Nancy Chodorow - "Family Structure and Feminine Personality"

In this article, Chodorow argues that differences in male and female development are a result of women's universal responsibility for early child care and for later female socialization.

Her perspective is psychoanalytic. She argues that the mother-daughter relationship is key to the development of the feminine personality and that the mother relationship in early childhood consciously and unconsciously effects the development of both sexes.

She proposes that the feminine personality "defines itself in relation and connection to other people more than masculine personality does" (pg. 44).

This paper is intended to fill a gap in social scientific literature. It focuses on relationships rather than behaviors (as Freudians tend to); it examines the mother-daughter relationship which has been ignored; and it should be considered as a general model because of the universality of the aspects of family structure discussed.

The Development of Gender Personality

"According to psychoanalytic theory, personality is a result of a boy's or girl's social-relational experiences from early infancy" (pg. 45). It is not a result of conscious parental intent. The nature and quality of the child's relationships are internalized, organized and generalized to create the child's permanent personality. There are parts of the individual's conscious personality such as self-concept, gender identity, etc. and these are dependent upon the stability of the unconscious aspects of the personality.

Separation and individuation (preoedipal development): All children start out completely dependent on the mother and their primary identification is with her. This means that they do not differentiate themselves from their mother, but experience complete oneness with her. For all children, the first few years of life are spent dealing with issues of separation and individuation or breaking the primary identification with the mother and creating a sense of self. The traditional psychoanalytic model says that this stage (the preoedipal) is the same for boys and girls, but Chodorow disagrees.

For a woman, mothering involves a double identification. She identifies with her own mother and also reexperiences herself as a mothered child. Since she was a female child and her mother was female, we expect that a woman's identification with a daughter will be stronger than her identification with a son. She is more likely "to experience her daughter (or parts of her daughter's life) as herself" (pg. 47).

Sons, on the other hand, are treated differently by the mother. She will tend to emphasize his masculinity and push him into a sexually toned male-role relation to her. So, from the very beginning (before the gender identity is even established), women are likely to identify more with daughters and help them differentiate less. This makes the process of separation and individuation more difficult for daughters. The mother identifies less with a son and pushes him towards early differentiation.

Gender Identity (oedipal crisis and solution): All psychoanalytic accounts agree that during this stage (about age 3) male and female development is radically different. For a boy, his masculine gender identification must replace his initial, primary identification with the mother. This identity is usually based on identity with the father, but since the father is generally more distant and remote to the child's life, the boy's identification is based on the father role, an idealization or fantasy, rather than an actual father-son relationship. The boy comes to define this masculinity in negative terms- that which is not feminine. So, 4 components to the establishment of the masculine gender identity:

- masculinity becomes and remains a problematic issue

- it involves denial of attachment, particularly of dependence or need for another (the mother) and differentiation from the mother

- it involves repression and devaluation of femininity both psychologically and culturally

- identification with the father does not usually occur through an affective relationship, but consists of attempts to internalize a not immediately available role.

For a girl, things are quite different. Femininity and female role activities are readily apprehensible in her daily life. The development of her gender identity does not require a rejection of the early identification with the mother. She continues to have an ongoing, affective relationship with her mother and is therefore not dependent on learning only role behaviors as the son is with the father. Her gender identification is not based on fantasy or idealization. Her most difficult problem is transferring her primary sexual object choice from her mother to her father (or men). Freud and others focus on the girl's discovery that she lacks a penis, blames this on the mother and turns to the father. This account has been greatly criticized, but Chodorow finds some merit in parts of it. The psychoanalysts emphasize that the oedipal crisis is not resolved the same absolute way for girls as it is for boys. She remains in a "bisexual triangle" between her parents because she cannot completely reject her mother in favor of men. Chodorow suggests, therefore, that a girl's relationships are more complex and more defining of her than a boy's. "Most women are genitally heterosexual. At the same time their lives always involve other sorts of equally deep and primary relationships, especially with their children, and, importantly, with other women" (pg. 53). Men, however, are not usually imbedded in close personal relationships, but rather in dominance and power. They are not so connected with their children and their relationships with other men are based on abstract role expectations rather than affective ties.

These masculine and feminine personalities are a result of boys and girls experiencing similar interpersonal environments and developing differently.

