Integrated Motherhood: Beyond Hegemonic Ideologies of Motherhood

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12264
• Date: 01 February 2016
• Published date: 01 February 2016
• Author: Dawn Marie Dow

D M D Syracuse University

Integrated Motherhood: Beyond Hegemonic

Ideologies of Motherhood

Existing researchassumes that hegemonic moth-

ering ideologies inuence U.S. mothers’ work

and family decisions. These ideologies assume

that childrearing is a mother’sduty, that mother-

ing occurs within a self-sufcient nuclear family,

and that paid employment conicts with moth-

erhood. Even when mothers do not conform to

these ideologies, scholars nd that they continue

to inuence mothers, as exhibited by mothers’

efforts to reframe, redene, or actively reject

the ideal. This study expands on research that

challenges the dominant inuence of these ide-

ologies on all mothers. Through analyzing the

accounts of 24 middle- and upper-middle-class

African American mothers employed in profes-

sional careers, three different cultural expecta-

tions about motherhood emerged. Participants

assumed that they should work outside of the

home, be nancially self-reliant, and use kin

and community members as child caregivers.

Together, these cultural expectations form the

basis of an alternative ideology of mothering

that the author terms integrated mothering.

Sociologists have identied a consistent set of

hegemonic ideologies that inuence women’s

work and family decisions. These ideologies

assert that (a) a mother’s primary responsibility

is childrearing and a father’s is breadwinning

(Blair-Loy, 2003; Gerson, 1985; Hays, 1996;

Sociology Department, Maxwell School of Citizenship and

Public Affairs, 319 Maxwell Hall, Syracuse University,

Syracuse, NY 13244 (dmdow@syr.edu).

Key Words: African Americans, child care, families and

work, motherhood, qualitative research and gender.

Smith, 1993; Uttal, 1996, 1999); (b) mother-

ing should occur in a self-sufcient nuclear

family (Hays, 1996; Macdonald, 2011; Smith,

1993); and (c) employment conicts with

motherhood (Blair-Loy, 2003; Damaske, 2011;

Gerson, 1985; Hays, 1996; J. Williams, 2000).

It is widely recognized that these ideologies are

modern creations that emerged in White middle-

class families during the Industrial Revolution

(Glenn, Chang, & Forcey, 1994; Landry, 2000;

J. Williams, 2000) and now occupy a dominant

place in American society (Blair-Loy, 2003;

Christopher, 2012; Hays, 1996; Segura, 1994).

Despite this, the number of employed mothers

has increased signicantly, no doubt a partial

result of the women’s rights movement of the

1960s and 1970s. Mothers today are more likely

to work outside the home (Cohany & Sok,

2007).

An expansive body of research has examined

why mothers engage in paid employment and

how they experience combining employment

and raising children. Scholars have also investi-

gated how ideology inuences mothers’ family

and work decisions (Bielby, 1992; Braun, Scott,

& Alwin, 1994; Herring & Wilson-Sadberry,

1993; Hochschild & Machung, 1989; Hock,

Gnezda, & McBride, 1984) and the meanings

they attach to their decisions, particularly when

they challenge hegemonic ideals (Hays, 1996;

Hochschild, 1997; Hochschild & Machung,

1989; Macdonald, 2011; Uttal, 1996). Schol-

ars have identied how mothers account for

their decisions when they are unable or choose

not to stay at home with their children. Some

scholars present a conict paradigm of work

180 Journal of Marriage and Family 78 (February 2016): 180–196

DOI:10.1111/jomf.12264

Integrated Motherhood 181

and family such that motherhood is considered

incompatible with employment (Blair-Loy,

2003; Gerson, 1985; Hays, 1996; Smith, 1993;

Stone, 2007; J. Williams, 2000). Because of this

incompatibility, employed mothers, specically

those who are middle class, often experience

conict and must reframe their decision to

work so that it symbolically conforms to these

ideologies (Blair-Loy, 2003; Damaske, 2011;

Gerson, 1985; Macdonald, 2011; Stone, 2007).

Other scholars describe how some middle-class

mothers actively reject these hegemonic ideolo-

gies and create their own (Christopher, 2012;

Garey, 1999; Gerson, 2010; Uttal, 1996, 1999).

This article adds to the existing scholarship by

identifying an alternative mothering ideology,

which I term integrated mothering, that African

American middle- and upper-middle-class

employed mothers feel accountable to regard-

ing their family and work decisions. Research

primarily examining the experiences of poor

and working-class African American women

and mothers describes how they reject dominant

cultural depictions and understandings of their

lives (Beauboeuf-Lafontant, 2009; Blum &

Deussen, 1996; Collins, 2009; Hays, 2003).

In general, study participants did not engage

with hegemonic ideologies by actively rejecting

them or by reframing their decisions to work

outside of the home to symbolically conform to

them. Participants’ accounts suggest that they

are inuenced by different cultural expectations

of motherhood from within their communities.

These expectations include the assumption

that mothers will work outside the home, be

economically self-reliant, and have access to

kin and community members to assist them

with child care. These mothers did not feel

compelled to justify their decisions in order for

them to be socially palatable to others. These

ndings suggest how distinct mothering ide-

ologies may differently inuence how mothers

experience and make sense of their family and

work decisions.

C F

Hegemonic Mothering Ideologies

Scholars have argued that because women feel

accountable to hegemonic mothering ideolo-

gies, such as the “standard North American

family” (Smith, 1993), the “cult of domestic-

ity” (J. Williams, 2000), “the family devotion

schema” (Blair-Loy, 2003), “intensive mother-

ing” (Hays, 1999), and “concerted cultivation”

(Lareau, 2011), they experience conict when

combining motherhood with employment. Hays

(1996) argued that the logic of intensive moth-

ering, which demands enormous commitments

of time and physical, emotional, and nancial

resources from mothers, directly conicts with

the rational actor ideology that shapes the pub-

lic sphere of work. Hegemonic ideologies also

inuence the operations of the workplace and

the school system (Gerson, 1985; Hays, 1996;

Smith, 1993; J. Williams, 2000). Stone (2007)

and J. Williams (2000) each provided a nuanced

analysis of how dominant cultural and structural

forces in the workplace are in tension with those

in the family, often favoring male workers and

constraining women’s choices (Blair-Loy, 2003;

Gerson, 1985; Stone, 2007; J. Williams, 2000).

Sociologists have identied how women

account for their decisions to “opt out” of

careers or motherhood or to opt in to “work-

ing motherhood” in light of these hegemonic

ideologies of family and work. For example,

Hays (1996) argued that employed mothers con-

tinue to be inuenced by intensive mothering

and attempt to be “super-moms” who main-

tain a successful career and are child focused.

These mothers often emphasize how employ-

ment makes them better mothers (Hays, 1996).

Blair-Loy’s (2003) analysis of 81 women then

or previously employed in professional careers

demonstrated that many career-committed

women do not have children because they view

motherhood as incompatible with careers; those

who do have children actively reject the idea

that children depend on their mothers, which is

a key tenet of intensive mothering.

Meaning Making and Navigating Hegemonic

Ideologies

Scholars have noted that the meanings moth-

ers attach to their decisions often determine

how they experience combining employment

with motherhood (Blair-Loy, 2003; Christo-

pher, 2012, 2013; Damaske, 2011; Estes, 2005;

Gerson, 1985, 2010; Macdonald, 2011; Uttal,

1996). Hochschild and Machung’s 1989 Second

Shift sought to uncover employed mothers’

experiences and ideals about the (often unequal)

division of labor within the household. Gerson’s

1985 research described how some mothers

respond to the structural constraints of the