply her own insecurity. It reflected broader patriarchal norms in my region, where a woman’s independence often remained secondary to her role as a wife.

With this lens, I began to see my private frustrations as part of a social pattern. My story was not unique—it was one small case of how patriarchy continues to organize everyday family life.

Theory in Action: Power and Gender

Michel Foucault argued that power is not only held by governments or institutions; it operates in everyday practices and norms. As he put it, this form of power “applies itself to immediate everyday life” (Foucault, 1980). My mother did not need external enforcement to obey patriarchal norms; she had internalized them.

Simone de Beauvoir, in The Second Sex, highlighted women’s social construction as the “Other,” always defined in relation to men. Even economically independent women are judged by how well they support husbands or families. My mother embodied this contradiction: she worked hard in her career, yet was still measured by her ability to defer at home.

Through these theories, critique becomes more than pointing out inconsistency—it reveals how power and gender intertwine to reproduce dependence.

Is Being Critical Rude?

When I voiced my questions, I was often told I was “mean” or “disrespectful.” Similarly, when I noticed female classmates becoming what I privately called “little wives,” always obeying boyfriends, I felt uneasy. Yet I did not confront them directly, because I knew that personal judgment could be mistaken for rudeness.

This tension shows why we must distinguish critique from rudeness.

• Rudeness attacks people.

• Critical thinking analyzes arguments.

• Sociological critique exposes structures and norms.

To be critical does not mean to insult. It means shifting the focus away from individuals and toward the cultural and structural forces shaping their choices.

My journey—from obeying father to questioning men—illustrates the movement from personal confusion to sociological critique. General critical thinking taught me to spot contradictions; sociological critique showed me how those contradictions are sustained by power.

Being critical is not the same as being rude. With the sociological imagination, critique becomes a way to link personal troubles to social structures, to ask how norms discipline us, and to imagine alternatives. The aim is not to belittle individuals but to illuminate the invisible power that shapes our everyday lives.

SOURCES

Beauvoir, S. de. (2011). The second sex (C. Borde & S. Malovany-Chevallier, Trans.). Vintage. (Original work published 1949)

Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings, 1972–1977 (C. Gordon, Ed.). Harvester Press. Retrieved from https://foucault.info/documents/foucault.power/

Mills, C. W. (1959). The sociological imagination. Oxford University Press.

Booker, M. (2021). What does ‘critical’ mean in social science writing, and how can I be critical in my essay? University of Edinburgh. Retrieved September 29, 2025, from https://blogs.ed.ac.uk/criticalturkey/what-does-critical-mean-in-social-science-writing-and-how-can-i-be-critical-in-my-essay/

Sep 29, 2025