Sex-Role Learning and Its Social Context

Sex-role training and social interaction in childhood build upon and reinforce the above unconscious development. Girls' sex role development is characterized by continuity. She is constantly with her mother and other women and learns through these relationships. Boys' development is characterized by discontinuity because he is also usually in the company of women. Aries suggests that boys become "children" and girls become "little women" because they are introduced into womanhood through these early childhood relationships with women while boys are separated from men during childhood. They are less likely to relate to men and even women, instead play alone or with other boys. These leads children towards the expected male and female roles. Men being achievement oriented and self-reliant and women being nurturant and responsible. "Girls are thus pressured to be involved with and connected to others, boys to deny this involvement and connection" (pg. 55).

Adult Gender Personality and Sex Role

Bakan describes the male personality as "agentic" and the female personality as "communal" (See quote beginning at bottom of pg. 55). Gutmann contrasts the socialization of the male personality in "allocentric" milieux and the female in "autocentric" milieux. Females have more flexible ego boundaries, are more present oriented and more subjective. Carlson agrees with both Bakan and Gutmann. Cohen contrasts "analytic" and "relational" cognitive styles. Chodorow suggests that "a quality of embeddedness in social interaction and personal relationships characterizes women's life relative to men's" (pg. 57). Women grow up in an intergenerational world of women, and are usually define relationally (wife, mother, daughter, etc.). Men's associations are more likely to cut across kinship units, be unigenerational, and involve universalistic criteria and responsibilities.

Ego Boundaries and the Mother-Daughter Relationship

"The care and socialization of girls by women ensure the production of feminine personalities founded on relation and connection, with flexible rather than rigid ego boundaries, and with a comparatively secure sense of gender identity" (pg. 57). This means that the mother-daughter relationship may entail a lack of separation and boundary confusion. Guilt for other's actions, over-identification of mother with daughter, loss of self in responsibility for others, etc. Daughters may project her own bad qualities onto her mother and keep the good ones in herself. Women's sense of individuation is therefore problematic when situation arise that challenge it. Chodorow argues that this personality structure may not be functional for society. Good mothering, which does not result in psychological problems for the child, comes from someone who has a firm sense of self and value and who freely chooses parenting.

Social Structure and the Mother-Daughter Relationship

Societal characteristics that contribute to the psychological strength of some of girls (based on studies of groups with matrifocal tendencies in the family structure):

- Ego strength is not completely dependent on the firmness of ego boundaries. Mother-daughter ties can be full of cooperation and companionship rather than painful and burdensome.

- Mature dependence: full differentiation with ability to give and receive, independence would not be desired by the mature. Women's sense of relation and connection and their embeddedness in social life can provide them with a security that men.

- the close mother-daughter tie is firmly grounded in real role expectations

These features are contrast with the experiences of the Western middle-class woman. Cultural devaluation and mother's over involvement make it difficult for girls to develop self-esteem. There are advantages for the boy who must deny his mother and hence all the feminine characteristics that are culturally devalued in favor of the male identity which is culturally valued. "For the daughter, feminine gender identification means identification with a devalued, passive mother, and personal maternal identification is with a mother whose own self-esteem is low" (pg. 65).

Conclusion

The female mothering role affects the development of both masculine and feminine personality and the relative status of the sexes. Chodorow describes the development of a relational personality for women and a personality that denies relation for men. Men gain cultural and social superiority over women, but are always defensive and insecure. Women have a secondary status to men, but a more secure sense of worth and importance based on their continuous embeddedness in social relationships. Social and psychological oppression is perpetuated in the structure of personality. If daughters and sons could develop a personal identification with more than one adult, social equality will be more possible. "Most important, boys need to grow up around men who take a major role in child care, and girls around women who, in addition to their child-care responsibilities, have a valued role and recognized spheres of legitimate control" (pg. 66). This will result in boys and girls with a healthy sense of self, positively valued gender identities, etc.

Key Words:

- female mothering

- mother-daughter relationships

- bisexual relational triangle

- male/female personality characteristics

- relationships vs. behaviors

Discussion:

- A psychoanalytical approach that focuses on relationships rather than behaviors, but psychoanalysis is always problematic (unconscious, etc.).

- Chodorow acknowledges that different family forms are possible but never discusses what the implications are concretely.