Complicating parents’ gender and sexual expectations for children: A comparison of biological parents and stepparents

Abstract

When social scientists argue that “families” reproduce and sometimes challenge gender and sexual norms, they tend to refer to biological, cisgender, and heterosexual families. We consider how one alternative family form—stepfamilies—might, like gay and lesbian families, challenge these norms. Interviews with 20 biological and stepparents reveal that whereas biological parents held relatively intense feelings about their children’s gender and sexual conformity, stepparents were indifferent and far less inclined to police their children’s behavior. We conclude that stepfamilies, similar to gay and lesbian families, might be a source of less rigid expectations and greater liberty than biological families, and we consider the implications for the future of traditional gender and sexual norms in the face of the proliferation of alternative family forms.

The family as gender and sexuality factory: A review of the literature and future directions

“…Kane's theoretical insights showed how doing gender with children, and the accompanying frameworks of accountability that are engendered in the process, commence before children are even born as they anticipate interactions and relationships through a gendered lens (Kane, 2009). After children are born, parents accomplish gender with and for their children by circumscribing toys, clothing, and activities, actions that place their reputations as normatively masculine fathers or feminine mothers on the line (Kane, 2006, 2012; Stacey & Padavic, 2021). Accountability, then, links parents and children as parents' placement in accountability structures dictate children's exposure to and engagement with sociocultural discourses and opportunities.…”

“…In addition, I contend that socialization perspectives are also limited in the extent to which they have emphasized childhood as the period in which enduring characteristics are formed and congeal. Socialization's theoretical supremacy in this field might have led to an overemphasis on preschool aged children in studies (e.g., Kane, 2006; K. A. Martin, 2009) which necessarily obscure the fact that children “do gender” beyond childhood and the fact that parents are still evaluated for children's gender and sexuality in adolescence (Solebello & Elliott, 2011) and even adulthood (Stacey & Padavic, 2021). Therefore, interactional approaches, namely “doing gender” and accountability, provide leverage on certain aspects on the link between parents and children that socialization does not and resolve weaknesses of socialization theories that presume consensual processes and children's limited agency.…”

“…Children's bedroom gender stereotypicality was shown to mediate the relationship between parents' gender attitudes and children's, suggesting that the stereotypical bedrooms convey to children what is gender‐appropriate and ‐inappropriate (Sutfin et al., 2008). Parents' underlying orientations about gender nonconformity also influence the extent to which they encourage children's gender nonconformity (Stacey & Padavic, 2021).…”

“…Two key findings are that fathers tend to engage in more gender‐differentiated childrearing than mothers do, more rigidly policing the boundaries of acceptable performances of gender for sons and daughters, and that sons tend to experience less flexibility than daughters when it comes to prescribed gender norms (Kane, 2006, 2012; McGuffey, 2005; Meadow, 2018; Stacey & Padavic, 2021; Sutfin et al., 2008; Witt, 1997). The predominant explanations offered for these two fundamental conclusions tend to be that fathers' performances of masculinity are inextricably linked with their children's performances of gender via accountability, particularly for sons, and that sons' gender nonconformity tends to be indicative of incipient homosexuality (Averett, 2016; Kane, 2006, 2012; K. A. Martin, 2005, 2009; Rahilly, 2018; Stacey & Padavic, 2021). Another important theme within this work is that parents describe feeling accountable to normative conceptions of masculinity or femininity based not only on their own performance of gender, but also their children's (Kane, 2006, 2012; Stacey & Padavic, 2021), such that parents feel their reputations as good parents are on the line in inculcating gender normativity.…”

“…The predominant explanations offered for these two fundamental conclusions tend to be that fathers' performances of masculinity are inextricably linked with their children's performances of gender via accountability, particularly for sons, and that sons' gender nonconformity tends to be indicative of incipient homosexuality (Averett, 2016; Kane, 2006, 2012; K. A. Martin, 2005, 2009; Rahilly, 2018; Stacey & Padavic, 2021). Another important theme within this work is that parents describe feeling accountable to normative conceptions of masculinity or femininity based not only on their own performance of gender, but also their children's (Kane, 2006, 2012; Stacey & Padavic, 2021), such that parents feel their reputations as good parents are on the line in inculcating gender normativity.…”