Categories
Art Birth Blog Education Featured Feminism gender MOM Art Annex MoM Pop Up motherhood

New Directions in Museum Accessibility

Violet Phillips

This article attempts to address and confront a number of issues within existing museum structures. While the Museum of Motherhood aspires to be a leader in championing women’s studies in a family-friendly environment, there is still much work to be done.

Gail Andersen is a museum consultant who’s been the director of the Mexican Museum, vice-president of Museum Management Consultations, chair of the department of museum studies at John F. Kennedy University, and is now a private museum consultant.

In 2002, she founded Gail Anderson & Associates to help museum leaders further transform their effects on community and global leadership. Her book, Mission Matters: Relevance and Museums in the 21st Century, addresses the ways in which museums can be social change agents.

While museums exist to preserve society, they can also show problems, like racism or sexism, as they exist. Showing the intersection between what has been and what could be, is part of what inspires people to create meaningful change. [3]

Art Works for Change Was founded in 2008, out of a desire for more meaningful change and also aims to use art to address social issues. It focuses on “human rights, social justice, gender equity, environmental stewardship and sustainability” And partners with local organizations. The organization’s philosophy sees artists as storytellers, to both reflect on past experiences and pave the way for better experiences in the future. [4]

As “writer, trainer and consultant” Anna Fathery wrote for MuseumNext:

“At their core, stories make us care. They connect us with people and places, even stimulating the release of a hormone usually expressed during intense bonding experiences, like childbirth, breastfeeding, and sex. This emotional connection is the reason stories are so powerful. As any advertiser knows, stories drive people to take action, whether that’s buying a product, gifting a donation, or making a difference in the world. From a marketing perspective, stories can help museums raise funds, encourage visits, and trigger sales. For instance, when the Tenement Museum in New York wrote about former First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt in a fundraising mailing it told a story about Roosevelt’s work in the local area. By connecting the teenage Roosevelt’s story with the Museum’s education programs, the call to action was obvious: donate money and you could inspire a new generation of young Eleanor Roosevelts” [5]

However, the storytelling experience currently curated in museums can be difficult for those with physical disabilities to access. People in wheelchairs usually use public transit to get around, and museums can be difficult to find from a bus stop or train station. Many museums also don’t have wheelchair ramps to help people get inside. It also can be hard for someone in a wheelchair to reach the resources provided, such as brochures.

Some museums are also lacking in Braille or audio descriptions that would help blind people access the exhibits, as well as sign language interpreters that would help deaf people access the exhibits. [6]

Also, as of 2015, 84% of museum staffers were white, and those who weren’t were often security guards or janitors. As of 2019, 85% of artists exhibited in major museums were white, and 87% were male. Historical museums rarely show the history of anyone who wasn’t a white man. Curators tend to agree that museums are important and should continue to be part of society, but should also expand to represent a more diverse society. [7]

Children are also less likely to enjoy museums, due to lack of engagement. Of course, many families would like to visit museums and bring their young children, and it could be a way for families to explore and learn together. Children are generally only willing to go to museums with a lot of interactive features. [8]

However, if done properly, museums can encourage children’s critical thinking skills, curiosity and creativity. [9] There are no good reasons why museums can’t make themselves enjoyable to children, who have a lot to learn, unless there are size constraints.

As Gail Andersen insists, museums are one of the most impactful ways to make sense of the past and future. Museums should be made accessible to as many people as possible, so that everyone can absorb the lessons about The past and future.

The current location of the MOM Art Annex in Florida requires additional funding so that it can implement special exhibits that are accessible to all, including those with disabilities, and expand our current space so that children may enjoy engaging, playful, and educational experiences (as we did during our time in New York City). Additionally, we pride ourselves on exhibits from multicultural perspectives. We welcome those of all races, nationalities, and ages to join us as board members, interns, and exhibitors.

Works cited

[1] https://www.amazon.com/Reinventing-Museum-Historical-Contemporary-Perspectives/dp/0759101701

http://linkedin.com/in/gail-anderson-6710575

[2] 1000 museums : museum quality fine art prints & custom framing. “How museums can lead the way for social change.” June 23, 2021. Online. Accessed February 10, 2021.https://www.1000museums.com/museum-activism/

[3] https://www.artworksforchange.org/our-story/

[4] museum next. “Why do stories matter to museums and how can museums become better storytellers?” July 7, 2019. Anna faherty. Accessed February 13, 2021. Online.

[5] museum next. “Making museums accessible to those with disabilities.” January 22, 2020. Goabaone montsho. Accessed February 13, 2021. Online.

[6] vox. “If museums want to diversify, they’ll have to change. A lot.” Constance Grady. November 18, 2020. Accessed February 13, 2021. Online.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vox.com/platform/amp/the-highlight/21542041/museums-diversity-guston-national-gallery-hiring

[7] “what do families with children need from a museum?” Kai-Lin wu. Accessed February 13, 2021. Online.

[8] world of illusions. “The educational benefits of taking kids to museums.” April 9, 2019. Accessed February 14, 2021. Online.

