Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Is there an “ideal feeder”? How healthy and eco-friendly food consumption choices impact judgments of parents

  • Published:
Agriculture and Human Values Aims and scope Submit manuscript

What I’m pleased with is when someone who has a toddler or two in the cart has the eco-friendly things and a lot of organic fruits and vegetables. Then I’m thinking, ‘oh good, this family is on the right track.’

—Laurel, 67 years old, no children

Abstract

On top of working longer hours in paid employment and spending more time actively caring for children, parents, especially mothers, also feel pressured to safeguard the health of their children and the planet through their food consumption choices. Surprisingly, little evidence identifies whether the health value and environmental impact of food consumption choices impact judgments of parents’ abilities, morality, or general worth. We address this gap by drawing on an experiment administered to an online convenience sample of the United States adult population (n = 1603). We find that the health value of a parent’s consumption choices only influences judgments of mothers, not fathers. Judgments of mothers and fathers are influenced by the environmental impact of their consumption choices. To add depth to these findings, we draw on supplementary interview data collected from 63 socioeconomically diverse residents of Washington State. The qualitative data demonstrate that people tend to ascribe the responsibility to make consumption choices to mothers, not fathers, and that participants value eco-friendly consumption because it represents a substantial commitment to a healthy lifestyle. These findings demonstrate that in the parenting context, consumption decisions influence social judgments and that food’s presumed health and environmental impact shape “feeding ideals” in gendered ways. Our evidence suggests the social costs for not meeting these ideals are more severe for mothers than for fathers.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Similar to other online survey systems, like Mechanical Turk, Prolific allows researchers to post surveys to their population of interest. Researchers pay participants to complete their survey.

  2. This question was modified from the questionnaire used for the Mass Observation Archive as described in Adams and Raisborough’s (2010) paper on ethical consumption.

References

  • Aarseth, H., and B. M. Olsen. 2008. Food and masculinity in dual-career couples. Journal of Gender Studies 17 (4): 277–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adams, M., and J. Raisborough. 2010. Making a difference: ethical consumption and the everyday. The British Journal of Sociology 61 (2): 256–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blum, L. M. 2007. Mother-blame in the Prozac nation: raising kids with invisible disabilities. Gender and Society 21 (2): 202–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P. 1984. Distinction: a social critique of the judgement of taste. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowen, S., S. Elliott, and J. Brenton. 2014. The joy of cooking? Contexts 13(3): 20–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brenton, J. 2017. The limits of intensive feeding: maternal foodwork at the intersections of race, class, and gender. Sociology of Health & Illness 39 (6): 863–877.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brough, A. R., J. E. Wilkie, J. Ma, S. M. Isaac, and D. Gal. 2016. Is eco-friendly unmanly? The green-feminine stereotype and its effect on sustainable consumption. Journal of Consumer Research 43 (4): 567–582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burningham, K. 2017. Understanding and practising sustainable consumption in early motherhood. Journal of Consumer Ethics 1 (2): 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumann, S., A. Engman, E. Huddart-Kennedy, and J. Johnston. 2017. Organic vs. local: Comparing individualist and collectivist motivations for “ethical” food consumption. Canadian Food Studies/La Revue canadienne des études sur l'alimentation 4 (1): 68–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cairns, K., and J. Johnston. 2015. Food and femininity. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cairns, K., and J. Johnston. 2018. On (not) knowing where your food comes from: meat, mothering and ethical eating. Agriculture and Human Values 35 (3): 569–580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cairns, K., J. Johnston, and N. MacKendrick. 2013. Feeding the ‘organic child’: mothering through ethical consumption. Journal of Consumer Culture 13 (2): 97–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cairns, K., K. de Laat, J. Johnston, and S. Baumann. 2014. The caring, committed eco-mom: consumption ideals and lived realities of Toronto mothers. In Green consumption: the global rise of eco-chic, eds. B. Barendregt, and R. Jaffe, 100–114. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carfagna, L. B., E. A. Dubois, C. Fitzmaurice, M. Y. Ouimette, J. B. Schor, M. Willis, and T. Laidley. 2014. An emerging eco-habitus: the reconfiguration of high cultural capital practices among ethical consumers. Journal of Consumer Culture 14 (2): 158–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castellano, R. L. S. 2015. Alternative food networks and food provisioning as a gendered act. Agriculture and Human Values 32 (3): 461–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castellano, R. L. S. 2016a. Alternative food networks and the labor of food provisioning: a third shift? Rural Sociology 81 (3): 445–469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castellano, R. L. S. 2016b. Emotional labor, food provisioning and local food system engagement. Gender and food: from production to consumption and after, eds. Vasililkie Demos, and Marcia Segal, 193–215. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Charmaz, K. 2014. Constructing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coffey, A., and P. Atkinson. 1996. Making sense of qualitative data: complementary research strategies. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Correll, S., S. Benard, and I. Paik. 2007. Getting a job: is there a motherhood penalty? American Journal of Sociology 112: 1297–1338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dombroski, K. 2016. Hybrid activist collectives: reframing mothers’ environmental and caring labour. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy 36 (9/10): 629–646.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dotti Sani, G., and J. Treas. 2016. Educational gradients in parents’ child-care time across countries, 1965–2012. Journal of Marriage and Family 78 (4): 1083–1096.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elliott, S., and S. Bowen. 2018. Defending motherhood: morality, responsibility, and double binds in feeding children. Journal of Marriage and Family 80 (2): 499–520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • England, P., M. Budig, and N. Folbre. 2002. Wages of virtue: the relative pay of care work. Social Problems 49 (4): 455–473.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fielding-Singh, P. 2017. Dining with dad: fathers’ influences on family food practices. Appetite 117: 98–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grønhøj, A. 2006. Communication about consumption: a family process perspective on ‘green’ consumer practices. Journal of Consumer Behaviour: An International Research Review 5 (6): 491–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hays, S. 1996. The cultural contradictions of motherhood. New Haven, CT: Yale Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jamieson, L. 2016. Families, relationships and environment’: (un)sustainability, climate change and biodiversity loss. Families, Relationships and Societies 5 (3): 335–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, J. 2008. The citizen-consumer hybrid: ideological tensions and the case of Whole Foods Market. Theory and Society 37 (3): 229–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Julier, A. P. 2005. Hiding gender and race in the discourse of commercial food consumption. In From Betty Crocker to feminist food studies: critical perspectives on women and food, eds. A. V. Avakian, and B. Haber, 163–184. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, E. H., and J. Kmec. 2018. Reinterpreting the gender gap in household pro-environmental behaviour. Environmental Sociology 4 (3): 299–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, E. H., H. Krahn, and N. T. Krogman. 2014. Egregious emitters: Disproportionality in household carbon footprints. Environment and Behavior 46 (5): 535–555.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lamont, M., and V. Molnár. 2002. The study of boundaries in the social sciences. Annual Review of Sociology 28 (1): 167–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacKendrick, N. 2014. More work for mother: chemical body burdens as a maternal responsibility. Gender and Society 28 (5): 705–728.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacKendrick, N. 2018. Better safe than sorry: how consumers navigate exposure to everyday toxics. Oakland, CA: University of California Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mares, T. M. 2017. Navigating gendered labor and local food: a tale of working mothers in Vermont. Food and Foodways 25 (3): 177–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCright, A. M., and C. Xiao. 2014. Gender and environmental concern: insights from recent work and for future research. Society & Natural Resources 27 (10): 1109–1113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGill, B. 2014. Employment, fathering attitudes, and father involvement. Journal of Family Issues 35 (8): 1089–1106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parker, B., and O. Morrow. 2017. Urban homesteading and intensive mothering:(re) gendering care and environmental responsibility in Boston and Chicago. Gender, Place and Culture 24 (2): 247–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peer, E., L. Brandimarte, S. Samat, and A. Acquisti. 2017. Beyond the Turk: alternative platforms for crowdsourcing behavioral research. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 70: 153–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, S. S., C. R. Daniels, M. W. Gillman, J. Golden, R. Kukla, C. Kuzawa, and J. Rich-Edwards. 2014. Society: don’t blame the mothers. Nature News 512 (7513): 131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szabo, M. 2014. Men nurturing through food: challenging gender dichotomies around domestic cooking. Journal of Gender Studies 23 (1): 18–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warde, A. 1997. Consumption, food and taste. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, J. 2001. Unbending gender: why family and work conflict and what to do about it. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, R. 2006. Generalized ordered logit/partial proportional odds models for ordinal dependent variables. Stata Journal 6: 58–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • York, R. 2018. Control variables and causal inference: a question of balance. International Journal of Social Research Methodology 21 (6): 675–684.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by Emily Huddart Kennedy’s New Faculty Seed Grant from Washington State University. Jacobs Hammond, Darcy Hauslik, and Jesse Mendiola provided research assistance for the interview portion of this study. Finally, we thank Josée Johnston who offered valuable commentary on the survey portion of this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Emily Huddart Kennedy.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kennedy, E.H., Kmec, J.A. Is there an “ideal feeder”? How healthy and eco-friendly food consumption choices impact judgments of parents. Agric Hum Values 36, 137–151 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-018-09904-z

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-018-09904-z

Keywords

Navigation