Gender and Family Relations Notes PDF

CHAPTER 8 Gender and Family Relations L e a r n i n g O b jec tiv es 1. Define the motherhood mandate and explain it from the perspectives of functionalism, conflict theory, and feminism. 2. List reasons why a “fatherhood mandate” has yet to emerge. 3. Describe the b...

CHAPTER 8 Gender and Family Relations L e a r n i n g O b jec tiv es 1. Define the motherhood mandate and explain it from the perspectives of functionalism, conflict theory, and feminism. 2. List reasons why a “fatherhood mandate” has yet to emerge. 3. Describe the benefits for children when parents are dual earners. 4. List distinctive gender role patterns in African American, Latino, Asian American, and Na- tive American families in the United States. 5. Identify the gendered consequences of divorce with respect to child custody, finances, and emotional well-being of parents. 6. Compare and contrast single-parent families headed by mothers and those headed by fathers. 7. Profile gay and lesbian families focusing on gender roles and childrearing. Women’s destiny is received through messages about love, marriage and motherhood. As Simone de Beauvoir declared in one of the most important 20th century works on feminist philosophy, The Second Sex (1953), this destiny is difficult “to reconcile with the will to succeed.” Most people eventually become parents. Like those from many other cultures, Americans are propelled into parenthood by the gendered processes of love, cohabitation, and marriage that prime the couple for their new roles as mothers and fathers. Parenthood is structured by gender beliefs and produces powerful gender outcomes. These gender beliefs are so completely embedded in family practices that the differences and inequalities they produce are largely taken for granted. As we saw in previous chapters, challenges to taken-for-granted definitions about the family provoke highly contentious debates. These debates have profound consequences when one or another definition is used to determine public policy on a variety of family-related issues, including divorce, child custody, and benefits for single parents, cohabitating couples, and partners and children in gay and lesbian families. Political rhetoric usually highlights beliefs that when the traditional family structure is changed to accommodate 243 244 C hap t e r 8 ▸ Gender and Family Relations change outside the family, such as women’s massive entry into paid employment, disastrous social consequences follow. Other views celebrate family diversity, flexibility, and the creation of new roles for all family members in response to social change. Gender-based parental roles are called into question as alternative definitions of the family emerge. We will see in this chapter that narrow views of gender severely restrict opportunities for exploration and growth for both children and their parents. (Unless otherwise noted, statistics in this chapter are taken from U.S. Census Bureau, 2009). The Parenthood Transition The transition from couple dyad to family triad is a momentous one. The first child brings numerous changes that affect the marriage and alter the lifestyle of the couple. New parents report that enormous joy is tempered with increased marital tension. To say that parenthood is filled with uncertainty is an understatement. Parenting is based on skills that need to be learned but cannot be effectively accomplished, if at all, until after the child is born. Socialization for parenthood is based on one’s own family experiences, involvement with others’ children, formal classes, folklore, and child care and parenting manuals. Whatever the degree of preparation, new parents discover that the anticipation of what it means to be a parent is far different from the reality. Gender is a key factor in accounting for this anticipation gap. Parenthood brings different experiences and produces different results for mothers compared to fathers. Early sociological work on the transition to parenthood focused on parenthood as crisis. In this model, first-time parents encounter anxiety, uncertainty, loss of confidence—even shock—during the first days and weeks of parenting. The strains of parenthood can be overwhelming, and the demands alter the quality as well as quantity of time spent on the marital relationship. More time and energy are spent on children-related issues than on marriage-related ones. When couples nurture their children but not their marriage, the risk of divorce increases. Traditional gender roles also can drive a wedge between the new parents. When women do virtually all of the infant care and take on the added housework demands, they adopt new roles. Men tend to maintain prefatherhood roles, often retreating to workplace roles that may find themselves emotionally distanced from both wife and newborn (Bell et al., 2007; Galdiolo and Roskam, 2012). The crisis of parenthood is eased when gender roles are more flexible and couples make a determined effort to enhance closeness. Parenthood as crisis has been largely replaced with the view that parenthood is a normal developmental stage. The disorganization and seeming chaos when the newborn enters the household gradually give way to new routines and family norms associated with the tension first, but then the joy and gratification new par- ents experience. Obviously, parenthood alters marital roles and creates new family roles. Whether the parenthood transition is seen as a crisis, a stage in normal develop- ment, or something in between depends on how a family responds to meet the parenting challenge. This response will be largely dependent on beliefs regarding gender roles. The labels “husband” and “wife” suggest different realities; the same can be said for motherhood and fatherhood.  C h a pter 8 ▸ Gender and Family Relations 245 Motherhood The belief that a woman’s ultimate fulfillment will be as a mother is a powerful socialization message girls hear very early in life. The motherhood mandate issues a command to females of all ages, instructing them that motherhood demands selfless devotion to children and subordination of one’s own life to the needs of children and family. Although many other activities that she finds personally worthwhile are halted, the mandate assumes that a woman willingly submits herself to her child- rearing responsibilities first. The power of this mandate instills guilt in women who have small children and work outside the home, regardless of whether they are em- ployed because they “want to be” (employment is personally rewarding) or they “have to be” (they need the money). The Motherhood Mandate American culture idealizes motherhood, but the actual support new mothers receive varies considerably. If women are socialized into believing that being a good mother comes easily, they are severely jolted by par- enting responsibilities. The tension and strain experienced by first-time mothers can be perceived as personal failure, in turn lessening their motivation to seek help. The notion of a maternal instinct is not empirically supported (Chapter 2), but the view that all females want to become mothers and that a mother’s role “comes naturally” stubbornly persists. Ideal mothers are expected to enjoy the work of mothering and caring for home and family, regardless of how demanding or tedious the work is. Exclusive devotion to mothering is good for her children and promotes a husband’s happiness and marital contentment (Hoffnung, 1995; Buchanan, 2013). Given the profound social changes accompanying the large-scale entry of women into paid employment, mothers would be expected to have more latitude navigating their motherhood roles. A new version of the mandate has surfaced, but it may exert more of a toll on mothers. This “new momism” is media-driven and pressures mothers to conform to impossible standards of perfection. Women are expected to seek out the latest information offering guidance in how to fulfill their roles as mothers. In parenting magazines, despite the use of the supposedly neutral word parent in their titles, mothers are the target audience (Zimmerman, 2004). These images of moms appear to “celebrate” work and family at the same time— achieve at work but self-sacrifice at home. The end result, however, is a paradox rather than a celebration, as suggested by Susan Douglas and Meredith Michaels (2009:244): Now here’s the beauty of this contorting contraction.... Both working mothers and stay-at home mothers get to be failures... intensive mothering has lower status... (stay-at-home mothers are boring), but occupies a higher moral ground (working mothers are neglectful). The new momism further divides women who work outside the home and those who don’t into opposing camps. Room mothers and cookie bakers make way for soccer moms and vanpool drivers. It is a no-win situation for mothers. She is blamed for spending too little or too much time with her children. Although she delights in her child’s development, her own development stalls and her sense of self can be diminished. 246 C hap t e r 8 ▸ Gender and Family Relations Functionalism In emphasizing that the motherhood mandate is essential for so- cial equilibrium, functionalists offer support for these qualities. Mothers are both the biological reproducers and the social reproducers. As a child’s primary social- izer, a mother provides the necessary ingredients for maintaining, producing, and continuing society. If socialization does not instill girls with the motherhood man- date—and the dream and idealism associated with it—society may be compromised. Functionalism assumes that the traditional division of labor of nonoverlapping gen- der roles within a patriarchal family is the most efficient and least contentious ar- rangement. It is a mother’s fault if children are flawed. She takes the responsibility, the blame, and ultimately the guilt (Garey and Arendell, 2001; Badinter, 2012). Functionalists point to the responsibilities associated with motherhood. But rights accrue as well. The motherhood mandate is in tandem with the motherhood mystique, which is a glorification of the role. Child rearing brings joy and pride for a child’s accomplishments, for which mothers take a great deal of credit. It is appar- ent, nonetheless, that mothers are more likely to share the credit for what goes right but assume the burden of blame for what goes wrong. There is no argument that the family is the critical institution for socialization. Contemporary functionalists recognize that there are social benefits when women, including those with school-age children, work outside the home. They assert that family stability today hinges on the incomes of employed mothers. Women, like men, need to be encouraged to pursue the work that offers the highest income. Functional- ists