labrys, études féministes/ estudos feministasjuillet /décembre / 2014 -julho/dezembro 2014

“I Need my Space”: The DiscursiveConstruction of Parenthood

Dafne Muntanyola

Abstract

The expression “my space” appears constantly in the spontaneousdiscourse of young mothers, defining a need for autonomy and self-realization that becomes paramount once the baby is born. Among fathers’,the favored claim seems to be the opposite: spending time with their childis described as a way of unwinding from work, and thus a way ofconstructing this private space. We follow a socio-cognitive paradigm,based on Idealized Cognitive Models (Lakoff, 1987). We made eight faceto face interviews and two Skype interviews. Since discourse is shaped byage, class, occupation and gender, our sample is restricted to middle classyoung parents with at least one child from 6 months to 2 years old,balanced by gender and activity. We looked into what these discursivedifferences say about the experiences of mothers and fathers in taking careof their children. The discursive topos indicates a strongly-genderedconstruction of roles based on care as a primary activity for mothers, whichexcludes fathers. Still, this gendered construction of time and space seemsto go through transformations that create diversity and that ought to takeinto account.

Key-words : Space, social metonymy, gendered time, parenting,communication, interviews

1. Introduction

What is personal space in parenthood?

Common knowledge, wildly shared in academia, tends

to conflate family time with personal time,

particularly in the case of mothers. This social

metonymy neglects both a pragmatic and a symbolic

aspect of parenthood that this paper would like to

explore further.

Symbolically, we would like to make visible

narratives from both partners. We are aware of the

absence of the “father” in many narratives on

motherhood (Capdevila, in press), and of the

fragmentary presence of fathering (as a

perfomative role) in the sphere of childcare and

domestic tasks (Romero et al, 2013, Moss &

O’Brien, 2010). Still, taking into account the

intersubjective and socially constructed nature of

parenthood, space cannot be taken exclusively as

an atomistic expression of a desire or preference,

but as built upon the partner’s role.

Pragmatically, we will discuss the daily

practices of subjects to preserve their personal

space. Space is an equivalent to personal time,

that is, an individualized experience that comes

with, but is not just, that of family or work time

(Callejo, 2013). Depending on structural social

factors, personal space might include activities

related to taking care of a healthy and beautiful

body, such as waxing or going to the gym;

shopping, socially sharing leisure activities with

friends; cultural consumption such as reading or

watching a movie, or more public activities, such

as developing professionally or studying.

We provide a qualitative thematic analysis

(Alonso, 1998) of 10 semi­structured interviews to

Spanish mothers and fathers. We follow a socio­

cognitive paradigm, based on Lakoff (1987) and his

concept of Idealized Cognitive Models (or ICM).

Since discourse is shaped by age, class,

occupation and gender, we created a typology of

interviewees restricted to middle class young

parents (30 to 35 years, since the average

motherhood age in Spain is 31) with at least one

child from 6 months to 2 years old), balanced by

gender and activity.

A space of ones own (taking Virginia

Woolf’s words) appears to be a fuzzy concept that

is strongly context­dependent. Clarifying its

meaning through a plurality of methodologies will

bring forward elements of the social imaginary on

parenthood based on idealized cognitive models

(Rosch, 1978; Lakoff, 1987). The recent fashion

of sustaining gender differences on neuroscience

and developmental psychology (see Muntanyola,

2013 review on Bluhm et al (eds) Neurofeminism)

naturalizes these roles and practices related to

childcare and parenthood. Subjective social

expectations have objective effects in family

relationships and identity making and can inform

social policies such as parental leaves, daycare

resources and equality in labor relations (Torns,

2004; Meil et al, 2007; Carrasco et al, 2011).

We expect this different ways of managing

work and care to bring to the table the

construction of social identities, ways of

understanding fatherhood and motherhood, as well

as differences in the conceptions of gender, care,

work, autonomy, childcare and pleasure. My

research questions are two: What do these

discursive differences say about the experiences

of mothers and fathers in taking care of their

children? and ¿These discursive patterns depend on

other social factors besides gender, such as

resources for care, work conditions or

communication in relationships? My claim is that

the heterogeneity of the expression “my space”

makes it a polyvalent operator (Champagne, 1990).

Still, common knowledge tends to conflate family

time with personal time, particularly in the case

of mothers. This discursive topos indicates a

strongly­gendered construction of roles based on

care as a primary activity for mothers, which seem

to exclude fathers. MY SPACE constitutes a social

stereotype on contemporary parenthood and

motherhood.

My objectives are to define the specific

practices and meanings that fall under the term

“my space”. Second, to contextualize this concept

as part of the network of caring practices that

involve parenthood. Third, try to make visible

this different ways of managing work and care.

Fourth, bring about the existing conceptions of

gender, autonomy, childcare and pleasure, and so

bringing to the table fatherhood and motherhood as

social identities under construction.

2. Theoretical Framework

The main theoretical standpoint of this

paper is that “my space” is a discursive

construction that is not arbitrary. That is,

following Lakoff (1987), we organize out knowledge

by means of structures called indealized cognitive

models (or ICM). Each ICM is a complete and

complex socio­linguistic structure, a gestalt,

which uses one of this four strcturing principles:

a proposition, an image­schematic structure, a

metaphoric mapping (such as conceptual blending as

in Lakoff & Johnson, 1980) or a metonymic mapping.

We will work here with the last case, in which

given an ICM with some background condition there

is a “stands for” relation that may hold between 2

elements A and B such than one element of the ICM,

B, stands in for another element, A (Lakoff,

1987). A simple example of this relationship is

the substitution of an institution such as a

national government for the physical place, thus

giving agency to a building, as in “L’Elysée has

decided this morning” or “The Kremlin has appeared

on Tv and…”.

A relevant example of social metonymy is

that of creativity and entrepreneurship as

articulated in Alonso & Fernandez(2013). In the

mass media and in business literature we find a

vision of totally depoliticized, pragmatic

economicistic, far from any idea of social

conflict, divergent interests or social actors

with different strategies and practices

(idem:116). Creativity becomes synonymous with

entrepreneurial, and is based on psychological

variables as atomized as intuition, emotional

intelligence or empathy. These illusory metonymy,

joins a second one, that is, with the mileuristas

"[..]the part takes the place of thewhole by the power of representation anddefinition of the social problems by themiddle class but behind there aredramatic situations that are invisibleand accepted ﴾labor unions thatdisappear, the social conditions ofimmigrants, the emergence of new povertyand wider social exclusion﴿ ﴾Alonso andFernández , 2013: 154﴿.

Alonso and Fernández ultimately propose

that "the phenomenon of job insecurity cannot be

understood only as a dysfunction or as an

irregularity result of mismatches in the new post­

Fordist scenario: On the contrary, it is an

absolutely essential factor for optimal

performance (2013: 120). Precariousness is not an

unexpected outcome of a market structure, but a

deliberate ideological construction in an ideal

cognitive model.

Moreover, for our gender analysis of

discourse, we are interested in a particular type

of metonymy, that of social stereotypes, where a

subcategory has a socially recognized status as

standing for the category as a whole. A typical

example is that of traditional gender roles in

parenting such as the male breadwinner for the

father and the female housewife for the mother.

Subject to change over time, they define cultural

expectations, in the shape of desires and goals in

everyday life, at work and at home. Most

importantly, the reproduction in discourse and in

practice of such cognitive constructions

reinforces these gender stereotypes and sets them

as categories that have a special cognitive

status, that of being a “best example”. Not all

fathers are breadwinners, but all breadwinners are

good fathers. Such is the idealization mechanism

at work, both selective and normative. The

ideological effects of these categories, in

marxist terms, is what Rosch (1978) calls

prototype effects of stereotypes.

Figure 1. An example of metonymy: Platon is on the topshelf. (Fauconnier, 1994).

How do prototypes appear, then, and what

social mechanisms makes them pervasive in the

social imaginary of individuals? The invariant

aspects of culture have cognitive elements, just

like cognitive elements must have cultural

elements. You cannot have culture without

cognition, or cognition without culture (Cicourel,

2013). In that sense, the perspective of semiotics

goes into the deep structure of this social

imaginary (Alonso y Fernandez, 2013).

Discursive analysis here appears as a

structural description of a chronological illusion

(Alonso y Fernandez, 2013: 36). The social

narration gains weight and legitimacy because of

its cognitive structure, that is, because of the

particular sequential structure of the social

stereotype. Still, this formal structure of

apparent universality hides the conditions of

production which are necessary social. These are

the social factors that we will try to put forward

in our analysis. The illusion, this mythical

dimension of cultural production in modern and

contemporary societies is what brings Roland

Barthes (1977) to explain fashion as a

reproduction of the language of superficial

appearance, and Guy Débord (1967) to talk about

the objectification of the female body that takes

place through nail polish and other body

ornaments.

Moreover, Paul Ricoeur (1973) considers the

structuralist method as the most reliable to

analize a written or spoken corpus that is closed

and finished. The deformation of cultural content

through social stereotypes implies, on the one

hand, a wider openness towards interpretation and,

on the other, the dissimulation of alternative

role models that do not belong to the prototype. I

am thinking the film Don Jon: the porn addiction

of a young Italo­American that goes to the gym and

to nightclubs, goes hand in hand with his

girlfriend’s fascination with Hollywood love

stories. While the porn critique is quite

mainstream, its juxtaposition with the compulsive

consumption of romantic comedies expresses clearly

the concept of deformation in Barthes.

The sweetness and lightness of these

mainstream films hides a stereotypical discourse

that defines men and women in limited gender roles

such as that of the brave prince and the princess

in danger. Barthes himself, in Fragments d’un

discourse amoureux (1977) performs a

deconstruction of romantic mythology as an

ideological product. Sill, a purely semiotic

analysis would let me unsatisfied, because in

focusing in words and its referential things, it

forgets the speaker and the capacity for agency

and intervention.

The idealized cognitive model such as the

social stereotype that we are presenting here is

meta­theoretical (Portes, 2010). That is, the

social texture that gives us this encompassing

concept is our theoretical framework , the

cognitive lens through which the researcher must

chose the strategic places for argumentation, that

is, its study cases, the empirical object, and the

mechanisms that direct the reserach question.

Following Robert K. Merton and its proposal for

constructing middle range concepts as explicative

mechanisms, I hope to build a typology for the

meaning of my space that goes beyond the

limitations of its social stereotype, both

theoretically and empirically.

In Romero et al (2013), we analyzed the

various reasons why Spanish fathers decided to

take time off work following the birth of one of

their children. The fathers’ discourses were

divided into three groups depending on the amount

of time that they took off work after the birth:

less than five days, (about) 15 days, and more

than one month. Discourses were distributed on

four axes, each one going from one idea to its

opposite (see Figure 2) These axes cross the

decision to take time off work and are usually

mixed throughout the respondents’ discourses. The

first one was taking a leave as a right/duty

(Hobson et al., 2002).

The second, individual/couple decisions.

The third, personal connections to work and care.

The fourth, the use of resources for care. In this

paper we will look into four conceptual mechanisms

for the construction of idealized parenthood:

decision­making in relationships, the place of

work, the availability and use of care resources

and the gendered construction of personal time.

All of these social topos contribute to the

background of the idealized cognitive model and so

shape the meaning of personal space as a social

stereotype.

Figure 2. The axes of discourse in Spanish fathers takingpaternity leave (Romero et al, 2013)

2.1. Communication in Parenthood

Intra­family negotiations regarding the

allocation of time at work and household

activities have been studied globally (Geisler

and Kreyenfeld, 2011). A common theme in

contemporary sociology of the family and discourse

is to look into how parents cope with decision

making and how hypotheses of individualization

(Beck, 1986) may have an effect on their

justification. Taking paternity or parental leave

can be taken as the respondents’ individual

expression of the will to become available for

their children. Still, just some of the fathers

interviewed in Romero et al (2013) reported a

previous conversation, dialogue, or verbal

negotiation with their partner related to taking

parental leave.

Individualization seems to be inversely

proportional to the degree of internalization of

those rights as a duty. This fact opens a new path

for fathers to choose their actions in fatherhood,

following Beck’s (1986) concept of the flexible

biography and its consolidation. Cultural

divergences could also explain this lack of

negotiation; Geisler and Kreyenfeld (2011) discuss

cultural differences about what is assumed to be

the ‘right thing to do” for a mother and a father

in different European countries.

Evertsson & Nyman (2011) points out that

the basic assumption in much sociological

theorizing on families and couples is establishing

a link between the movement towards more

democratic and gender equal intimate

relationships, and the increased importance of

negotiation. Freed from traditional gendered

norms, responsibilities and obligations, couples

are assumed to need to reflect over their

relationships and make active choices regarding

how they want to live their lives (Giddens 1992;

Beck & Beck­Gernsheim 1995; Castells 1997 Bauman

2003). Families have gone from being seen as duty

oriented to being families of negotiation

(Evertsson & Nyman, 2011: 70).

The 60’s revolution seems to have given way

to an individualistic and rationalized modern

society where couple relationships are pictured as

freed from rules and traditional norms.

Negotiation in couple relationship is thus

qualified as a rational behavior, necessary for

the organization of everyday life (Björnberg &

Kollind 2003; Giddens 1992). Moreover, within the

literature, there has been little consensus

regarding the definition and use of the concept

negotiation (Espwall et. al. 2001). While some see

negotiation as an open and specific form of

interaction that can and should be distinguished

from other forms of social interaction others

define negotiation in a much broader sense. Anselm

Strauss, leading proponent of grounded theory,

emphasizes that negotiations are an aspect of most

kinds of social relationships. Negotiation would

be a way of getting things done, which includes a

large spectrum of social activities (Strauss

1978).

Negotiation becomes too broad to have

explanatory power. Plus, if we follow Evertsson &

Nyman (2011) and the theoretical perspective they

come from, which includes Schutz(1962)

sociological phenomenology and Berger &

Luckmann(1966) social constructionism, we can

look into the everyday of parents from a much more

pragmatic point of view. Let’s take into account

that couples share a paramount reality, daily

routines that are transmitted and reproduced

within the family and significant others.

Well, such normative expectations and ways

of doing do not come after rational or intentional

planning, but as the natural outcome of how things

are.

Charlott Nyman, in an oral paper presented

at the ESFR conference in Madrid, puts forward how

Norwegian couples share constructions of

(un)suitability, thus reporting gender

differences on being more or less suitable for

different tasks related to care and work.

Interests, preferences, personality traits and

personal skills are taken as givens that explain

the division of housework. Mothers are faster and

more effective when dealing with laundry or

babyfood, while dads are clumsy, lazy or unaware

of these kind of practices. Additionally, the

responsibility for ones actions and preferences

are placed on someone else (the grandmother, for

instance, or the partner) or on circumstances that

are outside of one’s control, such as an economic

crisis or the biological instinct.

This is a totally different picture from

the “negotiation family” that seems to dominate

mainstream sociology. If most of daily issues are

not up for discussion, them the family is still,

despite the sexual revolution and the

participation of women in the labor market, an

institution that shapes and limits its members

choices and desires (Delphy & Leonard, 1992). Such

a common definition of shared reality comes with

an unequal distribution of power, which, as we

will se in our analysis, shows up not so much as

an arguments for open discussion but rather as

emotional dissatisfaction, unease or guilt. Miller

& Woodward (2012) claim that everyday life seems

to be “blindingly obvious”.

A common example of the existing gulf

between negotiation and doing in parenthood is a

conversation I overheard on the bus between a

young woman and her mother. The mother was

explaining the case of a couple of friends with

kids. The mother had been ill, and the father had

to take over for a week the daily routine of

picking up the kids from school, taking them to

their afterschool activities (swimming, piano,

judo) and then picking them up and driving them

home. He told his wife that he was not sure he

could have done the same for another week, and

felt incredibily relieved when she recovered. The

daughter at this point replied: Well, she could

have said something! Meaning that the mother’s

friend could have complained or negotiated the

division of labor in the household. But the mother

on the bus retorted: Well, maybe she just shut up.

This is a great example of the

impossibility of negotiation when the social

rhythm of everyday life takes over. The mother

that I overheard considered this narrative to be

an example of the type of duties that are taken by

women in childcare and that fathers don’t take

into account within a traditional gender model.

Talking about it is not an option because there

are ways of doing that come with marriage,

commitment and parenthood. This idealized

cognitive model is not necessarily intentional

and, moreover, does not appear as optional in the

normal way of doing things. The daughter’s ICM was

not the same, and so she could see the possibility

for negotiation. When this paramount reality is

broken (in this case, when one of the partners is

ill and cannot fulfill her assigned duties) this

normal expectations become partially explicit, as

expressed by the father’s relief.

As Garfinkel (1967) explains in defining

the concepts of action and actor, the cognitive

perspective of parents is entirely symbolic,

attached to experience and meaning. All manner of

things are real to him and are objects to him in

particular ways (117): thus when entering a

relationship and becoming parents, mothers and

fathers interact with each other to develop a

working consensus (Goffman, 1961:8) and thus share

a common experience of how life is like. Still,

this subjectivities are not necessarily the

product of verbal negotiation, but of hand to

mouth adjustments and decisions in the socially

defined circumstances of daily life. For instance,

social expectations define the mother as the

responsible member of the family in social matters

such as communicating with the grandmother or

family friends. This is the natural state of

things, and if the grandmother has this specific

social expectation, it will require an extra

effort from the parents to break this routine and

switch places when she calls her daughter in law,

which nowadays is harder because of the

preponderance of cell phones as opposed to

landlines.

We thus argue here that negotiation is a

term that should be used to describe explicit

negotiation, and that these type of social

communication does not happen that often, but only

in moments of garfinkeling, when implicit norms

are broken or when critical transitions take

place, such as moving in together, having a child

or loosing a loved one. As the project Enduring

Love (Gabb et al, 2013) from Open University

explains clearly, the key nurturing element of a

long­term relationship are moments fo

communication that take place daily and

indirectly. For instance, while making some tea or

cooking dinner, while going over the day or

thinking of the day that is about to come.

Moreover, since our interviews take place

between 6 months and two years of having the first

child, we expect to find negotiation, as a type of

social interaction, but also other forms of

communication such as emotional unrest, new

desires, a change of routines or a modification of

schedules. Interestingly, Treas (2008) claims that

emotional work, once a largely feminine attribute,

is increasingly demanded of husbands, because the

intimacy of mutual disclosure is said to be the

hallmark of satisfied couples. Emotional intimacy

makes extreme gender specialization problematic,

not because partners must substitute for one

another’s labor, but rather because contemporary

parenting norms call on them to reciprocate one

another’s efforts in kind.

2.2. The place of work and the availibily ofresources for care

Most of the interviews that we present here

took place in Spain. Apart from high unemployement

rates 26% in 2014, 33% in the 25­29 age group, and

54% under the age of 25), 32’4% of those under 40

hold a a contract of limited duration (fixed­term

employment) while the EU­28 average is 20,7%. in

2013. The considerable range in the propensity to

use limited duration contracts between EU Member

States may, at least to some degree, reflect

national practices, the supply and demand of

labor, employer assessments regarding potential

growth/contraction, and the ease with which

employers can hire or fire. In Romero et al (2013)

we found that work­connected fathers who take the

least amount of time off work after childbirth

feel indispensable in their jobs, have high levels

of uncertainty due to their unstable positions,

and/or are in non­care­sensitive workplaces. This

finding is consistent with previous Spanish

studies that indicate that work conditions, such

as employment stability or more father­friendly

workplaces, encourage employees to take more time

off (Lapuerta et al., 2011; Meil et al., 2007).

Spain is a familist Welfare State: Only 1.5% of

the social public expenditure is devoted to

resources for family care. while the OECD average

in was 2’3% in 2009. Individual and family

variables seem to be more important than paid work

conditions in countries with other types of

welfare systems, such as Sweden (Haas et al.,

2002).

Moreover, the traditional workplace

practices are highly presentalist, which means a

workplace culture of staying long hours at work:

Spain is well above the EU­28 average of number

of usually weekly hours at work, which is of 37’3

hours for full time workers, while in Spain is

38’4, behind France, Lituania and Austria, while

Italy, Finland or Germany are well below this

average. Despite the work conditions that are

imposed by the companies and/or the work

legislation, parents tend to define their choice

as an individual matter. Still, such a strategy

for justification seems to stem from a ‘reasoning

from necessity’ approach (Bourdieu, 1994). Both

mothers and fathers seem to express tastes and

preferences which are covertly constrained by

economic and material restrictions. Again,

remembering Garfinkel’s (1967) moral togetherness,

that we can expand to emotional togetherness, work

life balance is often times not the outcome of

negotiation, but of a social construction of

reality. Specifically, the feeling of uncertainty

about their work positions shapes parents’

discourse.

This paper includes interviews restricted

to middle class young parents (secondary or upper

education). The reason for defining this sample is

not because we consider class differences

irrelevant, on the contrary. Class divisions are

paramount, as shown in the academic debate

initiated in Sociology (Savage et al, 2013,

Bradley, 2014; Savage et al, 2014). Savage and his

colleagues propose a multidimensional definition

of social class that inlcudes economic, cultural

and social capital. While this reelaboration of

the concept has raised strong critiques, such as

the ones explained and developed in Sociology, we

believe its results shows the existence of strong

and relevant class boundaries and thus that social

class has not been abolished.

On the one hand, we take the educational

level as a marker for class and so for work

conditions and resources availability. The

marketization of knowledge makes brainwork or

clean work another commodity for the elite. The

aestheticization of employement, together with

causalization, poverty and inequality are the key

debates in the feminist reflections on work,

employment and gender (McDowell, 2014). On the

other hand, a key issue in taking care of a child

is the availability of care resources and the

value of parental childcare in comparison with

other types of care. The analysis of how fathers

use the available childcare resources in Romero et

al (2013) indicates how fathers’ preferences and

choices about childcare change according to their

decisions about taking time off work after

childbirth.

Work and family are not biological

organisms but social institutions. Feminist

perspectives on society made intelligible

connections between the sexual division of labor

which referred the socio­sexual domestic work or,

more broadly, the work of reproduction relegated

to the private sphere which excludes women of the

liberal model of citizenship (Carrasco et al,

2011). Historical studies, questioning false

essentialism and naturalization, have shown the

large variability of conceptions of care and home

over time.

The historical perspective also shows that

the devaluation of work within the family was a

social construction that accompanied the

development of commodity production, and offers

light on the root causes of gender inequality on

which it is based. Since the late nineteenth

century, motherhood has increased in complexity.

Tasks are progressively less conceptualized as

work and more as the result of maternal love,

based on emotions (Galligan, 1989), and constantly

monitored for its suitability as a type of

"expertise". However, mass consumption has made

unnecessary much of the "expertise" generated by

the domestic sphere. In some countries some of

these tasks have been assumed by the welfare

state, such as in Scandinavia, while on others

such as in Spain or the US women continue to

perform on a private basis, at home, the

reproduction of the labor market and for the

family welfare.

The time that women spend on daily

household tasks is inversely proportional to their

involvement in paid work (Bianchi et al., 2000).

As Treas (2008) and Moreno (in press) put forward,

specialization in the household division of labor

reduces the substitutability of labor. Daly (2011)

states that couples who have more egalitarian

behaviours regarding housework are those formed by

two adults working full­time (Moreno, in press).

Countries with more equal time use are those that

have a higher participation of women in the labour

market, so the females’ relationship to the

productive market is key (Kan et al., 2011).

Moreover, a new international division of

labor is based on the commodification of domestic

labor, with immigrant women as doubly marginalized

workers (Parella, 2003; Castelló, 2011). Recently,

the focus has been on embodiment and

performativity (Brook, 2009, Bolton 2009, Hakim,

2011) Kate Huppatz (2009) review of Bourdieu’s

capitals claims the existence of both feminity and

femaleness as resources women draw upon within the

field of paid caring work.¿So what happens with

personal space and parenthood?

2.3. The gendered construction of personal space

Researchers have argued that the actual

division of childcare is less important than

whether the division meets one’s expectations

(Gonzalez et al, 2014). In the literature,

violated expectations are found to be a stronger

predictor of depression and relationship

satisfaction than the reported division of labour

(Biehle & Mickelson, 2012). Violated expectations

may lead to less satisfaction with the transition

to parenthood (Khazan, McHale & Decourcey, 2008).

This claim reinforces the skepticism showed by

Evertsson & Nyman (2011) about the negotiation

model. The organization of social order, as

Garfinkel (1967) claims, is necessarily moral.

Thus, when dealing with our partner we cannot only

take into account the rational or instrumental

aspects of care, but the moral implications that

come with any social relationship.

In our own terms, given the social

construction of everyday life, together with the

gendered construction of work and care, parents

build their discourse on idealized cognitive

structures that put some social stereotypes, such

as motherhood or personal space, at the core of

identity as parents. Torns & Moreno (2008) explain

clearly how the discourse of young mothers in

Spain is still strongly gendered along the

traditional role models of male breadwinner and

female carer, and this despite both working full

time in the productive labor market. Women tend to

coordinate and synchronize the weekday schedule of

the family, while dads are those in charge of free

time and weekends. According to the authors, this

sexual division of time marks a strong difference

in availability and accessibility of personal

time. Zerubavel (1997), one of the key proponents

of cognitive sociology, claims that the key

difference is that fathers save time for their own

needs, time that cannot be accessed by their

children, while mothers is always there, expecting

to cover the needs of her children: The woman is

always mom while the man is father when he can or

wants (Torns & Moreno, 2008: 111). This division

responds directly to the morality of social order

that we explained earlier.

Callejo (2013) develops a similar analysis

of interviews and focus groups to Spanish men and

women forom diverse social backgrounds and

activity on the sintagm “My Time”. He develops a

typology for time as expressed in discourse,

creating two categories: Time for others, which

would be the time of duty, for obligations such as

productive work but also housework, studying,

taking care of others and socializing with family

if it is seen as following social conventions, or

else volunteering. The second group would be “MY

TIME”, divided in Available Time or Checking

Account time, which is at the fringe with the time

for obligations. It is the time parents invest for

their children in the long run, such as driving

them to piano lessons.

My time also includes Spending time, or

conspicous time, as defined already by Veblen

(1899), that is, time to buy valuable objects of

distintion (jewelry, cars, clothes…) or to by more

time (travel, hollidays); and time for oneself,

under the form of beauty treatments or health

activities such as sports which take care of the

body and the soul. Our analytical goal in this

paper is to discover if personal space as a social

stereotype follows the same path as time. Myykänen

& Böok (2014) found that Finnish parents seem to

build discourses which emphasize ‘own time’ and

‘own pleasure’ (which is not “guilty talk”).

Care becomes a state of mind. The

identification of feminity with an individual that

cares about others, and that takes care of them,

with personal qualities such as being sweet, soft,

delicate and responsive becomes another social

stereotype.This social metonymy forgets that

caring includes more than childcare and that such

practices evolve and change depending on the

social context. Caring involves emotions, but also

practical skills such as cleaning or scheduling,

and multitasking, which is one of the reasons why

pop neuroscience identifies, in another social

metonymy, feminity with the skill of doing several

things at the same time (Bluhm et al, 2012)

Ontologically, feminist neuroscience counters pop

neuroscience, which is how Robyn Bluhm names the

best sellers that locate women’s agency in a brain

that is separate from the body. An example is

Naomi Wolf’s last book, which locates the female

agency in a particular genital area, the vagina.

As Cynthia Krauss (in Bluhm et al, 2012) puts

forward, naturalizing gender stereotypes and

reducing gender issues to communication problems

(such as in Why Men Don't Listen and Women Can't

Read Maps) makes gender inequality less political.

The responsibility for changing discrimination

against women at work, or an unfair domestic share

of household tasks, falls into the hands of women

that thus blame their essentially problematic

biological equipment.

Popular narratives on women identities

counter contemporary cognitive science take on how

we think. Cognition never happens in isolation and

it is always interactive. The body, in words of

philosopher Andy Clark, is the locus of willed

action, the point of sensory­motor confluence, the

gateway to intelligent offloading (2008: 207).

Human cognition is not the innate, monolithic,

deterministic, genetic and individual process that

mainstream neuroscience and pop neuroscience

picture. The brain is a plastic, situated and

flexible organic entity that interacts constantly

with the physical, cultural and social

environment. Most importantly, and here is where

sociology, anthropology and social psychology can

play an important role, these changes happen not

only at the biological or the psychological level,

but at the social level. When authors from pop

neuroscience picture women as unique brain­body­

behavior systems, they are ignoring the social

nature of the embodied mind. Is at the level of

the social system that women and men negotiate

work family balance in their everyday lives,

through work, pleasure, love and creativity.

We must keep in mind that care is not an

homogeneous concept, but varies over time and

across social class (Moreno, 2006; Letablier,

2007; Torns, 2008, Castelló, 2011). The attitudes

and expectations are constructed in the early

stages of socialization, in the family and at

school. Thus, Idealized Cognitive Models such as

my space are strongly marked by class, gender and

ethnic origin (Carrasco et al, 2011). Gowing up

comes with the devaluation of care: look at

teenagers, which are not totally part of the

system and still value caring for their friends as

key in their every day life. Friends become less

and less present overtime, and the individuals we

care for are restricted to the very close family

members. Howerver, philosophers such as Nancy

Fraser (2013) puts forward that the capitalistiic

society still needs social relations based on

trust and mutual excange at home and at work.

Everyone needs to be taken care at some point in

one’s life, not only in the beginning As Cicourel

(2013) explores in a recent paper, sociology has

focused on primary socialization and thus on how

children become part of society, and its time to

focus on de de­socialization process, how

individuals leave this society through aging and

death.

A way of understanding the formation of

ICM around parenthood is through the emergence of

a new identity status, that is, becoming a mother

or a father, as identity theory claims (Habib,

2012). Following Gonzalez et al (2014) three are

the key dimensions of practice that shape the

pleasurable time that parents spend with their

children: engaging in care activities and play,

showing availability and being responsible for the

child, so making decisions related to her well­

being. In this kind of focused interaction

(Goffman, 1961), parents develop a personal

connection to work and care.

In Romero et al (2013), we found that men

who take parental leave, and especially those who

take an extensive leave, are usually more care

oriented than those who do not (Duvander et al.,

2010). The importance of this focused interaction

during primary socialization is what pushed us to

include in our questionnaire the place that the

grandparents had as a role model for mothers and

fathers. As Coltart & Henwood (2012) put forward,

the analysis of narratives by fathers from working

and middle classes make clear differences in terms

of the rejection or replication of inherited

classed masculinities (38).

The role models of their fathers and

mothers, together with their family system of

care, are crucial in the formation of the identity

of these fathers. Moreover, these fathers have

different work environments and work culture.

Working class fathers belong to more traditional

work environments which are object of disdain by

middle and upper classes; while middle class

fathers which share with their peers socially

valued practices and roles closer to affection and

mothering (Coltart & Henwood, 2012).

Labor unions play an important role as

well, as part of this work culture: Miguelez et al

(2007) shows how the discourse of Spanish unions

in collective bargaining reproduce mainstream and

traditional gender views on work life balance.

Thus, class inequality impacts working class

fathers in a more dramatic way. They must reject

their own parental models on care and work thus

lacking the positive role­models that middle class

fathers have both in the family and at work.

Working class fathers fall into a double bind

(Bateson et al, 1956), an ICM based on a specific

pattern of disturbed communication in which one

member of the family is subjected to a pair of

conflicting injunctions, or binds, in a situation

were there is no escape (Appignanesi, 2009: 410).

For example, a working class father whose own

father followed strict masculine traditional

values refusing emotion and care but who wants to

be present in his child’s life is confronted to a

dilemma: one the one hand, he loves his dad and

wants to continue his cultural heritage and family

identity; on the other hand, he doesnt want to

reproduce his practices and values, and thus he

feels irrevokably guilty towards him.

3. Methods

Since discourse is shaped by age, class,

gender and social imagery, we created a typology

for 30 interviews restricted to middle class young

parents (secondary or upper education) with at

least one child (30 to 35 years, since the average

motherhood age in Spain is 31 years old), balanced

by gender and occupation. In our sample we took

educational level, type of activity and job

qualifications as indicators of upper­middle

class. The exploratory example includes 10

individual interviews to 8 Spanish mothers and

fathers, and to a couple from California as a

contrast case because of different social policy

national frameworks. We analyzed 10 them with a

grounded theory apporach (Corbin & Strauss, 1990).

All interviews were face to face and

filmed, except for the US couple which was

recorded on Skype. The questionnaire started with

an open ended question: Please explain a normal

weekday, your daily routines, schedules and

activities from when you wake up to the time you

go to bed. If there is night routine, please

include it as well. and followed with four

sections on work conditions, communication,

resources for care and gendered personal time.

Figure 3. Exploratory sample: 10 interviews, middle­classcouples, 5 women, 5 men, 29 to 35 years old, Spain & US

4. Findings and Discussion

Our analysis will figure out which of these

four social factors shape the social prototype of

my space related to good parenting: communication

in parenting, the place of work and care resources

and the gendered construction of personal time.

I am flexible, if I have to stay alittle longer at work, there is mypartner or my mom. I have goodconditions, I am not a civil servant butmy work conditions are those of a civilservant ﴾﴾Neus, female, 32 years old,part time job﴿

The social stereotype that we find in the

interviews is that of the integrated mom or dad,

the profile most closely associated to middle­

class parenting. Work and care resources are not

perceived as an unsatisfied need: parents work and

they share care obligations. Plus, they have

enough social policy rights to cover daycare

and/or they have access to alternative care

resources such as grandparents, a common strategy

in Spain. This social metonymy follows closely

Callejo (2013) approach to personal time in Spain.

I miss a space for myself, because whenyou are with him you are with him andthats all, the first six months were adrag. Before we always met withgirlfriends on Friday evenings, and nowwith the kids you cant really talk… Soyes, getting together with friends andhaving time for oneself, reading a bookcalmly, more the mental stuff, and notonly the “Run, Mommy, jump, do aheadstand!” ﴾Neus, female, 32 years old,part time job﴿

This personal space in wishful thinking

would be filled with activities related to

cultural capital, such as reading, which is an

activity that this mother used to do before having

her child, and opposed to the physical activity of

playing with her child, which is identified by the

headstand. Personal space is also associated with

conspicuous leisure (Veblen, 1899), that is,

socializing with friends just for fun, following

the ritual of Friday’s girl talk. Interestingly

enough, personal space is the product of a clear

separation, since it is not shared with the

partner nor the child, and space for others. We

need to explore further the findings with further

interviews, but from our small sample it seems

that this profile was for both men and women, so

it seems that there is a masculinization of the

sense of personal space that breaks with the

everlasting availability of motherhood as opposed

to the selective time of fathers.

I have a google calendar with a taskcategory that is “Space” and they arethings dedicated to myself: thehairdresser, yoga, a coffee withgirlfriends...I stopped breastfeedingbecause it was torture and I was stuckto her. ﴾Núria, f, 31, full time﴿

Moreover, this type of ICM includes a high

level of reflexivity in organizing parenting, with

the existence of negotiation of schedules for work

and care. Items for the organization of time such

as calendars and other devices are apparent,

indicating a rationalization of free time. The

existence of negotiation indicates that this ICM

that is the product of a ideological disruption

with the previous traditional model, with a marked

awareness of gender inequality and the will off

changing the taken for granted organization of

parenthood.

We had a babysitter, my mom worked fulltime, my dad didn’t do anything at home,he set the table, emptied thedishwasher…I think about it a lot, howwhen my mom served dinner he said yikes,veggies! I don’t like greens. And ofcourse we ﴾my sister and I﴿ sided withhim. He played a lot with us. They arethe lost generation, they had to work athome and outside ﴾Núria, f, 31, fulltime﴿

There is a strong awareness of the

importance of the parents role model, and as

Coltard & Henwood (2012) put forward, a will to

reject the previous power inequality in the

organization of care. In her description of her

parents model, Neus describes the stereotypical

opposition between feeding and cleaning on the one

hand, and playing on the other. This opposition

could explain her strong rejection of play as part

of her personal space, being more a refusal of her

own father’s lack of involvement in other aspects

of parenthood.

Friday mornings the 3 hours that Sam isat daycare I go biking ﴾Jon, m, 30, fulltime﴿.

Such a rationalization of free time could

indicate as well, as Callejo (2013) claims, the

submission to a capitalist market that commodifies

personal time and space. Everything, including

subjectivity, must be transformed into some kind

of valued activity, such as taking care of one’s

body, diet or well­being through beauty

treatments, sports or education. The

individualization of personal space becomes

another instrument for the objetivation of the

female body, following Debord (1967) and Barthes

(1977). As we see in the previous quote,

activities are strongly gendered: fathers play

sports away from the family, such as biking, and

mothers discuss gregariously with other women or

take care of their bodies.

Figure 4. Figure 4. Models of personal space by type forwork identity and type of communication in parenting

I miss a space for myself, because whenyou are with him you are with him andthat's all, the first six months were adrag. Before we always met withgirlfriends on Friday evenings, and nowwith the kids you cant really talk… Soyes, getting together with friends andhaving time for oneself, reading a bookcalmly, more the mental stuff, and notonly the “Run, Mommy, jump, do aheadstand!” ﴾Neus, female, 32 years old,part time job﴿

This personal space in wishfull thinking

would be filled with activities related to

cultural capital, such as reading, which is an

activity that this mother used to do before having

her child, and opposed to the physical activity of

playing with her child, which is identified by the

headstand. Personal space is also associated with

conspicous leisure (Veblen, 1988), that is,

socializing with friends just for fun, following

the ritual of Friday’s girltalk. Interestingly

enough, personal space is the product of a clear

separation, since it is not shared with the

partner nor the child, and space for others. We

need to explore further the findings with further

interviews, but from our small sample it seems

that this profile was for both men and women, so

it seems that there is a masculinization of the

sense of personal space that breaks with the

everlasting availability of motherhood as opposed

to the selective time of fathers.

I have a google calendar with a taskcategory that is “Space” and they arethings dedicated to myself: thehairdresser, yoga, a coffee withgirlfriends...I stopped breastfeedingbecause it was torture and I was stuckto her. ﴾Nuria, f, 31, full time﴿

Moreover, this type of ICM includes a high

level of reflexivity in organizing parenting, with

the existence of negotiation of schedules for work

and care. Items for the organization of time such

as calendars and other devices are apparent,

indicating a rationalization of free time. The

existence of negotiation indicates that this ICM

that is the product of a ideological disruption

with the previous traditional model, with a marked

awareness of gender inequality and the will off

changing the taken for granted organization of

parenthood.

We had a babysitter, my mom worked fulltime, my dad didt do anything at home,he set the table, emptied thedishwasher…I thinkt about it a lot, howwhen my mom served dinner he said yikes,veggies! I dont like greens. And ofcourse we ﴾my sister and I﴿ sided withhim. He played a lot with us. They are

the lost generation, they had to work athome and outside ﴾Nuria, f, 31, fulltime﴿

There is a strong awareness of the

importance of the parents role model, and as

Coltard & Henwood (2012) put forward, a will to

reject the previous power inequality in the

organization of care. In her description of her

parents model, Núria describes the stereotypical

opposition between feeding and cleaning on the one

hand, and playing on the other. This opposition

could explain her strong rejection of play as part

of her personal space, being more a reffusalt of

her own father’s lack of involvement in other

aspects of parenthood.

Friday mornings the 3 hours that Sam isat daycare I go biking ﴾Jon, m, 30, fulltime﴿.

Such a rationalization of free time could

indicate as well, as Callejo (2013) claims, the

submission to a capitalist market that commodifies

personal time and space. Everything, including

subjectvity, must be transformed into some kind of

valued activity, such as taking care of one’s

body, diet or wellbeing through beauty treatments,

sports or education. The individualization of

personal space becomes another instrument for the

objetivation of the female body, following Debord

and Barthes. As we see in the previous quote,

activities are strongly gendered: fathers do

individual sports away from the family, such as

biking, and mothers discuss gregariously with

other women or takes care of her body.

As a contrast category, we find the

superparent. Personal space is closely associated

to a state of mind which is not attached to a

particular activity, and which can be shared with

the child, with other people, be part of work or

involve an individual activity such as running or

cleaning.

Yesterday, I was with the baby and wewent outside. I had a glass of wine, hehad his bottle, and he was looking up,and I realized he was looking at thepalm trees blowing in the wind, and Isaid this is so cool! I didnt noticethe palm trees before. Paying attentionat what the baby is doing is verymeditative. Its a new routine. ﴾Aina,33, full time﴿.

Both mothers and fathers are represented in

this profile, which is the least negotiated

profile of it all. This state of mindfulness comes

with the sense that having a child, while being an

important moment in the parents’ life, in not a

traumatic event but a totally assumed episode that

takes place in the flow of things.

Its just a great opportunity to be ableto take care of her, to get to know her,see all these little things.Unexpectedly, its made me moreproductive, all the dumb stuff that Iused to do to occupy time...You can onlyget 4­5 hours of good work , mentalwork, a day. ﴾Tona, male, 35, fulltime﴿.

There is a a strong continuity between the

before and after of the birth of the baby. Still,

parents in this profile have a strong work related

identity, usually with jobs that allow for

flexible schedules which help this sense of flow

and liquid parenting. The rationalization that

comes with the integrated profile here reappears

in relation to work: the pressure of multitasking

and taking care of a child brings efficiency

instead of stress.

My Dad would take care of me during theday, because my mom worked as a teacher,and he would go to night class to gethis MA ﴾Tona, male, 35, full time﴿.

Interestingly, the role model for parenting

is also important here: the more equalitarian

organization of childcare here is a given and

doesn’t need to be negotiated, precisely because

the previous generation were already aware of it

and changed it. These are grandparents that went

through the 60’s revolution and that transmitted

more egalitarian models to their children that are

now becoming parents.

You know like some people aretransgender? I am a transocial class, anaristocrat in a working class body ﴾﴾Aina, 33, full time﴿.

It is also important to say that this

profile comes with those couples where both have

the highest education level (MA or PhD), which is

also an indicator of pioneering cultural practices

and an awareness of the social structure of

everyday life.

