What It Means to Be Daddy

Fatherhood for Black Men Living Away from Their Children

Jennifer Hamer

• Publisher: Columbia University Press
• Year: 2001
• eBook ISBN: 9780231505109
• Topic: Social Sciences
• Subtopic: African American Studies
• Index: Social Sciences

Absent fathers, the breakdown of the nuclear family, and single-mother households are often blamed for the poor quality of life experienced by many African American children. Jennifer F. Hamer challenges both the imposition of an inappropriate value system and the resulting ineffectual social policies. Most of what we know about fathers who do not live with their children is based on interviews with the mothers; this book is based on interviews with the fathers themselves. How do these fathers perceive their roles and responsibilities?

This myth-shattering book challenges stereotypes of negotiating parenthood within the context of poverty, live-away status, and black American manhood. Hamer has collected the voices of eighty-eight men who participated in this study by first examining the macro or cultural elements that encompass men's daily lives. As part 1 explores these larger forces that define the social world of fathers, part 2 looks at what significant others expect of men as fathers and how they behave under these circumstances. Part 3 analyzes the particular parenting roles and functions of fathers, using narratives of individual men to tell their own stories. In this book, contemporary black live-away fathers talk about their goals, walk us through their workplaces, allow us to meet their families and children, and enable us to view the world of parenthood through their eyes.

PART 1

The World in Which Black Fathers Live

In 1965 John Oliver Killens suggested that “the Problems and the Burden of black men are historical, economic, cultural, and [sic] social” (p. 44). His point was that, in essence, the problems and burdens of black men are produced and sustained by the structure of American society. The structure of American society has positioned black men on one of the lowest rungs of its hierarchical ladder. Black manhood and, in effect, black fatherhood are elements of life grown within this environment of social and economic inequities. Within slavery and throughout the twentieth century, black men have been faced with uneven and inconsistent opportunities with which to negotiate life circumstances for themselves and their children. Moreover, the condition of their lives as black men have had repercussions for the roles and functions as fathers.

Part 1 discusses the macro- and exosystems that frame the conditions of life for black men in both past and present America. While working-class and low-income black males in general must negotiate their livelihood in a grim political economy, live-away fathers do so as black men and as parents. Chapter 1 provides a brief review and analysis of how traditional Western ideals of fatherhood, issues of black masculinity, and popular culture publicly define fatherhood for lower income never-married black men. In this chapter fathers discuss their public image and social status in a society where their parenting is, as the thirty-year-old live-away father of two insists, “trapped in a system hostile to the self-respect of black men … especially black fathers trying to do right by their children.” Chapter 2 describes the historical precedent of black live-away fatherhood and how economics, politics, and social systems buttressed and sustained a live-away parental status for black low-income fathers. Chapter 3 is an overview of contemporary economic conditions and how these fathers attempt to negotiate their work and education within the current environment. In this chapter black fathers talk about their experiences in the labor market and higher education.

1

“THERE’S NO SUCH THING AS A GOOD BLACK FATHER”

Standards of Fatherhood

Any discussion of live-away fatherhood should begin with the cultural elements encompassing men’s worlds. These are the belief systems, ideologies, and traditions that define normative paternal behavior in a given society. Public ideals and images, entrenched within varying mediums, tell men what they ought to look like, how they ought to talk, how they ought to relate, and how they ought to behave as fathers. These standards are not transhistorical, but rather have reflected the experiences, events, and circumstances of a moment in time. From the turn of the century to the 1970s, “ideal” fathers were primarily perceived as warmhearted providers on whom all family members could depend for counsel and support. In general, men measured their success as men in terms of their breadwinning role and the standard of living they were able to provide for themselves and their families.

Increasing numbers of white middle-class women in the paid workforce, and a decline in family wage occupations for men, are just two factors that have modified the paternal ideal in the latter decades of the twentieth century. We no longer assume that all households are male-headed. Nevertheless, men continue to idealize themselves as a family’s primary breadwinner. They are also expected to spend more quality time with their children, and participate more in their daily upbringing. These popular standards tend to apply across race and class, despite the variance that may occur within these categories. No extensive research is necessary to get a sense of how black men, in particular, are perceived with regard to meeting the criteria of fatherhood. One need only turn the pages of a newspaper, visit a local movie theater, or tune in to prime time television. The messages are irrefutably negative.

This chapter is a brief overview of popular ideals and images of family, fatherhood, and black men. As Earl Ofari Hutchinson (1996) asserts, popular ideals and images suggest that black men fall short on publicly prescribed paternal tasks, and lack normative masculine characteristics. According to Hutchinson, black men are America’s universal bogeyman. In his recent work, The Assassination of the Black Male Image, with chapters titled, “The Fine Art of Black Male Bashing” and “The Negro …. A Beast or in the Image of God?” he takes readers on a tour of contemporary popular representations of African American men. His book and other works demonstrate that negative images of black males permeate not only today’s media but most historical and contemporary cultural channels. Music, classic and award-winning literature and film, popular books and magazines from the past and the present provide a warped and sensational view of black men as men, and as fathers.

STANDARDS OF FATHERHOOD

In the United States, the “nuclear” family, consisting of a husband, wife, and children, tends to emerge above most others as the “ideal” form. Conventional wisdom holds that it provides “family members with guidelines for proper behavior in everyday family life,” and “presumably, these guidelines contribute to the unity and stability of families” (Cherlin 1978:634). The biological “nuclear” family form predominates in Western industrial countries generally, and has traditionally been the dominant family structure among European Americans for many economic classes. Its structure has been institutionalized in tradition, policy, and law as the appropriate familial guide for parents, children, and communities. Hence, the rituals, habits, practices, and values that make up this familial structure receive significant state sanctions and economic and ideological support.

There are many examples of this. Marriages between men and women are legalized by the state, publicly celebrated and announced. Folks outside of the marriage expect that marital partners be committed to one another sexually and emotionally. Thus, they are not available for dating. With marriage, each partner acquires recognized kin, mothers- and fathers-in-law, as well as brothers- and sisters-in-law. Such marriages bring with them certain benefits and privileges, like lower rates of federal income tax and automobile insurance. The state protects a spouse from testifying against a marital partner in a court of law. Other invisible boundaries exist around the marital partners and their shared offspring. Parents are allowed to spank their children. On their own accord, they may also pick them up from school early and enroll them in extracurricular activities. As parents, married couples have customary motherhood and fatherhood guidelines. They are expected to coordinate discipline practices and control their children’s behavior. Together they are expected to make major decisions regarding their children’s health and well-being.

For men, the nuclear family structure seems the widely accepted guide defining the primary roles and functions of their fatherhood. Among other social scientists and commentators, T. Tripp-Reissman and S. E. Wilson (1990) provide a summary of model fatherhood that has traditionally dominated Western culture. They suggest that fatherhood can be described in terms of men’s interactional social responsibilities and functions.

First and foremost is the legal and genetic endowment a father provides to his offspring: in addition to providing his children with hair and eye color, a father may also provide them with his surname, a lawful relation to a kinship network, and a legal right to inheritance.

Second, fathers may provide sustenance to family members, usually in the form of housing and food. With industrialization, the “adequate provision for children through work and wages won outside the home” was the primary function and role assigned to fathers (Stearn 1991:42). “Good” fathers also provide economic allowances and support in children’s pursuit of happiness, careers, and academic fulfillment.

The third primary function of fathers is to protect their children from physical harm, as well as demonstrate a genuine concern for their well-being.

Fourth, fathers may participate in the indirect and direct daily care of their children—participating in childbirth classes, changing and washing diapers, preparing school lunches, reading stories, and other forms of affective involvement.

Finally, Tripp-Reissman and Wilson (1990) suggest “formation function” as another paternal function. This is defined as fathers’ distinct contribution to the formation of children’s character and personality.

Although the image has changed slightly in recent years, all of these functions, correctly packaged, constitute the makings of a good family man or a “good father” in the European-American/Western view. For David Blankenhorn, and others who accept and aspire to this ideal, a good father is first and foremost a provider. The “male income” is perceived synonymously with the “male image.” For the ideal father, the two fit together. His ability to provide economically for his family is concomitant to his being a father. Blankenhorn explains:

A good father is one who is married. He stays around. He is a father on the premises. His children need him and he strives to give them what they need, every day. He knows that nothing can substitute for him. Either he is a father or his children are fatherless. He would never consider himself “not that important” to his children. (1995:201)

The “ideal” good father does not live separate from his children. Nor does he contemplate child support, visitation, or divorce. Blankenhorn states:

It would never occur to him—or to his children or to his wife—to make distinctions between “biological” and “social” fathering. For him, these two identities are tightly fused…. Consequently, he seldom ponders issues such as child support, visitation, paternity identification, fathers’ rights, better divorce, joint custody, dating, or blended families. (1995:201)

Yet, not all men share this paradigm of masculinity and fatherhood. Blankenhorn himself suggests there are varying levels of fatherhood both inside and outside the home.

Regardless, there are social commentators and social scientists who argue that a present lack of marital ties and legal father/child bonds contribute to the lack of commitment noncustodial black fathers appear to demonstrate toward their children. Without such formal and legal connections, there exist no rules to govern or control fathers’ paternal behavior (Popenoe 1998). Nor is there any means to curb their natural irresponsibility, “tame” their desire to “hang out with their boys,” or encourage monogamous intimate relationships. Thus, good paternal behavior as a nonmarital, live-away status is not impossible, but at a minimum is extremely difficult to attain. The argument appears to support the popular assumption that most black men continue to produce children they care little, if anything, about. Relative to most other demographic groups, black men are less likely to appear on children’s birth certificates. Additionally, in 1994, single-parenting women accounted for 60 percent of all African American family groups with children present (Shinagawa and Jang 1998). If trends continue, almost all African American children will be spending some portion of their lives without a father’s presence in the home. If one is to accept traditional and popular standards for good fatherhood, black children more than any other demographic group are doomed to a harrowing life.

