Sex Roles

, Volume 70, Issue 7–8, pp 315–328 | Cite as

Exploring the Social Origins of Dutch Mothers’ Ideal Family Lives

Original Article

Abstract

This paper examines how Dutch mothers’ ideal family lives (traditional, adaptive or egalitarian) have been formed in interaction with other people, an assumption that is central to socialization theories. With nominal regression analysis of data from a representative survey in 2010 among 935 Dutch mothers, we analyse various social influences on a mother’s current ideal family life. As hypothesized, the results show that a mother endorses a more egalitarian ideal family life if she recalls the gender role specific parental message ‘you should work in order to be financially independent of others’. Additionally, if the respondent recalls a positively work orientated mother at the age of 12 years, she has now as an adult more egalitarian ideals compared to daughters who recall a more home orientated mother or who have no memories of their mothers in that respect. We also show that as expected in the hypotheses 3 and 4, that Dutch mothers who have perceived career support by her partner and from people at work have now more egalitarian ideal family lives. Mothers’ current ideals are thus formed and further developed within prior social bonds. Moreover, mothers’ ideal family lives seem not only dependent on their current labour market behaviour, but to some degree resistant to change. However, the results must be interpreted with care because of the cross-sectional research design and the use of retrospective questions.

Keywords

Mothers Ideal family lives Parental socialization Career support Secondary others 

