The Price of Motherhood: Introduction
This author argues mothers’ value to American society, why it is underappreciated, and how it compares to the work other people do. The author defines mothering as “… selfless service to another. We don’t owe Mother for her gifts; she owes us” (Critterdon 1). Mothering is a woman completely giving herself to a baby, loving and nurturing the child while expecting nothing in return. The author then explains how many people in today’s society, even children and women, undervalue motherhood. Critterdon admits that before she had a child, she didn’t understand how someone could give up a well-paid, highly sought-after job for a baby. Although motherhood is seen as a part of American society, it is not economically valuable. Critterdon also points out several lawsuits in which taking time off to raise a child was punished by courts and companies, and outlines ways in which the government devalues mothers. The inflexible workplaces would rather hire a man or single woman than have to make allowances for a mother, even if she was a good worker. The author sites that this “… ‘mommy tax’, is typically more than $1 million for a college-educated American woman” (Critterdon 5). Also, after a divorce a non-working mother is usually not compensated by her ex-husband for her years of child rearing. Finally, the government does not provide any financial security for mothers, only welfare. The author asserts that many feminists are also reluctant to value women’s work at home, as she herself did. Another group against paid for mothers are social conservatives, although they want the mother’s to stay at home they do not want to give monetary benefits to them for their work. If all the mothers were to quit their childrearing duties, the economy would greatly suffer, especially considering the hours of unpaid housework represent at least half the hours worked by Americans (Critterdon 8). The families and economy heavily rely on mother’s unpaid labor. The economic solution to this problem is unknown is unknown by the author, but the most important thing is for people to appreciate and value the work of mothers. Mothers’, however, do not do their job to seek approval or validation from others, nor even economic value. As stated in the beginning of the introduction, mothers’ do their job because of their selflessness and love. However, women should not be questioned as to why they chose to be a mother, or devalued by society. They are producing society.
Women as Fathers
This article defines biological parents, and compares it to the act of actual parenting. It also debates the roles of caregivers and importance of non-parent care in a child’s life. Historically, children have mostly been seen as product of the man- women was just a small part in creating the children. The American patriarchal system is based on connection through blood- seen as coming form the father. The author asserts that while the genetic connection is seen as through the father, the emotional and social connection is seen through the mother. An interesting point was that parent-children and full siblings have the same amount of genetic similarities as each other. What makes the parent-child relationships so special is the nurturing factor, the unconditional love, which are present more so than in most other relationships in a child’s life. The parent-child relationship is also unique in terms of its legal definition; parents have special rights over their children and their lives. The new technology and ways to procreate raise the age-old question of nature versus nurture, and who the parent of a child is. As discussed by the author, however, a child makes a special bond with those who care for them day-to-day; there is no evidence she brings up besides genetic material that ties a child to their biological parents. The most interesting point the author makes lies in how men and women differ in their opinion of how they are a parent- “For men, what makes the child his is his seed. For women, what makes the child ours is the nurturance, the work of our bodies” (Rothman 96). The act of nurturing a child begins with pregnancy itself, and mothers carry out that act for the rest of their lives. But with mother substitutes such as nannies, daycare and preschool providers, and housekeepers, mothers need to find new ways to assert their control over their children, even when they are not there. It is difficult for a mother to put her children in someone else’s care, so they follow instructions from many experts. The most important advice is “making sure that she is doing things ‘your way’” (qtd. in Rothman 98). This means a mother making sure she is still in charge of the child rearing even while she is not there. One problem childcare providers face is that they usually are lower class, working for upper-class families, while their children are left at home because they cannot afford care for their own children. So the problem of childcare is not only monetary, but also emotionally- who is there to care for your children when you are not there? Mothers don’t always have the ability or desire to be with their children all the time, but the author argues there needs to be more options for childcare. Perhaps back to the time of hunter-gatherer societies, when women worked collectively to raise their children, so that mothers can work together. The problem is both monetary and social value of the work of childcare givers and parents themselves.
