Advertisement

Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Feminist Theory and Research on Family Relationships: Pluralism and Complexity

Abstract

Feminist perspectives on family relationships begin with the critique of the idealized template of the White, middle class, heterosexually married couple and their dependent children. Feminist scholars take family diversity and complexity as their starting point, by emphasizing how power infuses all of family relationships, from the local to the global scale. As the main location for caring and productive labor, families are the primary unit for providing gendered socialization and distributing power across the generations. In this issue and two subsequent issues of Sex Roles, we have collected theoretical and empirical articles that include critical analyses, case studies, quantitative studies, and qualitative studies that focus on a wide array of substantive topics in the examination of families. These topics include variations in marital and intimate partnerships and dissolution; motherhood and fatherhood in relation to ideology and practice; intergenerational parent–child relationships and socialization practices; and paid and unpaid labor. All of the articles across the three issues are guided by a type of feminist theory (e.g., gender theory; intersectional theory; Black feminist theory; globalization theory; queer theory) and many incorporate multiple theoretical perspectives, including mainstream social and behavioral science theories. Another feature of the collection is the authors’ insistence on conducting research that makes a difference in the lives of the individuals and families they study, thereby generating a wealth of practical strategies for relevant future research and empowering social change. In this introduction, we specifically address the first six articles in the special collection on feminist perspectives on family relationships.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Acker, J., Barry, K., & Esseveld, J. (1983). Objectivity and truth: Problems in doing feminist research. Women’s Studies International Forum, 6, 423–435. doi:10.1016/0277-5395(83)90035-3.

  2. Allen, K. R. (2000). A conscious and inclusive family studies. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62, 4–17. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.00004.x.

  3. Allen, K. R., Walker, A. J., & McCann, B. R. (2013). Feminism and families. In G. W. Peterson & K. R. Bush (Eds.), Handbook of marriage and the family (3rd ed., pp. 139–158). New York: Springer.

  4. Allen, K. R., Lloyd, S. A., & Few, A. L. (2009). Reclaiming feminist theory, methods, and practice for family studies. In S. A. Lloyd, A. L. Few, & K. R. Allen (Eds.), Handbook of feminist family studies (pp. 3–17). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

  5. Baber, K. M. (2004). Building bridges: Feminist research, theory, and practice: A response to Janet Saltzman Chafetz. Journal of Family Issues, 25, 978–983. doi:10.1177/0192513x04267100.

  6. Baber, K. M., & Allen, K. R. (1992). Women & families: Feminist reconstructions. New York: Guilford.

  7. Bjork-James, S. (2015). Feminist ethnography in cyberspace: Imagining families in the cloud. Sex Roles. doi:10.1007/s11199-015-0507-8.

  8. Chafetz, J. S. (2004). Bridging feminist theory and research methodology. Journal of Family Issues, 25, 963–977. doi:10.1177/0192513x04267098.

  9. Collins, P. H. (1990). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empowerment. Boston: Unwin Hyman.

  10. Coontz, S. (2015). Revolution in intimate life and relationships. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 7, 5–12. doi:10.1111/jftr.12061.

  11. Crawford, M., & Kimmel, E. (1999). Promoting methodological diversity in feminist research. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 23, 1–6. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.1999.tb00337.x.

  12. Curran, M. A., McDaniel, B. T., Pollitt, A. M., & Totenhagen, C. J. (2015). Gender, emotion work, and relationship quality: A daily diary study. Sex Roles. doi:10.1007/s11199-015-0495-8.

  13. De Reus, L., Few, A. L., & Blume, L. B. (2005). Multicultural and critical race feminisms: Theorizing families in the third wave. In V. L. Bengtson, A. C. Acock, K. R. Allen, P. Dilworth-Anderson, & D. M. Klein (Eds.), Sourcebook of family theory and research (pp. 447–468). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

  14. Dill, B. T., McLaughlin, A. E., & Nieves, A. D. (2007). Future directions of feminist research: Intersectionality. In S. N. Hesse-Biber (Ed.), Handbook of feminist research: Theory and praxis (pp. 629–637). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

  15. England, P. (2010). The gender revolution: Uneven and stalled. Gender and Society, 24, 149–166. doi:10.1177/0891243210361475.

  16. Ferree, M. M. (1990). Beyond separate spheres: Feminism and family research. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 52, 866–884. doi:10.2307/353307.

  17. Ferree, M. M. (2010). Filling the glass: Gender perspectives on families. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72, 420–439. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00711.x.

  18. Few, A. L. (2007). Integrating black consciousness and critical race feminism into family studies research. Journal of Family Issues, 28, 452–473. doi:10.1177/0192513X06297330.

  19. Few-Demo, A. L. (2014). Intersectionality as the “new” critical approach in feminist family studies: Evolving racial/ethnic feminisms and critical race theories. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 6, 169–183. doi:10.1111/jftr.12039.

  20. Few-Demo, A. L., Lloyd, S. A., & Allen, K. R. (2014). It’s all about power: Integrating feminist family studies and family communication. Journal of Family Communication, 14, 85–94. doi:10.1080/15267431.2013.864295.

  21. Freedman, E. B. (2002). No turning back: The history of feminism and the future of women. New York: Ballantine.

  22. Fulcher, M., Dinella, L. M., & Weisgram, E. S. (2015). Constructing a feminist reorganization of the heterosexual breadwinner/caregiver family model: College students’ plans for their own future families. Sex Roles. doi:10.1007/s11199-015-0487-8.

  23. Gergen, M. (2001). Feminist reconstructions in psychology: Narrative, gender, and performance. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

  24. Goldberg, A. E., & Allen, K. R. (2015). Communicating qualitative research: Some practical guideposts for scholars. Journal of Marriage and Family, 77, 3–22. doi:10.1111/jomf.12153.

  25. Goldberg, A. E., Moyer, A. M., Black, K., & Henry, A. (2014). Lesbian and heterosexual adoptive mothers’ experiences of relationship dissolution. Sex Roles. doi:10.1007/s11199-014-0432-2.

  26. Harding, S. (1998). Is science multicultural?: Postcolonialisms, feminisms, and epistemologies. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

  27. Hermann, A. C., & Stewart, A. J. (Eds.). (1994). Theorizing feminism: Parallel trends in the humanities and social sciences. Boulder: Westview Press.

  28. Hesse-Biber, S. N., & Piatelli, D. (2007). Holistic reflexivity: The feminist practice of reflexivity. In S. N. Hesse-Biber (Ed.), Handbook of feminist research: Theory and praxis (pp. 493–514). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

  29. Jacobs, J., & Gerson, K. (2004). The time divide: Work, family, and gender inequality. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

  30. Krieger, S. (1996). The family silver: Essays on relationships among women. Berkeley: University of California Press.

  31. Lather, P. (1991). Getting smart: Feminist research and pedagogy with/in the postmodern. New York: Routledge.

  32. Mahalingam, R., Balan, S., & Molina, K. M. (2009). Transnational intersectionality: A critical framework for theorizing motherhood. In S. A. Lloyd, A. L. Few, & K. R. Allen (Eds.), Handbook of feminist family studies (pp. 69–80). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

  33. Mahler, S. J., Chaudhuri, M., & Patil, V. (2015). Scaling intersectionality: Advancing feminist analysis of transnational families. Sex Roles. doi:10.1007/211199-015-0506-9.

  34. McCall, L. (2005). The complexity of intersectionality. Signs, 30, 1771–1800. doi:10.1086/426800.

  35. Osmond, M. W., & Thorne, B. (1993). Feminist theories: The social construction of gender in families. In V. L. Bengtson, A. C. Acock, K. R. Allen, P. Dilworth-Anderson, & D. M. Klein (Eds.), Sourcebook of family theory and research (pp. 591–623). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

  36. Patil, V. (2013). From patriarchy to intersectionality: A transnational feminist assessment of how far we’ve really come. Signs, 38, 847–867. doi:10.1086/669560.

  37. Risman, B. J. (2004). Gender as a social structure: Theory wrestling with activism. Gender and Society, 18, 429–450. doi:10.1177/0891243204265349.

  38. Shields, S. A. (2010). Gender: An intersectionality perspective. Sex Roles, 59, 301–311. doi:10.1007/s11199-008-9501-8.

  39. Smith, D. E. (1987). The everyday world as problematic: A feminist sociology. Boston: Northeastern University Press.

  40. Smith, D. E. (1993). The Standard North American Family: SNAF as an ideological code. Journal of Family Issues, 14, 50–65. doi:10.1177/0192513x93014001005.

  41. Sprague, J. (2005). Feminist methodologies for critical researchers: Bridging differences. Walnut Creek: AltaMira Press.

  42. Stanley, L. (1990). Feminist praxis and the academic mode of production: An editorial introduction. In L. Stanley (Ed.), Feminist praxis: Research, theory and epistemology in feminist sociology (pp. 3–19). London: Routledge.

  43. Tasker, F., & Delvoye, M. (2015). Moving out of the shadows: Accomplishing bisexual motherhood. Sex Roles. doi:10.1007/s11199-015-0503-z.

  44. Thompson, L., & Walker, A. J. (1995). The place of feminism in family studies. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 57, 847–865. doi:10.2307/353407.

  45. Thorne, B. (1982). Feminist rethinking of the family: An overview. In B. Thorne & M. Yalom (Eds.), Rethinking the family: Some feminist questions (pp. 1–24). New York: Longman.

  46. Tronto, J. (2006). Moral perspectives: Gender, ethnics, and political theory. In K. Davis, M. Evans, & J. Lorber (Eds.), Handbook of gender and women’s studies (pp. 417–434). London: Sage.

  47. Walker, A. J. (1999). Gender and family relationships. In M. Sussman, S. K. Steinmetz, & G. W. Peterson (Eds.), Handbook of marriage and the family (2nd ed., pp. 439–474). New York: Plenum Press.

  48. Walker, A. J. (2000). Refracted knowledge: Viewing families through the prism of social science. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62, 595–608. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.00595.x.

  49. Walker, A. J. (2009). A feminist critique of family studies. In S. A. Lloyd, A. L. Few, & K. R. Allen (Eds.), Handbook of feminist family studies (pp. 19–27). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

  50. Wills, J., & Risman, B. (2006). The visibility of feminist thought in family studies. Journal of Marriage and Family, 68, 690–700. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2006.00283.x.

  51. Wise, S., & Stanley, L. (2006). Having it all: Feminist fractured foundationalism. In K. Davis, M. Evans, & J. Lorber (Eds.), Handbook of gender and women’s studies (pp. 435–456). London: Sage.

  52. Yllo, K., & Bograd, M. (Eds.). (1988). Feminist perspectives on wife abuse. Newbury Park: Sage.

Download references

Compliance with Ethical Standards

This article complies with ethical standards of the American Psychological Association.

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, or publication of this article.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, or publication of this article.

Author information

Correspondence to Katherine R. Allen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Allen, K.R., Jaramillo-Sierra, A.L. Feminist Theory and Research on Family Relationships: Pluralism and Complexity. Sex Roles 73, 93–99 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-015-0527-4

Download citation

Keywords

  • Families
  • Family relationships
  • Feminist research
  • Feminist theory
  • Intersectionality