References

  1. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211. doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1973). Attitudinal and normative variables as predictors of specific behaviours. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 27, 41–57. doi:10.1037/h0034440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Azjen, I., & Fishbein, M. (2005). The influence of attitudes on behaviour. In D. Albarracín, B. T. Johnson, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The handbook of attitudes (pp. 173–221). Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  4. Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  5. Beets, G. C. N., Liefbroer, A. C., & de Jong Gierveld, J. (1997). Combining employment and parenthood: A longitudinal study of intentions of Dutch young adults. Population Research and Policy Review, 16, 457–474. doi:10.1023/1005895302226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1967). The social construction of reality. A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. London: Allen Lane.Google Scholar
  7. Blunsdon, B., & Reed, K. (2007). Changes in attitudes to mothers working: Evidence from Australian surveys. Labour and Industry, 16(2), 15–27. doi:10.1080/10301763.2005.10669321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bolzendahl, C., & Meyers, D. J. (2004). Feminist attitudes and support for gender equality: Opinion change in women and men, 1974–1998. Social Forces, 83, 759–790. doi:10.1353/sof.2005.0005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brown, B., Mounts, N., Lamborn, S. D., & Steinberg, L. (1993). Parenting practices and peer group affiliation. Child Development, 64, 467–482. doi:10.1111/j.1467-624.1993.tb02922.x.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cloïn, M. (2010). Het werken waard. (Worth the work). Den Haag: Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau.Google Scholar
  11. Crompton, R., & Harris, C. (1998). Gender relations and employment: The impact of occupation. Work, Employment and Society, 12, 297–315. doi:10.1177/0950017098012002005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cunningham, M. (2001). The influence of parental attitudes and behaviors on children’s attitudes toward gender and household labor in early adulthood. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 63, 111–122. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2001.00111.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cunningham, M., Beutel, A. M., Barber, J. S., & Thornton, A. (2005). Reciprocal relationships between attitudes about gender and social context during adulthood. Social Science Research, 34, 862–892. doi:10.1016/j.ssresearch.2005.03.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Donald, P. K., Bradley, L. M., & Guthrie, D. (2006). Challenging the rhetoric of choice in maternal labour-force participation: Preferred versus contracted work hours. Gender, Work and Organization, 13, 470–491. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0432.2006.00318.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Eagle, G. (1998). Learning to become a “natural woman”: The process of socialisation. Agenda Feminist Media, 2, 67–80. doi:10.1080/10130950.1988.9675020.Google Scholar
  16. Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Cambridge: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Geist, C. (2005). The welfare state and the home: Regime differences in the domestic division of labour. European Sociological Review, 21, 23–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Glass, J., Bengston, V. L., & Dunham, C. C. (1986). Attitude similarity in three-generations families. Socialization, status inheritance, or reciprocal influence? American Sociological Review, 51, 685–698.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Grube, J. W., & Morgan, M. (1990). Attitude-social support interactions: Contingent consistency effects in the prediction of adolescent smoking, drinking, and drug use. Social Psychology Quarterly, 53, 329–339. doi:10.2307/2786738.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hakim, C. (2000). Work-lifestyle choices in the twenty-first century: Preference theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Hakim, C. (2003a). Competing family models, competing social policies. Family Matters, 64, 52–61.Google Scholar
  22. Hakim, C. (2003b). Public morality versus personal choice: The failure of social attitudes surveys. British Journal of Sociology, 54, 339–345. doi:10.1111/j.1468-4446.2003.00339.x.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hakim, C. (2003c). Models of the family in modern societies. Ideals and realities. Hants: Ashgate Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
  24. Hakim, C. (2003d). Lifestyle preferences versus patriarchal values: Causal and non-causal attitudes. In J. Zollinger Giele & E. Holst (Eds.), Changing life patterns in Western industrial societies (pp. 69–95). Oxford: Elsevier ltd.Google Scholar
  25. Handel, G. (2006). Childhood socialization (2nd ed.). New Jersey: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
  26. Haas, B., Steiber, N., Hartel M., & Wallace, C. (2006). Household employment patterns in an enlarged European Union. Work, Employment and Society, 20, 751–771. doi:10.1177/0950017006069813.
  27. Hoffnung, M. (2004). Wanting it all: Career, marriage, and motherhood during college-educated women’s 20s. Sex Roles, 50, 711–723. doi:10.1023/B:SERS.0000027572.57049.ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hoffnung, M., & Williams, M. A. (2013). Balancing act: Career and family during college-educated women’s 30s. Sex Roles, 68, 321–334. doi:10.1007/s11199-012-0248-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Inman-Amos, J., Hendrick, S., & Hendrick, C. (1994). Love attitudes. Similarities between parents and between parents and children. Family Relations, 43, 456–461. doi:10.2307/585378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Johnston, D. D., & Swanson, D. H. (2006). Constructing the “Good Mother”: The experience of mothering ideologies by work status. Sex Roles, 54, 509–519. doi:10.1007/s11199-006-9021-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kan, M. Y. (2007). Work orientation and wives’ employment careers: An evaluation of Hakim’s preference Theory. Work and Occupations, 34, 430–462. doi:10.1177/0730888407307200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kangas, O., & Rostgaard, T. (2007). Preferences or institutions? Work family life opportunities in seven European countries. Journal of European Social Policy, 17, 240–256.Google Scholar
