The dynamic interplay between fatherhood and manhood as an example

It has been indicated convincingly that masculinity is neither biologically determined nor automatic - it is more of a social construct which can take many different forms and can change over time. Consequently, fatherhood is a role that can and should be understood and exercised in different ways. Particularly in the context of the developing world, other categories of father (than the biological) – i.e. economic and social – are important. Therefore, although the connection between fathers and masculinity seems patently obvious, it is, in fact, a complex subject⁹⁸. Fatherhood is associated with manhood. When one is ‘a man’ one is expected to be able to take on the fatherhood role. But the point at which one becomes a man is reached along different routes and the process is often contested.

In the Western world, it is widely understood that a man becomes a father when he impregnates a woman. This explanation makes a biological happening the exclusive criterion of becoming a father. In short, modern technologies – such as in vitro fertilisation, to name only one - are forcing new definitions of what a father is. “The status of ‘father’ is therefore not simply the result of a biological process, and caution should be taken against linking biology and procreation too closely or unquestioningly with the idea of ‘a father’.” (Morrell 2006: 13-14)

In examining the relationship of fatherhood to manhood, Morrell (2006: 15) focuses on two issues: the physical act of begetting a child, and the processes of accepting and performing a

98 One researcher that recognizes the complexity of the subject of fatherhood is R.D. Parke (2000), who assumes a developmental focus to provide a psychological perspective on the complexities of father involvement. Components of father involvement include such relationship components as direct interaction, availability, and the managerial function, all of which are conceptually distinct. Other issues that should be carefully considered are the context of father involvement, processes used to index involvement, and dimensions of involvement. Parke contends that future research needs to study father involvement within a greater variety of ethnic-minority groups so that both cross-group and within-cross-group variability can be appreciated.

fatherhood role (thus becoming a role-model)⁹⁹. Fatherhood can be understood in different and contested ways and from many angles. Some important questions to attend to are: How does fatherhood feature in the way men understand masculinity? How does/did race and class shape fatherhood (specifically in South Africa in the second half of the twentieth century)? How do/did understandings of fatherhood change over time?¹⁰⁰

These questions are attended to in detail in the book edited by Linda Richter and Robert Morrell (2006), BABA: men and fatherhood in South Africa. In essence, the authors argue that biological fathers should be encouraged to be close to their children and responsibly take on the fatherhood role. There exists a stereotype that men are not interested in children and that fathers are naturally ill-suited to parenting. In contrast, the book demonstrates the centrality of fatherhood in the lives of men and in the experiences of children. It argues that fathers can make a major contribution to the health of South African society by caring for children and producing a new generation of South Africans for whom fathers will be significant by their presence rather than their absence.

But, despite the widely held view that being a father and providing for one’s children is important, many South Africans neglect their parental responsibilities. Many children grow up without a father’s presence in their homes or in their lives. This can also be identified as a contributory cause of childhood vulnerability – including vulnerability to HIV infection.¹⁰¹

99 Fathers as role models are also vitally important for the adolescent male. Two Australian authors Biddulph (1994) and West (1996) stress the importance of fathers and other male role models in helping boys to understand what it is to be a man. The belief that the quality and characteristics of the father-son relationship are important in shaping boys’ understanding of masculinity is not only true in Australian society. The role of fathers in teaching boys about masculinity in other cultures is highlighted in research on masculinity from Jamaica. In Jamaica, 42% of households are headed by women. As a result boys in these communities often look for male role models outside the family, in the community. In so doing they are socialised in the ways of the street by modelling the behaviour of the “don men”

(these are men who control local politics in the poor rural areas of Jamaica). In the absence of their fathers these boys look to the older boys in the community to teach them about sexuality and ethical values (Cleaver, 2002).

100 See for example, Hewlett (2000), for a brief overview of anthropological approaches and studies of father involvement with insights into how father involvement is conceptualized in the USA (and has changed over time).

101 This is one of the reasons why movements such as the South African Men’s forum (SAMF) and the Moral Regeneration Movement (MRM) have begun to put their energies into fatherhood work. In recognition of the need to support men as fathers, the Child Youth and Family Development programme at the Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC) in South Africa was prompted to launch the Fatherhood Project in December 2003. The project was prompted by three converging issues: Firstly, the very high rates of child sexual abuse in South Africa, most of which is perpetrated by men. More than 25 000 children are sexually abused each year in South Africa. Secondly, the absence of very large numbers of men from households in which children are growing up and low levels of father support for children’s care. Thirdly, the increased care needs of children as a result of deaths and family disruption from the HIV epidemic require men to take responsibility for children’s wellbeing. The HIV pandemic has undoubtedly weakened family structures and highlighted the question of fatherhood. (Richter and Morrell 2006:6-7)

One of the central challenges facing researchers working on the topic of fatherhood is to distinguish between fathers and fatherhood. A father is easily equated with the man who makes the biological contribution to the creation of the child. But the term father is also used globally to refer to many people who take on the role of father with respect to children, families and the wider community. This is typed fatherhood. Fatherhood is therefore a social role, and the importance of this role fluctuates over time, and simultaneously the content of the role shifts.