Categories
Digital Media Internships Feminism gender

Women and the Wilderness

By Carla Ferris

This month’s Museum of Motherhood Ecofeminism research included the Women’s Wilderness Program and Early Native American women’s roles as hunters. As I ventured through the Women’s Wilderness website and associated articles, I reflected on my hiking days. This is when my church group and I blazed through on a ten-day hike through the upper Yosemite trails.

Our group was able to conquer the trail on top of El Capitan in Yosemite California.  I recall the strengthening training, and jogging events along the California coastal beach. I found my former training was very similar to the training the Women in the Wilderness practice, but nothing like the practices of Indigenous tribes in early American history. While contemporary hiking prep includes boots, plastic bags, sports bras, and sunblock with SPF of 30 +, these first peoples lived much closer to the land and did not require the kind of store-bought items modern day outdoor-types have come to count on, myself included.

In this final post for MOM, I am aiming to connect my modern-day nature experiences to the journal article, Female Hunter of Early America which references Native American women’s roles in the outdoors. In this article, Dr. Haas debates and shows evidence for females as hunters in Early America.  I cannot imagine a more different world than the Californian landscape I have come to expect and the assumptions and traditions I have grown up with in my lifetime. He asserts that some modern historians are now challenging previously held man-as-hunter theories. His labor division philosophy has gained new evidence for women’s roles as hunters. Dr. Haas reveals a young Native American female was found with a hunting tool kit in the Wilamaya Patjxa Native burial site. His findings demonstrate early-Native American women might have been large game hunters.

 As a Public History student, I was delighted to research and explore Ecofeminism concepts during my time at MOM. I am encouraged by the Women’s Wilderness program which continues to benefit young women’s growth, confidence, and leadership skills. I believe Dr. Haas’s article, The Female Hunter of Early America, has a valid stance that introduces a potential image-change with regard to woman’s roles. As my American Public University program is near completion, I am reaching the conclusion of my research goals. I have gained new knowledge of Native American, and Ecofeminism topics.  I appreciate the Museum of Motherhood lens throughout the Internship program and have learned so much through my experiences here.

This site contains outdoor skills, challenges and equipment for women and girls: https://www.womenswilderness.org/   

RESOURCES:

Science Advances 04 Nov 2020: Vol. 6, no. 45. Female Hunter of Early Americans https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/6/45/eabd0310

When Women Venture Outdoors Together https://www.womenswilderness.org/from-our-instructors/when-women-venture-outdoors-together

Photo by Pixabay.                                                                                                                                

Categories
Birth Blog Books breastfeeding Caregiving Classes Education Featured Feminism gender health History Media Medical motherhood Policy

Our Bodies Ourselves – The MOM Library

By Violet Phillips

Our Bodies, Ourselves was written by The Boston Women’s Health Collective in 1970, with the goal of promoting women and girl’s health, reproductive rights, and sexuality. The knowledge presented was radical for its day, illuminating topics as varied as masturbation and abortion.

To quote the Los Angeles Times, “Forty years ago, a copy of “OBOS” on the shelf signified you were a certain type of woman — curious, and unashamed of it. In control. You were not the high school junior who was clueless about sex and pregnancy and missed six months of classes due to “mono.”[1]

Three years after Our Bodies was published, abortion in America became legal with the passing of Roe Vs Wade.[2] Sex education programs in classrooms had been gaining in traction in schools since the 1960s.[3] However, controversy about girl’s bodies and who controls them has continued to be a topic of debate and public discourse.

Even in 2020, there is still growing pressure for women to get plastic surgery and sexual images shown on media pressure teenagers to engage in certain behaviors. While there have been many systemic changes, teenage girls’ vulnerability to STDs, ongoing pressure to have sex at a young age, and unrealistic beauty standards haven’t changed enough. Society continues to evolve, but when it comes to recognizing individual’s personal choices there is still room to be more inclusive.

Early versions of Our Bodies, Ouselves did not include information about transgender identities, environmental concerns, or mental health advice. However, the writers have since expanded their knowledge. In 2020, Our Bodies, Ourselves launched a website. Today, they give well-researched advice, on health, sexuality, and wellness for women, girls and also transgender people.

Throughout the years, The Boston Women’s Collective has inspired health care policies, research on women’s health, feminist activism, feminist studies, health care, and health activism. Prior to the publication of this seminal piece of literature, in many parts of the world, sexuality as well as reproductive rights had many negative associations.[4]

I have grown up in an era of increased knowledge. Gone are the early-day doctors who focused on women’s reproductive value, and used “hysteria” as a diagnosis, which minimized women’s emotional wellbeing and invalidated women’s experiences.[5] My grandmother nearly died from a botched illegal abortion in the early 60s. The original copy of Our Bodies, Ourselves in my bookcase was inherited from her. Because of the work of the Boston Women’s Collective, I am privileged to enjoy a more positive outlook than many women from my grandmother’s age.

Access to the internet in 2021 connects us at unprecedented levels. One recent novel titled, Conversations  Between Friends published in 2017, by Sally Rooney, discusses the topic of endometriosis. The main character gets diagnosed at 21 years old. The disease is often undiagnosed and rarely mentioned in the media, even though it’s been known to have serious effects on mental health, and even on education. Endometriosis is addressed on the new Our Bodies Ourselves website.[6]

Despite a prolific and sometimes superficial “wellness culture” that includes dubiously helpful information, there is a forty-year-plus history of Our Bodies Ourselves which gives people verified information that is dedicated to addressing topics as wide-ranging as motherhood, health, reproductive-control, and emotional well-being. That is a good thing!