agree that equality in the workplace is beneficial to families and to society. How- ever, with the ever-present motherhood mandate lurking, women are always on family alert. Parents and children accept the mandate and take for granted any arrangements permitting men less in-home responsibility. Functionalists have difficulty transferring beliefs about gender equity outside the home to gender inequality inside the home. In other words, how are women supposed to be equal and different at the same time? Often overlooked is the fact that the motherhood mandate is relatively recent in the United States. Until the mid-nineteenth century, a frontier economy based on subsistence farming required women to carry a multitude of productive roles. In her role set, a woman’s child-rearing function was less important for family survival than her farm and household-related money-raising activities (Chapter 5). It is only since the twentieth century that the notion of having children for purely emotional reasons became firmly ingrained in the American consciousness. Conflict Theory Conflict theorists focus on the motherhood mandate as con- tributing to the social powerlessness experienced by women in their household and roles outside the home. Because a woman’s earnings from paid employment alter the power relations within the family, men will evoke the motherhood mandate to ensure that women concentrate their energies on domestic roles. Careers and per- sonal growth are impeded when family responsibilities intrude in the workplace. The choices wives make regarding child rearing weaken their bargaining power at home and on the job and reinforce economic dependence on their husbands. In the workplace, this translates to lower salaries and sagging careers (Chapter 10). At home, it translates to shouldering the bulk of child care tasks. From a conflict per- spective, not until as many men as women truly want to stay home with the children can women hope to achieve real economic parity.  C h a pter 8 ▸ Gender and Family Relations 247 Challenging the Motherhood Mandate An acceptance of the motherhood mandate/new momism precludes much individual growth for women. By this definition, motherhood is the key worthwhile role that overrides all others. The obvious problems and contradictions emanating from the mystique are conveniently overlooked. Can women feel good about themselves as mothers if they also seek other roles? One answer lies in the demographics of motherhood, which have changed sig- nificantly since the 1950s. As women achieved career and educational goals, mar- riage and motherhood were delayed. The median age at first marriage for both women and men has risen steadily (Chapter 7). The decline of the fertility rate since World War II is linked to higher levels of education, rising wages, and the opportu- nity costs of child rearing for women. This explains why so many women in their late thirties and forties are now having children for the first time. It also supports the idea, however, that motherhood remains a fundamental goal. Most women are unwilling to give up biological parenthood but opt for smaller families than in their parents’ generation. Because career-oriented women also are unwilling to give up either motherhood or professional roles, they are adapting their beliefs about family and parenting accordingly. Voluntary Childlessness For both men and women, the acceptance of child- lessness has gradually increased since the 1970s, but contrary to the motherhood mandate, women are more likely than men to hold positive attitudes toward child- lessness (Koropeckyj-Cox and Pendell, 2007). Childless marriages are steadily in- creasing, and more women of childbearing age will not have children. These are often professional women who may be either less confident or more realistic in their ability to successfully carry out roles associated with motherhood and a satisfying career. Voluntarily childless couples express similar levels of marital happiness as couples with children. Their family life cycle is not traditional, but they develop ways to escape social pressures for parenthood (Pelton and Hertlein, 2011). Women who are childless do not lead childless lives. They choose not to be mothers, but children are central to their lives. They take on a variety of meaningful child-related responsibilities through their networks of kin, friends, voluntary organizations, and employment. Feminism The acceptance of feminist values by a larger proportion of women also affects notions about motherhood. Women who hold traditional gender role orientations desire larger families when compared to less traditional women. Traditional women also are likely to express higher levels of religiosity and have lower levels of education. College women who subjectively identify with feminism are less interested in motherhood or intend to delay marriage and motherhood until after they are established in their careers. Regardless of media hype, however, feminism and motherhood are not incompatible. Feminist mothers are realistic about the gendered pitfalls of mothering but also believe that motherhood offers opportunities for assertiveness, learning and mastering new skills, and ensuring that feminist principles are passed to the next generation of sons and daughters (Chapter 3). The old view of motherhood is unacceptable because paid work has become so important to the identities of mothers. They recognize that simply 248 C hap t e r 8 ▸ Gender and Family Relations staying home all day with preschoolers does not automatically qualify someone as a good mother. Critique Optimistic views of the waning of the motherhood mandate are chal- lenged by several trends. First, stay-at-home mothers have become more common since the 1990s; today about one-fourth of married couple households have stay-at- home mothers. Second, there is a burgeoning trend of later motherhood for women who are financially better off and have archived some personal and career goals. A billion dollar fertility industry has mushroomed for women to successfully challenge their biological clocks. Voluntary childless couples must still contend with the fall- out from resisting prochild messages when women in particular opt out of having children. Third, many single-parent women put motherhood before marriage. Con- trary to stereotypes, many of these women make a motherhood choice they believe provides them a benefit that marriage does not. They may desire marriage, but they desire motherhood more (Edin and Kefalas, 2011; U.S. Census Bureau Newsroom, 2012; Gregory, 2012). Most important, much research points to the persistent view that mothers should be the parent at home when children are young. We see throughout this text that on the most important indicators of development, children are not harmed but are enhanced by their mothers’ employment. Men perceive more costs to maternal employment, and women perceive more benefits. Both believe, however, that it is more beneficial for children when mothers retreat from the workplace to be at home with their children. Over half of the public also believes that mothers cannot be as productive at work as fathers.(Goldberg et al., 2012a; Roper Center, 2012). For the large majority of mothers who do combine work and family roles, however, we will see that their time with children has increased rather than decreased. It is true that a motherhood mandate is shifting to viewing of motherhood in much more flexible ways to fit the lifestyles of contemporary women and couples. This shift accounts for the well-being of children and the marital satisfaction of parents. The qualities we associate with motherhood can be more widely shared by both men and women in a variety of family contexts. This variety is very important because of the many women choosing motherhood but not marriage. It is expected that like other gender roles, qualities associated with motherhood will continue to change as we experi- ence more diversity in our families and workplaces. Fatherhood Cast into primary breadwinning roles, American fathers are viewed as more pe- ripheral in nurturing and child care compared to mothers. This is a far different picture than the colonial fathers who were expected to provide for not only the economic needs of their children, but also their moral and spiritual development. In this sense, colonial fathers were nurturers as much as mothers. Public policy and legislation regarding custody of children, child support, definitions of desertion, and child neglect reinforce the emphasis on the father’s role as the economic provider for the family. Increases in divorce and cohabitation have undermined father–child relationships, and nonresident fathers are increasingly absent from their children’s lives. To get women off welfare, public policy focuses on finding unwed, divorced,  C h a pter 8 ▸ Gender and Family Relations 249 and married fathers who deserted their families. A father is targeted in order for him to meet his financial obligation to the family; his emotional involvement with his children is largely ignored. The fact that fathers do take their breadwinning role very seriously does not diminish the interest or love they have for their families. Like women, men also see raising a family as a major life goal. Fathers today spend more time with their children and report greater overall family satisfaction. Quality family relations and supportive social connections are associated with better psychological health and well-being for fathers and better adjustment for their children (Auerbach and Sil- verstein, 2006; Rina and Feinberg, 2012; Lansford et al., 2013). Compared to non- fathers, contemporary dads exhibit two models of fatherhood: the “good-provider model,” encouraging them to work more hours, and the “involved-father model,” encouraging them to work less hours. The “forces pulling women out of the home are stronger than the forces pulling men into it” (Gerson, 2009:327). The models may seem contradictory, but they suggest that men regard their fatherhood role as a very significant one. New Fathers As first-time parents, men adapt more easily to the rigors of fatherhood than women do to motherhood, and husbands can predict with more success than their wives what kind of parents they are likely to be. In the transition to parenthood, husbands’ personal goals do not change substantially and husbands are less ambivalent about parenting responsibilities (Chapter 9). Fathers see themselves as less competent than mothers in dealing with daily child care. They internalize strong beliefs about their paternal responsibility, but largely surrender actual responsibility for child care to their wives. A father’s level of engagement, accessibility, and responsibility are a fraction of the mother’s. A father’s time is spent more on recreational activities with their children than with the children’s ongoing physical upkeep. The existing gender gap in housework is associated with traditional gender ideology. The gap increases with the birth of the first child and widens with more children. Women’s housework and child maintenance tasks increase significantly (Craig, 2006; Baxter et al., 2008; Carlson and Lynch, 2013). Child care and housework are seamless for mothers but not for fathers. Children’s Development Because the prime directive for fathers is to provide for the economic support of their families, in comparison to mothers, the father’s effect on the development of their children is often unheeded. Parental influence on childhood socialization is vitally important. Mothers accept the major responsibility in socialization of their children, but fathers send highly important early messages, especially regarding gender roles. These messages are powerful because fathers have less contact and quality of interaction with their children. Compared to mothers, fathers expect their adolescent sons to conform to gender roles much more than their adolescent daughters. Fathers are more likely than mothers to take into account gender when delegating chores and privileges, when showing affection, and when disciplining their children. Fathers are likely to use harsher discipline on sons, believing it enhances a son’s masculinity (Chapter 3). Fathers who are less traditional and stereotyped in their gender role beliefs have sons who match their fathers’ beliefs. 250 C hap t e r 8 ▸ Gender and Family Relations Traditional fatherhood may bring less of the profound personal and marital changes that mothers experience, but fathers do form strong bonds with their young children and are successfully taking on child care tasks and nurturing roles more than fathers did in the past. When fathers change, daughters—and especially sons— will follow. Egalitarian parenting clearly benefits children and enhances marital satisfaction. A Fatherhood Mandate Continued gender role stereotyping severely limits options for fathers to explore new roles. Conflict theory and the feminist perspec- tive argue that the motherhood mandate is a barrier to gender equity. But the op- posite is true for a fatherhood mandate. Young men have not adopted a fatherhood mandate allowing them to move in the direction of androgynous, flexible gender roles. Functionalists also would support a fatherhood mandate that moves beyond the provider role so that fathers can effectively meet the challenges of social change and the new family processes that emerge as a result. The involved-father model appears to be gaining in prominence, and as discussed on Chapter 9, it may signal a crack in a masculine ethic that deters men from more meaningful parent–child relationships. Parents as Dual Earners Again, the entry of women into paid employment significantly altered the structure and function of families in the United States. Paid employment benefits women socially and psychologically, especially when they work in positions they find challenging, rewarding, and personally meaningful. Their marriage and sense of well-being are enhanced, and shared decision making increases marital satisfaction for both wife and husband (Han and Moen, 2001; O’Keefe, 2002; Kendall, 2007). As suggested in Chapter 7, dual-earning couples are more likely to have egalitarian marriages than those that have a wife as full-time homemaker. The cost for women involves maintaining responsibilities at home and for the children when husbands do not share household and child care chores on anywhere near an equal basis. Mothers, but not fathers, adjust their time use at work and in the home to accommodate these demands. Outsourcing child care narrows the gendered division of household labor, but overall, it remains unchallenged (Craig and Powell, 2012). Multiple roles of employed women also include other caregiving demands, such as caring for frail parents, which may compromise the benefits of employment and life satisfaction (Chapter 10). In general, however, the evidence from dual- earner families shows that women are enriched by their labor force activities. The dual-earner family is now the normative family. There are more dual- earning nuclear families with children present than one-earner nuclear families with children present (Chapter 7). The largest overall increase is in families with pre- schoolers. Because women are traditionally responsible for child care, particularly in the preschool years, all eyes turn to them when questions arise as to how children are affected when both parents work outside the home. It is the wives rather than their husbands who reap society’s disapproval if children suffer when both parents are in the labor force. How accurate is the “suffering children” theme?  C h a pter 8 ▸ Gender and Family Relations 251 Children of Employed Women If parents are happy and the family is enhanced by a dual-earning family structure, this should logically carry over to the children. Not so, states writer Kate O’Beirne (2006:23–24), who maintains that... we know what is true about the bond between mother and child. Women fall madly in love with babies in a way that devoted fathers don’t... Women would have to be snookered to leave their young children in the care of someone else. This view asserts that a positive, sustained relationship with a caregiver is essential to healthy emotional childhood development, but a mother must be that caregiver. A person caring for a child out of love will do it better than one doing it for pay. If parents, especially mothers, are not filled with remorse and guilt, these feel- ings increase with messages that care options must not include “paid strangers.” These strangers are the female day care workers who will teach babies and young children “values, fears, beliefs and behaviors” (Robertson, 2003:48). Of course, the only option is mother care because even “devoted fathers do not fall madly in love with their babies like mothers do.” These messages ignore or dismiss any “damages” to children of parents who do not have the option of working for pay. They also tell fathers that they do not (and cannot) love their children as much as mothers. The Child Care Issue The contention from such writers is that a generation denied love when they were children will wreak havoc on them as adults and do un- told damage to the social structure, an argument echoed by the family restorationists mentioned in the previous chapter. Parents are abandoning their children to day care so they can selfishly pursue their own careers, which in later years will harm the next generation of their children. What is the evidence to warrant this conclusion? One major source of information is often overlooked in debates on this issue. When women were desperately needed to work in defense plants during World War II, they were recruited by the thousands through propaganda campaigns designed to alleviate anxiety and guilt about leaving their children with others (Chapter 5). Creative approaches to day care became the norm of the day. Because women were needed, day care centers multiplied quickly since many had no other care options for their children. Any potential negative, long-term consequences on these children were ignored. After the war, traditional attitudes prevailed and women were ex- pected to return home and be full-time housewives and mothers. They were not guilty of being neglectful mothers during the war, but if they chose to continue to work outside the home after the war, the guilt returned. The script that employed mothers are “bad” mothers returned with a vengeance. Over a half century after World War II, there is near consensus by developmen- tal psychologists that surrogate child care is not the major risk factor in the lives of children of dual-earner couples. The key problem is poor quality care. Fortunately for married and professional women, many employers provide benefit packages of- fering high-quality care options. The same cannot be said for most low-income, dual- earning couples and single-parent women who rely more on informal, less costly, and less desirable options of lower quality. On the other hand, an enriched group child care experience can stimulate the moral development and prosocial behavior 252 C hap t e r 8 ▸ Gender and Family Relations of infants and preschoolers. Poor children or children from troubled families may have resources in their child care centers that are absent in their homes. Low-income mothers who can gain quality subsidized child care from employers or public policy are able to maintain steady employment (Albelda, 2011). One of the greatest chal- lenges to these families is the availability of affordable, safe, accessible child care. Their satisfaction with child care carries over to the well-being of their children. Children’s Time with Parents There are no significant differences in the home environment or development of children in two-parent households with em- ployed mothers than in households whose mothers who are not employed. Children with employed mothers gain their strongest sense of well-being and attachment from parents (Harsch, 2006). “Paid strangers” who are caring and compassionate may supplement primary socialization, but they do not substitute for it. Compared with homes where mothers are not employed, dual earners purposely build in “qual- ity” parent–child time through reading, homework, and computer time. Working mothers with a college education spend significantly more time with their children than women who do not work outside the home. Employed mothers also spend more time with children than employed fathers. Mothers who do not—or cannot— shift their paid work time, shift the unpaid work time at home to enrich the time with their children (Guryan et al., 2008; Stewart, 2010; Moro-Egido, 2012). Con- sistent with conflict theory, fathers take on more care associated with responsibility for their children—not just child maintenance—when their wives spend more time at work. The ratio of “father care” to “mother care” rises when wives contribute a greater share to the household income (Raley et al. 2012a). Children benefit from more quality nonrecreational time with their dads. The amount of time working parents—both moms and dads—spend with their children or communicate with their children continues to increase. Adolescents Any adverse effect of maternal employment would be expected to show up during adolescence, an often stress-filled time for families. Research does not warrant this conclusion. Adolescents express the desire that their mothers be at home more. They report concerns about rushed and confused schedules that are inevitable with the demands of job, school, and limited leisure time. Nonetheless, children’s appreciation for their employed mothers’ talents and accomplishments outside the home grows over time. Daughters especially want to follow in the pro- fessional footsteps of their mothers (Moen, 2003; Campos et al., 2013). Not sur- prisingly, children of dual earners have less traditional gender role attitudes than children from single-earner homes. Adults reflecting on the effect of their mother’s employment viewed their family lifestyle positively and reported high degrees of pa- rental closeness, supportiveness, and interest in their personal problems (Gambone et al., 2002; Kinelski et al., 2002). Fueled by media stereotypes and guilt messages from a variety of sources, however, parents still agonize over decisions to use surro- gate care, for example, so that a mother can return to paid employment. Summary Decades of research on effects of the dual-earner family on children do not support the “suffering child” or “abandoned child” theme. Employed moth- ers do not neglect their children, nor are the children jeopardized by maternal  C h a pter 8 ▸ Gender and Family Relations 253 employment. Children and mothers both benefit when mothers’ well-being is en- hanced by employment. Children’s development related to self-esteem, academic achievement, language development, and behavior in dual-earner families is not damaged. Children compare favorably to those in families with stay-at-home mothers. To the relief of egalitarian, dual-earner couples, such results continue to be confirmed. Motherhood and working for pay do not harm children—to the contrary, they are likely to improve children’s social and intellectual development (Bianchi et al., 2006; Chang, 2013). When children are provided with high q ­ uality out-of-home child care options, employed mothers enrich the human capital of their families. Helicopter Parents The irony of the child care debate is that the majority of current college students were in some form of child care outside the home, attended preschool, and had em- ployed mothers. These students represent the cohort termed the millennial genera- tion, born between 1980 and 2000, which grew up with the Internet, cell phones, and text messaging. Often referred to as helicopter parents, the mothers and fathers of these children continue to hover over them in college as they did throughout their precollegiate years. Compared to the baby boomers and Generation X, millennials from middle-class homes see their dual-earning parents more frequently, communi- cate with them more often, and count on parents to intervene when problems arise in school and sometimes even in the workplace. Contrary to media messages on the lack of involvement in their children’s lives, dual-earning helicopter parents are overprotective and overinvolved. Although parents often are accused of meddling, college students report that they expect parents to run interference for them and prefer they do it more rather than less (Shellenbarger, 2006; Graves, 2007; Hoover and Supiano, 2008). From the students’ view, overinvolved parents produce happier students (Marklein, 2008). Hovering Moms Who hovers more: mothers or fathers? Most information on gender of parent and gender differences in type of hovering is still anecdotal. However, these reports suggest, as we would predict, that mothers hover more overall. They are concerned with their children’s lifestyle on campus—from food, clothing, and health to roommates, relationships, and grades. Fathers hover on issues related to choice of major and career and on college costs. One survey of parents reported that three-fourths communicated with their college- student-young adults two to three times a week; and one-third did so on a daily basis (Rainey, 2006). Mothers use cell phones and fathers use emails as the preferred way to stay in touch with their children. Texting is used by both. Literally on call at all times, a mother’s kin-keeping work as caregiver, nurturer, and vigilant parent is continuous (Dare, 2011:89). One mother reported that she supplemented her two or three daily conversations with her daughter using Facebook (Flanigan, 2008). Mothers have even contacted companies to speak to managers about why their sons were not hired and to speak to deans and professors about why their children received a lower-than-expected grade (Tresaugue, 2006; Rose, 2007). 254 C hap t e r 8 ▸ Gender and Family Relations These anecdotal reports support early research showing that mothers are more likely than fathers to be the hoverers and that mothers of sons do most of the hov- ering (Jayson, 2007; Shellenbarger, 2007). Mothers are vulnerable to the charge of “supermom” for their overzealous hovering (Robb, 2008). Supermom in the heli- copter parent context is more of a criticism than an approval of her behavior. Con- sidering the motherhood mandate, overinvolved parents, especially overinvolved mothers, who base their self-worth on the accomplishments of their children rather than their own accomplishments, express more sadness and have lower self-esteem. Intrusive mothering in the name of school success often results in fostering uncer- tainty in their children. Children believe they are incompetent students, and mothers inadvertently promote failure when their children are low achievers. Overparenting is associated with lower self-efficacy of college students, which may in turn produce less autonomous adults (Marsh, 2007; Bradley Geist and Olson-Buchanan, 2014). Believing that “mom will fix it,” childhood becomes so risk aversive that young adults may not be confident enough to make their own decisions (Newbart, 2005). We saw in Chapter 2 that the empty-nest syndrome is largely a myth, but for a variety of financial reasons (paying off student loans, having a low-paying job or no job, bridging to a new career) and personal reasons (divorce, relationship problems, health problems), children are moving in with their parents. These “boomerang kids” are both young millennials and midcareer adults. Mothers are more welcom- ing, and fathers are more wary of their return (Newman, 2012; Fry, 2013). Research is needed to determine if this signals a temporary arrangement in post-recession years or if another distinct, stable family form is emerging. If the birds return to the empty nests, will it challenge or sustain a motherhood mandate? Whether they work outside the home or not, mothers cope with mixed messages about expectations for involvement in their children’s lives. They can be blamed for too much involvement (smothering their children) or not enough involvement (abandoning their children). Definitions of a “good mother” keep a tight reign over all mothers. Families in Multicultural Perspective The multicultural heritage of the United States is undoubtedly reflected in its families. Because this heritage is linked to race and ethnicity, minority families are impacted by the same disadvantages that affect them outside their homes. To account for gender patterns in these families, the multiple risks and experiences from their unique cultural histories also must be considered. Keep in mind, however, that white and European American families also vary in social class, cultural history, and other variables that impact gender roles in their families. Although not profiled in this section, they should not be viewed as the default, normative family in the United States. African American Families Contrary to stereotypes, there are two parents present in over half of African Amer- ican families, and over half of the fathers in these families work full-time. Data from the turn of the century (1910) reveal that Africa American households were less likely to be nuclear and more likely to be headed by women, a pattern that  C h a pter 8 ▸ Gender and Family Relations 255 persists today. The half of the African American households without two parents present are those headed by single parents, and 90 percent of these are single-parent women. Compared to European Americans, African American family life cycles are marked by less formal marriages, parenthood earlier in marriage, less likelihood of remarriage later, and a higher divorce rate (Chapter 7). Over three-fourths of African American children are likely to live part of their life in a female-headed household, often with a female grandparent. The households are likely to consist of both kin and nonkin. The key factors in the development of these patterns are the legacy of slavery and economic oppression rooted in discrimination that led to the underemployment of African American men. These factors have a profound impact on gender roles in contemporary African American families. Compared to all other racial groups, African American females have had a much longer legacy of paid employment essential to the stability and survival of their families. This legacy fueled the variety of family and household structures that African American families exhibit. Paid employment is central to African American women’s mothering and to their family experience. It is the most important reason for the greater degree of role sharing by wives and husbands and has strengthened these families in several fundamental ways. First, families demonstrate a strong will- ingness to absorb others into kin structures by creating a network of fictive kin, where friends “become” family. African Americans tend to define the boundaries of their families with more flexibility than families of other races; so distant kin become primary kin, and close friends and neighbors become fictive kin. Women fill the fictive kin ranks. Women-centered networks of “bloodmothers” and “other- mothers” who share mothering responsibilities bring an array of exchange and sup- port that benefits all household members. In turn, children are offered a diversity of parenting models that are seen as enriching children with a more multifaceted form of nurturing (Collins, 2009). Employed mothers who are the family’s breadwinners often turn to these networks for child care needs. The resilience and positive outcomes of fictive kin among African Americans has extended to a new law in Missouri allowing courts to define distant relatives and close friends legally as fictive kin to aid displaced children. By extending the boundaries of guardianship, children can be placed in homes of those they know and who invite them in. These arrangements have vastly better outcomes than with children in foster care with no family connection (Cambria, 2013). Second, compared to white couples, for working-class and middle-class mar- ried couples, households are likely to be more egalitarian. These families have dual-­earning husband and wife in stable employment. Egalitarian arrangements are bolstered by middle-class