Tuesday, March 27, 2007

Questions:1. According to Hays, what were the four historical stages of development in the cultural notions of appropriate mothering in America in 17-20th centuries? 2. In Crittenden's view, what are the main indicators that mothering is devalued in the United States? Do you agree with her? 3. According to Collins, what are the two types of mothering that Black women tend to do? How are these related to the notion of "motherhood as a symbol of power"?4. According to Edin and Kefalas, what are the poor women's attitudes on and experiences with marriage and childbearing, and what can the society do to help these women get out of poverty? What is your opinion?


The four historical stages of development in the cultural notions of appropriate mothering in America in 17-20th centuries are (1) children were seen as demonic, animalistic, ill-formed, and psychically fragile in the Middle Ages, in which childrearing practices included drugged, whipped, tossed, or simply ignored. They were most likely raised by other people and seen as onerous. Further, by the age of six and seven, they were seen as old enough work and apart of adult society. (2) In the 17th and 18th centuries, the views of children and rearing began to change, in which childhood was understood as a special and valuable period of life; there were special clothes, toys, books, schools created for children. They were seen as needing protection from the outside world. (3) In the late 17th and 18th century, there is no notion of childhood innocence and a lack of children’s toys, games. But there was a belief that early childhood was a special and strict stage in which children were not ignored but molded by means of physical punishment. (4) In the 19th century, ideas of appropriate child rearing changed so that the value of childhood was discovered and children were viewed as innocent instead of agent of sin. By the second half, child rearing was synonymous with mothering and was accompanied by a more general movement and acknowledgement attached to children. According to Hays, the model of intensive mothering, which is a historically constructed cultural model for appropriate child care, asserts that children are innocent and that their rearing should be carried out primarily by individual mothers, so that the children’s needs are the center with methods that are informed by experts, labor-intensive, and expensive. This concept is said to be the best model, because it provides the best for children and what they deserve. However, in society today, it is rather difficult to offer this form of parenting to children, because parents are working and there is less time to spend with children. This model is definitely not the kind of parenting I, nor the families I know, received.
The main indicators that mothering is devalued according to Crittenden are that there are inflexible workplaces that accommodate taking care of children, which result in a lack of income for women, marriage is still not an equal financial partnership, and government social policies don’t even define unpaid care of family dependents as work. Furthermore, such cases serve as proof that individuals who assume the role of nurturer are punished and discourage from performing the very tasks that everyone agrees are essential. I agree that women’s work is really underappreciated, undervalued, and not fully understood in its complexity and difficulty, but I think there is a growing awareness and an effort to realize the importance of women’s ‘hidden’ work.
Collins addresses the issue of black women and the ways in which they are mothers. The two types of mothering that Black women tend to do according to Collins are the controlling image within society is of the White-male created image of the “matriarch” and the superstrong Black mother that has been Black-male –perpetuated. These two types of mothering hold that motherhood as types of power, because matriarch model views women, not solely bloodmothers, in supporting and helping raise children and the superstrong Black women model, in which women work to instill values and insure survival of their children. Both models of women assume that women are the dominant leaders (as opposed to men) in influencing the outcomes of their children’s lives.
Poor women’s attitudes on and experiences with marriage and childbearing are surprisingly positive and do not express regret for having gotten pregnant over possible opportunities for school and careers. In fact, children may offer poor youth a compelling sense of purpose in their lives that lead to drastic changes. Furthermore, they still want to get married, even if not with the father of their child; however, among poor couples, there is often mistrust increased with infidelity, drug and alcohol abuse, criminal activity, and incarceration, therefore, women have to ‘test’ the relationship to ensure that it will fail as a marriage. Some ways that society can help poor women is more access to jobs that lead to financial independence and access to better childcare services so that women can work. I think other important aspects in helping young poor women is the access to cheaper, more easily accessed education, flexibility within the workplace to accommodate raising children, sick days, health care, etc. Although, there could be governmental aids and occupational support systems for women, I do not think that in general people should make irrational decisions especially when it involves childrearing and marriage. Mothers may feel grateful for the change that their child has brought to their lives, but if they are economically, financially, and mentally instable to build their own families, then, they should really try to rationalize and rethink decisions to have children.

No comments: