This reading discusses how fatherhood in this country has changed over time. In the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, mothers were seen as they are today as the primary caregivers of children. However, fathers still had “greater responsibility for, and influence on, their children.” It was the fathers who were the ones that instilled in their children the morals and values necessary to learn in life. If the fathers were seen as literate, then it was their responsibility to teach the children how to read and write. It is interesting to see that back then when parents would separate it was the men who were “assigned the right and obligation of child custody.” While fathers had good relationships with their children during this time, it was the father-son relationships that were especially strong. Unfortunately, since the early nineteenth to the mid-twentieth centuries the role of the father has drastically changed. He has gone from being someone who is directly involved in his children’s lives to someone who is seen merely as the breadwinner of the family and the mother has taken over at the parent who provides the majority of the nurturing to the children. Previously it had been the fathers that were seen as the ones that were responsible for how the children turned out; it is now the mothers who are responsible. Many believe that during the beginning of industrialization that started the change of the roles of mothers and fathers. Pleck writes, “The father … was kicked upstairs, as they say in the industry, and was made chairman of the board. As such, he did not lose all his power—he still had to be consulted on important decisions—but his wife emerged as the executive director or manager of the enterprise which is called the family.”
The expectations about fatherhood today are that it is the father’s primary responsibility to be the breadwinner of the family. However, we are seeing more and more of fathers resuming some of the responsibilities that they had in the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. There has been an increase in people wanting men to not only be seen as the breadwinner of the family. If and when I get married and have children I definitely want my husband to play an active role in the raising and taking care of the children. I think it is good for children to see that both parents are capable to work and care for them. Even though there are certain gender roles for men and women as far as taking care and providing for the family go, I feel as though both husbands and wives are considered parents and both of them should be responsible for providing both financial support and care to the family. While it may not be possible for these responsibilities to be split equally 50-50 I feel as though both husbands and wives should do whatever is possible to ensure that their children are getting their needs met from both parents as a cohesive unit.
“Halving It All: The Mother and Mr. Mom”
This reading is about families where both the mothers and the fathers worked. It specifically focuses on those who do the alternating-shift work, where when one parent is working, the other is taking care of the children, and then they switch. Deutsch interviews alternating-shift couples and tries to get a better understanding of why it is that they decided to do this.
As we learn in the reading, couples with children decide to work alternating shifts for a variety of different reasons. It seemed as though the most common reason was because they needed the extra money to get by. Some needed the money that the wives brought because the money the husbands were making just wasn’t enough. Others thought that daycare was just too costly. As Deutsch discovers, it was the couples that did alternating shifts that were the ones who had the lowest incomes. Other reasons why couples did alternating shifts was because they felt as though they should be the ones to raise their children. They didn’t want complete strangers, like babysitters, to be the ones that were raising their children and being the ones to instill the values in their children that they saw fit. By alternating shifts, it ensured that at least one parent would be with the children at all hours of the day.
It is obvious that there is a direct correlation between social class status and whether or not couples decide to do alternating shifts. In almost all of the couples that Deutsch interviewed, with all of the different reasons they gave as to why they did alternating shifts, it seemed as though money was always a factor. Most of these couples did alternating shifts because the income of the husbands just wasn’t enough for the family to get by.
These families’ division of labor compares to their gender ideologies because even though both parents are working outside of the house, many of them continue to believe and practice certain gender roles. Deutsch writes, “Mothers are still ‘in charge’ of the work at home; fathers help because their wives are unavailable.” Even though both the mother and the father have jobs and may even share the responsibilities at home 50-50 in most cases the mother will still be seen as the parent who is supposed to nurture and care for the children, but the father only does it when the mother cannot. Also in most cases it was the father who was seen as the main breadwinner. Some families even went so far as to ensure that the father brought in more money than the mother so that he could maintain the role as the breadwinner. Deutsch says, “In eight families the women’s rate of pay was either higher or equal to their husbands’. But in only two of the families did the women earn higher overall salaries. When women earned a higher rate of pay, their husbands worked a substantially greater number of hours.” This just shows how important it is for the men to make sure that they are the ones who are the seen as the breadwinners of the family. As far as the women go, many of them were happy to be out of the house and working. Most of the husbands believed that the women were only working because the family needed the money, but in fact most of the women said that even if money wasn’t an issue, that they would want to continue working. Some of the reasons for this were “a sense of independence in bringing in money, a chance to get out of the house and be with other adults, a feeling of accomplishment and recognition for a job well done, time away from children.” However no matter how much these women work, they are still seen as the “number-one parent” of the family.
I feel as though an alternating shift is an option for me in the future, but there are many factors that would contribute to my decision. If money was an issue and alternating shifts seemed like the most logical option then yes I would do it. Having a career is something that is very important to me, but if there is no one that I trust to take care of my children when my husband and I are working, then there will have to be some changes made. If both my husband and I work in the day and there is a problem taking care of the children then something will have to change because they would be my main priority. However, if I could avoid alternating shifts than I probably would. If my husband and I were doing alternating shifts, then there would be less time for all of us to spend as a family to be together, which is something that I would not want.
“The Absent Black Father”
This reading discusses fatherlessness and how it is perceived in our society. We see the absent Black father as someone who “epitomizes the male component of family breakdown and its deplorable repercussions.” The author wants us to realize that it is not the lack of a father that causes many families with children, especially Black families, to be living in poverty, but instead it is racism that is the true reason. Roberts writes, “A Black child whose father is present still is likely to fare worse than a White child raised by a single mother.” It is this reality that shows us that it is not about whether or not a Black child is raised in a house with or without a father present that will determine if the child lives in poverty, but instead it is racial inequality that will be the determining factor.
The societal forces that discourage family participation of Black fathers are that often times in the media Black men are viewed as being “gangster rappers, hustlers, rapists, gang bangers, drug dealers, and crack heads” and that they should not be role models for their children. Also, the idea of living off of welfare increases the number of families who have children but are not married. For some women it is the idea of patriarchy that causes them to not want to have the father of their baby in the picture. Women in general are less likely to marry or stay with a man who offers little or no financial support. As Roberts writes, “Black sociologist William Julius Wilson, among others makes a convincing case that the rise in Black female-headed households is directly tied to Black male joblessness.” It is this decrease in being able to financially support a family that seems to be the reason that many Black families are fatherless. Another societal force is that the majority of those who make up the population of people who are incarcerated in this country are Black men. It is obvious that if a Black man is in jail he not only cannot financially support his family, but also he cannot physically be there for his children either. Even once he is out of jail, the fact that he is an ex-convict makes it extremely hard to find a relatively good job.
Many people still define the idea of the “perfect father” as someone who is able to financially support their children and families. Other factors are not taken into account when defining the “perfect father.” However, for a variety of reasons it is hard for Black men to find jobs where they are able to provide the financial support that their families need to get by. It is also because in our society it is the generally the mother, and not the father, who is supposed to be the parent that nurtures the children. But if the father cannot provide for his family financially and society doesn’t really accept a man being nurturing to his children, does that mean that a man can’t be nurturing to his children and can’t be there for them in any other way but financially?
Roberts says, “Stephanie Coontz reports that in one study ‘poor African-American, officially absent fathers actually had more contact with their children and gave them more informal support than did White, middle-class absent fathers.’” Roberts goes on to say, “Indeed, if we want to imagine nurturing fatherhood, decoupled from the patriarchal economic model, we might begin by looking to Black fathers.” By Roberts saying that she means that we need to remove ourselves from the idea that just providing financially for ones family does not define him as a father.
No comments:
Post a Comment