African American women who work outside the home by choice rather than economic necessity. Regardless of SES, however, most African Americans do not view their roles as wife–mother and wage earner as mutually ­exclusive. Research by sociologist Burt Landry (2000) suggests that these middle- class women were practicing an egalitarian lifestyle decades before white couples. Third, African American husbands appear more willing than white husbands to take responsibility for child rearing and adapt themselves and the household to the needs of their employed wives. However, the work is less satisfying if they hold traditional gender ideology. (See Chapter 7 concerning the paradox of traditional 256 C hap t e r 8 ▸ Gender and Family Relations attitudes about gender and simultaneous egalitarian behavior related to house- work.) This last pattern is interesting because African American working-class and lower-class men tend to hold traditional ideas about gender roles. The intersection of race and social class helps account for this pattern (Chapter 3). The Myth of Black Matriarchy The paid work of African American women has been a necessary and constructive adaptation to the reality of economic and social inequality in the United States. Historically, extended family closeness and high levels of religiosity facilitated resiliency and were psychologically protective for these women despite the difficulties they faced in their provider roles. As a re- sult, families were able to function with relative stability under extremely adverse conditions. This historical pattern holds true today, especially for single mothers hovering near the poverty line (Mendenhall et al., 2013). Yet this very strength has been viewed as a weakness in these families. An early influential report purporting to explain the poverty of African American families by Daniel Moynihan (1965) in- timated that a “black matriarchy” exists in which decision making and other family powers and responsibilities rest with women rather than men. By this way of think- ing, African American men are emasculated, stripped of authority, and driven from the family under an aura of self-defeat. The family is left with fewer defenses against poverty, delinquency, and illegitimacy. The Moynihan report reminds us of the connection between sexism and racism. The report was attacked largely because black men were usurped of their right- ful place as family head. To untangle the pathology surrounding the black fam- ily, the father must be returned as the dominant person in the household. Assertive and independent women can wreak havoc on both the family and the race. Black women apparently do not suffer the same humiliation as black men and “neither feel nor need what other human beings do either emotionally or materially” (Smith, 1995:157). The demographic reality of African American households (and the household structures that accommodate the legacy of economic oppression) chal- lenges the notion of black matriarchy. However, this has done untold damage by creating and reinforcing stereotypes of superhuman women and weak and absent men, who are then blamed for the circumstances in which they find themselves. A great deal of research also challenges myths of missing and uninvolved black fathers (Coles and Green, 2010). Many African American men may have internalized as- sumptions of both myths, which in turn create tension between the genders. Multiple Risks of Race, Class, and Gender Despite stellar educational, health, and professional gains and ongoing career success, African American women have the lowest earnings of both genders and all races, a pattern worsened dur- ing the recession (Chapter 10). Although esteemed for their strong work ethic and perseverance in family kin-keeping, African American women carry the double bur- den of minority group status (Newsome and DoDoo, 2006; Kaba, 2008). If she is a single parent, the prospects of decent wages to maintain her family above the poverty level are severely reduced. This is intensified by the kind of jobs African American women typically have. Although women of all races earn less than men overall, poverty risk is significantly higher for women in occupations dominated by African American women and lower in occupations dominated by white women.  C h a pter 8 ▸ Gender and Family Relations 257 This is despite a strong commitment to employment and socialization messages to girls emphasizing self-reliance, independence, and resourcefulness (Collins, 2004). African American men must contend with a double bind of their own. Like other men in the United States, they are socialized into instrumental family roles that connect masculinity with being a good provider and father. African American men accept this standard for masculinity, but opportunities for carrying it out are restricted. In seeking masculinity standards that are available and acceptable in poor neighborhoods, African American teens often turn their attention away from school and home to life on the streets. Coping mechanisms include “compulsive masculin- ity” that is often violent in and outside the home (Chapter 9). The African American community is not immune to other stereotypes concern- ing black male–black female relationships. African American men often perceive that black women have more opportunity and are held responsible for the status of black men. Tension may be heightened because African American women now have higher levels of education than black men and are outpacing men in gain- ing professional occupations. The marriage squeeze and the marriage gap are more acute for African American women searching for same-race men of comparable age and educational levels. Increased joblessness, underemployment, incarceration, and higher death rates from violent crime, disease, and poor health care deplete the pool of marriageable black males in absolute numbers and render those who are avail- able as less desirable to marry (Chapters 2 and 7). Interviews of African American women who live with violence and poverty in their daily lives express what they look for in a man: “To a one, they all indicated that they wanted a man who was employed and had not been in jail” (Hattery and Smith, 2007:54–55). Stereotyping increases during periods of economic uncertainty. The high un- employment rates of black men may counter the legacy of role flexibility and egali- tarianism evident in many African American families. It is the economic position of men that significantly determine the course of many African American families and how gender roles will be enacted. Latino Families For the first time in U.S. history, more people now identify themselves as Latino or Hispanic (15 percent) than identify themselves as black or African American (14 percent), making them the largest racial minority in the nation. Most significant, by 2050, the African American population is projected to increase by 1 percent and the Latino population is projected to double; one in three U.S. residents will be Latino. Latinos are very diverse, and the enactment of gender roles is a major indicator of that diversity. There are significant cultural and historical differences between Lati- nos, especially economic well-being and number of generations in the United States, that are important determinants of gender roles in their families. The three largest subgroups are Mexican Americans, Puerto Ricans, and Cuban Americans. Although all three groups suffer the economic burdens of minority status, poverty is most acute for Puerto Ricans and least acute for Cuban Americans. Although Mexican Americans hover near the poverty line as a group, there are wide variations in overall economic status. Latinos share a heritage of Spanish colonialism and, through this, a solid connection to the Catholic Church. Several 258 C hap t e r 8 ▸ Gender and Family Relations fundamental values related to gender and the family link these diverse groups. First, family relations are characterized by respect and honor. Second is the notion of familism, a strong cultural value emphasizing the family and its collective needs over personal and individual needs and any other groups to which a family mem- ber belongs. Familism creates strong bonds between nuclear and extended family members in terms of support, loyalty, and solidarity. Familism is associated with emotional protection, resilience, and guidance for Latino youth and a buffer against negative influences outside the home (Azmitia et al., 2009; German et al., 2009). These bonds ensure that family members remain intimately connected to one an- other throughout their lives. Third, and the most important element related to gender roles and the fam- ily, is that familism is strongly gendered. There is an adherence to patriarchal gen- der roles in a well-defined system of mutually exclusive beliefs that separate men and women; these roles are found throughout all social classes in Latino cultures. Derived from the Spanish word macho (“male”), the man’s role is associated with machismo, seen to include virility, sexual prowess, and the physical and ideological control of women. The woman’s role is associated with marianismo (from the Vir- gin Mary’s name Maria), seen to include the beliefs of spiritual and moral superior- ity of women over men, the glorification of motherhood, and the acceptance of a difficult marriage. Women are expected to have an infinite capacity for sacrifice in their role as mothers and to be submissive to the demands of the men in their fam- ily. These attitudes are associated with compromised emotional health for women (Bedolla et al., 2006; Steidel, 2006). The beliefs that support marianismo remain strong, but changes are evident in what were once entrenched patriarchal gender roles in the family. Higher education for both males and females in Latino subcultures is associated with more gender role flexibility in the home and a loosening of stereotyped beliefs about humble women and aggressive men. Older Latino males are more likely to resist these changes than are younger Latino females. Latina adolescents and young women entering new ca- reers armed with college degrees are in the forefront of these changes (Denner and Guzman, 2006). It is clear that education, SES, and degree of acculturation affect how these values are translated into the home. Puerto Rican Families By far, research on gender and the family in Latino subcultures centers on the link between employment and home for women and their families. Puerto Ricans have the lowest income of any Latino group, and it is the critical gender–family link that explains this fact. Women head half of all Puerto Rican households, and only half of Puerto Rican women are high school graduates. Women have been employed in low-paying jobs, such as light