Mothering

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? What is intensive mothering, and does this concept apply to your mother or mothers of your friends?

According to Hays, the four historical stages were the Middles Ages in Europe, then the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries in Puritan America, the Nineteenth century in America, and finishing with the 20th Century, known as the Progressive Era. In the Middle Ages, readings show information that leads historians to feel like they feared their children almost. According to the reading, children were not considered blessings. “Adults found children demonic, animalistic, ill-formed, and physically fragile.” They needed to be disciplined because they would cause harm to themselves and the people around them is they were left on their own accord. They were physically beaten as a form a discipline, known as flogging. Wet nurses were every common. Also, cuddling and other forms of affection were not seen as kosher.
In Puritan America, children were beginning to be seen in a completely different light. Instead of being little devils, they were seen as innocent human beings. Childhood was a value period of life. People began to embrace childhood by creating its own type of clothing and toys. Parents were becoming more like the parents we see today- loving and caring. Cuddling was now not seen as such a taboo. The primary teaching guide for the parents was the bible.
In the nineteenth century, the view of a child transformed again as well as the parenting skills. Parents were children caretakers. Instead of being bad and being transformed into good people, Americans started to believe that they were born with good intentions and it was the mother’s job to make sure they stayed that way. Mothers were beginning to be seen as more important. It was her and her husband’s job to keep the children as innocent as possible. Unlike in the Middle Ages when the child was seen as matured by age six or seven. Mothers were not expected to have as many children as they had been before. Their new jobs were to focus intently on the ones they had and not to focus on her own fertility.
In the twentieth century, due to new scientific and technological advances, children’s mothers were now seen more as protectors against the world outside the home. They kept the children off of the streets and in schools. They were also mostly taken out of the work force, in middle class homes. Discussions surrounding how to raise a child were common as debates on what was proper became a little more mainstream. Women were viewed as the care takers or the nurturers. The family became a unit centered on the children.
Intensive mothering is the concept where the mother is the primary caregiver over the children. They are to love them and nurture them. The mother gives the child everything he or she wants or needs. They take the front seat in making sure that the child grows into a well rounded individual, at pretty much any cost.
My mom is very much like that. She would give up everything for my sister and I. Even when my parents were married, she was the primary caregiver for us. My father would be around on the weekends, but when it came to school and other extracurricular activities, she was the one that was there. At times I felt smothered but I know if she wasn’t there looking over me like she did, I certainly would not be attending Boston College this year. She was a wonderful mother and a wonderful woman. My Nana, her mother, was exactly the same way. They are both mothers that most should strive to be like.




2. In Crittenden's view, what are the main indicators that mothering is devalued in the United States? Do you agree with her?

The main indicators that show that mothers are being devalued are ever so present in everyday life. It is demonstrated when the government do not recognize being a stay at home as an occupation. In fact, they receive absolutely no benefits whatsoever. Studies have shown that every year a woman stays home, she is losing retirement benefits and money. It is the most unappreciated job in society. If there were no stay at home moms, who would raise the children? Or more importantly, how would these parentless children turn out? Women are also encouraged to not put stay at home mom when applying for a job. In the working world, a stay at home mom is seen as a woman who has it easy. Who doesn’t have to go into work everyday and has no stress. It is seen as a weakness, not as strength; when ironically, being a stay at home more is more labor intensive than any other job out there. They never get to call in sick or take a personal day. Overtime is not a punishment, but a way of life. Being a mother is a 24/7 job- the most unappreciative job in the world. When women decide to be the primary parent, the government slowly takes away government pension by hundreds of dollars a month. (5) Court rulings are usually in the favor of the “bread winner”, so in divorce court, the mother usually loses, and finances force her to go back to work, meaning that the children’s primary care giver is barely ever around. Women also face hardship in the work place. And some women are actually even fired because they cannot care for their children, while working over time and weekend shifts. Society also gives women a lot of undue hassle. Career women look down on stay at home moms because they see them as dependents and not as self sufficient women. Children even look down on stay at home moms because society marks them as “wastes”, when really the salary a woman would receive for her daily actions would grant her, according to the text, over $500,000 (plus) annually.
I totally agree with Crittenden’s view. Society puts women as a stereotype as mothers and nurturers, then penalizes them for the roles they were shoved in to. When my mother got married she had a very successful career. As she got older, and wanted a family, she decided to take a break and raise her children without the help of a full time nanny. When talking to her about her experience, she claimed it was the best job she ever had, and no matter how far behind it got her in the working world, she’d do it all over again. She often felt unappreciated by my father, who once asked her, “What do you do all day?” She simply replied, “Raising your children.” Society puts so much pressure on women to do different things. If a woman was at home, they’d want her in the working world. But if she got a nanny because of a full-time job, she’d be looked down upon because she would be deemed a bad mother. Women should make their own decisions when it comes to their careers and their families just like men do. No man is looked down upon because he has a career. Women should be embraced no matter what they decide. And the government, especially in the conservative one we have today, should give benefits to the women who are raising our country’s next generation and our future leaders. By providing a strong base at home, mothers are insuring that our society will be better off in the future. They need to be recognized for their success.



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"?

The two types of mothering that Black women tend to do are biological mothers or “othermothers”. The biological mother is the blood mother of the child. Whereas the term other mother, is another person, related by blood or not, that steps in when the biological mother is not present. The othermother can be Grandmothers, sisters, aunts, or cousins. They can step in temporarily or long term with informal adoption. Raising a children is almost a community affair, just in specific households.The family itself in a woman-based family tie. The family tends to be more than just a mother and a father. Like we see with othermothers, the entire family steps in to raise the child.
Mothers, whether biological or not, are the head of the family, especially regarding Black women. They are the anchors that ground a family. A mother can be a child’s cousin, aunt, or grandmother. Either way, the mother figure is the matriarch or the family. Their job is to take care of the children and raise them in a society where the children face discrimination against their race, gender, class, sexuality, and nationality. Their job is to help the children keep their values when the ways of the world are against their children. Instead of letting them be oppressed they make it so children feel they can keep their chins up. In this way, they are the overseers of our future society. Mothers are producing and raising the next generation. Therefore, giving them the power to change the world as we know it.


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?

According to Edin and Kefalas, the attitudes of poor women in America on child rearing and what the consequences of their actions are, are completely different than what is what more middle class citizens would consider the norm. In fact, women like Jen, the young woman interviewed, believes that having a child got her off the streets and made her a better all together. By being forced to take on responsibility, it has made her a better rounded individual. It was also curious to see that she did not include any opinions by her own parents. The only thing we know is that they felt she really turned her life around, after the birth of her son Collin. In a middle class home, a family would go on high alert and panic if their daughter in her sophomore year of high school got pregnant. The family would see it as a determent to her success, not a blessing in disguise, like Jen did. When it comes to marriage, the more poverty stricken Americans, find that having kids is less important, or binding, than a marriage. They have children frequently but don’t marry a man as quickly. Like Jen, children are a way of life, a failed marriage isn’t. Therefore, they are not going to jump into a marriage with someone they have kids with, just because they are the parent of their child. They aren’t going to get married if they know it’s going to fail. These individuals have become tough and independent through all of their hard times. They are not going to give up their independence for someone who is just going to leave them after a couple of years. If you said this to a middle class family, they would strongly disagree, I know my family would. My mother would say that if I made a decision to sleep with someone, she would assume that I was in love with the man, therefore I would want to marry him. I find that middle class homes have a more traditional way of looking at the family, whereas with poorer families, they actions are made to insure their own success.
To help these women out of poverty, we have to help them stand on their own two feet. Since young women value their independence so much, make it so the government is helping them succeed while letting the women feel they are truly doing it on their own. Like we learned last week, most European nations provide free and much better health care than we have here in the States. Therefore, I feel we should adopt this program in impoverished areas so that women like Jen can work sufficient hours to make rent and buy food, while she knows that her child is in good hands. Taking some of the worry and stress out of life would make these people more affective in their jobs. Then, women like Jen, could be promoted and make enough money for her and her son to get out of the bad areas and into a place where her son would have more success.
I can understand both sides of the arguments that the middle class and lower classes represent. I do not believe that just because a young woman gets pregnant she should have to marry her husband, especially if she is as young as 15 years old. But I also disagree with having a child in order to gain a sense of independence and help to get off the street. A child is a life long commitment and it needs to be a serious decision, one that I feel like a 15 year old couldn’t make at such a young and impressionable age. But, to each their own, and I feel like single mothers are never going to be extinct. Meaning that as long as they are around, our government needs to help them raise their children as easily as possible. And also try to give them the same chances to succeed that the next person has.