CITATIONS


[1] https://www.thedailybeast.com/our-bodies-ourselves-turns-40-why-the-womens-sexual-health-book-still-matters. Our bodies, ourselves’ turns 40: why the women’s sexual health book still matters.” Jessica bennettt. Daily beast. September 30,  2011. Online. Accessed January 9,2021.

[2] https://www.history.com/topics/womens-rights/roe-v-wade#:~:text=Sources-,Roe%20v.,procedure%20across%20the%20United%20States.&text=Wade%2C%20abortion%20had%20been%20illegal,since%20the%20late%2019th%20century. Accessed January 11, 2021.

[3] https://www.plannedparenthood.org/uploads/filer_public/da/67/da67fd5d-631d-438a-85e8-a446d90fd1e3/20170209_sexed_d04_1.pdf. Planned Parenthood accessed January, 11, 2021

[4] The legacy of Our bodies, O

urselves– and how one book can change your entire life.” Laura lambert. Brightly. Online. Accessed January 9, 2021.

[5] The female problem: how male bias In medical trials ruined women’s health.” Gabrielle Jackson. The guardian. November 13, 2019. Online. Accessed January 8, 2021.

[6] https://www.ourbodiesourselves.org/book-excerpts/health-article/endometriosis/. Accessed January 11, 2021

_

ABOUT

Meet our newest intern, English major Violet Phillips from Mills College, Oakland, CA. Read more about Violet on our Internship page. We look forward to her ongoing reports from the MOM Library, posted here throughout the next few months.

Categories
Blog Caregiving Education Featured Feminism gender Internships USF

Out With The Old – In With The New

By Ca Hoang

The pile of work I had felt endless. As soon one was completed, another followed. Letting out a deep sigh, I allowed myself to take a break, to do anything that did not involve staring at the laptop screen for the next hour. I fetched a broom and a dustpan and began sweeping the floor of the shared area in my apartment. It was my new found mode of tending to myself. While looking after my living space, I was also greeted with a sense of calmness that I craved. Almost every time I embark on this simple act of self-care, I am reminded of an incident with my once close friend when we were in middle school. It was our turn that morning to handle class cleaning duties and I remember vividly how the moment I started sweeping, my friend gasped and scolded, “That’s not how you do it!” She grabbed the broom from my hands and continued, “You should at least know how to sweep the floor as a girl!” I was eagerly sweeping dust into the air and surely learned a thing or two about housekeeping from my friend then and there. I used to laugh off her reaction to how inexperienced I was with chores, but lately, I cannot help but think about her latter exclamation. Why must I know how to sweep the floor as a girl?

Recently, I was introduced to Sara Ruddick’s Maternal Thinking. In her book, Ruddick engages the readers in discussions of mothering as a practice informed by maternal thinking and how it relates to politics of peace. One of the many ways in which Maternal Thinking proved significant is that rather than viewing motherhood as an identity, maternal work is proposed to be studied as an experience, which thus de-genders motherwork (O’Reilly, A., 2009). Through the lens of maternal thinking, no longer would caring for a child or taking care of household matters such as sweeping, or ironing clothes be seen as exclusive to women. In an article written before the publication of Maternal Thinking, Ruddick shares that one of the goals she had when developing the concept was to unite mothers and feminists (Ruddick, 1983). Ruddick expresses her beliefs that, in spite of how feminism and motherhood may seem contradicting to some, maternal work can contribute to the feminist perspective, while “feminist transformation of maternal thinking was in the deepest interests of mothers”, which I think has become increasingly evident. Although dated, the concepts introduced by Sara Ruddick then continue to be relevant today.

Learning about maternal thought and how it separates gender from labour has changed my internal dialogue from questioning why certain labour are gendered the way they are, to seeking how the understanding of feminism and motherhood can be transformed. I am only beginning to internalize how gender norms and idealization of motherhood has shaped the environment that I grew up in, but I am glad that Maternal Thinking has provided me at least a starting point. Perhaps maternal thinking can also be applied to the way we mother ourselves, as tending to our personal needs also involves preservation and growth. Nonetheless, I think I can now comfortably sweep the floor or partake any other housekeeping activity without obsessing over how engaging in them would relate to my gender and instead focus on myself as well as the activity in its own right.

Featured Photo by Jan Kopřiva

References

O’Reilly, A. (2009). “I Envision a Future in Which Maternal Thinkers Are Respected and Self-Respecting”: The Legacy of Sara Ruddick’s Maternal Thinking. WSQ: Women’s Studies Quarterly, 37(3–4), 295–298.

Ruddick, S. (1983). Thinking about Mothering—and Putting Maternal Thinking to Use. Women’s Studies Quarterly, 11(4), 4–7.

About

Ca is an international student from Vietnam at the University of South Florida. She is pursuing a dual degree in Statistics and Public Health with aspirations of working in the field of biostatistics in the future. Ca learned about the Museum of Motherhood through the Reproductive Health, Rights and Justice class instructed by Dr. Singh and was inspired by the work the Museum has and continues to engage in. As an intern, she has created blog posts that share activities and perspectives about caregiving, self-care, as well as the lessons we can learn from each activity.

Categories
Art Birth Blog Education Featured gender health Internships Media Medical Sociology

Mothering Myself – Perspectives On Exercise

By Ca Hoang

Ever since the beginning of summer, my roommates and I have committed to working out at least twice every week. On weekends, we push the living room tables aside, connect our laptop to the TV, and follow the home workout videos on YouTube. The initial dread of regularly drowning in sweat and enduring physical pain soon disperses and is replaced by the joy of engaging our muscles and building our stamina while occasionally laughing at each other’s random comments. I feel grateful that we are continuing this ritual despite the increasing workload we have as students with the semester underway. Exercising together has not only helped keep us active while cooped up at home but also gives us time to focus on ourselves: our bodies, our preferences, our limits. Here at MOM, I am hoping to reflect on some of the ways in which I mother myself as I continue to explore topics in my reproductive justice class with Holly Singh at USF. [My bio link for the museum internship program is here].

Yet, for many expecting mothers as well as mothers who have recently given birth, engaging in physical activity has become their “third shift”. A concept developed by Dworkin and Wachs (2004), the “third shift” refers to how mothers, besides their first working shift and second shift of tending to household matters and childcare, are also socially coerced into participating in fitness regimens in order to “erase physical evidence of motherhood” Mallox, DeLuca, and Bustad (2020). Through thematic analysis, the authors studied the causes and ways in which mothers engage in this cultural phenomenon. They determined five categories that identify mothers within this “third shift’, namely Marathon Moms, Family Fitness Focused Moms, Gym Goer Moms, Custom Coached Moms, and Internet Inspired Moms. The study notes how the media and consumer products have been tailored to pressure mothers to “regain control over their body” and examines the ways in which women’s bodies, post-birth, are conflated with “individual responsibility and moral fortitude”. Both studies also underline how socioeconomic status is entwined with these unrealistic expectations, as not all mothers are able to afford the resources needed to engage in the “third shift bodywork”.

Putting the findings into perspective, I cannot help but feel enraged by postpartum aesthetic ideals that are perpetuated by businesses to profit off of mothers’, and the ways in which they prevail. Rather than being able to prioritize individual well-being with potential health concerns, mothers are subjected to unnecessary and often impractical expectations of having a “good” body by society’s standards. Perhaps unknowingly, my friends and I are also influenced by societal expectations of how our bodies should look when we engage in our workouts as well as in our daily lives. In addition to that, the study prompted me to contemplate how physical activity is dictated by our socioeconomic status. My friends and I do not have the means to afford a personal trainer or special exercising equipment, but we at least have the luxury of space, time, and ability to engage in regular physical activity. This is a clear indication of the health disparities present in our society and yet, the shape of our body is still believed to be determined by how much control we have over ourselves and how responsible we are as individuals. As I enter the next workout session with my roommates, I will keep this in mind: as much as fitness should be promoted, it should never be a measure of one’s character.

Photo credit: Karolina Grabowska from Pexels

References

Maddox, C.B., DeLuca, J.R. and Bustad, J.J. (2020), Working a Third Shift: Physical Activity and Embodied Motherhood. Sociological Inquiry, 90(3) 603-624. https://doi.org/10.1111/soin.12297

Shari L. Dworkin, & Faye Linda Wachs. (2004). “Getting Your Body Back”: Postindustrial Fit Motherhood in Shape Fit Pregnancy Magazine. Gender and Society, 18(5), 610-624. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4149421

Categories
Blog Books Education Featured Feminism gender History Internships

WITCHES, MIDWIVES AND NURSES

By, Srilagna Majumdar

In America, the month of October is the month of witches – the evil, the cruel, and the ugly. The Museum of Motherhood has hundreds of books in its collection, intended to educate, elucidate, and empower. How have women been targeted as witches throughout history, since the middle ages and what can we learn? Let’s look at how Barbara Ehrenreich sheds light upon this subject in her book “Witches, Midwives and Nurses: A history of women healers “ :

The age of witch-hunting spanned more than four centuries in its sweep from Germany to England. Witches represented a political, religious, and sexual threat to the Churches, as well as to the State. In the late fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, there were thousands of executions- usually burnings at the stake- in Germany, Italy, and other countries- an average of 600 a year for certain German cities. The witch hunts represented a deep-seated social phenomenon that goes far beyond the history of medicine. The most virulent witch hunts were associated with periods of great social upheaval shaking feudalism at its roots- mass peasant uprisings and conspiracies, the beginning of capitalism, and the rise of Protestantism. In some areas, witchcraft represented a female lead peasant rebellion. Unfortunately, the witch herself- poor and illiterate- did not leave us her story. It was recorded, like all history, by the educated elite so that today we know the which only through the eyes of her persecutors. 

While one theory suggests that witch-craze was an epidemic of mass hatred and panic, another interpretation holds that witches themselves were insane. But, in fact, the witch-crazes were neither a lynching party nor a mass suicide by hysterical women. The witch-hunts were well-organized campaigns, initiated, financed and executed by Church and State. Anyone failing to report a witch faced both communication and a long list of temporal punishments.

Who were the witches, then, and what were their “crimes” that arouse such vicious upper-class suppression? First, witches are accused of every conceivable sexual crime against men. Second, they are accused of being organized. Third, they are accused of having magical powers affecting health- of harming, but also of healing. Witch-healers were often the only general medical practitioners for people who had no doctors and no hospitals and who were bitterly affected by poverty and disease. But witch-hunters Kramer and Sprenger had to write, “ No one does more harm to a Church than midwives”. Male upper-class healing under the auspices of the Church was acceptable, female healing as a part of a peasant subculture was not (Pages 7,8,10,14).

The witch healers methods posed a great threat to the Church, since the witch relied on her senses, and on trial and error, cause and effect. She didn’t need any faith or doctrine- this hit the dogma of the Church very hard. This scared the orthodox authoritative Church and compelled them to curb the potential of these women. So, now you know why some regressive and mean minds refer to intelligent, brave, and proud women as “witches” every now and then, even today!

Srilagna Majumdar, India
Included in the MOM Art Annex Library
Categories
Caregiving Featured Feminism gender International Internships motherhood Queering Parenting

‘UNFIT’ MOTHERS: THE BURDEN OF STEREOTYPES

By Srilagna Majumdar

During everyday conversations and discourses, we come across labels given to mothers that are burdened by stereotypes and fraught with sky-touching expectations limited by narrow definitions. Aimed at the welfare of others, this focus is seldom targeted towards women’s wellbeing. There have been so less frequent moments when fathers, and children, or people, in general, look at mothers as separate and independent human beings. Writing as an Indian student, engaged in feminist studies, it appears that the stereotypes that mothers are often corralled into can be organized into three main categories: Mothers as (a) primary caregivers, (b) teachers or role models, and (c) household workers or homemakers (Tessier, Gosselin, 2018). It would be safe to say that these categories are most often applied to biological mothers.

As a college student, contemplating the subject of motherhood, it appears that media depictions as well as the general tenure of social expectation dictate women caregivers must give exclusive priority to their children. Certainly, babies require much care and mothers are often the primary sources for expressions of love as well as providers of food and shelter. Being a good caregiver involves balancing many roles, including that of nurturer and a disciplinarian (as required). These qualities are highlighted in society with the expectation that mothers put everything on hold to be more available to their children and devote all of themselves to motherhood as the primary obligation. This belief reflects a deep internalization of an intensive mothering ideology. The mothers I know see themselves as purveyors of wisdom, important teachers- not exclusively in the academic sense- but as a source of information about how to get along in the world, which contemporary women are often encouraged to do.

But, within the home, many mothers are managers of the household. Women who are mothers are seen by some to embrace this duty to family almost exclusively. Many of the mothers I studied perceived themselves as very loyal toward their families. The chores associated with maintaining a stable home were a signifier of demonstrated loyalty. While divorced mothers might be perceived as failures: cowards, frivolous, weak for not persevering or enduring in the marriage (even whoreish, and easy-prey for free sex), promiscuous, irresponsible, selfish, not trustworthy, lacking courage, incapable of maintaining a family, alone and without protection, disrespectful of God’s rules, and without moral values – a heavy burden to contemplate, indeed (Aneja, Vaidya, 2016).

Outside the home, working mothers, portrayed by the media, or judged generally through a negative lens by society as well, are accountable not only to themselves but to the public at large. It is presumed that a mother, who works outside the home, would be incapable of managing the necessities of her children. If a mother keeps her child in the custody of a nanny, or a crèche, while she goes for work, society apprehends that it will affect the upbringing of the child and that full responsibility of any perceived outcome, is to be taken on solely by the working mother.

As in the previous two examples, mothers have a difficult time performing in the “correct” manner expected of them. Deviations from perceived “norms” are prone to accountability and assessment. Lesbian mothers, i.e. same-sex mothers are viewed as unfit, by society, in cases that I have read about or heard of. These negative conceptions appear particularly rooted in religious doctrine. Stereotypes regarding lesbian mothers as not normal are promoted by entrenched beliefs that children should be raised by a mother and a father, not by two mothers. The argument for this lack of a male parent, doctrine asserts, might confuse children, especially regarding their own sexual preference when they become teenagers (Tessier, Gosselin, 2018). Participants of interviews conducted by Vadiya, in 2016, reported different cultural norms influencing their attitudes. This included coming from a conservative Catholic religious background, uncontested and unchecked concepts of machismo, and the fact that interviewees did not know any lesbian parents personally, further polarizing them from actions outside of hegemonic ideals and further entrenching erroneous assumptions about “good” parenting.

The themes of deficiency and lack, good and bad mothers, the burden of care, and the valorization of the mothering role that have been explored here acquire a new dimension when we take into account a different kind of embodiment, namely, disability. When the mother in question is a disabled woman, the discourse of motherhood becomes even more complicated. Sexuality, conjugality, and motherhood are associated with normative, desirable, fertile bodies, whereas the disabled body is regarded as defective, undesirable, and thus, devalued (Aneja, Vaidya,2016). Motherhood denotes caregiving, while disability suggests a person in need of care herself, and thus, being unfit to assume the caring role for another, especially of one as vulnerable as an infant. We can certainly see how difficult it is for mothers to avail themselves of additional scrutiny.