manufacturing, and these are quickly disappearing. Coupled with global economic recession, companies are moving operations to Asia, where even lower-paid female workers are hired. Families are often divided, with children being raised by grandparents in Puerto Rico and husbands migrating back and forth between the island and New York in search of employment. Marriages are fragile, but marianismo and the stigma of divorce keep many couples legally married but separated. About half of all hetero- sexual couples form consensual unions, different from cohabitation, that are recog- nized as informal marriage. Births to unmarried Puerto Rican women have soared  C h a pter 8 ▸ Gender and Family Relations 259 over the last five decades, today comprising over 60 percent of all their births in the United States. Women who are recent migrants, especially those who are spouses in middle- and working-class couples, strive to maintain a continuity of family life. These families are more nuclear in structure and are at the forefront of the trend toward fewer consensual unions and more legal marriages. Consensual unions, however, are not necessarily associated with negative outcomes for children. From a social constructionism view, this definition of family is normative and accepted and may be the resilient form that children depend on for stability, strong family relationships, and cultural connections between Puerto Rico and New York. United States, Puerto Rican, and Latino families in general, do not fit the measurements of family structure in the United States (Fomby and Estacion, 2011). Being born in a consensual union is socially constructed as being born into a marriage. This con- struction works to the benefit of a child’s development and may lessen, rather than increase, problem behavior. Better-educated women are more likely to value both career and family roles, and this is reflected in their parenting practices (Safa, 2003; Guilamo-Ramos et al., 2007). However, girls are often caught between two cultures that mirror one set of values more than the other. Echoing the marianismo–machismo duality, for ex- ample, Judith Ortiz Cofer (1995:204–205) writes of her experiences growing up in a Puerto Rican community in New Jersey. As a girl I was kept under strict surveillance, since virtue and modesty were, by cul- tural equation, the same as family honor.... But it was a conflicting message girls got, since Puerto Rican mothers also encouraged their daughters to look and act like women.... The extended family and church structure could provide a young woman with a circle of safety; if a man “wronged” a girl, everyone would close in to save her family honor. Cofer asserts that her education gave her a stronger footing to survive this kind of duality in mainstream culture and saved her from the harsher forms of racial and ethnic prejudice. Familism may buffer girls from the “harshness” of the outside world, but it does not adequately prepare them for the role conflict they will inevi- tably face when they enter it as wives, mothers, and employed workers. Mexican American Families Mexican American (Chicana) women also confront gender roles tied to ideology surrounding marianismo–machismo and familism, factors that keep divorce rates low. The nuclear family is embedded in a network of kin who maintain intergenerational ties by passing on cultural tradi- tions, fostering ethnic pride, and serving as social and economic support (Rinderle and Montoya, 2008). Early research interpreted machismo as a male defense against racial discrimination and poverty. The belittling daily world faced by Mexican- American laborers is reproduced in the home, so men are bolstered when women are “kept in their place.” Notice how the concepts of machismo and black matri- archy can be used to justify the same conclusion and then be used to perpetuate gender inequality. Subordination of women to men in families is evident, but recent research is challenging the model of the all-dominant and controlling male. Families are not as patriarchal as had been assumed, and there is a trend toward gender equity. Couples 260 C hap t e r 8 ▸ Gender and Family Relations do report that the spheres of men and women are still separated, but that they share child rearing and household tasks. Joint decision making is more apparent, espe- cially when women are employed outside the home. Gender roles are less traditional because extended family ties also are weakening. There is a trade-off: Families may receive less child care support from older kin, but children are less likely to hear messages about female subordination. When pressures outside the home, such as job loss, a health crisis, or neighborhood deterioration, threaten family cohesion, families rally around traditional cultural values. However, these values are being adapted to fit family needs, even if they counter traditional beliefs about gender. Women may need to enter the world of work, and men may need to be family care- takers. In this sense, family stress functions to bolster family cohesion as well as encourage productive gender role change. When compared to their immigrant parents, even as traditional cultural values offer protection and resilience during adversity, these patterns have been altered sig- nificantly for children born in the United States. Poverty significantly decreases by the second generation of immigration, college education for both men and women is increasing, and families are moving upward in SES. On the negative side, Chicana women are largely employed in occupations segregated by gender that offer little job mobility—both functioning to keep income levels low. Parallel to decreases for all U.S. women, teen pregnancy rates are on the decline, but more Mexican Ameri- can women are entering the “single-parent” ranks. With weakening familism, child care and financial support are less available. The risks of class, race, ethnicity, and gender will determine whether the economic prosperity of second and third genera- tion Mexican Americans can be sustained (Coltrane et al., 2008; Lam et al., 2012; Consoli and Llamas, 2013). Cuban American Families Cuban Americans enjoy the highest standard of living of all Latino groups. Immigrants in the 1960s were highly educated, many drawn from Cuba’s professional ranks. Even though women were not likely to be in the labor force, education for middle- and upper-class women was encouraged and helped bolster the prestige of the family. The double standard of sexual morality lives on in the Cuban American subculture. Parents want their daughters not only to be educated, but also to remain virginal, uncorrupted, and sequestered. Later im- migrants were poorer, families more fragile and prone to breakup, and women in the workplace more common, a trend that continues today. However, Cuban Ameri- can families are demographically more similar to European Americans. Compared with other Latino subgroups, these families have fewer children, are economically stronger, and are more likely to be headed by a married couple. Married couples with higher levels of education are less traditional and are slowly moving toward more gender-equitable family roles. Unlike European Americans, Cuban American families are more likely to be extended and children are expected to live with their parents until they get married. The elderly in these families offer child care services and in turn expect to be taken care of as they become feeble. The increased number of Cuban American women in the work force is associated with child care by el- derly kin (Skaine, 2004). More egalitarian family and work roles are in line with the future expectations of Cuban American girls. As they become more acculturated, younger women are less likely to accept restrictions based on gender.  C h a pter 8 ▸ Gender and Family Relations 261 Asian American Families The Asian American and Pacific Islander population is the fastest growing of all ra- cial minorities, with projections that by 2050, they will represent just fewer than 10 percent of the population, double from 2008. Their numbers increase by immigra- tion rather than increases in the resident population. Asian Americans—primarily Chinese, Japanese, and Filipino—have the highest number of married couples and the lowest divorce rate of all other racial minorities at a number similar to whites. Compared to other racial minorities in the United States, there is also a wider spread in income and poverty level. Cambodians, Native Hawaiians, and other Pacific Is- landers have the highest poverty rates, and Japanese and Indians have the lowest. Chinese are in between but on the higher rather than the lower side of income lev- els. Gender is the one factor that shows the least diversity related to income: Re- gardless of subculture and education, Asian American women have lower incomes than Asian American men. On the other hand, even more so than in Latino families, Asian Americans ex- hibit striking cultural diversity. In religion, for example, Koreans are predominantly Protestant Christian, Filipinos are Catholic, Japanese are Shinto and Buddhist, Paki- stanis are Muslim, and Indians are Hindu. Religion has a powerful influence on beliefs about gender that are carried into the family (Chapter 12). Asian American families share several other patterns that have important gen- der implications. Gender roles from the originating Asian cultures demonstrate col- lectivistic kinship traditions in which personal needs are sacrificed for family needs. Extended families are normative, and children are socialized to be obedient in the family and loyal to parents and elders. Conformity to cultural and family traditions is expected in children but much more for girls than boys. Obedience is played out by marriages that are commonly orchestrated by kin rather than left solely to the devices of children. These family traditions emphasize female subordination to all males and older females in a patriarchal family structure (Ternikar, 2004; Espiritu, 2008; Ahluwalia and Suzuki, 2009; Hall, 2009; Park et al., 2009). The comments of the baby boomer daughter of Chinese immigrants is a good representation of these traditions. Despite my deference to traditional Chinese behavior, the day finally came when I had to disobey my father. I had received several offers of full scholarships to attend college.... When the time came for him to sign the college registration forms, he refused. “The proper place for an unmarried daughter is at home with her parents,” he insisted. He wanted to keep me out of trouble until I found a husband to do the overseeing. (Zia, 2009:44–45) Education is the key for Asian American women from all cultures to challenge such subordination. Today Asian American women lead women of all racial