Full-time dad Marcus Williams senses some nonsense in the Census.
I’ve always been good with kids. From about age 13 continuing into my 20’s, I was the regular and favorite babysitter for several different families and kids. In my college years, I worked a few summers as a camp counselor (later director) and spent my first year out of college working with kids as an instructor at a sleep-away Outdoor Science School. My babysitting gigs never lasted more than a few hours at a time. At OSS, I lived with and helped care for a bunch of kids for 4.5 days at a time, but it was still just working with and watching out for other people’s kids. Almost three years ago, at age 39, I became a father to twin daughters, for whom I have been a stay-at-home dad since they were born. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, I’m still just providing babysitting and childcare services. “Parenting”, apparently, is what mothers do.
Since reading about this at The New York Times, Huffington Post, and Time, I’ve had a hard time deciding how much this bothers me. On a personal level, I’m not all that troubled, because I care more about what fatherhood (or even manhood) means to me than how I might be judged according to cultural stereotypes. I know that what I do is parenting, even if some governmental agency doesn’t see it that way. On a policy level, it’s more disturbing. As Kristin Maschka wrote in her HuffPo piece:
If the data the Census Bureau uses for their report, “Who’s Minding the Kids?”, treats mothers caring for children as totally invisible, and fathers caring for children as equivalent to “babysitting,” we end up with an inaccurate and nearly useless picture of what’s really going on with today’s families.
[…]
Measuring caregiving work, in a gender-neutral way, and using that information is critical to making good decisions that support the unpaid caregiving work that creates healthy communities and a healthy economy for all of us.
Don’t like ads? Become a supporter and enjoy The Good Men Project ad free
The implied insult to my and other fathers’ parenting role is less important to me than the fact that framing the stats that way does a disservice to both mothers and fathers, and the communities they live in. I remember an old programming cliché I learned: GIGO – Garbage In, Garbage Out. With this kind of garbage going in to Census Bureau reports, it’s hard to expect anything but garbage coming out.
Photo courtesy of Katie Tegtmeyer
Lord knows what they’d say about lesbian or gay households.
This is offensive to everyone.
Either it’s all “childcare” and needs to be monetized as such, or it’s all parenting and not considered “help.”
I vote for parenting. Parents? Parent.
Parents are great. Like they say, breast is best. But some parents are disabled, poor and *have* to work for survival, have been deported, are mentally ill, are abusive, or otherwise not able to parent, and in those times when all parents are indisposed, I vote for some other qualified and fairly compensated person to do it. (Some of us babysit out of love, others for a living.)
Right, I have no issues with other care givers. What I’m saying is, in their two person household, when there is a mother and father, both are parents or both are “caregivers.” It’s weird study/set up.
Agreed, and that’s where I think the “designated parent” thing is whacky. I don’t think this skewed understanding would be fixed by saying if mom is out to work and dad is the caregiver, that he’s the “designated parent” and she’s the babysitter. It’s offensive either way to basically assert that only one parent at a time can be designated the actual “parent”, and the rest is just babysitting.
+1
This is hilarious! In an attempt to white-wash this shameless feminist disinformation campaign, the report writes everything in an (apparently) gender neutral way. It makes no sense, as you can see from this section: “Twenty-three percent of preschoolers were regularly cared for by their grandparent and 16 percent were cared for by their father. The survey only asked about child care provided by the fathers for the time the designated parent was working.” But wait! You have to read the fine print! Here is the DEFINITION of “designate parent”: “The universe of respondents in the Survey of Income and Program… Read more »
OK, now I understand. The author of the report was trained at Temple University. Home to one of the largest Women’s Studies departments, boasting 150 faculty members (in a small school, this means there is one feminist brain-washer for every 180 students).
This explains both the incomprehensible language and the desperate attempt to pretend that all primary caretakers are mothers.
You are correct, the report is so completely gendered that it is virtually useless. The entire thing is written from the point of view of “what happens to children when mothers are at work?” Why not ask what happens to children when fathers are at work? Or both parents are at work? Or both parents are not employed? Or there is only one parent in the child’s life? The perspective is so twisted that the report is difficult to read. It is hard to believe that the U.S. Department of Commerce paid for this junk science. The report works so… Read more »
Anthony, this report doesn’t strike me as remotely feminist. The stereotypes could hardly be more traditional – women are mothers who raise kids and keep house round the clock, and men work. When the natural order is disturbed, men are still only babysitters and even a full-time working mom is the “designated parent”, regardless of the choices or necessities involved. The report is bad for men, but it doesn’t do women any favors, either. It managed to be sexist in both directions at once.
I agree with you, Marcus, that the census’ assumption that the question should be, “who’s taking care of the kids when mom’s at work?” is not feminist, and makes too many assumptions about what a “real” family is like. (Thank you, Nikki B.!) Our real families don’t look like that, and if we are going to find out what they do look like, we have to drop the assumptions. If you want to know who’s taking care of the kids, my suggestion to the census people is, break it out into hours and dollars. How many of the 24 hours… Read more »
Marcus! You assume that feminists fight for feminism?!? This has not been the case for 30 years! The current feminist agenda is driven by one dogmatic objective: POWER! In those instances where power gravitates to the strong and/or primary producer, feminists scream “bloody murder” if women are not 50% (or more) … such as political positions, college degrees, earning power, purchasing power, scientific accomplishment, etc. In those instances where power gravitates to the weak and/or primary nurturer, feminists morph into Rick Santorum fem-bots, clamouring for extra protection for women in terms of alimony, child support, mother-bias in family court, woman-bias… Read more »
Does any of that shed light on how you thought the Census report was infected with a feminist agenda? Have you seen feminists blogging or speaking about what a boon this report is to their cause, and how it’s high time women get recognized as the designated parents they are?
I’ve seen feminists irritated that its sexist and wrong in both directions.