Black Women and Motherhood
African-American mothers have historically held much power in the family, due to the fact that fathers were often absent. However, before the 1970s there is little information on black families, as most studies focused on white, middle class families. Mothers have always been especially praised in the Black community, even though they often have to spend time outside of the home to do work in order to provide for their family. Black men often pressure women to have more children, even though they know their children will be born into poverty. Domesticity in the United States is historically seen as something for White women, therefore Black women become subordinate and ignored when studying domesticity. Black women’s view of motherhood is diverse within the community, some see themselves forced into a motherhood role while others see it as a chance to exercise their power and influence the future of society. The author cites five themes that have characterized Black motherhood, that were sustained by “…slavery, Southern rural life, and class-stratified, racially segregated neighborhoods” (Collins 177). These characteristics were present during the migration of Blacks that followed the post-WWII era. There have been enduring needs and hardships that Black women have faced throughout history, which have been unable to be cured. The author asserts that even though the father’s as often absent, the women are an important figure despite the father’s absence. Unlike White families, Black families have kin ties through the mother. Black families often have to rely on family or community members for childcare; especially important to Black families is the role of Grandmothers as childcare providers. The author calls this “othermother”, where women in their extended family or community raise children other than their own. Often times the “othermothers” are themselves young children, learning how to become a mother early on in their lives. Young males sometimes also are in charge of watching over children, but this is only if they are not working yet. The concept of othermothers began during slavery, while Black women helped to take care of each other’s children while the other parents would be working. Even during the 1980s, when drugs and violent were rampant in Black urban communities, othermothers still existed. However, as time goes on the concept of othermothers is fading, as more women are forced into the labor market and Black children are left to care for themselves. It is important for women to teach their daughters to learn domestic work at a young age, as they often have to support themselves and enter the workforce at a young age. The domestic work they often perform is not paid well, and also comes with a risk of sexual harassment from their White male employers. Black mothers encourage their daughters to be strong and independent, so they can strive for more than their mother’s had. Black mothers are often portrayed as strict and serious, rarely showing their love for their children. This stereotype is perhaps because of Black mother’s desire to have their children be more successful in life than they were, as the mother’s always push them to do more. Othermothers now also act as social activists for their community, working to ensure a positive future for the children within the community. Motherhood is a symbol of power within the African American community, those women who are trusted to be othermothers have immense social power and influence within their community. Repeated unwanted pregnancies, often while Black women are still young, puts a strain on them at early ages to start raising a family and leave the workplace. The author does not discuss any birth control education within black communities, and states abortion was frowned upon. Before legalized abortion, many Black women died from illegal abortions. Mothering is an empowering experience for Black women, whether they are biological mothers or otherwise, and gives women to influence the future of their community.
The Wage Penalty for Motherhood
The authors begin by questioning if mother’s low wages are a spurious or casual act. The authors then cite several possible reasons that mother’s earn less than other women- “…having children causes [women] to (1) lose job experience, (2) be less productive at work, (3) trade off higher wages for mother-friendly jobs, or (4) be discriminated against by employers” (Budig et. al 204). However, perhaps the most important correlation is the fact that career ambitions and advances in the workplace discourage most women to have children. Mother’s are seen to be a burden in the workplace, because things at home take time and effort that would otherwise be focused in the workplace. Mothers earn lower wages in the immediate moment, but lose money in the long term, by having decreased pensions and retirement money. The authors assert that most of us are “’free riders’ on [mother’s] labor” (Budig et. al 205), because we will grow up to work with their children, and we benefit from mothers’ good child rearing skills. Well-raised children make better citizens, and everyone who interacts with them benefits from positive child rearing from their mothers. Most studies have found an immediate wage penalty between 4-6% for women with one child (Budig et. al 206), but this is thought to increase overtime and significantly with more children. The human capital theory asserts that women are paid less because they are seen not to work as hard in the workplace, since they instead save energy for work in the home. Even though there have been no studies directly researching productivity of mothers vs. non mothers, or mothers vs. men, although in a 1988 Bielby and Bielby study women reported putting in slightly more effort in the workplace (Budig et. al 207). Another opinion on why mother’s earn less, is that mothers often take less demanding, more “mother friendly” jobs, which usually earn less because they are less demanding. Some employers also may refuse to hire mother’s, which is not simply sex discrimination, but discrimination between women who are and are not mothers. Law prohibits both sex and race discrimination, and this includes discriminating against mothers. Opposite from causal effects, spurious theory suggests that women do not earn less because they have children, these women are usually under educated or do not aspire to a career. But this does not explain why women keep earning less as they have more children. In the study conducted, in the categories of never-married women, married women, and divorced women, childless women earned more. Married mothers, the study shows, experience the highest wage penalty. However, it is also close to the penalty that divorced women experience. The study concludes that there is “… a wage penalty for motherhood of approximately 7 percent per child among young American women” (Budig et. al 218). The study finds a smaller wage penalty for Black and Latina women only for second and third children. The authors conclude that child rearing deserves public support, because all of society benefits from well-raised children. The government and public should try to socialize some of the costs of child rearing and help provide economic support so mother’s can do their best while raising children.
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Monday, September 21, 2009
Blog entry #2
Families in the US Chapter 26
This article describes the history of fathers in the US. During the eighteenth and early nineteenth century, fathers stayed close to their families, often working at a farm at home or close to home. This gave them the opportunity to be a fundamental part of their children’s lives. Perhaps their most important role was providing a moral guidance for their children, which wives’ couldn’t deliver because of their “emotional” behavior. This teaching of right and wrong was especially important to sons’. In the early nineteenth to mid-twentieth century, industrialization brought fathers out of the home. Mothers began to be responsible for the children, and for providing them with the moral and religious guidance fathers previously had. Although the father was still the ultimate authority, he had less direct influence and contact with his family then before. This absence of fathers was seen in all economic classes, but according to the Middletown study, business class mothers expressed more acceptance of the absentee father than working class families did (Pleck 355). From 1940-1965, fathers remained absentee, but became a “sex role model”- mothers were believed to have too much involvement in their children’s lives so their roles scaled back as well. World War II brought men out of the home to fight, and women out of the home to work. Sons were now looking to their fathers on how to act like their gender, and this influence worked on girls too, to see what not to do.
Today, the father remains the distant breadwinner figure. However, father’s influences are growing, in response to women working away from home more and the continued desire to be a “sex role model” for children. There is more desire from father’s now to be more present, even though the distant breadwinner role is most dominant. Issues in the workplace, such as maternity vs. paternity leaves, illustrate this tension. Although industrialization took men out of their homes and gave responsibility to women, men and women now fight against this tradition. The importance of a father figure is known, but often fathers can seem too busy with their breadwinner role to work on their parenting. The social structures within the workplace and government, as well as our media, continue to promote the role of father as breadwinner. Although there is a struggle against this notion, father’s still have their main role in the family outside of the home- economic support.
Unbending gender Introduction and Chapter 1
Like in the previous article, this article asserts that historically there are two parents- the absent economic provider and the busy caretaker of home and children. These roles have traditionally been for men and women, respectively. Men who work the longest hours are often seen as the best types of fathers, providing the most economic stability for their families. Although women’s pay rates are rising, mothers’, the author asserts, are not. This makes parenthood extremely difficult for the single mother. After divorce, men maintain the role of breadwinner, but often solely for themselves or a new family then, leaving women to provide economic support and parenting. Policies in the workplace only perpetuate the separate domestic and labor circles of men and women. The definition of a good worker and of a good mother, the author argues, make it so women have to choose between the two roles. For mothers to be ideal workers, these assumptions have to change. The author also stresses two important types of nontraditional families, the unmarried parents and gay parents.
Many women claim to make the “choice” to be at home with their children and give up jobs, but the low wages and public policy that doesn’t help their cases might have more of an effect on this choice then often discussed. In the article, one working mom explains that while she was as good of a worker as she good be, the constraints that she experienced as a working mom prevented her from performing many tasks at the office. The mothers have to compromise their time at work, because fathers usually either cannot or don’t want to. The mother also describes the guilt she would feel for being an absentee parent, and the importance of having at least one parent in the household. Fathers have always been seen as the ultimate source of authority, guidance, and force within the families, women too often being emotionally erratic and unable to provide their children with the stability they need. Men’s competitive nature also makes them more suited to the workplace, while at home mothers attempt equality. Fathers try to pass down their traits to sons, while sons constantly compete for fathers’ attention. This need for fathers to succeed at their jobs places stress on them and keeps them away from their families. Mothers in the workforce take the masculinity away from their husbands, especially if they were earning more than their husbands- but this rarely happens. And women who see themselves mainly as family caretakers want to make their husbands happy. The choice of motherhood is almost nonexistent- and the choice for fathers as breadwinners must follow from the mothers’ choice.
From Rods to Reasoning, Chapter 2
This author begins with asserting there is no primitive connection between a mother and her child- it is a construct within our society, just as all societies have constructed parenthood. The author begins with dealing with the notion of the “evil infant”, seen as reeking havoc on the peaceful household and demanding their mothers’ time. In the past, raising children was often, if the family can afford it, given out to other caretakers, until the child has reached an age where they can be of value to the family. For colonial families, the main goal was instructing and raising the child within the guidelines of the Puritan religion. The fathers were in charge of instructing both their wives and children how to act within the religious code. Children were rewarded through hard work, and started working with the family as soon as they were old enough. By the middle of the eighteenth century, motherhood started to develop into what it is today- the mothers desire to raise their children, nurturing them to grow while the father seldom provided orders. Since the father no longer provided moral guidance, the women and children retreated into the home to save themselves from the worlds’ evils. It became the mothers’ task to provide moral guidance as well as love and affection to her children within the home. During the nineteenth century, however, servants and other women working for families held a majority of the responsibility for raising children. While the mother stayed home and kept an air of comfort and safety within the home, they didn’t spend the majority of their time with their family. The women who cared for others’ children, however, were not able to spend the same time with their own family, so the working class children often grew up with both parents being absent. Toward the end of the nineteenth century, doctors and others started publishing work about how to raise a child, so that mothers could be trained and then take care of the child themselves. Similar to methods of teaching how to raise children today, these doctors published several studies based on their scientific findings after observing mothers and children. While reforms to family life were made during the nineteenth century, while they benefited middle class families, working class families had a difficult time keeping a family together. With child labor laws, families couldn’t send their children to work and the mother had to stay home as well, making the father the sole income provider. By the 1940s, with many husbands out of the house in the war effort, mothering once again became about love and affection, unlike when servants cared for the children. But this was a sensitive issue, especially because women didn’t want to smother their male children, who weren’t supposed to show the affection women did. After the war, most women returned home and families once again operated as always, the father and breadwinner out at work, mother and children at home.
This article describes the history of fathers in the US. During the eighteenth and early nineteenth century, fathers stayed close to their families, often working at a farm at home or close to home. This gave them the opportunity to be a fundamental part of their children’s lives. Perhaps their most important role was providing a moral guidance for their children, which wives’ couldn’t deliver because of their “emotional” behavior. This teaching of right and wrong was especially important to sons’. In the early nineteenth to mid-twentieth century, industrialization brought fathers out of the home. Mothers began to be responsible for the children, and for providing them with the moral and religious guidance fathers previously had. Although the father was still the ultimate authority, he had less direct influence and contact with his family then before. This absence of fathers was seen in all economic classes, but according to the Middletown study, business class mothers expressed more acceptance of the absentee father than working class families did (Pleck 355). From 1940-1965, fathers remained absentee, but became a “sex role model”- mothers were believed to have too much involvement in their children’s lives so their roles scaled back as well. World War II brought men out of the home to fight, and women out of the home to work. Sons were now looking to their fathers on how to act like their gender, and this influence worked on girls too, to see what not to do.
Today, the father remains the distant breadwinner figure. However, father’s influences are growing, in response to women working away from home more and the continued desire to be a “sex role model” for children. There is more desire from father’s now to be more present, even though the distant breadwinner role is most dominant. Issues in the workplace, such as maternity vs. paternity leaves, illustrate this tension. Although industrialization took men out of their homes and gave responsibility to women, men and women now fight against this tradition. The importance of a father figure is known, but often fathers can seem too busy with their breadwinner role to work on their parenting. The social structures within the workplace and government, as well as our media, continue to promote the role of father as breadwinner. Although there is a struggle against this notion, father’s still have their main role in the family outside of the home- economic support.
Unbending gender Introduction and Chapter 1
Like in the previous article, this article asserts that historically there are two parents- the absent economic provider and the busy caretaker of home and children. These roles have traditionally been for men and women, respectively. Men who work the longest hours are often seen as the best types of fathers, providing the most economic stability for their families. Although women’s pay rates are rising, mothers’, the author asserts, are not. This makes parenthood extremely difficult for the single mother. After divorce, men maintain the role of breadwinner, but often solely for themselves or a new family then, leaving women to provide economic support and parenting. Policies in the workplace only perpetuate the separate domestic and labor circles of men and women. The definition of a good worker and of a good mother, the author argues, make it so women have to choose between the two roles. For mothers to be ideal workers, these assumptions have to change. The author also stresses two important types of nontraditional families, the unmarried parents and gay parents.
Many women claim to make the “choice” to be at home with their children and give up jobs, but the low wages and public policy that doesn’t help their cases might have more of an effect on this choice then often discussed. In the article, one working mom explains that while she was as good of a worker as she good be, the constraints that she experienced as a working mom prevented her from performing many tasks at the office. The mothers have to compromise their time at work, because fathers usually either cannot or don’t want to. The mother also describes the guilt she would feel for being an absentee parent, and the importance of having at least one parent in the household. Fathers have always been seen as the ultimate source of authority, guidance, and force within the families, women too often being emotionally erratic and unable to provide their children with the stability they need. Men’s competitive nature also makes them more suited to the workplace, while at home mothers attempt equality. Fathers try to pass down their traits to sons, while sons constantly compete for fathers’ attention. This need for fathers to succeed at their jobs places stress on them and keeps them away from their families. Mothers in the workforce take the masculinity away from their husbands, especially if they were earning more than their husbands- but this rarely happens. And women who see themselves mainly as family caretakers want to make their husbands happy. The choice of motherhood is almost nonexistent- and the choice for fathers as breadwinners must follow from the mothers’ choice.
From Rods to Reasoning, Chapter 2
This author begins with asserting there is no primitive connection between a mother and her child- it is a construct within our society, just as all societies have constructed parenthood. The author begins with dealing with the notion of the “evil infant”, seen as reeking havoc on the peaceful household and demanding their mothers’ time. In the past, raising children was often, if the family can afford it, given out to other caretakers, until the child has reached an age where they can be of value to the family. For colonial families, the main goal was instructing and raising the child within the guidelines of the Puritan religion. The fathers were in charge of instructing both their wives and children how to act within the religious code. Children were rewarded through hard work, and started working with the family as soon as they were old enough. By the middle of the eighteenth century, motherhood started to develop into what it is today- the mothers desire to raise their children, nurturing them to grow while the father seldom provided orders. Since the father no longer provided moral guidance, the women and children retreated into the home to save themselves from the worlds’ evils. It became the mothers’ task to provide moral guidance as well as love and affection to her children within the home. During the nineteenth century, however, servants and other women working for families held a majority of the responsibility for raising children. While the mother stayed home and kept an air of comfort and safety within the home, they didn’t spend the majority of their time with their family. The women who cared for others’ children, however, were not able to spend the same time with their own family, so the working class children often grew up with both parents being absent. Toward the end of the nineteenth century, doctors and others started publishing work about how to raise a child, so that mothers could be trained and then take care of the child themselves. Similar to methods of teaching how to raise children today, these doctors published several studies based on their scientific findings after observing mothers and children. While reforms to family life were made during the nineteenth century, while they benefited middle class families, working class families had a difficult time keeping a family together. With child labor laws, families couldn’t send their children to work and the mother had to stay home as well, making the father the sole income provider. By the 1940s, with many husbands out of the house in the war effort, mothering once again became about love and affection, unlike when servants cared for the children. But this was a sensitive issue, especially because women didn’t want to smother their male children, who weren’t supposed to show the affection women did. After the war, most women returned home and families once again operated as always, the father and breadwinner out at work, mother and children at home.
Sunday, September 13, 2009
Blog entry #1
“Feminism, Children, and the New Families” analyzes the shift of women from the home to the workplace. The authors attribute this shift to several changes that occurred during the 20th century- most notably postponement or rejection of marriage altogether, increased access to birth control and low fertility rates, and increased rates and acceptance of divorce. Birth control and divorce used to be concepts looked down on within our society, but during the 1960s and 1970s these became more acceptable, with nearly half of first marriages resulting in divorce (Dornbusch et. al). Public policy has also accepted these new shifts. The authors believe that the increased divorce rates and low fertility trends will level off or sink back down, but there is no proof in these beliefs. This article asserts that the shift in women from home to the workplace has some biological influences- extension of life and low fertility rates. Also, by delaying marriage, women work for sometime before getting married and aren’t as willing to give up their job once married. This article asserts the new trend towards women working is a combination of biological forces and choice- for men and women. Men feel increasingly pressured to be sole breadwinners for the families, and shy away from the heavy responsibilities. A question I had was, is there a specific economic class in which the men viewed it acceptable for their wives to work outside of the home, or was it uniform throughout economic classes? According to these authors, several factors affect the shift of women out of the home and to workplace.
“From Marriage to the Market” also tries to explain the historical shift of women from the home to the workplace during the 20th century. The surge of women into the workplace became in the first two decades after World War II, and continued thereafter. The notion that women entered the workplace mostly in times of economic hardship is incorrect, as the economy was booming after World War II when women first entered the workplace in large numbers. Also, beginning in the 1950s, with electrical appliances and the growing middle class, women didn’t need to work as many hours in the home, and while some still chose to work more time in their home, others chose to spend that free time elsewhere. Similar to the previous reading, access birth control as well as rising divorce rates made being responsible for raising a family a choice for women. One question I had after both of the readings was- is the shift of women from the home to family responsible for the high divorce rates and increased use of birth control, or the opposite? Public policy and laws represented this shift of women, with laws legalizing abortion, creating maternity leave, abolishing the “marriage bar”, and making it illegal to fire pregnant women. Another factor the author cites is the shift of marriage seen as something that people had to do to something to fulfill emotional and sexual desires. Women no longer looked for men that could be financially responsible for them and a future family, but instead for someone they love. Men also felt this shift too, looking for mates that they would love and not to fit into a perfect image of a future family. This author asserts that a variety of reasons are responsible for the shift of women out of the home, including those in the previous reading, but also the new electrical appliances, changing laws about women in the workplace, and the search for emotional fulfillment in a partner.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)