minorities in obtaining college degrees and are close to par with white women. Shattering gender barriers and juggling divergent cultural expectations, however, also take an emo- tional toll by disappointing one’s family. The extent to which these patterns occur is linked to length of residence in the United States. Recent arrivals are strongly connected to their ethnic community, for example, which provides social support and jobs in family businesses. Chinese and Koreans in particular appear to benefit from community ties—they have high 262 C hap t e r 8 ▸ Gender and Family Relations levels of education for both females and males and enjoy relatively fast upward mobility. Although still quite low, the divorce rate and the number of female-headed households are steadily increasing among all Asian American groups. When chil- dren become more “Americanized,” intergenerational conflict increases, with males more likely to challenge restrictions imposed by parents (Chen, 2009; Kim, 2009). Among Chinese Americans, for instance, children will gladly provide economic help for their parents but resist their parents’ advice on personal matters such as whom they choose as friends or dates. Traditional expectations for marriage are eroding, and emerging norms are now emphasizing choice of partners based on romantic love. Whereas arranged marriages have not disappeared among Chinese Americans, formal arrangements have been replaced with “strong suggestions” from parents and elders, which children are at least expected to investigate (Luo, 2008). And as expected, boys are less likely than girls to take their parents’ suggestions for investi- gating a possible marriage partner. Native American Families Native Americans comprise less than 1 percent of the U.S. population and include those reporting American Indian and Alaskan (Eskimo and Aleut) origin. Native Americans are rapidly being assimilated into majority culture, and intermarriage rates have soared. At the same time, resurgent cultural pride has fueled tribal di- versity and contributed to a rise in the number of people claiming Native American origin. Nonetheless, Native Americans share some key patterns related to gender roles in family life. About one-third of Native American households are female headed; most of these are in poverty. The remaining two-thirds are made up primarily of married couples. These households are at risk for social problems related to their poverty status, such as unemployment, dropping out of high school, illiteracy, and alcohol- ism. Historic governmental policy is fundamentally responsible for the current eco- nomic plight of Native Americans (U.S. Commission on Human Rights, 2000). Colonialism accompanied by Christianity altered ancient tribal patterns drasti- cally, particularly those related to gender roles in the family. Women’s power and prestige varied by tribe, but historical evidence indicates that women lost status with colonialization. Many tribal units were matrilineal, the family name being traced through the mother’s line, and matrilocal, a couple moving into the bride’s home at marriage. Although gender segregation was the norm, complementarity, balance, and gynocratic (female-centered) egalitarianism also existed both in and outside the home. Women held important political, religious, and other extradomes- tic roles. With increased European contact, women were gradually stripped of these roles (Chapter 5). To assimilate native people, the U.S. government first sought to obliterate ancient traditions—a policy that become known as “cultural genocide”. Altered family patterns were its first expression, and an egalitarian family structure changed to a patriarchal one. Cultural genocide did not succeed. Although ancient tribal customs were al- tered, they were not eradicated and they continue to reinforce family strength and stability. Women retain spiritual, economic, and leadership roles offering prestige and power in their families and communities. For those who live off the reservation,  C h a pter 8 ▸ Gender and Family Relations 263 these roles contribute to more equally shared household and parenting responsibili- ties (Hossain, 2001; Coles, 2006). Unlike other racial, ethnic, and religious groups, a return to cultural traditions among Native Americans may signal more, rather than less, egalitarianism. Divorce An enduring marriage is not necessarily a successful one. Because Americans say that romantic love is the primary reason for marriage, “falling out of love” is a reason for divorce. The two intersecting factors that most consistently predict divorce—as well as a breakup after cohabitation—are age and social class. Teenage marriages and cohabitants of lower SES are most likely to dissolve, probably within five years. For teenage couples who start out with less education, fewer economic resources, and less emotional maturity, the idealization of love quickly fades when confronted with the stark reality of married life. Whether married or not, teenage males lose the idealization quicker than teenage females (Sawhill, 2006). Although subject to historical anomalies such as the Depression and World War II, the divorce rate steadily increased throughout the last century, peaking in the 1980s, but de- creasing continuously, although modestly, since. The marriage rate is also declining (see Table 7.2). It is easier to calculate marriage rates than divorce rates. Depending on which standard for calculating divorce rates is used, the future of marriage in the United States as well as for its individual couples appears rather bleak. When comparing the number of divorces with the number of new marriages, it is fair to say that half will end in divorce. The problem with this comparison is that it does not account for how long a couple was married, so it may inflate the failure rate of new marriages. It is more revealing to look at annual divorces per 1,000 married women (half of married couples), which is about 20. This indicates a less discouraging four-in-ten marriage failure rate. Because the divorce rate is so high, first marriages may be referred to as “starter marriages.” By all measures, the divorce rate is rising through- out the world, but the United States remains at the top (Figure 8.1). Gender and Adjustment in Divorce Divorce has profound social, psychological, and economic effects on the divorcing couple and their families. Research shows that divorce is strongly gendered—in how it is carried out and in its differential impact on women and men. Gender Role Beliefs and Emotional Well-Being Although it is difficult to separate economic from noneconomic factors, women tend to adjust better to divorce than men. However, both men and women who are nontraditional in their gender role orientation adjust better than those who are traditional. Men and women with less traditional gender ideology are better at reconciling themselves to divorce than men and women who hold more conventional gender role beliefs. Women of all races who have higher levels of self-esteem and independence opt out of unsatisfactory marriages at a faster rate and adjust better to their postdivorce lives. Although religiosity may predict more traditional gender role beliefs, spiritual 264 C hap t e r 8 ▸ Gender and Family Relations Number of divorces per 1000 population 5.0 Rate in 1970 Change from 1970 to 2010 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 –1.0 –2.0 a n S al ak rm in ep y ew e c st d C ralia Fr da s ch hu m ep ia L lic en ia Sw Es rk er ia K d a te Fi ary ng d Au om rtu a C No nce s y Lu J ,2) N mb an rl g ra s lg ) Po ria Ic and Tu nd G key ov e ia Ire aly M nd C o le Bu l (3 ru wa R an N Sw ubli Be ate Is and Ze de Au lan n H ore Ki an Po stri he ur Sl eec ic g ov Ge pa R an D atv itz ton en hi ze it lgiu a ub a xe ap la a la a (1 It ex d m g et o r a d nl an l el e yp r St n r u d L te ni U ni Sl C U Figure 8.1 Increase in Divorce Rates from 1970 to 2010 in OECD* Countries *Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Note: Countries are ranked by descending order of crude divorce rates in 2010. Source: OECD Family Database. www.oecd.org/social/family/database OECD—Social Policy Division—Directorate for Employment, Labour and Social Affairs. http://www.oecd.org/social/family/SF3_1_MarriageAndDivorce Rates_Jan2013.pdf well-being predicts better divorce outcomes for women. Nontraditional gender role beliefs, however, are less protective for divorced women with young children (Zim- mer, 2001; Baum, 2007; Steiner et al., 2011). The powerful emotional toll of moth- erhood ideology works against a woman’s well-being. Men who adjust better to divorce are likely to be connected to a new partner and quickly reestablish their preferred gender role pattern, whether or not it is a traditional one. Ex-spouses ap- pear to adjust better when they attribute the cause of the divorce to the relationship rather than to themselves or each other (Amato and Previti, 2003; Natalier, 2012). In this sense, they leave the marriage with a more intact sense of self that serves as bolsters as they face a postmarried future. Age Younger people are better at rebuilding their lives after a divorce, and the spouse who first sought the divorce adjusts to it more readily. Women are more likely to initiate a divorce than men, and younger women do so at higher rates than both older men and older women. Divorce at an earlier age can lead to more growth options and enhance the person’s well-being over the long run. Older women suf- fer greater psychological trauma in divorce and may be more likely to stay in an unhappy marriage until a new partner is on the horizon (Sweeney, 2002; Pedrovska and Carr, 2008). Employment Although most women are employed and may have the finan- cial latitude to end an unhappy marriage, their income contributes more to marital happiness than marital dissatisfaction. A husband today is not only less likely to feel threatened by a wife who matches or outearns him, but also may celebrate the mismatch. As we have seen, for dual-earner couples, housework, rather than  C h a pter 8 ▸ Gender and Family Relations 265 income, fuels marital problems. The most dissatisfied couples are those in which wives want joint decision making and household task sharing by husbands, whereas husbands prefer a more traditional, patriarchal style of family functioning—a pat- tern that holds for couples of all races (Ono and Raymo, 2006; Lucier-Greer and Adler-Baeder, 2011; Offer and Schneider, 2011). Shifts in gender role ideology help explain why today’s women are now more likely than their mothers and grand- mothers to initiate divorce. The Impact of Gendered Law in Divorce Divorce is no longer a legally difficult process. The legal ease of ending a marriage is linked to the no-fault divorce, which