In October 1995 an estimated one million African American men participated in the Million Man March in Washington D.C. Implicitly embracing the Western view of fatherhood, the march’s Mission Statement called for African American men to “stand up” and “take responsibility,” be more accountable and dependable, and assume familial obligations and duties. While certainly laudable, this view uncritically adopted the traditional ideal of fatherhood and much of the conservative rhetoric espoused by politicians and policy makers, particularly the assumption of black male irresponsibility to their families and children. In their recent work titled Black Man Emerging, Joseph White and James Cones III contest that one of the two primary conclusions that could be drawn from the March “is that Black men are willing to take responsibility for initiating interventions that will transform themselves and the Black community.” However, they also point out that “no amount of individual or group transformation will change the economic and social obstacles with which Black men are confronted in a racist society” (1999:8).¹

Economic class further complicates the issue of men’s paternal attitudes and behaviors. What tends to be left out of public discussions are studies indicating that middle- and working-class African American men may assent to the importance of the economic provider role and the paternal accountability one. Which one is viewed as most important may be influenced by socioeconomic status. In Cazenave’s (1979) study, working-class men perceived their provider role as primary. This was followed by husband, father, and worker, respectively. In a subsequent study, Cazenave (1984) found that among white-collar workers, aggressiveness, success at work, and competitiveness were used to define the essential characteristics of the “ideal man.” Still, other research suggests that as they age, black men’s views of manhood begin to diverge from those of whites and are less likely to reflect traditional notions. These findings indicate that overall, different groups may have varying notions about fatherhood, and variances may occur due to race and ethnicity, class, and/or age.²

Majors and Billson, in Cool Pose: The Dilemmas of Black Manhood in America (1992), also accept much of the popular discourse. Specifically, they argue that live-away fathers’ laxity is part of a “cool pose.” From this perspective, they argue that black men adapt to limited opportunity and attempt to maintain some control over their manhood by acting aloof and cool toward women and the children for whom they cannot provide. Thus time and again, black men maintain this composure in order to maintain some control over their manhood. This demeanor well fits what William Julius Wilson suggests is pathological behavior and “ghetto specific culture.” Majors and Billson contend that black fathers accept traditional Western ideals of masculinity and fatherhood, each striving to be a “good provider for self and family.” However, political, educational, and economic systems thwart attempts to fulfill this dream (a point discussed at length in later chapters). This, in turn, inhibits their ability to fulfill expected roles in family systems and to be present and supportive fathers. The authors cite Robert K. Merton, who theorized that individuals shut out of sanctioned means to success may actually be motivated to adopt deviant behavior to achieve some prestige and social standing. Still, rather than marshaling empirical evidence, the authors’ work rests primarily on anecdotal evidence and general assumptions—a fact not missed by critics. Yet, this has not prevented the work from aiding in the persistent images of black men and fathers.³

ARE WE NOT MEN? POPULAR PERCEPTIONS OF BLACK MEN IN AMERICA

Popular perceptions of African American men historically have represented extremes. Characterizations have ranged from hypersexual to emasculated; from dangerous to less than intelligent, comic, or lazy. Each stereotype has appeared at an appropriate place and time to justify racial proscription. One example is the popular 1915 film Birth of a Nation. Here, a fictional black man’s “savage” and brutal sexual assault of a virtuous white woman was accepted by much of the film’s audience as an accurate description of black males’ animal character. Adapted from the play The Clansman, the drama was privately screened by Woodrow Wilson in the White House during his presidency. Even today, the American Film Institute ranks it as one of the top fifty greatest American movies ever made. The film was one of several that attempted to justify the fierce social control of black men through publicly sanctioned lynchings, beatings, and incarceration. Such racial media tactics were successfully repeated almost seventy years later when, as a political ploy to woo white middle and working-class voters, George Bush’s 1988 presidential campaign aired the infamous Willie Horton ad. The broadcast vividly depicted a black male parolee’s brutal rape of a white woman. If they are not brutal savages from whom the public needs protection, they are lazy, inept, cowardly buffoons with childlike tendencies. From Amos ’n’ Andy in the 1950s (which began as a radio show in 1928) to Sanford and Son, Good Times, and The Jeffersons in the 1970s, black men have been more likely to perform as ignorant jesters than as dramatic leading actors.⁴

This trend has continued into the 1980s and 1990s with primetime programs like The Jamie Foxx Show, The Wayans Brothers, Martin, and Family Matters. In each of these, the leading characters sustain a tradition of clownish and often slapstick black performanc...

Table of contents

• Cover 
• Half title
• Title
• Copyright
• Dedication
• Contents 
• Acknowledgments
• Introduction: Fathers’ Lives in Context
• Part 1. The World in Which Black Fathers Live
• Part 2. Expectations of Others
• Part 3. Being Fathers
• Conclusion: “Got to Make Fatherhood Work for Us”—The Meaning of Fatherhood for Black Men Who Do Not Live with Their Children
• Notes
• Bibliography
• Index