According to Richter and Morrell (2006: 2) some South African men are beginning to reassess the value of fatherhood. This is part of an international process, in which two kinds of response by men can be discerned. One response is to demand rights for fathers - therefore fathers’ rights organisations share, with other men’s rights organisations such as the Promise Keepers, a reputation for anti-feminism. Some other responses are to approach the question of parenting from a more holistic position and emphasize the interests of children.

Current international movements to promote fatherhood include innovative changes in state policy in various areas of the world. In the Scandinavian countries, for example, paternity leave has been dramatically extended, encouraging men to be primary caregivers for their children (see Brandth and Kvande 2001, 2002). The experiences of South Africa’s fathers have been powerfully influenced by history. For the biggest part of the twentieth century, different experiences of work basically shaped what was possible for black, coloured, white and Indian fathers. There are many reasons why fatherhood has not yet become a policy issue in South Africa – and not yet followed the lead taken by social welfare states in the north - not least that there are many other claims made upon the over-stretched social agenda of the state. Modest attempts have been made to extend parental leave but this has not explicitly aimed to increase father involvement in childcare. Rather, the move emanates from equity arguments generated by the country’s emerging human rights culture. (Richter and Morrell 2006: 3-4)

Fundamentally, in South Africa there are (at least) two very important factors to consider when thinking about men and fatherhood in the context of masculinity. The first is the persistence of high levels of unemployment which affects young black men disproportionately. Secondly, the historical legacy of racial emasculation by which African men were infantilised (Morrell, 1998).

To restore the value of fatherhood in constructions of masculinity it is necessary give attention to both of these factors. This endeavour unfortunately exceeds the limits of this dissertation (see Richter and Morrell, 2006 for more detail).

10.1.1 Fathers in society (specifically the media) and the politics of fatherhood

At the very heart of feminism is the idea that patriarchy – the rule of the father – is the cause of women’s oppression (as was indicated earlier). Even allowing for the difference between a patriarch (a male leader in the biblical sense that implies age, seniority and paternal rights) and a pater (a ‘father’), it is important to consider the gendered status of fathers. Is fatherhood necessarily implicated in gender inequality? Do men use their position as fathers to oppress women? Or does the assumption of fatherhood produce men who are more responsible, more tolerant, and more supportive of gender equality? These are key questions in considering how fatherhood is related to constructions of masculinity. (Morrell 2006: 17)

The most prominent concern in research on fathers in the recent period has been the phenomenon of the absent father¹⁰². In his book, Absent Fathers, Lost Sons, Guy Corneau reflects upon the consequence of the father’s absence. He notes that the crisis of absent fathers is reaching epidemic proportions. The number of children living in fatherless homes (mostly homes headed by women), are dramatically on the rise. Even when a man lives in the home, Corneau (1991:

12-13) suggests that there is no guarantee of effective fathering. This lack of attention from the father results in the son’s inability to identify with his father as a means of establishing his own masculine identity:

“The term absent fathers…refers to both the psychological and physical absence of fathers and implies both spiritual and emotional absence. It also suggests the notion of fathers who, although physically present, behave in ways that are unacceptable: authoritarian fathers, for example, are oppressive and jealous of their sons’ talents and smother their sons’ attempts at creativity or self-affirmation. Alcoholic fathers’ emotional instability keeps their sons in a permanent state of insecurity.”

102 See for instance Gordon Dalbey’s Sons of the father: healing the father-wound in men today (1992), for an evangelical Christian interpretation of this issue.

Corneau notes furthermore that a boy who has experienced such paternal neglect in many cases struggles with sexual identity, represses aggression, lacks healthy ambition, suffers from learning disorders, has a diminished sense of moral value and personal responsibility, and often turns to some form of substance abuse in an attempt to quench his inner psychic turmoil. To summarise the depths of these problems, he writes:

“The father’s absence results in the child’s lack of internal structure…His ideas are confused; he has trouble setting himself goals, making choices, deciding what is good for him, and identifying his own needs. For him, everything gets mixed up: love and reason, sexual appetites and the simple need for affection…Basically he never feels sure about anything.” (Corneau 1991: 37)

Many different works on masculinity have, from varying standpoints, examined the way in which boys have been affected by physically absent fathers. Bly (1991), through his mythopoetic work, has for instance created support for the idea that absent fathers are responsible for a crisis of masculinity. Morrell (2006: 18) however contends that there are two problems with the absent father argument. The first is that it is difficult to show that the physical absence of the biological father is as serious for the child as it is often argued. Indeed, the presence of the father can have negative consequences for the child.

The second problem is that men have used the arguments that children need their (biological) fathers to pursue anti-feminist campaigns designed to return women to their dependence on men or to reduce their autonomy. Consequently “the position of a father cannot be measured simplistically in terms of his physical absence or presence…A father might well be physically present, but emotionally absent, or physically absent but emotionally supportive.” The ensuing debate on this issue of the real impact of absent fathers on their children (specifically sons) is considered to be extremely important, but unfortunately exceeds the limits of this dissertation’s focus.

Another important aspect to analyse is the way in which fathers appear in the media and how this influences the politics of fatherhood. Men as fathers are often ignored or portrayed in narrow ways in the media, which inhibit alternative forms of fatherhood from emerging. However, one exception is the image of the African man as father – intimately engaged with childcare and responsibility – which was an important feature in media representations in the 1950’s in the

black newspaper Drum. Lindsay Clowes (2006: 108-120) indicates that in the 1950’s, African fathers in urban areas had a better chance of establishing themselves in the household and enjoying a healthy relationship with their children. Representations in this era often portrayed men as fathers happily ensconced in domestic situations.

While Drum dropped this portrayal in the 1960’s and replaced it with images of men at work, relating to one another rather than to women and children, the idea that African men were and are not interested in children, was and is challenged. These last-mentioned kinds of images (of men at work etc.) were much more typical of the ways in which white men had, for decades, been represented in magazines aimed at white audiences. “The period thus sees the images of black men produced by Drum converge with those produced for white audiences, showing parenting as women’s work. The involved and nurturing father was, in other words, written out of Drum’s discourse on manhood over the 1950’s” (Clowes 2006:108)

Although the representation of fathers in advertisements of Drum may be only a very relative reflection of actual fatherly involvement, it nonetheless remains highly significant that this popular and widely-read magazine decided to represent men in domestic environments and involved with their children. This resonates with the fact that the number of men that have decided to actively partake in the care-giving and upbringing of children have certainly increased during the past few years. More and more men are utilizing the opportunities to stay home and take care of children while the women return to work earlier than would otherwise be the case.

10.1.2 The reconstruction of fathering capacities

In the light of the importance of work in men’s lives, one can raise the question how being away from the public arena, and entering a domain traditionally reserved for women, affects their masculinity? Since men’s increased involvement in care-giving, there has been a change in the nature of fatherhood as it is continuously “shaped and reshaped according to cultural context, work and family relations” (Brandth and Kvande 1998: 2). It is generally evident that men in higher paid positions, whose wives earn equivalent incomes, have the structural resources to stay home and care for children. For these men, fathering is constructed within and integrated into a

hegemonic form of masculinity, and it is also constructed by the interactions of mothers and fathers as they negotiate issues pertaining child care.

By sharing leave from work, men and women regard themselves as participating in equal parenting, but the styles of parenting are not necessarily equal. Brandth and Kvande (1998) contends that, although fathers, like mothers, also deem closeness, care and contact as important to ideal parenting, they do not hold the same perceptions as to how these should be manifested.

While women’s ideas of intimacy involve face to face contact, men have more of a side-by-side nature in the provision of care. Fathers regard friendship with the child as important and engage in activities where things are done together, e.g. going for walks. Much of the activities done together occur in the public arena instead of inside the home, as would be the case with mothers.

Fathers also claim that mothers worry too much and are over-involved, suggesting that they as fathers worry less. They believe that children should be taught independence and not be pampered too much (Brandth and Kvande 1998: 7). Even though mothers agree with the idea of independence, they are also concerned as to whether such practices provide children with sufficient emotional involvement on the side of the parent.

Women often give masculine or rather paternal care higher status than their own material practices. This has the effect of reproducing masculinity as the norm. This, along with the fact that men generally refuse to equalize the amount of housework that the woman did when she was the primary care-giver explicates the distance between fathering and mothering. As such, it reinforces women’s secondary position and men’s dominant position.

Another way in which added support is given to men’s dominance is by means of the combination of hegemonic masculinity – in terms of work life – and caring. This implies that paternal leave does not necessarily involve a break with hegemonic masculinity. Fathers who take paternity leave still manage to stay in touch with the public sphere by managing their time according to their own needs and taking the baby along on visits to the workplace etc. Thus, in this sense, fathers on paternal leave do many of the things they would have done anyway.

Staying at home does not threaten their masculine identity since they simply combine child care

and masculine activities. Consequently, childcare has (to a large extent) been successfully integrated into an ever-changing hegemonic masculinity. It has become admirable for men to be good at caring for their children, and this has infiltrated the rigid boundaries of hegemonic masculinity.

In conclusion: fatherhood is an integral element in the construction of masculinities, but it is interpreted in different ways. For men who accept that fathering goes beyond their contribution to conception, there are many ways of interpreting fatherhood. Fatherhood may be understood as negotiating a responsibility to provide and protect, or it may be interpreted as an entity in which one’s children become part of one’s identity – ‘I am my children’. Masculinities which value both responsibility and care can and should be fostered. Such masculinities should steer clear of the claim that fatherhood gives men power over women and children and justifies authority and tyranny. Basically, “…fatherhood can make a contribution to the lives of men. It can give meaning to their lives and open up unexplored channels of emotional engagement. When men accept the fatherhood role, in whatever form, they also contribute to the broader goals of gender equity. Fatherhood should be a role that integrates men into families, rather than separating them from children, women and other men.” (Morrell 2006: 23)