allows one spouse to divorce the other without placing blame on either. Divorce is readily available to those who want it, such as women in abusive marriages, older men hoping to remarry younger women, and young couples who married quickly and confronted marital conflict just as quickly. “Irreconcilable differences” has become the generic default category used by divorc- ing couples (Watkins, 2006). No-fault divorces now represent the large majority of all divorces in the United States. Custody Mothers gain custody of children about 70 percent of the time, usually without further legal action by fathers. Father custody and other joint arrangements constitute about one-third of child custody decisions. Although all states have gender-neutral child custody laws, custody is still likely to be granted to the mother, the preferred pattern for mothers and fathers. Most often fathers give in to the mother’s demand for full custody without further legal action. A woman must now take on an array of roles that she and her husband previously shared. Even if she is working outside the home, the divorce increases financial obliga- tions, child care, and household responsibilities. Conflicts involving children can intensify and create a greater sense of insecurity. For those divorced mothers who recognize that they do not have the financial capability to adequately provide for their children, the decision may be to give up custody. The belief that children— especially young children—should stay with their mothers is pervasive. Unlike a noncustodial father, a mother who voluntarily gives up custody is stigmatized; often she is viewed as abandoning her children. She may relinquish custody out of love, knowing that her ex-husband is in a better financial position to offer them what she cannot. Reinforced by social stigma, contact with her children also may be reduced (Kielty, 2008). Fathers are now more likely to gain full custody in contested divorces. Custody revisionists have begun to challenge the maternal preference argument, citing the best- interest-of-the-child standard (BICS) (Goel, 2008). Fathers can be favored over moth- ers because fathers are usually financially better off. The courts rarely award alimony (and even less so to women capable of earning a living), so divorce requires women to give up any thought about remaining a homemaker if that was her predivorce existence. Earning a living can jeopardize her chances of gaining custody, especially if she has young children. Besides the father making more money, if he remarries, he has the possibility of another full-time caretaker. Although uncontrollable economic factors are the key reasons most mothers lose custody battles, they are cast into the 266 C hap t e r 8 ▸ Gender and Family Relations stigmatized role of unfit parents. The case for fathers’ rights in custody decisions is often more of a case against mothers, with claims that men are the victims in a family law system that privileges women (Adams, 2006). Gender-neutral standards are sup- posedly in effect to ensure parity in divorce and child custody decisions, but gender stereotyping of parents works against this in both principle and practice. Joint Custody To deal with problems associated with child custody, joint- custody arrangements—where parents share decisions related to their children, including how much time children will spend in the home of each parent—have skyrocketed. Joint custody is now the most prevalent court-ordered divorce ar- rangement. Coparenting occurs in a variety of contexts, from simply sharing day- to-day decisions about children with their ex-spouses to actually moving children (and sometimes parents) to different homes on a rotating basis. There are vigorous debates on the effects of such arrangements on children. Joint-custody fathers are more involved in their children’s lives, have increased contact with them, and ac- tively participate in shared decision making regarding their children. Complicated scheduling is a downside, but less strain is reported if one does not carry the full burden of parental responsibilities (Peters and Ehrenberg, 2008; Stirling and Al- drich, 2012; Vanassche et al., 2013). A huge issue is the degree of parental coop- eration. If channels of communication remain open and children are not used as pawns, a joint-custody arrangement may be a constructive option. If parental coop- eration fails, joint custody serves to increase conflict between parents. The quality of the coparenting relationship is the key factor in how a child adjusts to divorce. Gendered beliefs about who is a “good” or “better” parent intrude, however, and often thwart adjustment for parents as well as their children (Bokker, 2006; Finzi- Dottan and Cohen, 2014). Another often overlooked issue in joint custody is that fathers are less likely than mothers to be available for coparenting. An “equal” pattern of care may be imposed, but it disguises the greater contributions of mothers, rather than fa- thers, to the “physical and emotional well-being of their children” (Elizabeth et al., 2012:256). Decisions about the degree of care and contact need to be determined based on the actual living situations of parents rather than the courts. As equitable as the arrangements may seem on paper, women take on the greater care and eco- nomic burdens associated with joint custody. Divorce and Poverty Although women appear to fare better than men in the psychological trauma of divorce, the economic consequences are often disas- trous for women in the United States as well as globally. Research shows that in the first year of the breakup, 1 in 5 women enter into poverty compared with 1 in 13 men, and women are at higher risk than men for chronic poverty (Gadalla, 2008). Adding parenthood to gender, compared with divorced fathers, divorced mothers have a disproportionate share of the economic burden of the divorce. Approxi- mately 40 percent of divorced mothers enter poverty; 30 percent of custodial moth- ers are in poverty, twice as high as for custodial fathers (Grall, 20113). For both African American and white women, divorce increases a woman’s financial bur- dens in two important ways. First, child support payments do not match expenses of maintaining the family; second, women must work outside the home, often in  C h a pter 8 ▸ Gender and Family Relations 267 low-salary jobs, a situation compounded by both race and gender discrimination. Older women, housewives, and those reentering the labor force after a long ab- sence are in an extremely precarious position, especially if Social Security benefits continue to be assaulted (Butrica and Smith, 2012). These women are at a distinct disadvantage in the job market at the exact time they need an adequate income to support the family. Dividing Assets No-fault divorce makes a bad economic situation worse for women when courts mandate an equal division of assets, such as the family home and savings. Coupled with no-fault divorce, joint custody puts women at great fi- nancial risk. Joint custody may be agreed on during a divorce mediation process in which parents meet with an impartial third party to reach mutually acceptable agreements. However, mediators may usher in beliefs about gender-neutral stan- dards that are anything but neutral as far as finances are concerned (Comerford, 2006). Most women do not have the economic resources to coparent on an equal basis with their ex-husbands. Misconceptions abound about women who are “set up” for a life of leisure by their wealthy ex-husbands. Actually, court-ordered alimony—”maintenance”—is awarded to only a small percentage of women and in amounts so low that they barely match welfare or Social Security. Laws in many states are not kind to the few women who do receive alimony. In Florida, a judge is allowed to reduce alimony if a former spouse enters into a “new supportive relationship.” If money is received from a boyfriend, for example, a divorced woman’s alimony can be reduced, regard- less of whether she has custody of her children or she is living with her boyfriend (Caputo, 2008). If the relationship ends, alimony is unlikely to be reinstated, as much for the legal cost as for the lack of sympathy she will receive from the system. Divorced and cohabitating women of all races who end long-term relationships are often cast into dire economic circumstances. Child Support The issue of what is awarded is related to the issue of what can be collected. Fewer than half of all custodial mothers are awarded child support. Half of these mothers actually receive it from nonresidential fathers, and only 25 percent receive the full amount. The amount of unpaid child support is staggering. The U. S. Census Bureau reports that almost 40 percent of $38 billion in child sup- port is not paid to the custodial parent who was due support, forcing 10 million children into welfare. In half of divorced families, by two years after the divorce, there is no contact with the nonresidential parent, usually the father (Grall, 2013). The deep emotional loss that fathers experience at divorce may help explain the financial distancing from their children. The severe economic consequences of divorce are played out among women of all races. Although young minority men are not well off economically, their post- divorce financial situation tends to be better than that of their ex-wives. A man’s standard of living tends to show a moderate decrease in the immediate aftermath of a divorce but improves considerably over time. Although declines in postdivorce income are less for women than in years past, decreases and losses remain much greater compared to men’s post-divorce income (Bedard and Deschenes, 2005; Dan- iels et al., 2006). A loss of half the family income is typical. Divorce is a principal 268 C hap t e r 8 ▸ Gender and Family Relations reason for the high poverty rate of single-parent women and their dependent chil- dren. In addition to the population of never-married women with dependent chil- dren, divorce contributes to the feminization of poverty—a global trend showing an increase in the percentage of women in the poverty population. Women at highest risk of poverty are single-parent women of color. To help get divorced women off public assistance, states are more vigilant in enforcing child custody orders. To recoup the cost of collecting the money from fathers, however, many states keep the money rather than passing it on to ex-wives and children. The benefits of getting men to live up to their financial obligations, however, are greater when programs encourage men to maintain active contact with their children and are nurtured in their identities as fathers (Nepomnyaschy, 2007; Troilo and Coleman, 2012). In addition, the men who have been slipping out of their child