A AAAAA AAASAA'AAS AA AA A AA’AAA A3. A3 .AAAAAAA 3A AAAM AAAY FE‘L’CT‘C AAAAAA ADA? “WW EBA “NHL-f Eisse Artai'iea for the Degree of $51.13. 33.8% A}! STATE UNT‘A ERSSTY MAP AGATA ET 3-3053" PARISH 1E755 WWT\\\\T\\W\\W\\WWW 3 1293 10424 3484 95/49; ABSTRACT WOMEN AT WORK: HOUSEWIVES AND PAID WORKERS AS MOTHERS IN CONTEMPORARY REALISTIC FICTION FOR CHILDREN By MARGARET HOLT PARISH The purpose of this study was to examine roles of women (housewives, paid workers, and mothers) as perceived by contemporary social scientists and as perceived by the women authors of a selected group of books for children. The forty five children's books included in this study are contemporary realistic fiction published between 1964 and June, 1975 in both hardcover and paperback which include protagonists eleven to fifteen years of age who live at home with their mothers present. Congruence in the perceptions about women's roles of contemporary social scientists and of the authors of con- temporary realistic fiction for children was considered. Connections in the children's books between the work roles of the protagonists' mothers and these mothers' relationships with their children were also investigated. There is much evidence that many contemporary social scientists perceive the housewife's role today as a diminished and unsatisfying one. Contemporary social scientists also indicate that paid employment is becoming an increasingly important option for modern women, as more and more women enter the workplace and remain there for a longer part of their'worklives. And many social scientists emphasize that MARGARET HOLT PARISH there continue to be, essentially, two different labor markets for men and women; they perceive different labor markets to be one of the reasons that women as a group receive lower remuneration for their work than men do. Social scientists report some confusion and ambivalence in our society about the role of mother today, as new realities and old myths collide. The perspectives of the women authors of the children's books included in this study do agree with the perspectives of the social scientists in some respects. In one important area, however, there is disagreement. Most of the authors of the children's books do show the housewife role as a limited and limiting one. And they do portray several of the protagonists' mothers as ambivalent about their mothering role. They show several housewife *mothers relating to their children in a hostile manner; the mothers who work for pay are generally shown in the books to have more satisfying relationships with their children. The authors of the children's books, however, do not seem to perceive women's options in the world of paid employment in the same way that contemporary social scientists do. In the children's books the protagonists"mothers who hold paid employment are mostly shown in jobs that are more highly rewarded than are the jobs that the majority of women hold in the "real" world. There seems to be an element of cultural lag in the children's books included irlthis study. While the books MARGARET HOLT PARISH do reflect the dissatisfaction with housewifery that has found articulate expression in our culture since the early 19603, they do not reflect the constraints of today's job market upon women. Young reader's would find in these books relatively little information that would alert them to the challenges that face women who seek to find satisfying employment today. WOMEN AT WORK: HOUSEWIVES AND PAID WORKERS AS MOTHERS IN CONTEMPORARY REALISTIC FICTION FOR CHILDREN By Margaret Holt Parish A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Education 1976 Dedicated to the members of my doctoral committee, and especially to Dr. George Sherman, its Chairman, and Dr. Stephen Judy, Dissertation Director. ii . TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION Chapter I. THE WOMAN AS HOUSEWIFE II. THE WOMAN AS PAID WORKER III. THE WOMAN AS MOTHER . IV. DATA FROM CONTEMPORARY REALISTIC FICTION FOR CHILDREN ABOUT THE WORKING AND MOTHERING ROLES OF PROTAGONISTS' MOTHERS . . V} IMAGES OF MOTHERS IN CHILDREN'S BOOKS INCLUDED IN STUDY . . HOSTILE HOUSEWIFE MOTHERS NEW WOMEN AS MOTHERS HAPPY HOUSEWIFE MOTHERS . HUMOROUS HOUSEWIFE MOTHERS. STRUGGLING MOTHERS VI. CHARACTER FOILS: FAIRY GODMOTHERS AND CARICATURES VII. CONCLUSIONS . BIBLIOGRAPHY iii Page 29 51 63 99 100 115 132 . 144 . 161 179 . 195 . 204 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION Chapter I. THE WOMAN AS HOUSEWIFE II. THE WOMAN AS PAID WORKER III. THE WOMAN AS MOTHER . IV. DATA FROM CONTEMPORARY REALISTIC FICTION FOR CHILDREN ABOUT THE WORKING AND MOTHERING ROLES OF PROTAGONISTS' MOTHERS . V, IMAGES OF MOTHERS IN CHILDREN'S BOOKS INCLUDED IN STUDY . HOSTILE HOUSEWIFE MOTHERS NEW WOMEN AS MOTHERS HAPPY HOUSEWIFE MOTHERS . HUMOROUS HOUSEWIFE MOTHERS. STRUGGLING MOTHERS Page 29 51 63 99 100 115 132 . 144 . 161 VI. CHARACTER FOILS: FAIRY GODMOTHERS AND CARICATURES 179 VII. CONCLUSIONS . BIBLIOGRAPHY iii . 195 . 204 INTRODUCTION Change is a central focus in this study. The perspec- tives of social scientists about changes in the roles of women, especially in the last decade, are reviewed in the first three chapters. In the last chapters I discuss the perspectives on the changing work roles of mothers as perceived by women authors of contemporary realistic fiction for children. Two questions lie at the center of this study. In what ways are the perspectives of the social scientists and the authors of the children's books similar or dissimilar? How do the work roles of the mothers in the children's books connect with the mothers' parenting? There has been a trend in children's literature since the early 19603 by critics as "the new realism." Authors of children's books have tended to be more honest and forthright about discussing social problems than were authors of the past. They have dealt with new themes that previously did not have a place in children's literature, as they have examined old themes with greater frankness. One would therefore expect that recent changes in the roles of women might be reflected in contemporary realistic fiction for children. This study is an effort to determine whether 2 such a reflection of change does indeed exist in the children's books. First as a Children's Librarian, later as an Instructor of Children's Literature, I have followed this trend toward "new realism” with great interest, noting that in the books, parents are now shown as sometimes less than perfect (even hostile) and that children sometimes are shown looking 'within themselves or turning to their contemporaries for solutions to their problems. I have also noted that many young readers have been highly interested in the new kind of children's book that describes, or attempts to describe, their "real world." A few books included in this study - HARRIET THE SPY and ARE YOU THERE, GOD? IT'S ME, MARGARET, for example, have become widely read ”classics." In this study I first review the work of social scientists about women as housewives, paid workers and mothers. Then I examine the writing of women authors of children's books, focusing on their portrayal of the protagonists' mothers in these roles. It is not my assumption that either the social scientists' perspectives about women's roles or those of the authors of children's books represent an ultimate "reality." I do believe, however, that both groups are expressing contemporary values and ideas about an important question of our time: woman's place. And since one goal of contemporary realistic fiction is surely "to tell it 3 like it is," and since the goal of social scientists is to describe what is happening in our society, it seems to be of value to investigate fully the relationship between their views. CHAPTER I THE WOMAN AS A HOUSEWIFE One of the earliest studies of the role of housewife in our culture was done during the 19503 by sociologist Helena Lopata. Unlike many social scientists writing today, Lopata did not bring a negative perspective about house- wifery to her work. Nevertheless, she concluded that the housewife role in our society was both marginal and menial and that the work of the housewife lacked the defining characteristics that give legitimacy to paid employment. Lopata wrote that: The girl entering the role of housewife faces a completely different situation. One of the role's characteristics is that American girls do not "apply for it." There is no organized social circle which tests a candidate and then admits or rejects her on the basis of proven skills. She enters the role "sideways," as an adjunct to the role of wife, and only then does she pull a social circle around herself. In addition, the role is not easily located in the occupational social structure. Most Americans are not even sure it belongs there; it lacks the basic criteria of most jobs... Studies that have followed Lopata's have amplified some of her conclusions. At the time that this dissertation is written, a review of the literature about housewifery in SIGNS: JOURNAL OF WOMEN AND CULTURE IN OUR SOCIETY (Summer, 1Helena Z. Lopata, Occupation Housewife (New York: Oxford University Press, 1971), p. 139. 4 1976) makes dramatically clear the shift in emphasis that scholarship about housework has undergone. While once housework was studied primarily to investigate (and justify) the division of labor between the sexes, today the emphasis is on change. Contemporary social scientists quite often come to the conclusion, in one way or another, that the housewife role, as it is presently structured in our culture, is archaic or vestigal. Changes in the attitudes of our society toward house- work during the last decade will be one topic of this section on the women as housewife. But changes in the realities of housewifery that go back to the turn of the century and, indeed, to industrialization, must be emphasized as well. The actual work that needs to be done in the home has been steadily diminishing for several decades. Even during the postwar years when the "feminine mystique" was preached, and, to some degree, practiced, women continued to move out- side the home to join the workforce in ever-increasing num- bers, a trend that began during World War II. Rosie the Riveter did not go home after the war, in many cases; in- stead she took a job (at less pay than she received in her previous blue-collar one) in the every-expanding areas of clerical or service work that needed cheap labor (women's services) during the postwar years. New realities about "woman's place" and housework did not begin with the feminists in the late 19603. They did not begin with Betty Friedan's book in 1963 or with Simone de Beauvoir's earlier 6 work, THE SECOND SEX, in 1954. They have been with us for a-long time. We have only begun to deal with their full implications. Increasing participation of women in the paid work- force began during World War II and will be discussed in the chapter that follows on woman as paid worker. Decreas- ing needs for woman's productivity in the home go back to the Industrial Revolution and continue today. One must look to historians, demographers, economists, and sociologists for evidences of change in "woman's work" in our society. With many voices they make many of the same essential points about the past and present. (Demographers, however, are especially humble about predicting the future.) Technology has freed women from a great deal of the demanding productive work that they did at the turn of the century. Smaller families have also reduced the workload. A woman at the turn of the century - without most of today's labor saving devices - would raise an average of six child— ren, nurse them through childhood diseases that no longer exist in this country because of modern immunization, and die at an average age of fifty,with no time between the dual responsibilities of housework and childrearing and her own death to wonder what else might occupy her life. That same woman was of great economic importance to her family. They depended upon her for their food and often for their clothing. 7 Demographer Judith Blake points out that the Industrial Revolution took out of the home much of the productive work (other than parenting) that women once did there. She states that this fact creates a situation, which began in the nineteenth century, in which men are less dependent on their wives (for the goods and services they once produced), while women and children are more dependent on their husbands and fathers respectively, for the money that they earn to support the household. She believes that since the Indus- trial Revolution caused women and children to become an economic liability, the efforts of women to enter the work- force today can be perceived as an attempt to restore an equilibrium that was lost with industrialization. Blake writes that: The changes in migration, mortality and fertility that accompanied the Industrial Revolution appear to have profoundly disrupted the symmetry of the status of men and women. As a result, since the middle of the nineteenth century serious question have been raised concerning the realism, as well as the legitimacy, of a continuing attempt to prescribe one kind of position - a derivedzone - as being the primary status for all women. A frequently-cited study by Joann Vanek makes a related point. On the basis of data from the Federal Government on time spent by women doing housework over the last fifty years, Vanek reports that employed women today spend half as much time as unemployed women doing house- work. Unemployed women spend as much time as their mothers 2Judith Blake, "The Changing Status of Women in Developed Countries," Scientific American 231:3 (September, 1974), p. 137. 8 or their grandmothers did before them. After checking out all the variables that could explain the discrepancy, Vanek comes to the conclusion that, since the modern homemaker's contribution to the family is less clear than was that of the rural homemaker before her, i.e., since cooking, clean- ing, and shopping for bargains are less clear contributions than were making butter, bread and clothing, today's home- maker finds little evidence that what she does is considered to be a contribution equal to the wage earner's. She there- fore feels that the work itself must be clearly evident and acknowledged. Vanek writes that: Since the value of household work is not clear, non- employed women feel pressure to spend long hours at it. Time spent in work, rather than the results of the work, serves to express to the homemaker and others that an equal contribution is being made. women who are in the labor force contribute to the family income and so do not feel the same pressure.3 Based on interview-data and her own observations, Betty Freidan expresses the same idea in THE FEMININE MYSTIQUE : l. The more a woman is deprived of function in society at the level of her own ability, the more her house-work, wife-work, mother-work, will expand - and the more she will resist finishing her house—work, or mother-work, and being without any function at all... 2. The time required to do the housework for any given woman varies inversely with the challenge of the other work to which she is committed. Without any outside interests, a woman is virtually forced to devote hzr every moment to the trivia of keeping house. 3Joann Vanek, "Time Spent on Housework" Scientific American 231:5 (November, 1974), p. 120. 4Betty Freidan, The Feminine Mystique (New York: Dell, 1963). p. 230. 9 Blake and Vanek both make the point that the modern woman has considerably less productive work to do in the home than her grandmother; Vanek and Freidan both make the point that the modern woman therefore begins to feel that she ‘must justify her existence. She busies herself with a host of chores, trying to make what was once a full-time life- time job (and is now a part—time job, once children are in school) into a central occupation of all her resources. In a market economy, she is in a non-market role; she is marginal to the functioning of the society. Sociologist Philip Slater entitles one of his chapters in THE PURSUIT OF LONELINESS, ”WOmen and Children Last." He describes one aspect of the marginality of the modern house- wife in this passage: There are societies in which the domestic role works, but in those societies the housewife is not isolated. She is either part of a large, extended family house- hold, in which domestic activities are a communal effort, or participates in a tightly knit village community, or both. The idea of imprisoning each woman alone in a small, self-contained dwelling is a modern invention, dependent upon advanced technology. In Moslem societies, for example, the wife may be a prisoner, but she is at least not in solitary confine- ment. In our society, the housewife may move about fully, but since she has nowhere to go and is not 3 part of anything anyway her prison needs no walls. An economist, Robert Lekachman, writing in an earlier issue of SIGNS, takes a perspective similar to Slater's; housewives are outside - outside the market economy by which we determine what is valuable in our society. Lekachman analyzes the changes that have come to the modern army since 5Philip Slater, The Pursuit of Loneliness (Boston: Beacon Press, 1972), p. 63. 10 it has begun to pay for the services of its soldiers, and he predicts the kinds of changes that the housewife role might undergo if it were included in our market economy (at least to the extent of counting housework as part of the Gross National Product). Lekachman makes a direct connection between lack of pay for housework and the lowly status of the occupation and those who work at it. Much of the interplay between home and market- place reflects social imputations of women's in- feriority in both locales. Since it is unpaid, work in the home is undervalued in capitalist societies. When women leave their homes, they are channeled to women's occupations which are also undervalued, partly because of their association with "free" domestic labor. Lekachman shows how society devalues the housewife role; Elizabeth Janeway, in MAN'S WORLD, WOMAN'S PLACE, argues that women themselves doubt the value of their role since its scope has steadily decreased. ...Managing a household...ha3 declined spectac- ularly as a socially useful skill, even with servants almost non-existent. Nowadays one buys in shops things that were made at home only a generation or two ago, and food is processed so completely that cooking has ceased to be a necessity and become a leisure art. This decline in the economic value of woman's traditional role has, in fact, drawn a great deal of significance and reward out of it. When a house- hold was in part a factory women were in touch with society and its demands at home almost as much as their husbands were abroad and much more than many women with jobs in business are now. 6Robert Lekachman, "On Economic Reality," Signs: Journal of Women and Culture in Our Society, Volume I, Number 1 (Autumn, 1975), p. 99. 7Elizabeth Janeway, Man's World, Woman's Place (New York: Dell, 1971), p. 130. ll Janeway goes on to make the point that women have not only lost much of the work that they did earlier, losing with it some of the status that was attached to it; they are almost without any objective measure of the work that they actually do. We cannot regain that world and even when we talk of the 'good things' it offered, we should never over— look the terrible drawbacks of narrowness, of drudgery and of frustration which it often imposed on body and spirit. But when we examine woman's role today, we ‘must also take account of the gaps which exist there now that women at home have lost their old tie with the production of economically valuable goods, and thus lost,too,timechmmx:oflxflng;fir¥mdlnrthecfifiecthm:summhrds ofzmlouufidecxmmmfity,rmwmnxgrtnweanL 'nmmesuamiufls repnxmnttmetnaflityynfincufle. Sociologist Ann Oakley has written two books, WOMAN'S WORK and THE SOCIOLOGY OF HOUSEWORK, that result from her research study of the attitudes of British housewives toward housework. Oakley presents the limitations of housework for today's woman in this way. Housework contrasts with employed work in its lack of economic reward, its isolation, and the lack of social recognition accorded to the responsibilities carried on by the housewife... Enjoyment of one's past job does not gugur well for contentment in the role of housewife. She shows how much housewives dislike their working conditions: the fragmentation, isolation and monotony of their situation. Oakley goes on to show how women try to deal with the lack of external rewards and structure that is inherent in 8Janeway, p. 172. 9Ann Oakley, The Sociology of Housework, (New York: Random House, 1973), p. 87. 12 the housewife role by inventing their own standards and keeping to them. The specificiation of standards and routines has four identifiable functions. First, it provides a means of unifying the collection of hetrogeneous tasks that make up housework; dissimilar tasks are knitted together, and some kind of coherent job structure emerges“ Secondly, it serves as proof that housework is work; the spelling out of these rules to be followea places housework in the same category as other work - there are things that simply have to be done. In this sense, the definition of standards and routines can be seen as a defensive process; the housewife is defending herself against the allegation that she does nothing at all. Thirdly rule specification is a means of job enlargement, a process of elaborating housework tasks so they take up endlessly increasing amounts of time. For the full-time housewife, in particular, standards and routines thus serve to keep the "worker" employed. And lastly, the definition of rules for housework establishes a mechanism whefsby the house- wife can reward herself for doing it. Oakley observes that the standards that the house- wife internalizes in order to make her work meaningful become a trap for her. Ironically, they become "shoulds and oughts" that make her feel guilty if she does not live up to them. "Women enter into a form of contract with them- selves to be their own bosses, judges and rewardgivers. Gaining coherence and self—reward in their work, autonomy is relinquished and creativity constrained."11 Somehow, women are thus caught in a double bind. Kristen Amundsen, a political scientist, also writes cogently on the housewife's dilemma. Here again one finds evidence cited of the way that the housewife's role has looakley, p. 104. 11Oakley, p. 112. 13 changed; here again one finds comment on the anxiety that the change in the housewife role brings to the person who is trying to perform it. The novelty to these circumstances cannot be over- emphasized. The role of housewife and mother was central to a woman's experience and dominated all of her adult life up to this century for the very simple reason that when she was finally through with the bearing and raising of children she had precious few years to live. At the same time, housework in the past required more effort and a great deal more physical energy that it does now.... Today, however, even the most dedicated house- wife is apt to be plagued by doubts, by boredom, by a stifling sense of frustration in contemplating all those years ahead spent doing the same menial tasks and the unimportant busy work. She will also, if she is reasonably socially aware, be bothered by the fear of having to rely on her own resources at some time in the future. Mbre than two-thirds of American housewives end up on the job market sooner or later in their lives - very often out of necessity and almost always withpgt any decent preparation for their new roles. "Busy work" may be a key word in Amundsen's statement, for surely, many would argue, there are a number of modern housewives who are very busy indeed. But do they have to be? Economist John Galbraith argues that the real work of the American housewife today is consumerwork, that she does work that is essential to the functioning of our affluent society which is unacknowledged and unrewarded, indeed, disguised as a kind of enjoyment. The higher the standard of living - that is to say, the larger the house, the more numerous the auto- mobiles, the more elaborate the attire, the more demanding the administration. Were women unavail- able for this task, an upper limit would be set on 12Kristen Amundsen, The Silenced Majority, (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1971), p. 14-15. 14 consumption by the administrative tasks involved. At some point, it would become too time-consuming, too burdensome, as it does for the bachelor of either sex13who leads a comparatively simple existence. Galbraith believes that while women do not have a primary role within the home as producers, they do often play the role of active consumers, a role upon which our society depends to maintain its present level of conspic- uous consumption. He believes that the role that American Women play is concealed from them by the fact that, in American society, there is an identification of consumption of goods and services with increasing happiness and an ignoring of the tasks and services that must be done to bring about that consumption. Galbraith concludes that: ...the family is both the justification and the disguise for the economic function of women. Their service in making possible the indefinite expansion, especially of affluent consumption and production, is justified, and even sanctified, as a service to the family. The service is then submerged in the concept of the household - and it is thus kept out of view. There is much, no doubt, to be said for the institution of the family. And it is not surprising that conservatives say it so much. It serves them well. Galbraith's point is surely not a minor one; buying and maintaining so many possessions is surely one of the non-productive activities that absorbs much of many house- wives' time. (Paying for these things of course consumes the time of many breadwinners.) It is interesting to note 13John Kenneth Galbraith, "How the Economy Hangs on Her Apron Strings," Ms. (May, 1974), p. 75. 14Galbraith, p. 77. 15 that one of the solutions sometimes offered in personal accounts to non-productive but time-consuming housework is getting rid of some of the "things” that consume energy. In a book entitled I'M RUNNING AWAY FROM HOME, BUT I'M NOT ALLOWED TO CROSS THE STREET, the author writes of her own family's successful move toward role-sharing. She begins her account like this: Eight years ago, my own feelings were indeed deep, but also confused. I wasn't working; I lay around for nine months and 10 days, waiting for my first fulfillment to come. I insisted that I loved being a housewife. My husband, Roger, suggested once, between my sobbings, that maybe I'd be happier if I went out and did something. What did he know? With my extraordinary sensitivity, I knew that his ego would be shattered if I brought in a buck. Besides, ig would all fall into place when the baby was born.1 She goes on to explain how work became later on divided among her, her husband, and their five children, one of the tasks being that of taking a basket from room to room and putting in it things that were out of place. Such things that were not claimed in half an hour were given away or thrown away. Then she comments: The house never has a pristine look. One reason we have so much mess is that we are innundated with possessions. Possessions can become a pain in the neck. The labor of upkeep can quickly suffocate the pleasure of having them. Some things show up in the pick-up basket that no one cares enough about to take responsi- bility for. In the past, I would have said, in a long-suffering voice, "That beautiful thing. Tskl Tsk! I'll do it," for I was Woman, he conserver. Now I throw it out ot give it away. 15Gabrielle Burton, "I'm Running Away from Home But I'm Not Allowed to Cross the Street." Chapter from book by that name printed in Ms., February, 1973, p. 73. 16Burton, p. 101. 16 It would be possible, but perhaps not practical, to end this section on the woman as housewife by quoting from other autobiographical accounts, as well as from the poems, short stories and novels of women who have written about housewifery over the last decade. The social scientists make their point about the diminished housewife role and its effects upon the housewife herself in objective tones; women who have lived the ambiguities of the role speak with more feeling, write with more meat and metaphor. UP THE SANDBOX, DIARY OF A MAD HOUSEWIFE, SMALL CHANGES, MAMA DOESN'T LIVE HERE ANYMORE, THE SUMMER BEFORE THE DARK, THE PUMPKIN EATER - the titles themselves suggest some of the struggles that lie within the books. And here are two bits of poetry that speak eloquently. The first is from a poem entitled "Unmailed Letter to My Husband" by Eve Merriam. The second is from a poem entitled "Housewife" by Susan Fromberg Schaeffer. Housebound, houseround, assume and resume my part, perfecting my grammar day by ritual day. Verb: to cook, to clean, to wash, to dry; Noun: menu, garbage, broom, cloth, closet. Bargain-hunter, purse-loser, worshiper of plastics; I wear the costume: it becomes my skin. My hands are always picking up and twitching straight. Climbing stairs, I feel as if I am falling gasping, grasping for free time: I tumble 17 Submerged by safety pins and plastering milk. Eve Merriam 17Eve Merriam, "Unmailed Letter to My Husband,” The Double Bed, (New York: Lippincott, 1973), p. 78. 17 Once I drove my car into a tree. The bottles in the back Burst like bombs, tubular glass beasts, Giving up the ghost. My husband Thought it was the road. It was. In the rearview mirror, it curved and curled, Longer and straighter than the road ahead, A question of perspective, I thought then. I watched it until it turned, and I did not. I sucked in pain like air, As if, I, the rib, had cracked. 7': 'k * So I live inside my wedding ring, Beneath its arch, Multiplying the tables of my days, Rehearsing the lessons of this dish, that sleeve, Wanting the book that no one wrote, Loving my husband, my children, my house, With this pain in my jaw, wanting to go. Do others feel like this? Where do they go?18 Susan Fromberg Shaeffer It is worthy of emphasis that it is the ideas about housewifery of contemporary social scientists that have been reviewed here. The technology of housewifery has not changed substantially in the last decade, but attitudes toward housework have changed, and the writings of contemporary social scientists reflect those changes in attitude. For whatever reason or reasons (some social scientists postulate that the people of this country needed a return to old verities after the trauma of the Second World War), we did not deal with important changes in the nature of the house- wife role nor with the implications of women's increasing participation in the labor force in the 19503. Many 18Susan Fromberg Schaffer, "Housewife,” The Granite Lady (New York: Macmillan, 1974), p. 40. 18 social scientists writing then reified sharply defined sex roles for husbands and wives at a time when modern technology was making such sharply differentiated roles increasingly obsolete. The age cohort of women that matured during the 19503 resolved some of the problems of empty time by joining the work force, by having several children, or by doing volunteer work. For some combination of reasons (the stimu- lus of the Civil Rights Movement, the pressures of Zero Population Growth etc.) our contemporary culture has begun to carefully examine, during the last decade, the diminished workload, and the diminished work identity, of the contempo- rary housewife. Although there is considerable divergence of opinion about what caused what, relative to the changing roles of women (Did available paid work free women from the demands of defining themselves as housewives, or did the dimished demands of housework free women to assume paid employment, or is there a third explanation, perhaps a much more complex one?) there seems considerable agreement among social scientists that the modern woman ganLE go home again - not to the kind of home we remember, not to stay, not for a full time lifetime - and that changes in our social and economic structure will be needed to deal with the full implications of her changed situation. SUMMARY One might summarize the points made in this section on the woman as housewife in this way. Both the quantity of productive work and the number of children to be raised 19 are considerably less for the modern woman than they were for her grandmother (at the turn of the century). Today's homemaker is, therefore, to some degree put in a defensive position. She must justify her own existence, both to her- self and to the outside world. She does not do work, in many cases, that she can take seriously; nor is it taken seriously (television commercials that show her husband going into ecstasy over the way the laundry smells to the contrary) by those around her. The modern housewife must fight a sense of meaninglessness. She must also fight a sense of marginality, as a non-market worker in a market economy. High self—imposed standards (a floor one can eat from, sheets changed twice a week, gourmet cooking), increased investment in the mother role, and volunteer work are some of the strategies with which the modern woman tries to shore up her identity against the forces which wash against it and threaten to erode it. Entering the labor force so that she, too, is a part of the market economy, is another strategy for increased recognition. Consumerwork is unpaid work that the economy extracts from the housewife without labeling it as ”real work." The novels, short stories, poetry and autobiographical accounts of today's women express their dilemma. A sense of fragmentation, a fear of loss of identity, an unconfortable- ness with dependency, and a dread of meaninglessness emerge from the pages of a great deal of the work being written by women today. There is also a sense of having come to the end 20 of something and needing a new beginning without knowing precisely what or where that new beginning is. If contemporary realistic fiction for children accurately reflects the changing realities of the house- wife role as portrayed by contemporary social scientists, it will show housewives as dissatisfied with their work and their situation, for social scientists indicate that there is reason for such dissatisfaction, and the autobiographical accounts of women themselves indicate that they are increasingly critical of ”woman's place" in our society. CHAPTER II THE WOMAN AS PAID WORKER In the previous chapter, changes in the role of housewife were examined. Several contemporary social scientists (only a few of whom are cited here) believe that the role of housewife is considerably diminished, and that many modern housewives feel themselves diminished because their work is not considered important by those around them. One response that women have made to their changing work situation at home is to join the labor force in ever-increasing numbers. In this chapter, I will review the literature concerning women in the labor force. This chapter establishes four facts about the woman as worker. The first is that women, especially married women, and more especially mothers, have joined the labor force in ever-increasing numbers since World War II. (One can therefore reasonably expect to find a number of protag- onists' mothers in contemporary realistic fiction for child- ren engaged in paid employment.) The second is that women are occupationally segregated into the lower—paying, lower- status occupations. (One would therefore expect that many working mothers in contemporary realistic fiction for child— ren would be portrayed as employed in low—paid and low- 21 22 status jobs.) The third is that women's socialization for family roles and responsibilities has been tied to their lower aspirations for employment. (One might expect to find that protagonists' mother in the books included in this study have taken jobs that they can readily combine with their parenting and domestic responsibilities; one might also expect to find some evidence of role conflict for mothers who are managing "two jobs" - one at home and one in the paid labor force.) The fourth fact about the woman as worker that will be discussed in this chapter is that women's aspirations for careers and paid employment are changing; as 'more women enter the labor market and stay for longer periods of time, they begin to view their roles as paid workers as primary, rather than secondary ones. (If the children's books included in this study reflect this reality, they will show some of the protagonists' mother striving for success in the world of paid employment and defining themselves not .only as wives and mothers, but as paid workers as well.) WOMEN HAVE JOINED THE LABOR FORCE IN EVER-INCREASING NUMBERS SINCE WORLD WAR II In an unpublished speech given in Cincinnati in June, 1976, Elizabeth Janeway emphasized the increasing partici- pation of women in today's workforce. She stressed the fact that there is no reason to believe that women will not continue to enter paid employment in substantial numbers. And she pointed out the significant contributions that women's labor has made to the economic expansion that our 23 country experienced in the post World War II period. But women are here to stay. They are here in the economic system, more of them every year by actual number and by percentage, and they are staying irlthe labor force longer. In 1947, there were six and a half million wives who had jobs, and thirty million husbands - a ratio of about 1 to 5. Last year, the ratio was 1 to 2, or a little better - twenty million wives to 38 million husbands. Add the single, divorced or widowed women who are work— ing, and you come up with a labor force participation figure of 37 million women for 1975. It's true that married women don't work as many years overall, or as steadily as men do - but don't think that means they're there for just a couple of years until the babies come. As long ago as 1970, the average working life for married women was 25 years, compared to 43 years for men. Single women, you might be interested to know, averaged 45 years - two years longer than men.1 "In 1940 as in 1900," writes historian William Chafe, ”duaaverage woman worker was young, single, and poor."2 He goes on to point out that during World War II there was a larger increase in the female labor force than had taken place in the previous four decades combined. The point that Chafe and other emphasize does not have to do only with numbers of women; it has to do with the labor pool from which they are drawn. ”From a social point of View... the most important fact about World War II was that women who went to work were married and over thirty five.”3 1Elizabeth Janeway, Unpublished address given in Cincinnati in June, 1976, entitled "On the Economic System of the Future." A xerox of her speech was supplied to be by Ms. Janeway. 2William Chafe, "Looking Backward in Order to Look Forward," in Women and the American Economy: A Look to the 19803 ed. by Juanita Kreps (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1976), p. 12. 3 Chafe, p. 16. 24 World War II brought women into the labor force, then. The ending of hostilties did not send them home again. "During the 19503 the employment of women increased at a rate four times faster than that of men and in 1960 twice as many women were on the job as in 1940. By the 19703, 45 percent of all women over sixteen were in the labor force and there seemed little reason to doubt that the percentage would grow."4 The women who entered the labor force in ever-increas- ing numbers after World War II were wives and mothers, in many cases. (By 1970, almost two thirds of the female labor force were married women.)5 These women combined family roles with paid employment, some of them working part time. (Three out of ten of today's workers work part-time.)6 Many economists believe that the economic growth spurt which the United States achieved after World War II would have been impossible without the contributions of women. Carolyn Shaw Bell writes about the changing economic cycles that our country has experienced since World War II, including a long period of prosperity and a period of coinciding inflation and depression, and notes that none of these changes has reversed the trend for women to continue entering the labor force. Her point is not only that women have made a great 4Chafe, p. 17. 5Peter Gabriel Filene, Him Her Self: Sex Roles in America (New York: Harcourt Brace,—l975), p. 241. 6U.S. Department of Labor, Employment Standards Division, Women's Bureau, ”Twenty Facts About Women Workers," June, 1975 (revised). 25 contribution but that they have become an integral part of the American economy. ...the economic contributions of women have become more firmly embedded in national production, income, and employment than ever before. ...One simple, but rarely cited, conclusion, is that women were responsible for much of the growth in output which occurred over the same period when gross national product in real terms more than doubled. The volume of goods and services available to people during these years would have been far smaller without the labor services of women.7 It was the mothers of school—age children who first entered the labor force; the mothers of pre-school-age children have followed. Today over half of school age children have mothers in the labor force. Over one-third of children under six have mothers in the labor force.8 The turn—of the-century pattern in which women worked until they were married and then retired from the labor force was replaced by a pattern in which women stopped work when their children were young and then returned. A new pattern moves toward an uninterrupted work history. Demographer Valerie K. Oppenheimer comments on the trends in women's employment during this century by giving specific percentages while showing the overall shape and significance of what has been happening. 7Carolyn Shaw Bell, "Economic Realities Anticipated," in Impact ERA: Limitations and Possibilities ed. by The Equal Rights Amendment Project and the California Commission on the Status of Women (Millbrook, California: Las Femmes Publishing, 1976), p. 78-79. 8Women's Bureau, Employment Standards Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, "Highlights of Women's Employment and Education," May, 1975. 26 ...the extent to which women have contributed to the economy outside their homes has changed considerably over the past 70 years. The change has been particularly great since 1940, when an accelerated growth in women's labor-force parti- cipation began. By 1970, 50% of American women 18— 64 were in the labor force compared with 30% in 1940 and 20% in 1900....Even more impressive is the chang- ing relationship between female labor-force partici- pation and the family life cycle. In 1900 if the average woman worked at all during her lifetime - and not many did- it was before marriage and child- ren; the proportion employed declined steadily with age. By 1940, the rates showed some changes in the degree of labor force participation, but the attern by age was very similar to that of 1900. Starting in the 19403, however, the traditional pattern was transformed. The first great departure was the entry or reentry of women past 35 into the labor force — those whose children, by and large - had reached school age. The 1950 Census shows a sharp increase over the 1940 Census in the work rates of women over 35 has persisted, so we find that in 1970 between 49% and 54% of women in the 35-59 age groups were in the labor force. A second trend, starting in the 19503 but picking up momentum since then, has been the increased labor- force participation of younger married women, includ- ing women with pre-school children....9 Clearly, women are working for pay more than they ever have before. The question of whthomen have increasingly sought paid employment warrents further discussion here. Partly, of course, women's choice of paid employment was probably connected with the decrease of available productive work that was discussed in the previous chapter. Economist T. Aldrich Finegan summarizes several reasons in this way: 9Valerie K. Oppenheimer, "Demographic Influence in Female Employment and the Status of Women," in Changing Women in a Changing Society ed. by Joan Huber (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1973), p. 185. 27 The rising labor force participation rate of married women is one of the most interesting long- run trends in the American Economy. The more important reasons for this trend include the growth in the real wages of women, the development of labor-saving innovations in the home, shifts in the occupational and industrial composition of employ- ment, the shorter workweek, the falling birthrate (since 1960), the earlier school enrollment of childrin, and the rising educational attainment of women. 0 Oppenheimer believes that particular kinds of demands in the job market (in the clerical and service sectors, for example) called for female labor in particular. "Although men and women are used interchangably in some jobs, most demand for labor has usually been sex specific.11 Oppen- heimer also states that, "the poor pay and poor advancement opportunities for most female occupations made them unat- tractive to men."12 These comments are somewhat puzzling. Particular kinds of work and a particular kind of pay (low) were reserved for women. Why? The next section will explore this question. WOMEN ARE SEGREGATED INTO THE LOWER- PAYING, LOWER-STATUS OCCUPATIONS What has changed since World War II is that more and more women are in the workforce, especially wives and mothers. (A very recent estimate of wives' contributions loT. Aldrich Finegan, "Participation of Married Women in the Labor Force,” in Sex, Discrimination, and the Division of Labor ed. by Cynthia B. Lloyd (Nengofk: Columbia Univer- sity Press, 1975), p. 52. 11Oppenheimer, p. 187. 12Oppenheimer, p. 195. 28 to the family income is that they contribute one-third.) What has not changed is that women continue to work in particular jobs where they are over—represented, sometimes referred to as "the female job ghetto." What has been in the process of change over the last decade is attitudes about these dual realities. Our society has now begun to expect that women will be able to command the same incomes that men do. Partly the change in attitudes springs from the recognition of women's ever- increasing role in the labor force; partly new attitudes spring from the activities of the Women's Liberation Move- ment (although many social commentators see the Women's Liberation Movement as more a response to the changing situation of women than a cause of it); partly changes in attitudes spring from the recognition that women have, increasingly, the same responsibilities as breadwinners that men have. Marth Griffiths summarizes this point by saying: Thus, while men have been given jobs, high pay, and preferential promotion on the supposition that they are supporting wives and children, the facts show that this supposition is not true in a large number of cases. ...if the breadwinner argument is applied in fact rather than in theory, women can no longer be denied the right to the education, the jobs, the pay and the promotions which have tradi- tionally gone to men. If women are in reality the providers, they should have the benefit of the law on their side. Nevertheless, despite recent gains, the facts are that women are still confined to low- paying jobs by virtue of their educational level, the type of career counseling they receive, and soci- ety's unwillingness to accept the real reasons why women work. Women work because of economic need, just as men do. Two-thirds of all women workers are either 29 single, divorced, widowed, or separated or have husbands who earn less than $7,000 a year. Work- ing wives employed full-time contribute almost two- fifths of their families income, and in many cases make the difference getween a middle and low—income standard of living.1 Government charts included here reinforce Griffiths' point. They show that most women work from economic necessity and that they earn considerably less than men do. Other government data show that the wage gap between men and women is widening. What does the working woman do? According to Econo- mist Juanita Kreps, "the working woman is a typist, teacher, nurse, cashier or saleswoman.‘ She goes on to elaborate her statement in this way: Few women participate in craft or kindred occupa- tions; few find employment as professionals in engineering, law, or medicine. Within the indus- tries where women do find employment, they are on the lower rungs of the occupations ladder. Despite their education, women have failed to make signifi- cant ippoads into the most valuable market occupa- tions. Kreps emphasizes that it is not necessarily the amount of education that women receive that holds them back, it is the kind of education they receive that limits their occupa- tional possibilities. 13Martha W. Griffiths, "Can We Still Afford Occupa- tional Segregation?" Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, Volume 1, Number 3, Part 2 (Spring, 1976), p. 8 and 14Juanita Kreps, "Home Work, Market World and the Allocation of Time,” Women and the American Economy: A Look to the 19803 (Englewood CIiffs, New Jersey: Prentice- Hall, 1976), p. 70. 30 .0234 .o EoETQQoO m D CLmLBm 5sz Lo 2.5.3m or: >0 Cucm._32_ 3...: E0; .c3._o;m.c_EU< wbétcgm .CmE>O_QEw 5.3.15 a £060; 05 >3 0058K. outaom oEooE 9030:0831 \Illlll Ill) cm>o .95 000.0m 000.8 OOOfiw 000.05 ..OOO.B 1000.3 59.0 #9 «K 88 (I II||\ 9:39; ocoowaxv ooEoS. 099003 to 995 009020 .U®>>00_>> A39 665. .865 .252 5 .85”. .83 9: c_ 560% oooz 055.38 .o @3008 x33 coEoguos. 31 .outoEEoU .o “coEtmamO .w.3 £350 05 .0 323m 05 >0 “353.53.". 33 Ea: .593 .o EoEtmooo .m.D .co..m:m.c.Eo< «p.355 .coESEEw 53:5 «.5502, 05 >0 actuate ”083m .222. :3: .050 «38 ..a 83.8.. E202, «SP >.:~_OZ=>_ 3032.352 .0 0:55.053 .0 cos. oo>o_aEm 2.3“. :05 80.. 53 oh 0:52.00 c0803 oo>o_oEm 2.3“. 32 ”We try harder and get paid less,' is the slogan on a button sold at Women's Studies Conferences. A more objective way of expressing this idea would be to say that it is (at first) quite puzzling to note that women are working more than ever before, making a substantial contribution to their families' incomes and to the economic growth of the nation; yet women are at the same time earning relatively less than ever before. This phonomenon is explained in different ways by different economists. The work that women do - in almost all ny. ing the She the instances some kind of "service” work - deserves scruti- Economist Janet L. Norwood, after stressing the increas— percentage of women in the labor market, also emphasizes decreasing monetary rewards that women have found there. connects women's limited financial gains directly with kinds of work that they do. ...Women still account for more than one-half of all workers in the service industries, especially in education, health, hotels, restaurants, and private households. In other industrial categories, women are still concentrated in large numbers in such sub- groups as clothing manufacture and general merchan- dise. The BLS data show that in 1974 close to 70 percent of all sales workers and almost 78 percent of all clerical staff were women. Women represented 81 percent of all librarians; 93 percent of all nurses, diaticians, and therapists; 60 percent of all social workers, 70 percent of all elementary and secondary school teachers ..Unfortunately, the female-intensive occupations and industries 311 tend to fall at the low end of the wage scale.1 And if women are over represented in some occupations (the lower-paying ones), they are under-represented in those occupations that pay relatively well, as the following chart 15Janet L. Norwood, "Presentation V,” Signs, Volume 1, Number 3, Part 2 (Spring, 1976), p. 278. 33 entitled, "WOmen Are Underrepresented as Managers and Skilled Craft Workers" illustrates. Carolyn Shaw Bell succinctly summarizes the situation that has held women's wages down, even though their parti- cipation in the work force continues to increase. She and other economists describe a situation in which there have been (and continue to be) essentially two separate and unequal labor markets — one for men and one for women. Women, then, have over-competed for the jobs available to them. They have crowded into particular occupations (such as clerical or service work) where they are over-represented. Wages in these occupations have been kept low by the fact that the supply of labor far exceeds the demand.16 To what degree women have done this by "choice,” that is, because they were socialized to want to do particular kinds of work, and to what degree they have ended up in certain occupations because they were unable to enter others, is an area of some disagreement among economists and other social scientists. Bell write that: The primary cause of the worsening position of women workers in terms of earned income has been the influx of women into the labor force coupled with stringent occupational barriers. While wages have generally risen, the increase over the past decade for those types of employment known as "women's jobs" has fallen short of the average, simply because, with more women available, competi- tion served to dampen the increases. Exactly the reverse took place in the occupations restricted to men, where wages rose much higher; the overall result was a widening of the earnings gap... The economist recognizes the persistent and worsening differential between earnings by sex as 16Bell, p. 82-83. 34 con-1. .0 Elston—on .m.3 £5255 .003 .0 235m oz. 3 02.2.92. 23 80826 .353 29 E0; .co:!§EEu< «pine-5 EuE>oiEw 585m 3552: o... B 02-00.... 3958 29:02, 89:03 200:0; 92030: 39:02 ”90m 29:02, 201.0; 3.0m 200:0; 80.59600 0625 60:05 __0_0~_ 092$ 6:93905 820000 200802 __0L0_coz :90 __< . . . x. . . . . . o O . ON . Ow . 00 . Om OO— eoi0>> .28 Lo Eoootoa 29:03 =20 32:05 0:0 £009.22 no 0020352005.. 02 c0E03 35 an indicator of separate markets, in which different prices can be maintained because there is little or no mobility between the two. In our everyday lives a pattern of occupational segregation is so familiar to most of us that we take for granted the realities we experience without, perhaps, con- structing in our minds the pattern they fall into and its significance. We assume, for example, a world where doctors are men and nurses are women, where dentists are men and dental hygenists are women, where lawyers are men and legal secretaries are women, where pilots are men and stewardesses are women, and where administrators are men and teachers are women. The significance of the jobs being filled in this way is that, essentially, the top half of all occupations, in terms of money and status, is the world of male employ- ment; the bottom half is the world of working women. A government chart makes evident the differences in the kinds of work that men and women do in our society. nu... Clerica‘ Nonlarm Workefi Service Laborers Other 7% 332:: the Home 8% Clerical Work er: 34% Prolcssionat and Technica| Workers 14% Crah Workers 21% Operatives 14% Operatich Manage“ and Professional and Servic e Workers Tozhnical Workers Outside the Home Administrators 19% 15% 17% “”8 Sales Workers 6% ~--.....~-.n.u my _ Women Men 36 "Women Workers Today,” the same source from which the previous chart was taken, summarizes the situation of women's earnings in this way: Earnings. Among workers fully employed the year round, women's median earnings were less than three- fifths of those of men - $6,335 and $11,186, respective— ly, in 1973. These substantial differences may be due in part to the concentration of women in certain occupations, which could involve elements of discrim- ination. Earnings differentials may also reflect differences in the amount and type of training or education a worker has received, the skill level and demand for the particular occupation, the number of hours warked per week, and the lifetime work expe- erience of the employee. The Council of Economic Advisors to the President estimated in 1973 that "a differential, perhaps on the order of 20 percent, between the earnings of men and women remains after adjusting for factors such as education, work expe- rience during the year, and even lifelong work expe- rience.”17 These two sections on the woman as paid worker have established that women play as increasingly active part in the wotkiof paid employment and that their concentration in particular occupations is a cause of the relatively low pay that they receive. The next section will establish a connection between women's family roles and their secondary position in the working world. WOMEN'S SOCIALIZATION FOR FAMILY ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES HAS BEEN TIED TO THEIR LOWER ASPIRATIONS FOR EMPLOYMENT The socialization of women is inextricably tied to their aspirations in the world of paid employment. Women have been socialized to expect to put their family roles 17U.S. Department of Labor, Employment Standards Administration, Women's Bureau, "Women Workers Today,” 1974 (revised). 37 first, to put a first priority on finding a good husband, and to expect that their deepest satisfactions will be found in their roles as wives and mothers. Women have been explicitly and implicitly taught to limit their aspirations toward achievement, lest such aspirations interfere with their realization of their affiliative goals and their per- formances in the domestic sphere, particularly as parents. Women have traditionally put the concerns of others before their own. "Traditionally" is perhaps a key word here. The life- style for which women have been socialized — for which many girls continue to be socialized - is one that economists tell us is a vanishing one. The mother of a small, modern family needs to devote all of her energies to parenting for only a small percentage of her lifetime. Additional community responsibility for the rearing of children - the widespread availability of first—rate daycare, for example - could make total responsibility for childcare even in the early years an anachronism. Middle-aged women in our culture find them- selves "out of a job” and many of them do not have the skills that would enable them to readily seek a new one. The reason that this is so is because they have focused their attentions on their work as housewife-mothers; they have not carefully examined the demands that the labor market might make of them, as men do in the formative years. In the past, expectations connected with rigid sex-role stereotypes have influenced women to choose careers that 38 seemed compatible with family responsibilities, or not to seriously plan their careers at all in the belief that their ”real" work would be that of wives and mothers. But many social scientists writing today predict that the dual-career family will increasingly be the model of the future. If this is the case, then socialization that rewards achievement in girls as well as boys (and correspondingly, socialization that rewards nurturance in boys as well as girls) would be a more utilitarian model than our present system - which encourages girls to concentrate on service and self-sacrifice, while boys concentrate on success in the world of money and power.18 There appears to be evidence that women have, in the recent past, experienced considerable conflict concerning the dual demands of mastering those attributes which are necessary in our culture for occupational success, and at the same time those which our culture has labeled as "feminine.” The research of Broverman and others indicates that counselors share the general prejudices of our culture about appropriate 18Substantial work has been done in the area of child- ren's books (especially readers) and their effect of rein— forcing stereotyped sex roles. See, for example, Lenore J. Weitzman et al., ”Sex Role Socialization in Picture Books for Preschoool Children," (paper delivered at the American Sociological Association meeting, Denver, Col., September 2, 1971) or Women on Words and Images, Dick and Jane as Victims: Sex Sterotyping in Children's Readers (Princeton, N.J.: National Association of Women Central New Jersey Chapter, 1972). 39 sex-typed behavior. These psychologists found in their study that there was high agreement among clinicians as to the attributes characterizing healthy adult men, healthy adult women, and healthy adults, sex unspecified, and that the attributes that the clinicians described as healthy for adult men were the same as those that they described as healthy for adults, sex unspecified, but different from those that they described as healthy for adult females. Logically, this would leave women with the choice of behaving as healthy, unfeminine adults or unhealthy but feminine women. Brover- man expressed the dilemma for women in this way: ...Acceptance of an adjustment notion of health, then, places women in the conflictual position of having to decide whether to exhibit those positive characteristics considered desirable for men and adults, and thus have their ”femininity" question- ed, that is, to be deviant in terms of being a woman; or to behave in the prescribed feminine manner, accept second-class status, and possibly live a lie to boot .. Thus, while American society continually emphasizes equality of opportunity and freedom of choice, social pressures toward conformity to the sex—role stereotypes tend to restrict the actual career choicig open to women, and, to a lesser extent, men. Women, then, have not only set lesser career goals because they assumed they would not be the primary bread- winners and their time would be occupied primarily with domestic responsibilities. They also have set lesser career goals because they were socialized into thinking 19Inge K. Broverman, Donald M. Broverman, Frank E. Clarkson, Paul S. Rosenkrantz, and Susan R. Vogal, "Sex-Role Stereotypes and Clinical Judgement of Mental Health," Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 34:1, 1970, pp. 1-7. 40 that the independent, assertive behavior which some occupa- tions demand is "unfeminine."20 While today there is a new effort to train women for the professions, this has been the case for only a very few years. A study done by Alice Rossi in the early 19603 showed that the fear of career interference with family responsibi- lities stopped many women from pursuing careers in medicine and science, while a concern about femininity stopped women from pursuing careers in engineering. Parents' influences were shown to be an important factor in the career goals of their children. The ”obstacles” women perceive concerning a choice of engineering as a career goal are thus factors oper- ating much earlier in life than those concerning a choice of medicine or science. Parents discourage in their daughters while they encourage in their sons the interests and hobbies that precede, by many years, a choice of engineering as a career goal. A long childhood of learning "appropriate" sex role behavior militates against American girls' acquiring the in- terests and skills that might start them on a path leading to careers in engineering. In contrast, the barriers to a choice of medicine and science operate at a somewhat later point in the life span. These are careers they belisye would conflict with feminine skills and interests. 20The term "lesser" as used here demands some clari- fication. It is used to indicate that women have tradition- ally chosen jobs that are less rewarding in terms of money and status than those chosen by men. It can certainly be argued that many of the occupations that women have chosen are of great value to society (teaching, for example) and that their rewards should be comensurate with their worth. 1Rossi, Alice, "Barriers to Career Choice," in Readings on the ngchology of Women (New York: Harper and Row, 1972) p. 77. 41 Philip Slater comments articulately on the kinds of limits that rigid sex-role stereotypes have set on female achievement, echoing the central point of Broverman's study; society has been structured in such a way that women have been forced to make career choices that defined them as achieving and masculine or feminine and unambitious. It should be emphasized, then that when we talk of ”masculine" and "feminine” we are referring only to the ways in which these are customarily defined in our culture, and since sex role definitions change from time to time there is ample room for confusion. If women behave in ways that seem imitative of men, we call this masculine, but if customs change....One suddenly realizes that we have stumbled on a popgr- fule weapon for ”keeping women in their place.” Psychologist Judith Bardwick writes about how women have often coped with a kind of double bind message from society. Women, encouraged toward nurturing and affiliative behavior while at the same time aware of the rewards that society offers for ”masculine" achievement, have often chosen to achieve through the traditional feminine role. Such women have sought a special kind of feminine "success" - success in their performance of their domestic, nurturing or affiliative roles. Such success becomes harder and harder to "earn" at a time when the housewife-mother role is steadily shrinking. Nineteenth—century literature - reflecting a culture that idealized women and created separate spheres for the two sexes - is fraught with heroines who maginificantly 22Philip Slater, The Pursuit of Loneliness: American Culture at the Breaking Point (Boston: Beacon Press, 1970) p. 71. 42 performed (or sometimes over-performed) their feminine role. Self-sacrifice, for example, is a theme that runs through both George Eliot's life and her works. One wonders if the deaths or suicides which figure so prominently in litera- ture by and about women is not the ultimate manifestation of triumphant selflessness. Nora, in Ibsen's The Doll's House, for example, considers suicide in order to save her husband Torvald, and is shocked to learn that his primary interest is in his career and that he has relatively little interest in saving her. Bardwick describes a central conflict of women - and their adaptation to it - in this way: Conflict is the simultaneous desire to achieve a stable heterosexual relationship (and the rest of the female's traditional responsibilities and sat- isfactions) and to participate fully in competitive achievement and succeed. Conflict in this sense, is understandable as a vying between traditional and nontraditional roles, between affiliative and achieve- ment motives. (Most women resolve this potential dif- ficulty by defining affiliation as achievement.) To "define affiliation as achievement" is to invest heavily in the wife-mother role, while at the same time relinquishing claims to success in the world of paid employ— ment. If the authors of the children's books included in this study believe this to be a useful strategy, then they will show full-time homemakers enjoying the intimacy and approval of the families for whom they have foresaken the Judith M. Bardwick and Elizabeth Douvan, "Ambivalence: the Socialization of Women" Readings on the Psychology of Women (New York: Harper and Row, 1972). 43 world of paid employment; if they do not believe this to be a sound course to follow, they are more likely to show employed women functioning as happy wives and mothers than unemployed ones do. The children's books should indicate what some women writing today (and presumably influencing their young readers to some degree) consider to be the most likely aveneus for women's success. It should be noted here that not only contemporary psychologists and sociologists believe that the way we have socialized women is counter-productive to their achievement, economists express this perspective as well. Elizabeth Sawhill, for example, points out that socializing women in such a way that they do not have saleable skills makes them incompetent to perform one of the jobs that society expects of a good parent - the financial support of children. Saw- hill remarks that: Women at all economic levels continue to marry and have children on the assumption that someone else will provide for the children. About one-third of these women are going to face the prospect of divorce at some point in their lives, and an even greater propor- tion wlll be divorced among those who are least pre- pared torxme in terms of education and financial re- sources. If more young women were made aware of this risk, they might make a different set of decisions about their own education, work experience, and child- bearing. They might become more aggressive about insisting on their fair share of the better-paid jobs which they have been led to believe they app not qualified for or are not welcome to enter. 24Isabel Sawhill, ”Discrimination and Poverty Among Women Who Head Families," Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, Volume 1, Number 3, Part 2 (Spring, 1976), p. 211. 44 Women's aspirations for careers and paid employment are changing; as more women enter the labor force and stay for longer periods of time, they begin to view the role of paid worker as a primary, rather than a secondary one. In the past, and indeed in the present, the fact that women defined themselves primarily as wives and mothers meant that they could be persuaded into the job market when they were needed, to function as ”secondary workers," who would take less desirable jobs for less pay, and then return home to their "real job" when they were no longer needed. Political scientist Kristen Amundsen summarizes the way that women functioned as a ”reserve labor force" in our society. It must be understood that the role of house- wife is inextricably tied to the role of female employee. The sexual dualism on the labor market is in no small measure due to the acceptance by women of the former role as an - or the essential one. The differently structured set of opportuni- ties offered women are defended on the basis of this ideology, at the same time that the supply of women to the job market can be more easily ex- panded and constricted because, presumably, women can always return to "home base.” New job oppor— tunities for women come only during periods of a tight labor market, when the pool of male labor is drying up. Women then constitute a reserve labor force, to be used if and when male employers, and not the workers themselves, find it opportune.25 While there appears to be ample evidence that women have, in the past, functioned as a kind of reserve labor force, to be lured to the marketplace with offers of "good” 25Kisten Amundsen, The Silenced Majority (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice—Hall, 1971), p. 53. 45 pay, good working conditions, or appeals to patriotic duty, there begins to be a growing body of evidence that suggests that women are increasingly identifying themselves as workers as well as wives and mothers. Demographer Valerie Oppenheimer emphasized this point at a conference for businessmen and social scientists at Columbia University. ...if women at all stages of the family life cycle are working in every greater numbers, it is inevita- ble that many are going to stop viewing work as a brief interlude in a long life devoted to their families. Instead, they will start to look upon work as a possible lifetime activity, interrupted at times, perhaps, but nevertheless one of their major adult roles. Thus, it is unlikely that women will continue to be satisfied with the kinds of jobs that used to be good enough for an interim period. As long as work was of secondary importance, women's work goals remained limited and the characteristics of women's jobs that make them most unattractive to men - poor pay and poor advancement opportunities - did not cause a great deal of dissatisfaction. However, as work becomes more important to women, and to their families as well, the more irritating will become the poor pay an? the lack of opportunities so typical of female jobs. 6 Without doubt, today's high unemployment rate is part- ly explained by the increasing movement of women into the labor market. They do not withdraw from the labor pool any longer; they persist in their search for paid employment. Women can be expected to be more assertive about employment opportunities in the decades to come, since they become increasingly aware that, married or not, they might still reasonably assume that they will have a life- 26Valerie K. Oppenheimer, "A Sociologist's Skepticism," in Corporate Lib: Women's Challenge to Management ed. by Eli Ginzberg andgAlice M. Yohalem (Baltimore: John Hopkins Press, 1973). p. 35. 46 time of labor force attachment. The reality remains, how- ever, that women still do have primary responsibility for housework, whether they are working for pay or not. Juanita Kreps remarks that: Throughout three quarters of a century of women's rapid movement into market activities, their respon- sibility for home work has changed very little. Improvements in technology and reduced family size have lowered the time necessary to manage a household, tho the amount of time necessary for such duties is by no means trivial. The social convention that it is woman's responsibility - many would say her primary responsibility - to manage and maintain the household continues to exercise a severe constraint on her choice of market activity. For many women, particularly those unable to afford the gadgetry required to increase the efficiency of household production or to reduce the costs of child care, or those who are unable to locate market work with the earnings or hours necessary to cover such costs, nonmarket obligations preclude any sort of market activity. For the woman who is able to take on market work, the paid job is an additional occupa- tion which, when combined with hpme work, means that she is pursuing a "dual” career. 7 "Dual career" takes on a new meaning here. Instead of referring to two people within one family working at paid employment, it refers to one person within the family (the woman) who holds two (or perhaps one and a half) jobs - un- paid housework and paid employment outside the home. Inevi- tably, some adaptions have to be made by those women who have opted to fill these two roles simultaneously. The reality of women's increasingly active participation in the labor force has out-stripped both ideology and legis— lation in most industrialized nations. Even in Sweden, which 27Juanita Kreps, "Home Work, Market Work & The Allocat- ion of Time," in Women and the American Economy, ed by Kreps (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1976), p. 68. 47 has shown its commitment to women's employment through such legislation as paid maternity (or paternity) leave, pay for the mother (or father) who does parentwork in the home, special programs to help women improve their job skills, and taxation of a man and a woman, married or unmarried, at the same rate (so that a working wife's income is not eaten up by being taxed at the rate of her husband's income) - even in Sweden, where there is both an ideological and legislative commitment to equality for the sexes, the evidence indicates that women still do the major share of the housework. Nancy Smith Barrett comments upon this: Most studies show that, even in those countries with the most advanced ideologies, working women do most of the housework. Thus, labor force parti- cipation produces a double burden. (One) study of household activity of women shows that the average woman working full-time outside the home devotes approximately 30 hours per week to housework. If one takes into account the time spent going to and from work as well as time spent on the job, this suggests that the average working woman has practi- cally no leisure. Not only is she overworked, but the unequal distribution of household responsibil- ities between the spouses is likely to produce resent- ment and marital tension that ultimately generate unfavorable attitudes toward the wife's career within the family as a whole. In none of the countries of Western Europe, the United States, or Canada has there been a radical shift in the assignment of household responsibilities by sex, even though it has been widely recognized (although officially stated only in the more progres- sive societies) that this must precede any serious change in the labor force status of women. This has meant that women are more often forced to interrupt their labor force activity during the peak years of child-care, take parE-time work, or search for work with flexible hours. 8 28Nancy Smith Barrett "Women in Industrial Society,” in Economic Independence for Women. 48 If women must operate on the contingency basis that Barrett suggests, if they must look for part-time work, or drop out of the labor force during the years when their children are very young, or adopt flexible work hours, they are clearly at a disadvantage competing in a labor market which is structured around the assumption that ”real," that is full-time, well—paid, upwardly mobile workers, will be men, who do not often deal with the same contingencies. Presently women are limited in the job market and in the labor force in a way that men are not. Not only the realities of the additional domestic responsibilities that marriage and maternity bring to women, but even the possibility of their marriage and/or maternity, have caused employers to view them as less potentially productive workers. One would expect to find women dealing with the implications of this situation in the children's books included in this study, for the mothers in these books have children (the protagonists) who are adolescent or pre- adolescent. Except for those who also have younger children, this means that the mothers in these children's books have, in a sense, "completed" one job - they have raised their children to a point where the children can be relatively self-sufficient. Their problem, then, might be whether they themselves can be self-sufficient. Do they have the resources to seek other employment if they wish to do so — and d9 they wish to do 30? Or are they already gainfully employed? Because our culture has encouraged women to invest highly 49 in motherhood, and because that is not a job that occupies a full lifetime, one can expect that many mothers in the situation of those in the children's books included in this study will be dealing with a crisis in their own identities, as they strive to shift from defining themselves primarily in their affiliative and nurturing roles to defining them- selves as paid workers. The fact that ever-increasing numbers of women seek employment in the paid labor force undoubtedly puts new pressures on women who choose to remain at home. One might expect to find evidence of these pressures on the protagonists' mothers in the books included in this study. Summary This chapter has focused on four different realities about women as paid workers. Women are working in ever- increasing numbers. Most women are segregated into lower- paying, lower-status occupations. The socialization of women for family roles and responsibilities has limited their aspirations for careers and paid employment. Women's aspirations for careers and paid employment are changing; in the last decade there has been increasing cultural permission (indeed, to some extent, cultural pressure) for women to achieve in the world of paid employment. The mothers of the protagonists in the books included in this study would have been enculturated at a time when the role of homemaker was encouraged by our society. But they reach middle age at a time when many forces combine to 50 make paid employment more and more desirable for women. One might reasonably expect that their attitudes toward their roles as workers, as full-time housewives or as dual career housewife-workers, would be affected by the changing realities and attitudes of our culture. How ”realistic" is this contemporary realistic fiction for children? Does it reflect the conflict and confusion about the roles of women that women in our culture are experiencing? The second half of this study will focus on such questions. The next chapter is a discussion of the role of woman as mother. CHAPTER III THE WOMAN AS MOTHER Just as there has been considerable change in the roles of the woman as housewife and as paid worker, with the actual productive work of the home considerably reduced by modern technology and with women entering the labor market in ever-increasing numbers, there begins to be change in our cultural realities and attitudes in regard to the role of woman as mother. This particular role is so heavily invested with emotion, however, that it is more difficult to discuss with objectivity than are the roles of housewife or paid worker. The mother role has been romanticized for centuries, and romaticized in a particular kind of way since the Victorian era, when technology took much of woman's pro- ductive work out of the home and a stronger emphasis on the mother role was used as an explanation of woman's special status. The role has been debunked, in both non— fiction and fiction, Philip Wylie's GENERATION OF VIPERS and Philip Roth's PORTNOY'S COMPLAINT being two of the more notable examples. Most recently the mother role has been questioned by women themselves, many of whom believe that the price they pay for a kind of reverence and awe, on the 51 52 one hand, is to be labeled as "special" or ”different” (or even less dependable) workers on the other, and therefore excluded from the avenues to power and occupational success that are open to men. In the very widely read earlier editions of Dr. Spock's CHILDCARE, for example, mothers were strongly discouraged from working while their children were young. Many women today insist that mothers should have the same opportunities to work that fathers do; they believe that motherhood has been used as a way to harness women to the home and keep them out of the job market. Daycare and abortion are both highly controversial issues in contemporary society. This is surely because as a culture, we have not yet clarified what motherhood ig and what is is ppp in our collective value system. Ambiguities and contradictions are everywhere. Motherhood is still acclaimed as perhaps the most important work there is, while at the same time there is considerable pressure on women to have smaller families because of p0pu1ation considerations. Women grow up with the idea that being good mothers will be the central focus of their lives; yet motherhood as a ”job" can be expected to take up only a decade (or at most two) of a lifespan that now stretches into the seventies. The care of the nation's children is declared to be a high national priority; yet "welfare mothers" live and raise their children on a budget that is minimal. The conditions for raising children have changed considerably over the last few decades, as an increasingly mobile population makes the 53 proximity of an extended family to aid in the task more and more unlikely, yet we have not redefined our goals and our methods for achieving them in terms of the new realities that the nation's children are born into. There seems little question that today's women receive a number of mixed messages about their roles. They must raise their children for independence and then let them go; yet they themselves are unlikely to be independent in their middle and latter years if they have invested all of their resources in motherhood. They must insure that their child- ren are adequately supported; yet the increasing instability of the nuclear family means that an exclusive reliance on a male breadwinner is dysfunctional. The prevailing cultural attitude still seems to be that a "good mother" does not leave her children when they are young, but that a "good mother" will leave them alone when they are older. If women are to meet both of these definitions of good mothering, they must be able to make a rapid transition in the middle years from a primarily nurturing role to a primarily independent one. Yet options are limited by the middle of a lifetime; most careers demand an investment of time and energies well before that. Central to all the contradictions and ambiguities that I have so far discussed is the question of maternal employ- ment. There is evidence that our cultural attitudes are undergoing change in that area. We seem to be moving from a culture in which employed mothers were on the defensive 54 to one in which non-employed mothers are. This is one of the many interesting points that Hoffman and Nye make in their new edition of their book WORKING MOTHERS. Hoffman and Nye also stress the need for new research that will answer some of the questions whose answers we have taken for granted in the past. They write that, "The questions still unanswered and the new ones that are arising seem to indicate that behavioral scientists should be readying their theoretical and conceptual tools for the challenges presented.”1 In order to better understand changing realities and changing attitudes in regard to the role of mother, it seems useful to briefly examine the attitudes toward that role that existed in our culture in previous decades. In the post World War II era, when modern technology made possible a reduction of the workload for housewives, one response that these women made, as was mentioned earlier, was to have more children. A family of four became a kind of national ideal. (Paid employment and volunteer work were other alternatives that women pursued.) "Femininity” at that time, was defined by many psychologists as identical with maternity. The "real woman" wanted children (as well as a dependent status) according to many social scientists writing during that era. Only ”masculine" women wanted achievement. In a book that was widely read at that time, MODERN WOMAN, THE LOST SEX, the authors, Ferinand Lundberg and Marynia F. Farnam, M.D., described the "feminine mother" 1Lois Wladis Hoffman and F. Ivan Nye, Working Mothers (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1974), p. 232. 55 in this way: ...Having children is to her the most natural thing possible, and it would never occur to her to have any doubts about it. When she hears someone ques- tion the advisability of having children she is be- wildered unless she is told of some trenchant medi- cal reason. Then she does feel sorry for the woman deprived. If a woman does not have children, she asks ingenuously, what is everything all about for her? Women with one or no children, excluding from consideration those with adverse organic conditions (present in few instances), are, with occasional exceptions, emotionally disoriented. That is to say, they are unhappy women, whateveg may be their conscious testimony to the contrary. It almost goes without saying that many contemporary social scientists, as well as many modern women, would question the assumptions that underlie what was once written by Lundberg and Farnham, although their basic tenets were questioned very little at the time that their book was first published. Another book written during the same era, THE PSYCHOLOGY OF WOMEN by Helene Deutsch, is now available in paperback in two volumes. It too reflects a perspective that was not unusual during the post World War II era, one that is being challenged on many fronts in our contemporary society. Writing in 1945, Deutsch contrasted "good" and "bad" mothers in this way: Even psychically healthy women do not all ex- perience motherliness in the same manner. But in the innumerable individual variations two types can be discerned: one type is the woman who awakens to a new life through her child without having the feeling of a 1033. Such a woman develops her charm and beauty only after her first child is born. The 2Ferdinand Lundberg and Marynia F. Farnam, Modern Woman, the Last Sex (New York: Universal Library, 1947), p. 319. 56 other type is the woman who from the first feels a kind of depersonalization in her relation to her child. Usually such a woman has spent her affecti- vity on other values (eroticism, art, or masculine aspirations) or this affectivity was too poor or ambivalent originally and cannot stand a new emotional burden. The first type expands her ego through her Ogild, the second feels restricted and impoverished. It would be unlikely that anyone writing today, of course, would question that women should invest their energies in "art or masculine aspirations" or suggest that women who choose to do so would make bad mothers. (Even more unlikely, in our post Kinsey and Masters and Johnson era, would be any suggestion that a woman should not invest her energies in the erotic. Even THE TOTAL WOMAN, a book which surely supports a kind of status quo in terms of sex roles, puts considerable emphasis on sex; it has been ridiculed by critics for the manner in which it does exactly that.) One must look to the writing about motherhood of the early post World War II era not only for contrast with the writing of today; one must also look to the romanticized tone of the earlier writing for the reason that the writing that has followed has sounded so outspoken and strident. The myth of mother as a kind of modern day martyr has elicited some strong debunking responses. In the following autobiographical account, included in Judith Bardwick's READINGS ON THE PSYCHOLOGY OF WOMEN, a young mother who is struggling to take care of two pre-school 3Helene Deutsch, The Psychology of Women (New York: Bantam, 1973), p. 58. 57 children in New York City clearly shows her resentment, not only of her predicament - she has a job to do without the resources that would enable her success — but also of the way that the economic realities of her predicament are buried in sanctimonious attitudes and rhetoric. "...I can't take care of two children on fifteen dollars a week. Let him do it. He can have them right now." ..."You can't desert your children. That's against the law." "How can I be deserting them" I'm giving them to their father." "But you can't do that! You're their mother." People, especially those without children, have a way of saying "mother" that I find incredib e. They manage to pronounce a halo around it..." The tone is also notable in John Holt's book ESCAPE FROM CHILDHOOD, although his emphasis, throughout his book, is more on the fact that an overemphasis on motherhood is dsyfunctional for the phild than it is on the liabilities for the parent. Like many other contemporary commentators on the social scene who question the healthiness of making children the raison d'etre of one's existence, Holt seems to feel that fairly strong language is needed in order to cut through the sentimentality of previous rhetoric.5 Modern childhood is an extraordinary emotional and financial burden. And as this burden has become heavier beyond anyone's wildest imaginings, parents have been told more insistently that they have a dut to love their children, and the child- ren that t ey have a duty to love their parents. 4Joanna Clark, "Motherhood," in Readings on the Psychology of Women ed. by Judith M. Barwick (New York: Harper and Row, 1972), p. 130. 5When Holt spoke to a seminar at Michigan State Univer- sity which I attended, he expressed the belief that children need adults' respect even more than they need their love. 58 We lock the young and old into this extraordinarily tense and troublesome relationship, and then tell them that they have to like it, even love it, and that if they don't they are bad or wrong or sick. There is no legitimate way for parents, staggering under this burden, to admit without shame or guilt that they don't much like these young people who live in their house, worry them half to death, and soak up most of their money, or that they wish they had never had them in the first place, or that they could have had something different. The children on their part are expected to be grateful for what they did not ask for and often do not want. Even in THE FUTURE OF MOTHERHOOD, an extensively documented, scholarly book by sociologist Jessie Bernard, the tone is an outspoken one. Bernard challenges the way that motherhood has been romaticized in the past at the same time that she points out the difficulties of doing the job well for the mother of the present. But never until this very historical moment have women rebelled as many are now doing against the very way we institutionalize motherhood. They are daring to say that although they love children, they hate motherhood. That they object to having child care conceived as their only major activity. That they object to the isolation in which they must perform the role of mother, cut off from help, from one another, from the outside world. For the first time they are protesting the false aura of romanticism with which motherhood is endowed, keeping from young women its terrible "hidden under- side" which is hardly talked about. Throughout her book, Bernard questions the "mother- hood mystique" that she believes has pervaded our culture, distorting the role into a burlesque of self-sacrifice. Many of today's social scientists agree with her, and she cites a considerable amount of evidence to back up her points. 6John Holt, Escape from Childhood (New York: Dutton, 1974). P. 70. 7Jessie Bernard, The Future of Motherhood (New York: Dial Press, 1974), p. 14. 59 Criticisms of unquestioned assumptions about mother- hood and the ways that we are raising children can be found in many diverse sources. There is Ellen Peck's book, PRONTALISM: THE MYTH OF MOM AND APPLE PIE,8 for example. There is an incisive satire, SHOULD CHILDREN STAY HOME WITH THEIR MOTHERS? by Hadley V. Baxendale.9 There is a thought- ful article by Urie Bronfenbrenner ("The Origins of Alienation”)10 in SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, in which he connects the increasing difficulties of our nation's children with the increasingly precarious position of women in our society. And there is the perspective of Shulamuth Firestone in THE DIALECTIC OF SEX,11 who goes so far as to recommend extra- uterine conception in order to free women from a role that she believes has been used against them. Everything that is being written about woman's role as mother, I believe, can best be understood in two contexts. The sentimentalized perspective of the past is likely to elicit a debunking tone from those writing in the present, and the realities of motherhood today, which takes place in a context in which many previous social. financial, and psychological supports have vanished, is likely to elicit a tone of either anger or concern (depending on the situation and perspective of 8El'lenPeck, Pronatalism: the Myth of Mom and Apple Pie (New York: Crowell, 1974) 9Hadley V. Baxendale, Are Children Neglecting Their Mothers? (Garden City, New York, 1974), p. 39. loUrie Bronfenbrenner, ”The Origins of Alienation," Scientific American 231:2 (1974), pp. 53-66. 11Shulamuth Firestone, The Dialectic of Sex (New York: Bantam, 1971) 60 the writer). It is against this background that one must examine what is being written about the paid employment of mothers, which, in contemporary society, is viewed in a much more positive light than it was immediately after World War II. At that time, since women's increased participation in the workforce and an increase in juvenile deliquency had coin- cided, it was hypothesized that the employment of mothers was a cause of juvenile deliquency. Subsequent research has proven this assumption to be false. Indeed, ppdpr certain conditions, which are discussed in detail in Hoffman and Nye's book WORKING MOTHERS, a mother's paid employment has been shown to have positive effects upon her children. In their Concluding Remarks, Hoffman and Nye enumerate some of these positive effects and suggest that we are moving toward a pattern in which it will be the pppworking mother who is an exception in our society. .. As the situation changes, however, and the social conditions leading to maternal employment become more compelling, the role of the nonemployed mother is likely to become subject to strain. Some of the data reported in this volume support the hypothesis that for families in certain situations - such as when the children are adolescent, or the mother is highly educated, or the mother is the sole support and economic resources are scarce - maternal employ- ment has a positive effect....For example, ...data indicate that adolescent daughters of working mothers showed higher achievement patterns than did those of nonworking mothers, and elementary school children of full-time working mothers in a lower- class black sample showed better social adjustment on psychological tests and school records than did children of nonworking mothers... and among highly 61 educa ed women, em loyment may increase martial satis action...emp oyed women seem to have better health, although the casual sequence is not clear.12 Much of the research that is reviewed in Hoffman and Nye is directly relevant to the children's books included in this study. They report that maternal employment can have a positive effect when the children are adolescents, for example, and this is the age group of the protagonists of the forty-five children's books. They also report that maternal employment can have a positive effect when the mother is the sole support of the family, as is the case in several of these children's books. And their point about maternal employment having an especially positive effect upon adolescent daughters is directly relevant because the majority of these children's books written by women have female protagonists. One might reasonably expect that maternal employment will be fairly positively presented in the children's books included in this study. Summary In the first three chapters of this study I have re- viewed the literature concerning the changing roles of women as housewives, paid workers, and mothers. My purpose in doing this was to establish what the "realities" of these roles are, as perceived by contemporary social scientists, so that the ”realities" perceived by the authors of forty five children's books - works of contemporary realistic fiction—can be discussed against this background. I began this work with 12Hoffman and Nye, p. 227. 62 the idea that contemporary realistic fiction often presents a negative image of the housewife and an impression that full—time housewives were Often portrayed as hostile mothers in the books. An examination of the writing of contemporary social scientists has led me to believe that the housewife role is under increasingly critical scrutiny in our society, that the role of paid worker for women, including mothers, is gaining increasing approbation in our society, and that there is considerable ambivalance and confusion about the role of mother in our society, confusion and ambiviliance which is directly connected with notions of what work roles mothers ought to perform. An investigation of how work roles connect with mothering in the children's books included in this study will indicate whether the authors' writing reflects the ideas about these roles that currently meet with some acceptance in our society. One might expect that the housewife role will be negatively presented in at least some of the books, that the role of paid worker might be positively presented (especially since the protagonists' are pre—adolescent or adolescent), and that there might be some ambiguity about the role of mother, reflecting the confusion of our society. CHAPTER IV EMPLOYED AND NON-EMPLOYED MOTHERS IN CONTEMPORARY REALISTIC FICTION FOR CHILDREN The previous three chapters have shown how contempor- ary social scientists View the roles of women as housewives, paid employees, and mothers. In this chapter the data in forty five books - contemporary realistic fiction for child- ren - is analyzed in order to determine how the mothers' work roles, as either paid employees or housewives, relates to their roles as mothers. How have these contemporary aut- hors treated connections between women's work roles and their roles as mothers? Books included here have been published in paperback by American publishers since 1964. (All but two were pub- lished in hardcover first; the two books by Norma Klein were first published in Mg. magazine.) All the books included are by women authors, and the books have protagonists aged eleven to sixteen who are still living at home. Only books in which the action takes place in the home, with both mother and child present, were included. The settings are in the "here and now." 63 64 EMPLOYED MOTHERS Three overall observations can be made about the books in which the mothers hold paid employment. The first observation is a very Obvious one. In the ”real world” today, more than half of the mothers of school-age children hold paid employment. The percentage has been over one half since 1969, and most of the books included in this study were published after that date. But only sixteen out of the forty five books (a little over one third) show the mothers holding paid employment. These books do not, therefore, reflect the full extent to which today's mothers are playing an active role in the labor force. A second observation that can be made is that the jobs at which the mothers in these books are working do not accurately reflect the kinds Of jobs at which most women today are working. (A socio-economic bias seems to operate here, since many of the families in the books are middle class or upper middle class.) While a little over a third of the women employed today work in clerical jobs, there is only ppg_mother in these books shown to be employed in this kind of work. While at least 17 percent of the women employ- ed today are working in service occupations, only £39 mothers are shown in the boOks in this kind of work. Thus only three of the books included in this study portray mothers doing the kind of work that over one—half of all women employed today are engaged in. (Three books do not give any information at all about the nature of the mothers' work.) Fourteen percent of today's employed women work as factory 65 operatives, and one mother in the books is so employed. While only 15 percent of today's employed women work as professional or technical workers, and 5 percent work as managers and administrators, there are several books in which the mothers' jobs seem to fall into these higher status categories. The mother in DREAMS OF VICTORY works as a half- time kindergarten teacher. The mother in THE PHAEDRA COMPLEX is an advertising executive. The mother in MOM THE WOLF MAN AND ME is a photographer. The mother in STICKS AND STONES runs her own antique store. The mother in DINKY HOOKER SHOOTS SMACK edits a romance magazine. The mother in THE TRUTH ABOUT MARY ROSE is a dentist. The mother in REGGIE AND NILMA is an advertising copywriter, and the mother in KATE is a partner with her husband in running a family bookstore. It is worth noting that several of these jobs are centered in New York City; the fact that mothers are shown working in them perhaps indicates more about the experiences of the women who wrote the books than about the experiences of most women in contemporary society. Paid employment, then, is somewhat romaticized in these books. The difficulties that women face in finding satis- fying and remunerative work is given relatively little attention. But this theme is not ignored altogether. The mother in NO EASY CIRCLE, a medical secretary who has been previously married to a highly-paid executive, does voice dissatisfaction with her work, but her primary concern seems to be with her relationships with men and, increasingly, as she matures, with her daughter. She does not seem to be 66 so much interested in a stronger work identity as with the opportunity not to work at all. It is clear that the factory work that the mother does in A HERO AIN'T NOTHIN' BUT A SAND- WICH is simply a means of economic survival. The texts indicate that the work the mothers do in (GEORGE), MEANING WELL, and THE NOONDAY FRIENDS (occupations not given) is not particularly satisfying. In THE NOONDAY FRIENDS the mother encourages her daughter to develop better job skills than she herself has, and in REGGIE AND NILMA, where the mother has a fairly highly-paid job as an advertising copywriter, she points out to her children that it is mppgy_that keeps them from the fate of another child in their neighborhood, who lives in neglect while his mother works as a hostess in a bar. The third observation that can be made about the books in which the mothers hold paid employment is connected with the fact that several of the mothers are working at fairly high-status jobs. Thirteen of the sixteen books which show the mothers engaged in paid employment show positive or fairly positive ("mixed”) interaction between the mothers and the protagonists. Research cited in Hoffman and Nye indi— cates that a mother's working is likely to enhance her relationship with her child if she likes to work - and it is surely much easier to like a job as a dentist, photographer or antique store owner than one as a secretary, factory worker, or domestic worker. One might expect, too, that employment in a fairly satisfying and high-status job would enhance the mother's sense of self-worth and put her in a 67 stronger position when relating to her children. She would also be in a position to buy goods and services that her absence from the home might make it helpful to purchase. The "reality" portrayed in these books relative to the world of working women tends to be somewhat rosy. How is the "reality" of the woman who works at home as a housewife portrayed? An examination of the housewife role as presented in these books reveals some interesting contrasts to the generally positive presentation of the role of paid worker. Charts and summaries of charts that give data about working mothers in contemporary realistic fiction for children are included here. Discussion about the housewife role in the children's books and charts that give data in this area follow the information about working mothers. SUMMARY OF DATA IN CHART I (WORKING MOTHERS: BOOKS IN WHICH THE FACT THAT THE MOTHER WORKS SEEMS TO CAUSE N9 STRESS ON HER RELATIONSHIP WITH THE PROTAGONIST) There are Egg books in which the mothers hold paid em- ployment and in which the mothers' working does pgp seem to cause stress in their relationships with the protagonists. In Egg of the books included in this chart, there app serious difficulties within the family, but they do not seem to be caused by the mother's working. In THE PHAEDRA COMPLEX, the mother seems to fear growing older and losing her attrac- tiveness. She marries, leaves her work, and spends her time worrying about her new husband (a foreign correspondant) and the bond between her new husband and her adolescent 68 daughter. After she has a nervous breakdown she returns to work and the protagonist changes the way in which she relates to her step-father. In STICKS AND STONES the son experiences strong anxiety about his masculinity which he does not share with his mother. IEEES of these mothers work part-time, which leaves them time and energy to deal with their domestic roles as well as their work roles. One of these mothers works in a situation (helping her husband, an ex-engineer who lost his job in a recession, run a family inn) thatiseilogical extension of the traditional wife-mother role. :32 mothers are working when their husbands are not. In DINKY HOCKER SHOOTS SMACK, the protagonist's mother, a Ph.D. in English, edits a romance magazine to supply family income after her husband loses his job as a fund-raiser; she shows a cautious concern about her relationship with her husband while she is the breadwinner. At the end of the book her husband is re-employed, she is going to law school and the whole family takes responsibility for domestic tasks. In THE TRUTH ABOUT MARY ROSE, the mother and father seem to have a kind of role-sharing marriage. At the beginning of the book the mother works as a dentist while the father paints, cooks, and parents. After her husband leaves her work to re-locate with the family and decides that she will temporarily stay at home. Two mothers do not seem to be working for financial 69 need. The mother in IT'S NOT WHAT YOU EXPECT seems to view her job dressing as a chicken for a supermarket as a kind of diversion. The chicken costume is probably symbolic, too, of the fact that the mother does not commit her considerable talents to a specific goal; she seems happy to parent, keep house, paint, and dress up once a week (surely enough to keep anyone busy). The mother's job in DREAMS OF VICTORY seems to offer her a welcome outlet for her competencies (which the text makes clear are ppp domestic, though her family humors her) as well as an opportunity to be at home when her daughter comes home from school. (She tells her daughter she named her Victory because she waited so long to have her.) Two of the mothers in these books are divorced and one is single; they are all planning to re-marry. One of the mothers is separated; she is re-united with her husband at the end of the book. Hiya of these mothers have only one child (the protago- nist). In only one case (where the mother's workplace and home are the same) does the mother have a child younger than the protagonist. :39 of the protagonists are male; 315p; are female. None of these mothers carries total responsibility for household work. Two have husbands who are willing to take equal responsibility. All have families who are willing helpers. A11 married mothers have good relationships with their husbands. 7O mmom WMH0Hmom 0>Hufimom .umHOCOQ .C%HH002 .mnomm .COHDOEOHQ umxpmfiumadm How amxowno mm .Hommxm so» HHuflmom 0>Huamom memmmua Amewuruummv .mEuoz .GHOHM .mz Qz< zH0Hmom 0>Huwmom .Hmsamuwouonm .mEsoz .chHx .cowwz meooaoz How NMm>mmom Qmmmog H mH 0>H0Hmom 0>Huflmom ofiwuruumm mxHoB .m .2 .Huox .mcnmmmms .Moazm msoomm amsoom sszHo Rssomxwz 0>Humwmz mocmeou muwom .m .2 .unox .aonm museums .mmzoem oz< meoHsm Rammxflz 0>Huwmom 030 we: 005m .CG%A .Hamm .0>Hunomx0 xmqmzou wumwmz 0>Huflmom wCHmwuH0>0< .muumcmmh .kawmmm .smaommu seesaw .wmosoH> mo mzH0Hmom 0>Huamom rHOUCax .OEHurmamm .00HHm .muomcoo QAHmo mHHz mow Qm<30H onHHmom m.mmmHoz MAHHH Qz< momHD< mHmmonHHuHmom wcwmwuum>v< .mmHDOA .umCSMH .ccfi zaflamm .m:om wHuHmom m>Huwmom cam wcwpmsz maamz .xumz .Nuaoum QAHmo mHHB mom ommmom A.maHu-uHma mmmmoq H HH zaco mxnos Hmzuozv .02 Q mm» .m .2 .HHmM A.>uHHHnHmcommmH mmxmu HHHEmH mpHucm .MQ Ho mzHo mmoz MAHHH 92¢ momHD< Immaom QH¢m mqosz OH mmmHoz mom mo muzmmH>m QmHmmfluwmom m>m£ mumsuoa Umfluumz .xoon mo ofim um oouficzuou udn .omumumamm mum mucoumm «««« .zuumfi ou woman umsuoz ¥«* .zwnmeumu ou mamaa nonuoz «% . uo3 ou mfihfiumu .c30 mow ano>umc mm . H03 mo>mo .mmaunmanmu no no . « .Hn zmoz MAHHH nz< momes< uMmDom aHm omHmm HHHH HmH a HH H .NH .Humz .NHoum HuHo Hue» 3oz amnu .Hmom HH<2 Hmom< HHDHH HHH .mxmmunmz .cHoocHH mHHH 0H w «H H .HH .cHHHHmz .mnomm HuHo Hue» .nHm umvHo HoHHxH sow HHHOH .mumum HHHHOH H HH Hz cH asou HHmam mHoH maoz 2 .HH .H .2 .uumx .Ho42m mHoomm HHHooH HHzHo HuHo Huow 3mz NHHH mcoz 2 .HH .H .2 .uumH .mHZOHm oz< mHoHHm mon .Hmmuo Hunm NHHH mcoz 2 .HH .ccHH .HHmH .xHHHzoo Ho mzfiuomwmm wchoo mH .aams £HH3 .Hmunwdmo Hos Han .mmwuflusommcH wcouum fiuHB wcHmeo mH mqomHo wmm£ mH 053 mumfiuoa omonQEm HHHz muchowmuouH can me use mH Honozo s30£m mH Hmnuoa mnu Hon .omHHu xH03 Eoum maon mmEoo umHHM mam CmLS Hmnuoa no: nuHB Hommwmo umfiBmEOm on ude mzm umSH m30cx uchowmuoum .mmHuHmaxm oflummaoo mo xoma m.Hm£u08 mHs ocm mouoso owummEoo mwz mo Homucmmmu quBmEOm ma umficowmuonm udp .oums cowumoHGDEEoo ooow meow *«k %% .mQZMHmm >Humwmz .Co>Hw uoz .znmz .NHoum .mqomHo wmwumwoz .o>Humwmz .umeoaocnoou Hmowooz .mHoHHumm .uonmz .ououmxoon kHHEmw mHHuHmom .m>HuHmom SSH ocmnmon maaom .ammh .mauqu .AHoHoHoV %.ooxwz .Cm>Hw uoz .Co>Hw uoz .mchHm .wudnmecoz .Aqmz oszHw uoz .Co>Hw uoz .mHHonm .oHoo .monozHumwmz .xnoB zuouomm .moHH< .mmmuoawno QAHmo EHHz mow om<30H onHHmom m.mmmHoz MAHHH oz< momHo< mHmmonemqmm moDHHHH< m.mmzHoz mrmmmeoz HmHZOOwo m How on momma Hmnuoe mmmeHHmE 3ma Ganoo A.zuum>om HomoCmu -xmuum>o noon umH .mozmHmm >0d HoooCmu .moHBQZHm 4 uxmnum>o mamom mnm Hom .szHoz H.ZH< ommm < umnu mmumoHocH Hmnuozo 02 Hz mmw .moHH< .mmmHoHHno mqmm oqom omomo>Ho zmoz MAHHH oz¢ momao< ummoom onm mHosz OH mmmeoz mom mo mozmoH>m omHmmHH HowaoH on ocm ooHHHme wH Houmwm Hmoao % .mQZMHmh wHH HHHH H H .HH .cmmw .mHuuHH .HHoHomov «UHHOHH QHHH Ho 2 .HH .maHmHH .wuspmeaoH .HHHH oszumc m mm: 0:3 .aom Hon cH wmnuomnm HHmumHHaoo cam umnusuch .zonH Honan Ho HHz .couHHamm .mwduo nuHB muamafiumaxo Hmuawnmn .wchomxmmDon Ho muson nuHB uHHsm mmwmommm uHOSOOHm OH oOHOHoom mmaoomn .mmmmzoz zomm mmuoc mm: Hmnuoz mow .mHHm .amBHoo .mEOHnOHQ nomaoum HSOHHOm QOHm>mo 0» EH: mmsmo GOm no mmuammmum .H.zoz H mmwHo wcHEoo .mucmnma Hon unonm soHHOH mHOmH may Ho ozm mmH Hoz m.HH Houswsmo HomHmHum mHoom .wcnoz omHHuma 033 .umnuoz oz .mvSh .OBDHm mm .mmNHOHuHHO HHuamumaoo .Hoooe m on ou uchowmuoum Ono mucma .MHzmmo .muouawnmo 03» ouao mGOHanBm muomnoua Honuoz oz .Hooh .masHm ZmHmomm mo mmoeHH HOSHOE UOHHmHummmHo oz .mumnumm .mnmnmz .mouo>Ho muamumm :.oo ou wcHnu: mnu mm3 HH mmsmomn vanumE Monuoa.um£u mOHHmaH uNmH .mxoon cH HHmm .MOOH Dow mmommm HHumanmchD oam oouHfiHH .WmmHMH .H um Momma mHmom uouswnma .mGHOHo>HU mucmhmm oz .mEHoz .Howmz .mmeHHwB m.Hmu£wsmo umOoHo swoonnu mocmmxm mumnam HmHOOm m.um£uoa HSOHHHAE< .coauuonm mm mm: cam unmcwoum mmeooon mm» .wmmom < zH mo oszomo ,4 0:3 .umswsmo mHouuaooum>o ocm muommmu soon Hmfiuoz sm£u\oz .omHHHCHB .GOHHomz 8 .wcHHmuuDum mmaoouo>o paw zuHHsOomcH mumswaoo com .Hmsuoa_ .msz ozHHo .Hosumm wcHocmEmo paw udMumHo oz .oOHoHHz .moH .mustH Hmfiumw mxmwm .emwamuumm wcm wmumcmHHm com .mmaHu .Hom£ ou maoom Hmmuoz oz .OHHonmmH .ocmHHom Swamomm mo mmoHmmH Houmm HSOo :xmmun mno>umc was Houswdmo .Hmuswdmo mHouucoo uum>o cam mwmc .Hmmomxmmuos m>HmHsmaoo .Hmnuoz oz .mmommm muzzom mmH .MHOHHumm .HOmocHz ZMHHOMH mo mMDHHo Ho mmmooum CH ¥ .Wmmbm < ZH ms UZHSOHU m>flmwmz Hoz 2 63353 .833: .MZHm ozHBHumwmz .mmeHumE .moHumwoz mm» 2 .chkuH> .aouHHEmm .m&mm302 zomm mmHumwmz wow 2 .muuocmmh .zHHmzm .memHm oHM UHHzHumwmz mo» 2 .zosh .made .oqmoz Mme Ho ozm Mme Roz m.HH 3tz mm» z .32. .288 .mHzmmo m>Humwmz Hoz *2 .zodh .made QHHmo mHHS moHo m.mm=Hoz MHosz AvmnaHucoov HHH HmHU mUGOHNm 39% .mouo>Ho Ho mmmooua SH * .mMommm mHZZDm mmH m>Humwmz wow 2 .MHOHuumm .HOmocH3 7 .8 mmmoa<3 zHumwmz wow 2 .wumnumm .mnmhmz .MOOH Dow mmommm mHumwmz mow REE .Humz .NHoum .wmmHMH .H m>Humwmz mow HE .mEHoz .Hmnmz QHHmo mHHS moHo m.mmmhoz mqosz HomncHucoov HHH HH .couHHBmm .mmmm3oz 20mm mmmomm .muumcmmh .HHHOHM MMHmHm HHH OHHzHH uoa mH Hmuzwsma Acquuv ummzHo «HH AmmeHoov .OEOS um wnH>HH uoa mH HmumHm HmoHo «« AomHHHMZV .maon um wcH>HH uoc mH mGOm Aouwnuv ummoHo H .mmommm mmzzom mmH .GBOu HHmEm .mmmH OHHoz .m .nH .mHOHHumH .HOmocHB .mmm0943 zoH m Han .nouH cm mH uchowmuoum .Hoabn Ho mmcmm maH>mm mms Honuoz .aHmn m.um£uoa Ho mmamomn mHuuwm .zHHSHmmmoodm mHmHHo nwnounu moow mzm .am>mHm me HHucs omudc m mun uchomeOHa cam zHHmHoom o>Huom mH umnuoz .mumnaw zHHamm onu GH mumuuma udonm zHEMHH mxmmam pun .mHOH HmSOHuHomuu mzmHm Honuoz .OEos co zwumcm cam OBHu nonmam Hmsuofi .fiuH3 3H0? ou zmaoe mHuuHH nuHB .OMHH oHSOB mam cmsu wcHHnHm Hmwcsoz suHB OBHH whoa mommmm Hounwsmo .muduchnm moanchmH ocm mucha OmH¢ .wcHuHH3 m.ocmnmsn pom soummmmn mmoo Hmnuoz .moHH mzH mqqmmHA m3 oz .HoammHm .umahHo HmmmmH HmHumcmechs um£3080m Hmfiuoz .amHoHH50 muoa usom Ho muwo so moxmu Moguoa HHuas ooucmummuum>o uOfiBMEOm mHmom umHaowmuoum .amOu HHmnmmmn m.a0m monomoo .mocmuwoaoo paw zwumcm Hon How uOHuSO dexOmw .Hmnuoz .ucbm kuHnHmm whoa Hmumm mHmooE uounwdmo .zuHHmGOHuaO>Goo mo unnumOHHmo m Hmnuoz .amamuHHom dawns m50H>umc hp omHHHx oaOHHH m.umu£msmo .cOmmou adozqu uoc Han .O>Huomuoumuo>o umssmaom Moguoz .mcHuumm ouuono .moamoaoamocH wcHuHmmmm paw Hmnuoa wcHoSHm OEHH vammm Hmnuoun an ocm uchowmuoum .UZmm mmfi oz .HHHSH .mHHH>mz .zo 3omo OH mzo oz .cmmh .OHuuHH .Soosz w: mooommH M004 oz .cmmh .mHuuHH .mHmo¢m HH HHmmam .H HHHuHmom N oz 2 .moamumcoo .mcmmuo .wmm mmh HmHmmHuHmom N oz 2 .muwnnmm .cmuoouoo .Hzozq< mmH zH om>HH m3 omtz N oz 2 .HoammHm .umazHo HmmmmHoHooH H oz 2 .Hooo .oaoHH QHHmo mHHB zmmoHHmo moHo m.mmmaoz mgosz HooocHoaoov >H HHOH m mH QH£HGOHumHmH OSu Hun .HOHHHGOO mEom mH mumsu umsu moumOHocH momma HHm CH omtz .Hz<4m mmnHmm mmH o>HuHmoH H oz 2 .«HHHH .Hoo>ooom .«ozHHo HHm HHH ooxH: H oz 2 .HHHaH .oHHH>oz .zo Homo oH Hzo ootz o oz z .cmow .oHHUHH 6 9 .zoosz Hz HoonHH HooH o>HuHooH H oz 2 .aooo .oHouHH .mHHoHuHmom N oz z .maHmHm .wnnanHcOM .mzozHuwwmz H us a .m .2 .HHOM HHHHU HHHH zHHoHHHo HOH HHHH H3 .oonuz oHHH AHV oH H .HH .HocooHH .uoaHHo HmHHHHHHo HHH zHoo Hoz HHH .HoHo Huo» 3oz moHH HHvHH .oH H .oH .oHoH .HHonoaoo .Hmm¢um<2 m2 m.BH N000 mamme Dow mm¢ .Hoouoo 3oz OHHH ocoz H .HH .zoso .oasHH ozHHHHm onHH HHoa HHHBmH .HuHo snow 302 .OonHo>HH .Amomamo GH HuHasEEoo Haas ”3382 .xuow 3oz ampunndm .ocwHwam 3oz mooH oH H .HH oH H .HH oomH mcoz H .HH HHV . momH .HH.mH.¢H H HH oan « H .HH ooHH AHV HH 2 .HH oHHH ocoz H .HH .HZ<0H mmoHHm HHH .muumw .xom>mmHm .¢0ZMHU H¢H 02¢ m2 .MHHH .Humm .ozHm HHH .HHHeH .oHHH>oz .zo zozo oH Hzo .ooos .oHHOHH .zoosz Hz HoonHH zooH .amow .oHHOHH .mHmo¢m H¢z.m HHH Hoom¢ .OGHMHm .wusnmwwcoz .mDoz¢H mzo mZom Ho zom mmH cm a: «HHmVH UZHHHmm ZOHH¢UHAHDH zmm0HHmU HmHZOU¢HOMH HO mH¢0 HO Ho Ho mmu¢ xmm 02¢ m0¢ MHHHH 02¢ momHD¢ HoosoHucooV >H HH