  33. Karatepe, O. M., & Kilic, H. (2007). Relationships of supervisor support and conflicts in the work-family interface with the selected job outcomes of frontline employees. Tourism Management, 28, 238–252. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2005.12.019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Keuzenkamp, S., Hillebrink, C., Portegijs, W., & Pouwels, B. (2009), Deeltijd (g)een probleem. Mogelijkheden om de arbeidsduur van vrouwen met een kleine deeltijdbaan te vergroten [Working part-time (not) a problem: Possibilities to advance the labour participation of women with a small part-time job]. Den Haag: Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau.Google Scholar
  35. King, E. B. (2008). The effect of bias on the advancement of working mothers: Disentangling legitimate concerns from inaccurate stereotypes as predictors of advancement in academe. Human Relations, 61, 1677–1711. doi:10.1177/0018726708098082.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kloek, E. (2009). Vrouw des Huizes. Een cultuurgeschiedenis van de Hollandse vrouw. (The woman of the house. A cultural history of the Dutch wife.) Amsterdam: Uitgeverij Balans.Google Scholar
  37. Komter, A. (1990). De macht van de dubbele moraal. Verschil en gelijkheid in de verhouding tussen de seksen. (The power of double morality. Difference and equality in the relationship between the genders). Amsterdam: Van Gennep.Google Scholar
  38. Kraaykamp, G. (2012). Employment status and family role attitudes: A trend analysis for the Netherlands. International Sociology, 27, 308–329. doi:10.1177/0268580911423046.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kremer, M. (2007). How welfare states care: Culture, gender, and parenting in Europe. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. doi: 10.5117/9789053569757.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kroska, A., & Elman, C. (2009). Change in attitude about employed mothers: Exposure, interests, and gender ideology discrepancies. Social Science Research, 38, 366–382. doi:10.1016/j.ssresearch.2008.12.004.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Marks, G., & Houston, D. M. (2002a). Attitudes towards work and motherhood held by working and non-working mothers. Work, Employment and Society, 16, 523–536. doi:10.1177/095001702762217470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Marks, G., & Houston, D. M. (2002b). The determinants of young women’s intentions about education. Career development and family life. Journal of Education and Work, 15, 321–336. doi:10.1080/1363908022000012085.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Merens, A., van den Brakel, M., Hartgers, M., & Hermans, B. (2011). Emancipatiemonitor 2010. (Emancipation Monitor 2010). Den Haag: Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau, Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek.Google Scholar
  44. Moen, P., Erickson, M. A., & Demster-McClain, D. (1997). Their mother’s daughters? The intergenerational transmission of gender attitudes in a world of changing roles. Journal of Marriage and Family, 59, 281–293. doi:10.2307/353470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Ostroff, C., & Atwater, L. E. (2003). Does whom you work with matter? Effects of referent group gender and age composition on managers’ compensation. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(4), 725–740. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.4.725.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Plantenga, J. (1996). For women only? The rise of part-time work in the Netherlands. Social Politics, 3–1, 57–71. doi:10.1093/sp/3.1.57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Plantenga, J. (2002). Combining work and care in the polder model: An assessment of the Dutch part-time strategy. Critical Social Policy, 22, 53–71. doi:10.1177/02610183020220010601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Portegijs, W., Cloïn, M., Keuzenkamp, S., Merens, A., & Steenvoorden, E. (2008). Verdeelde tijd: Waarom vrouwen in deeltijd werken. (Time Divided: Why women work part-time). Den Haag: Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau.Google Scholar
  49. Risman, B. J., Atkinson, M. P., & Blackwelder, S. P. (1999). Understanding the juggling act: Gendered preferences and social structural constraints. Sociological Forum, 14, 319–344. doi:10.1023/1021422930020.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Smart, C. (2007). Personal life. New directions in sociological thinking. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  51. Steiber, N., & Haas, B. (2009). Ideals or compromises? The attitude-behaviour relationship in mothers’ employment. Socio-Economic Review, 7, 639–668. doi:10.1093/ser/mwp015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Steiber, N., & Haas, B. (2012). Advances in explaining women’s employment patterns. Socio-Economic Review, 10, 343–367. doi:10.1093/ser/mwr039.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Thornton, A., Alwin, D. F., & Camburn, D. (1983). Causes and consequences of sex-role attitudes and attitude change. American Sociological Review, 43, 211–227. doi:10.2307/2095106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Tijdens, K. (2006). Een wereld van verschil: Arbeidsparticipatie van vrouwen 1945–2005. (A World of difference: Labor participation of women 1945–2005). Oratie: Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam.Google Scholar
  55. Tomlinson, J. (2006). Women’s work-life balance trajectories in the UK: Reformulating choice and constraint in transitions through part-time work across the life-course. British Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 34, 365–382. doi:10.1080/03069880600769555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Tuck, B., Rolfe, J., & Adair, V. (1994). Adolescents attitudes toward gender roles within work and it relationship to gender, personality type and parental occupation. Sex Roles, 31, 547–558. doi:10.1007/BF01544279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Van Doorne-Huiskes, A., & Schippers, J. (2010). Vrouwen op de arbeidsmarkt: Een succesvolle worsteling. (Women in the labor market, a succesful struggle). Tijdschrift voor Arbeidsvraagstukken, 26, 400–416.Google Scholar
  58. Van Wel, F., & Knijn, T. (2006). Transitional phase or a new balance? Working and caring by mothers with young children in the Netherlands. Journal of Family Issues, 27, 633–651. doi:10.1177/0192513X05284858.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Visser, J., & Hemerijck, A. (1997). A Dutch miracle: Job growth, welfare reform and corporatism in the Netherlands. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Wallace, R. A., & Wolf, A. (2006). Contemporary sociological theory. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  61. Weinshenker, M. N. (2006). Adolescents expectations about mothers’ employment: Life course patterns and parental influence. Sex Roles, 54, 845–857. doi:10.1007/s11199-006-9052-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Amsterdam Institute for Advanced Labour Studies (AIAS)University of AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations