MOTHERING

Accroding to Hays the idea we hold today of mothering is not the same idea that has always been held. She begins by explaininng how the Europeans in the Middle Ages viewed their children as demonic and animals. This led to the ignoring and maltreatment towards the children of the Middle Ages. The children were not given nany special attention, they were not given special toys, they were not buried in small caskets, and they did not spend much time with their mothers or even families. There were often sent away to be cared for by others, and these others still did not treat them well. There were high rates of infant mortality. Finally at the age of about 6 they were considered to be fit to go out in the work field. They were sent to take apprenticeships so they could learn a skill and thus make money. These children were considered to deserve only as much attention as they would return wealth to the family in their later years. If the chld was a good prospect in society then the mother would apply more effort and attention in child rearing. THe second stage Hays mentions is in the sventeenth and eighteenth centuries among the upper and middle class. They began to adopt a view of children that was more endearing than the previously held view. The children were no longer animals that were lowly, but now there was a sense of value to childhood. Childhood had a sense of innocence that was to be respected and reared. The innocence was to be protected and thus the children were more sheltered from the outside world until a later age. There were physical punishments, but then at a certain age you would shift to a loving, friendship that taught them conscience. Children seemed to be taking a more important position in society. Locke and Rousseau were very important in this new image of childhood. But this was only among the upper classes, the lower classes still treated their children as animals. Next Hays mentions the Puritans of the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries. They had a very strong patriarch where the father was the shepherd and the mother was merely the sheep dog, the children were the sheep. This meant that children again were at the bottom of the pole. These children underwent physical abuse in order to purge the child of its "inherent evil" and then they were taught be good tools in the society. Children were not allowed to play or be idle. As soon as they were able to work they began to help in the family farm or family business. THis showed their function and self control. The Puritan belief was based on the Bible, and mothers were not to show affection or play witht their children because the father is the one who said the direction in which the flock went. The child was to be obedient and useful. Finally in the eighteenth and nineteenth century American families the ideology behind childrearing and mothers shifted. During the revolutionary years women were struggling to show that they had a place in society to raise good citizens, and so the women were the predominant caretakers of the children and they were also the beacon of morality. There were less children since the mother had to care for them and be a personal example. They were given much affection and instead of physical punishment, there was more psychological punishment as the loss of affection if the child got out of line. There were also less children because childrearing was more expensive because they had their own toys, books, and play areas. Children were cared for and considered innocent. They were sheltered from the real world for as long as possible. They were no longer a means of economic growth and the mother had to care for them all through school. There was a clear distinction between the realm of the family and that of the real world, and the children were to be kept safe from the real world. These ideals were also the most popular within the middle class american women. This idea of the mother caring for her children so intensively is what brought up the idea of intensive mothering. The mother was the sole person responsible for caring for the children and her realm was completely separate from the real world, or economic realm, and she was to give her affection and be a moral role model for her child. The idea of intensive mothering does apply to my mother and many of the mothers of my friends because they did not have jobs while we were young, and alltheir efforts went in to playing with us, teaching us and disciplining us. Our mothers are our moral role models, and most of our mothers never physically punished us. The only idea that might differ is that my father was also very active in my upbrining. It was a joint effort, though my mother was not a member of the economic world and my father was.
Crittendon discusses how mothering is devalued in our society. She calls on the fact that our society is an economic one and in an economic society mothering is considered detrimental to one's human capital, and mothers are considered to be in atrophy while child rearing. They are not working in the market place and so they are being lethargic. The society does not take into account the great amount of work and stress that goes into chldrearing, and moreover it is not even a paying job. MOthers care for their children for free. Also a married woman who does not work is not entitled to any of the income of her partner. A married mother is considered a dependent, and once divorced she is only given what the judge thinks she should get. The government does not even define unpaid care of the family dependents as work, thus not being considered as actual contributors to society. It is totally disregarded. She also mentions how any paid work that resembles caring for the family, such as teaching, is looked down upon by greater society. They don't think people should be paid to do this work, that shows how lowly they view it. I completely agree with Crittendon's argument. Mothers in this society are not given credit for the difficulty of their actual tasks. It is a full blown job, and includes extreme over-time hours, and yet this country totally dismisses it.
Patrici Hill Collins talks about the African American mother and their different ways of mothering. She discusses two types of mothering: blood mothers and other-mothers. Blood mothering refers to caring for your own children, but other-mothering comes from the idea that full responsibility of caring for a child on one person is too much, and so women of the community help care for other women's chldren. These other women can have children of their own, or they can be extended family members (both younger and older, like sisters or grandmothers) who do not have children of their own that they still need to care for. This is connected to "motherhood as a symbol of power" because In society Black society, women of power are those who have practiced community politics and community care, mostly involving othermothering. The more activist mothering or community othermothering, and bloodmothering, these women are involved in the more power they have within the eyes of their community and Black society. The role and practice of mothering is highly esteemed because the view of the strong Black woman comes in where she is molding the Blacks of the future. They serve to "uplift the race."
Edin's article shows the thoughts of unwed mothers on marriage and childrearing. Erin shows that these unwed women have not given up on the idea of marriage, it is just much more difficult for their "husbands" to afford marriage. They do not want to marry unless they are ready for the "white picket fence life". More often these women also want to be stable themselves before they marry someone else, mostly because they want to be economic equals in a relationship to guard themselves if anything goes wrong. Having a child for these women serves as a source of strength and good change, what Edin calls "a strong sense of sense of purpose and a profound sense of intimacy". As a society we can help stop such young pregnancies and poor unwed mothers by provided more resources for these women to have the opportunity to access jobs that lead to financial stability and independence. They would rather have a child out of wedlock than get divorced, and they will not marry because they do not think they are economically read to marry.