bell hooks, “Feminist Parenting”

[seabeyond]

One of the primary difficulties feminist thinkers faced when confronting sexism within families was that more often than not female parents were the transmitters of sexist thinking. Even in households where no adult male parental caregiver was present, women taught and teach children sexist thinking. Ironically, many people assume that any female-headed household is automatically matriarchal. In actuality women who head households in patriarchal society often feel guilty about the absence of a male figure and are hypervigilant about imparting sexist values to children, especially males. In recent times mainstream conservative pundits have responded to a wellspring of violent acts by young males of all classes and races by suggesting that single women cannot possible raise a healthy male child. This is just simply not true. The facts show that some of the most loving and powerful men in our society were raised by single mothers. Again it must be reiterated that most people assume that a woman raising children alone, especially sons, will fail to teach a male child how to become a patriarchal male. This is simply not the case.

Within white supremacist capitalist patriarchal cultures of domination children do not have rights. Feminist movement was the first movement for social justice in this society to call attention to the fact that ours is a culture that does not love children, that continues to see children as the property of parents to do with as they will. Adult violence against children is a norm in our society. Problematically, for the most part feminist thinkers have never wanted to call attention to the reality that women are often the primary culprits in everyday violence against children simply because they are the primary parental caregivers. While it was crucial and revolutionary that feminist movement called attention to the fact that male domination in the home often creates an autocracy where men sexually abuse children, the fact is that masses of children are daily abused verbally and physically by women and men. Maternal sadism often leads women to emotionally abuse children, and feminist theory has not yet offered both feminist critique and feminist intervention when the issue is adult female violence against children.

*

Abusive shaming lays the foundation for other forms of abuse. Male children are often subjected to abuse when their behavior does not conform to sexist notions of masculinity. They are often shamed by sexist adults (particularly mothers) and other children. When male parental caregivers embody anti-sexist thought and behavior boys and girls have the opportunity to see feminism in action. When feminist thinkers and activists provide children with educational arenas where anti-sexist biases are not the standards used to judge behavior, boys and girls are able to develop healthy self-esteem. One of the most positive interventions feminist movement made on behalf of children was to create greater cultural awareness of the need for men to participate equally in parenting not just to create gender equity but to build better relationships with children. Future feminist studies will document all the ways anti-sexist male parenting enhances the lives of children. Concurrently, we need to know more about feminist parenting in general, about the practical ways one can raise a child in an anti-sexist environment, and most importantly we need to know more about what type of people the children who are raised in these homes become.

*

No anti-feminist backlash has been as detrimental to the well-being of children as societal disparagement of single mothers. In a culture which holds the two-parent patriarchal family in higher esteem than any other arrangement, all children feel emotionally insecure when their family does not measure up to the standard. A utopian vision of the patriarchal family remains intact despite all the evidence which proves that the well-being of children is no more secure in the dysfunctional male-headed household than in the dysfunctional female-headed household. Children need to be raised in loving environments. Whenever domination is present love is lacking. Loving parents, be they single or coupled, gay or straight, headed by females or males, are more likely to raise healthy, happy children with sound self-esteem. In future feminist movement we need to work harder to show parents the ways ending sexism positively changes family life. Feminist movement is pro-family. Ending patriarchal domination of children, by men or women, is the only way to make the family a place where children can be safe, where they can be free, where they can know love.

http://caringlabor.wordpress.com/2010/11/22/bell-hooks-feminist-parenting/

___________________________

i really like the balance of this piece. valuing all.

[lumberjack_jeff]

1. Consider this.

Perhaps the techniques and approaches that dads use with kids are the ones that were effective for them when they were children.

Maybe it's not "patriarchal domination", maybe it's experience. There's a compelling argument to be made that children shouldn't be "free" (i.e. without restraint).

[seabeyond]

2. only cause it was the techniques that they knew.

i am not real sure, and you would have to clarify before i can discuss, what techniques you are referring to.