Disability has historically been viewed as a ‘problem’ or aberration in need of fixing or remediation, suggesting that something is missing or lacking. The personhood and agency of women who are deemed ‘the other’ on account of their bodily differences are denied in the context of their reproductive needs and rights. Women with disabilities are regarded either as asexual beings incapable of becoming sexual companions or as hyper-sexual and unregulated ones (Aneja, Vaidya, 2016). In some cases, disabled mothers were abandoned by husbands, who later got married to able-bodied women at the behest of the man’s family. Many times, it is revealed that disabled mothers experience violence within the family, both emotional as well as severe physical violence in some cases. It can be imagined, how these disabled mothers also have to explain to their children why they can’t participate in an activity, attend a field trip, or use the same door [as their children do]. They might even have to spend a great deal of time explaining themselves or educating other people, and that can wear a person down (Scroll,2018).

In most societies, the predominant image of the family is represented by a middle-class, first-marriage nuclear family with two heterosexual parents, including a working father, a stay-at-home mother, and biological children (Routledge, “Marriage and Family review”, 2018). Social institutions, including mass media, language, legal systems, and religion, convey the message that this family configuration is the norm. As a student who wants to arrive at a finer feminist perspective, I feel this is how agency over the body and consent for the things done to it are appropriated by medical, legal, and social practices that challenge the very personhood and humanity of the mothers who want to break away from the society generated idea of how a mother should be.

Citations:

A Literature Review of Cultural Stereotypes Associated with Motherhood and Fatherhood, Sophie-Claire Valiquette-Tessier, Julie Gosselin, Kristel Thomassin, 2018

EMBODYING MOTHERHOOD-Perspectives from Contemporary India, Anu Aneja and Shubhangi Vaidya, Yoda Press, 2016

‘Your priority is your baby’: Why does India have a culture of demonizing working mothers?, Article by Scroll, 2018

Edited by M. Joy Rose

About Srilagna:

Srilagna Majumdar is a student of History, third Year in Jadavpur University, Kolkata, India. She is a keen student of social sciences and wants to pursue her future in Museology. She is currently working with 1947 Partition Archive and Stanford University for a project regarding interviewing Partition witnesses. She is also a Digital Content writer and editor at the same Archive. She wrote papers on Redefining gender roles to get a wider perspective of gender relations in the Global South. Srilagna Majumdar lives in Kolkata, West Bengal, India. She is also working for developing the proper ways of editing Partition witness’s stories and preparing them for digitization. She is also working with the Partition Museum to archive Partition history and find how women were affected during the same. She interns with Daak, a nonprofit organization for promoting lesser-known artworks and artists of South Asia. Srilagna is also the research authenticator at India Lost and Found, a heritage conservation initiative by Amit Pasricha. She is an oral histories and research intern at Kashmir Untold, an initiative to archive stories of Kashmiri migrants and is also working for exploring various aspects of motherhood in society and trying to arrive at a finer feminist lens by being an intern at the Museum of Motherhood, Florida.

Categories
Art Birth Books Education Feminism gender International Internships Queering Parenting

Making Space for More Than One Mother

By Aster Woods

Shelley Park in “Queering Motherhood” discusses her personal experience with being both a birth-giving mother and an adoptive mother in an extended family. She considers her children’s own perspectives on the way in which she mothers them; her adopted daughter in particular is resistant to her claim of motherhood, screaming “You’re not my real mother!” at her through a slammed-shut door. This leads Park to consider:

“ If child’s affective psychology might be queered to allow “room in her mind” for two (or more) mothers.”

Which begs the question, how do children absorb and interact with monomaternalism as it intersects with the heteronormative hegemony? This is the “teleological script – mythological life script” It is the pervasive system of indoctrination to the idea that a nuclear family is the only worthwhile family. It is tempting to see this as an outdated concept – and it is – and yet it remains with us, a shadow cast by our confusion and doubt. This concept of a perfect family is flawed in so many ways; as Park says, it:

“Ignores historical realities of genetic families divided by poverty, war, and slavery. It is further contested by the now common forms of family created by adoption, divorce, and remarriage, and new reproductive technologies such as surrogacy and in vitro fertilization (IVF)”.

Intuition is arguably an infant’s most profound sense of ability. Babies have no other reliable sense, no way of understanding the things they do perceive, but they can intuit accurately and consistently from birth. Furthermore, as a child begins to learn about the world around them, they are devoted to classification and organizing systems; particularly child-friendly systems such as color-coding. Have you noticed the extent to which we classify children’s gender? Before they have any concept of it their clothing, toys, books, games, and TV is telling them exactly what they are and how to behave based on that. This is compounded by what they mirror from the people around them (predominantly parents, although teachers and extended families play a huge role also) their intuition leading their development in a subtle but insidious way toward conformity. The “unlearning” of this comes in fits and starts later and throughout life; girls of 7 or 8 will ritualistically destroy their barbies, disavowing simultaneously their child-ness and their female-ness. Young boys have less permissivity in their experimentation of rejection; in a world where femalehood is seen as defective, a young girl aping boyhood is seen as unproblematic whereas a boy rejecting boyhood is cause for serious concern. The teenage years, with their turbulent uncertainty, are often marked with a return to gender norms which are then re-negotiated in emerging adulthood.

And so, to revisit Park’s question – How to “queer a child’s affective psychology” to refute the heteronormative one-mother fallacy?

From an adopted child’s perspective, these two frameworks are irreconcilable; loyalty to either script requires the child to be disloyal to someone in her life. Hence, as I suggest here, neither script’s notion of a “real” mother is adequate and the adopted child—indeed all children with multiple mothers, including children of divorce and remarriage, children of lesbian partners, and children birthed with the aid of new reproductive technologies and relationships—need to learn to deconstruct the nature/culture dichotomy that gives rise to these notions.

The nature vs nurture debate leads to some difficult ideological areas. One argument supporting genetics and privileging gestation and birth as the only valid path to motherhood, can be uncovered as problematic when you consider the child is a person in their own right, who cannot be owned or controlled unless ethical structures are seriously breached. However, are children blank slates? I don’t believe so. Genetic and epigenetic factors aside, how much do we pass on to our children?
As Uma Narayan (1999) states, perhaps the most ethical form of parenting holds “the virtue of privileging a child’s interests above those of competing parents, treating children more as ends-in-themselves than as objects of property-like disputes between contending parents.”

Furthermore, by rejecting the teleological, monomaternalistic and heteronormative life-script we are able to engage again with other historical and cultural forms of child-rearing, which involve:

“maintain[ing] as many . . . parental connections with adults who wish to maintain these bonds as is . . . feasible in any given case”

And, when done responsibly and ethically, have been proven to be beneficial for the health of all children and adults involved.

Sources:

Park, Shelley M. Mothering Queerly, Queering Motherhood. State University of New York Press, 2013.

Petrella, Serena. 2005. A geneology of serial monogamy. In Geneologies of identity: Interdisciplinary readings on sex and sexuality, eds. Margaret Sönser Breen and Fiona Peters, 169–82.

Narayan, Uma. 1999. Family ties: Rethinking parental claims in the light of surrogacy and custody. In Having and raising children: Unconventional families, hard choices, and the social good, ed. Uma Narayan and Julia J. Bartkowiak, 65–86. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.

Categories
Education gender health home Internships Medical motherhood Queering Parenting

Accepting Help

By Aster Woods

Can you imagine a scenario that would finally push you over the edge?

Or do you just keep telling yourself you can handle anything?

For people who care for others, hitting rock bottom is often an abstract principle. You do whatever it takes to keep on going. Because what’s the alternative? Really? People you love are counting on you. If you’re exhausted, you have to keep going. If you’re overwhelmed, you have to keep going. If your hands are shaking so badly that you break the plate you’re trying to clean, and then you burst into tears because you’ve failed to clean that plate, and then can’t stop crying, and then go numb and sometime later realize you’re still sitting on the kitchen floor…you stand up and finish the washing up, hands wrinkling in the cold water. Because you have to keep going.

I care for my mother. I need a break, I tell her. She doesn’t understand why; I explain that I’m struggling with my mental health, that I’m tired and stressed all the time. That I have been for a long time and it’s taking a serious toll.

She suggests I try chilling out.

I leave the room and scream into my pillow.

A few days later she hangs up the phone and beams at me. Your sister has agreed to help out while she’s visiting! Anger wells up inside me, hot and dry. Why on earth is it up to her? My sister knows the least about this situation, has no knowledge of how hard it is. Why on earth is she the one to decide if I get to have a break or not? Why does she get to choose when she takes care of our mum, but I don’t?

I know this is supposed to be a good thing. But panic overwhelms me. I have been resenting my caregiving but I can’t let it go. I have held it too tightly for too long. It’s who I am. Can I trust my sister to do it right? Is she going to mess up my carefully organized systems, making more work for me in the long run?

Or worse. Is she going to tell me that this is all easy, that I have nothing to worry about really, that my stress and frustration and despair and isolation are not valid emotions, but rather a symptom of my weakness and failure?

Why is accepting help so difficult?

Why can’t we put down this toxic burden of control? I want to relinquish this weight of responsibility so badly. I want to be able to move freely within my life. To do things that are only about me. I know that I can be a better person if I manage to do this and that it will mean I take better care of my mum; as people are so fond of telling me.

You can’t pour from an empty cup.

But people are not cups. Filling yourself up again is difficult.

And this is what I think of as the heart of the problem: The stress is the only thing that enables you to get stuff done. The most sustainable option is to remain stressed, like a plane using less fuel to cruise than to land, refuel, and take off again.

Stress gets you out of bed in the morning, gets the kitchen cleaned. I can’t relax while there are the bins to take out; I can’t sleep properly if I’m also listening out for mum’s call for help.

To let go of my stress is to relinquish my responsibility; and that is an impossibility as long as I have people relying on me.

Categories
Art Digital Media Internships Education Feminism gender home motherhood Queering Parenting Sociology

Let’s Talk About Monomaternalism

Explorations and Art by Aster Woods

What is Monomaternalism?