[lumberjack_jeff]

3. When my sons misbehaved...

... my wife's approach was to show disapproval with a wall of words. If the existing wall proved insufficient, adding a few more "what were you thinking"s or "I can't believe that you'd be so disrespectful"s atop it. The underlying assumption was "if you loved me, you wouldn't be bad". Sorry moms, but that's not how boys roll. Their immediate behavior isn't linked in any meaningful way to emotional consequences. The emotional consequences only have a cumulative effect when they reach their teen years having heard this message so often (because the discipline was inadequate to correct behavior, so it was repeated) that they reflect and internalize on their fundamental unfitness.

Me? When the kid shot at the neighbor's dog with his bb gun, I took the gun, bent it over my knee (it wasn't especially well made) and handed it back to him. "Any questions?"

He became an enthusiastic coach to his younger brothers about what was acceptable, not that they listened all that well, because just like the older brother, the only effective approaches for them involve consequences, not words.

Discipline, if necessary, must be effective.

[seabeyond]

5. i have always parented with "a wall of words". and my boys have been able to follow,

digest and articulate for greater communication.

and then there was the time a toy gun was pointed at me (against the rules) and without a single word it went flying across the room, or the two boys, little, were fighting and i grabbed one and he flew across the room, then grabbed the other and he flew in the other direction.... without a word. (ok, they didnt fly.... )

there is a time and a place in all things. the most effective parent with MY boys is discussion. at 14 and 17 i simply have not had many issues that discussion has not been effective. even when the kids were little.

i do not see anywhere in this article that the woman is suggesting what you did is not effective parenting. i read more in favor of you... the father.... being valuable, per the example you give. so i really do not see, thru your example, how it is not in line with this article.

[lumberjack_jeff]

6. I had two main areas of disagreement with this article.

In a culture which holds the two-parent patriarchal family in higher esteem than any other arrangement, all children feel emotionally insecure when their family does not measure up to the standard.

Perhaps children feel emotionally insecure when they lack a parent who understands them; was once a girl (or boy) like me.

One of the most mixed-up girls I know was raised by a single father whom I hold in very high regard for his parenting skills. In contrast, his son (the daughter's twin brother) is a fine young man who just joined the Navy. I know that he did his best parenting, but for her it wasn't enough. I see the mirror image of this in many single mom households, but because they are so much more common, the phenomenon of mixed up boys ubiquitous.

A utopian vision of the patriarchal family remains intact despite all the evidence which proves that the well-being of children is no more secure in the dysfunctional male-headed household than in the dysfunctional female-headed household. Children need to be raised in loving environments. Whenever domination is present love is lacking. Loving parents, be they single or coupled, gay or straight, headed by females or males, are more likely to raise healthy, happy children with sound self-esteem. In future feminist movement we need to work harder to show parents the ways ending sexism positively changes family life. Feminist movement is pro-family. Ending patriarchal domination of children, by men or women, is the only way to make the family a place where children can be safe, where they can be free, where they can know love.

Why compare the dysfunctional to the dysfunctional? Besides, every family is functional to some degree. We should aim for the optimal, not rationalize our families as not quite as dysfunctional as the neighbors.

I can tell you, as a man who was once a boy, and who now has now raised 3 sons, that they need to be encouraged to explore, but that the boundaries on that exploration need to be unambiguous. And I strongly disagree (and now that 2 of the three sons are grownups, they agree) those boundaries are not evidence that love is absent. "Domination"? Kind of a loaded word, but in my household, the parents are the boss, and in retrospect, the now-grown kids express appreciation.

I strongly doubt that the skills I have (and have learned) raising boys are very portable to raising daughters.

BTW, I don't think I told you that the eldest got married on Saturday.

[seabeyond]

7. ahhh, how much fun. yea to son and congrats...

when actually discussing, lol, a fun subject like this, i like to think a bit. will get back to you on what you say.