Monomaternalism, as defined by Shelley Park in her 2013 academic work ”Mothering Queerly, Queering Motherhood: Resisting Monomaternalism in Adoptive, Lesbian, Blended, and Polygamous Families” is essentially the pervasive notion that a person can have only one mother; it also privileges the bio-essentialist belief that only the birth mother is real. This notion naturally marginalizes the existence of adoptive parents, lesbian parents, transgender parents, inter-generational parenting (such as a mother-daughter team raising a child,) extended/blended families, and polyamorous families.

Let’s Unpack it!

As Shelley Park explains:

“Monomaternalism, as an ideological doctrine, resides at the intersection of patriarchy (with its insistence that women bear responsibility for biological and social reproduction), heteronormativity (with its insistence that a woman must pair with a man, rather than other women, in order to raise children successfully), capitalism (in its conception of children as private property), and Eurocentrism (in its erasure of polymaternalism in other cultures and historical periods)”

Monomaternalism’s patriarchal ethos has increased the pressure on mothers as they attempt to take care of their new baby within a vacuum, often devoid of support and under an overwhelming amount of pressure. While we are seeing a slow trend towards an even balance of parenting duties within nuclear families, society still has a skewed view of the responsibilities of the mother versus the father. The work being done, intellectually and culturally, to balance family dynamics will need to continue for several decades before a true equilibrium can be achieved.

Additionally, these parental gender roles can replicate in queer couples, with one partner bearing the weight of “motherhood” particularly if that person has physically given birth. Monomaternalism distances the non-birth-giving partner into an unreal and devalued form of parenting much closer to outdated archetypal fatherhood than traditional or contemporary motherhood. Additionally, we see withi8n monomaternalistic views the belief that the child themselves will suffer in a non-traditional environment; that only the straight, middle class, Eurocentric nuclear family is capable of raising a child successfully, and all other forms of child-rearing are to a greater or lesser extent covert forms of abuse. This particular belief is extraordinarily short-sighted as a large proportion of global cultures utilize an extended system of adults in order to raise children. The closed nuclear family is an outdated and relatively short-lived concept, as intergenerational households containing a number of different relationships and structures have been consistently the norm for much of our human history. I am also curious to see if, in the developed western world, we are likely to see a return to this family living structure as economic instability reduces the residential options of young couples, along with our improving healthcare and nutrition extending the average lifespan. It may become more normal for individual households to become communal, intergenerational extended and flexible arrangements, sharing childcare between them, as in other contexts.

Essentialism is a sociological theory that reduces a person to their biology, causing unsupported, widely erroneous claims.

“Antecedently convinced of biological essentialism, the romanticization of the biological mother-child bond shapes one’s phenomenological experiences of biological motherhood; those experiences then become “proof” of the essentialist hypothesis, making it a difficult hypothesis to dislodge.”

i.e. if a person is already convinced of biological motherhood being the only valid form of motherhood, the idealised view of the bond between mother and child forces that person to experience motherhood within that limited parameter (i.e. the biological bond is sacred and mystical) which then “proves” the original hypothesis, making a circular argument that is difficult to break. However, we have, as a society, a wealth of qualitative research and anecdotal evidence that proves that a mother-child bond can be profound to the point of sacredness in fathers and non-biological mothers.

What are just some of the negative consequences it has on families?

Competition among women for maternal status
This is especially prevalent when views differ on childrearing techniques, or best practices. At its most toxic, this can develop into a situation where the child’s autonomy is reduced and they are used as a pawn in a game they cannot understand. This situation can also play out inside a child’s mind, for instance after learning they have been adopted. It can cause significant emotional damage.

The erasure of many women’s childbearing and childrearing labors. 

A lack of attention to the ways in which women might— and sometimes do—mother cooperatively.
Much of the raising of children is devalued as only the biological mother’s input is seen as being true and valid parenting; although every adult who consistently interacts with a child has an influence on their wellbeing and development, this invisible labor is termed “babysitting” even when the adult in question has a societally valid link to the child (for instance, a grandmother or aunt.)

The treatment of children as private property.
This is a capitalist idiom that erases the rights of the child as an independent and autonomous person. Often used as a means of control within the context of punishment.
“I am your mother and you will do what I tell you to.”

The separation of children from mothers (and mothers from children) 

A lack of imagination concerning ways in which laws, policies, and practices could be transformed to better serve both women and children.
If a form of motherhood or parenting is not seen as legitimate it can have impacts far beyond the social; legal practices governing adoption and custody overwhelmingly privilege biological mothers and take little account of non-biological parenting. These have knock-on effects into child protection policies, family preservation policies, social welfare policies, tax incentives, census bureau definitions of family, school policies, hospital policies, employer benefit policies, and (in the case of diasporic families created through transnational adoption or by some other means) even foreign policy.

The maternal grief and guilt often suffered both by those who relinquish custody of their children and those who come to bear full responsibility for them.

Source:

Park, S. M. (2013) Mothering Queerly, Queering Motherhood : Resisting Monomaternalism in Adoptive, Lesbian, Blended, and Polygamous Families. Albany: State University of New York Press.