[seabeyond]

8. i do not think she is suggesting there should not be boundaries. ALL parent suggestions state

boundaries and consistency with boundaries are a necessity for children like with the two year old that needs those boundaries, the teenager does too.

that is not what she is talking about with the patriarchal dominance.

my oldest tells me i am so tough in one area, and the most laid back parent in the rest of the areas. there are absolutes in this house. clear lines drawn. they know what they are. we are also a open and outside the box house where discussion gets us a long way.

providing a foundation of trust and safety is what she is talking about in a loving environment. when she is talking about the dominance, that is missing. that is not healthy for a child.

[redqueen]

4. I love bell hooks.

I wish some of her stuff was more available online. She has written some very quotable, if somewhat vulgar stuff about the sex trade.

And this is the kind of full on straight talk she's famous for. She's absolutely right of course. Many single moms feel they need to make up for the lack of a father figure, and go overboard in trying to ensure they 'make a man' out of their sons... and all too often that includes the usual sexist conditioning.

[ismnotwasm]

9. Excellent

This article is not about feminism, but a rough overview of parenting practices throughout a lot of history
http://www.kindredcommunity.com/articles/from-horror-to-hope-the-evolution-of-childrearing/p/975

[seabeyond]

10. good stuff.

Parents today are bombarded with more conflicting advice on how to raise their children, by a greater number of ‘experts', than ever before. As soon as their first-born takes a first breath, well-meaning friends, family and professionals crowd their doorway clutching towers of books, all penned by the most highly accredited child care specialists. Some say you must use ‘controlled crying'; others say ‘co-sleeping' is better. Some say breastfeed on demand, others recommend schedules. Still others say just trust your own instincts. The bright side is the fact that we have so many contradictory views shows how hard our civilisation is working to improve the child's quality of life.

The Infanticidal Period
De Mause has categorised into periods the different modes of parent–child relations throughout Western civilisation. He refers to the first period — dating roughly up to the fourth century AD — as ‘Infanticidal'. There are hundreds of references to infanticide of both legitimate and illegitimate children in the Western world — an accepted and everyday occurrence which only slowly began to abate by the Middle Ages. Small children and babies were routinely thrown into rivers, flung into cess trenches, or simply exposed to die on roadsides or in the wilderness. Surviving children would have been witness to this barbarous, and surely terrifying, activity. As girls were more frequently disposed of than boys, the documented result was significant imbalances in male–female population ratios.

The Ambivalent Mode
Fourteenth-century Europe saw a proliferation of childrearing instruction manuals. It was as if parents collectively began to allow their children to remain close to them, but only under strict conditions of non-demanding behaviour. De Mause refers to this growing new parenting style as the ‘Ambivalent' mode, the emphasis of which was to beat (often severely) or mould children into convenient shape. An examination of over 200 pre-eighteenth century statements on childrearing advice found that the majority expressed approval of severe beatings, whereas only three discouraged child-beating of any kind. One thirteenth century article of law begins with: ‘If one beats a child until it bleeds, then it will remember...'

An Emerging New Mode
Psycho-historically, we find ourselves at the cusp of an emergent new mode of childrearing which Lloyd de Mause names the ‘Helping' mode. Progressively, each new mode has signified more nurturing, and less blame on the child for parental feelings of anxiety or overwhelm. The ‘Helping' mode is characterised by empathic responses to the child's needs, two-way dialogue with the child, and a greater tolerance for children's emotional self-expression. It features less demand for the child to be quiet or still, and supports natural curiosity and exploration of the environment. Rather than imposing ‘good' values through punishment or control, or by enforcing blind obedience, the ‘Helping' parent fosters autonomy, self-regulation and creativity in the child by allowing the child's individual will to develop. While the setting of firm boundaries remains important, we are learning to do so without resorting to humiliation, shaming, or violence against the child.

interesting. thanks.

[ismnotwasm]

11. Goes hand in hand with Ms. Hooks article don't you think?

Evolved and evolving parenting *is* feminist parenting

[seabeyond]

12. absolute. and i think it gives more an idea to lumber what they talk about patriarchal or dominant

parenting.

not gender specific. a mode of being.

thanks

[Tumbulu]

13. Thanks, that is an interesting read

and it is amazing really how we have progressed...what the article does not really touch are the effects of other cultures on the western european ones (in terms of child rearing).