If the integrated mom/dad and the

superparent profile are at odds in their degree of

explicit communication, the relationship to work

and care, and their gendered construction of time,

we found two radial categories, which are

alternative cognitive models of personal space

that are in between: the bubblemom and the

balanced mom. Both profiles are clearly

represented by women. In the bubble mom personal

space is transformed for the child, making more

space for care related activities and often times

displacing the place of work at home to be able to

be physically close to the child.

When I do things, I do it at a 100% Icould continue with my previous job andI decided to start something totally new﴾Mercè, f, 33, self­employed﴿

Here we find mothers who after having the

baby decide to quit their previous white collar

jobs to become bloggers, and to start a business

making crafts, knitting, making beauty products or

designing clothes for kids. Importantly, work here

occupies a central role, because the new activity

is considered as a real vocation, opposed to the

previous job which was not part of their real

identity. The decision is formulated individually

and there is no mention of the partner, so there

is no negotiation and apparently not even

communication with the partner before actually

taking the step of leaving her job.

﴾Some parents﴿ want them to grow upreally fast, and they are not adults,they are children. They push them tomuch, and what for? To consume more, togo to the gym, to go shopping? Two kidsand the work is done. What does thiseven means? Nobody forces you to havekids, they want them to grow up and be

done with it. I get really upset when Ihear this kind of stuff. ﴾Mercè, f, 33,self­ employed﴿.

The change that the child caused in the

parent relation to the child is described in

positive terms, as a source of wellbeing and

pleasure. There is a strong push against a

capitalistic and neoliberal society and a revival

of essentialist and naturalistic view of childhood

as a unique stage of life which parents must

cherish, respect and enjoy.

Now I do more things than ever, withless money: I have been working in therestaurant business since I was 14, sobecause of Sam, and most of all stress,I changed ﴾Llorenc, m, 30, part time﴿.

The drawback of this change in labor status

is less money, which appears in the parents

discourse, but which is largely downplayed by the

positive aspects of this life­saving decision. The

change can inolve in some cases, such as in the

previous quotation, spending less hours in a

vocational job such as being a cook.

Still, the father views this change as a

positive step toward improving his health, since

in this particular case he had been ill during the

first year of life of his son out of guilt for not

spending enough time with him. This is a typically

gendered attitude towards time, that we will find

in the next profile as well. What is relevant here

is that the way of getting over the gilt is

changing the work conditions and adopt a caring

role closer to traditional motherhood. Personal

space then becomes childcare. This change brings

satisfaction, a sense of liberation from previous

work constraints and better quality of life.

Finally, we defined the balanced mom, since

fathers were a clear minority. Here personal space

is nonexistent, substituted bt transitional

spaces, such as the commuting train or car, to and

from work.

I email friends when I am on the traincoming to and from work. I got asmartphone when Max was 10 months andgot back to work, and I am so glad I gotit right now because if I didn’t have itI honestly would not email anybody ever.Is the only way I email anymore. ﴾Neus,33, part time﴿

This spaces are occupied in socializing

through online devices, such as chat, email or

facebook, and it is defined as the only

possibility for keeping touch with friend and

family.

I dont want to regret it, I’m reallygrateful that he gets this time, thatthe baby has him to take care of him, Ihope that my decision is ok, that I’mnot going to be sad later that I didn’thave more time because this is the onlybaby time I got. ﴾Tatiana, 33, full­time﴿

Here work is defined in opposition to

childcare, and there is a clear expression of

guilt towards the classic work life balance and

the will of spending “enough” time with the child.

I wanted to send flowers, and I calledwhile I was pumping. I didn’t have mywallet, so I had to call back, and I

havent called back, and that’s 2 weeksago. ﴾Tatiana, 33, full­time﴿

The specific gendered care duties, such as

pumping milk at work, is for this mothers another

possible personal space to do errands, such as

sending flowers to a friend whose loved one passed

away. This multitasking puts forward a level of

stress and anxiety.

I work all day long. It’s a jam packedday, I’m going very fast, I have morework to do because usually before thebaby a 9 hour work was a nice work day.Tona and I have been negotiating astrategy where I need to get home at acertain time. ﴾Tatiana, 33, full­time﴿

The work and life balance for this mothers

involves squeezing more in less time, which

virtually erases personal spaces, in a classic

“superwoman” model. Still, what is interesting

here is that Tatiana is Tona’s partner, who is the

main caregiver for the child. So here we so how,

while Tona as a superparent seems unfazed by the

baby appearance, in the case of Tatiana, because

of the work schedules and the care arrangements,

this event is much more disruptive. We van see

that such disruption is expressed by explicit

communication patterns of negotiating the time

that she must be home to take care of the baby and

give Tona personal time.

I haven’t had time to think aboutpersonal space, but one thing I havewished is that I feel I dont haveAlberto­Mercè time anymore. I don’t everhave time to talk to her. Last weekendwe had a 3 hour drive to Mia’s party and

I didn’t stop talking for 3 hours aboutwork, gossip, things ﴾Alberto, 34,self­employed﴿.

Guilt is the other side of another regret,

which is to have shared intimate space with the

family, being the child or, in the case of

Alberto, with his partner. Communication, as the

project Enduring Love puts forward, is is the most

important nurturing element of a long­term

relationship, and Alberto explicitly states that

he feels the need for shared time, which Callejo

(2013) would classify as time for others, rather

that this non­existent personal space.

Conclusions

“My space” becomes a social stereotype

when the parenting experience is restricted to a

particular prototype, such as integrated mom/dad,

which is the mainstream model in middle class

parenting and is represented by both genders.

Personal space in integrated parenting is time

that is not invested in others but in one’s body

or mind. This space comes with explicit

negotiation within the couple and it is

facilitated by comfortable work conditions and the

availability of care resources that are not

perceived as problematic. As stated by Callejo

(2013), but also Beck (1986) and Myykänen & Böok

(2014), the integrated parent personal space is

constructed in opposition to family time. The

construction of personal space as an ICM relates

to a process of identity construction related to

work, the cultural practices of care transmitted

in primary socialization by the family role

models, and the degree of individualization in the

relationship. Still, within dual earners couples

of middle class families such as the ones that we

put together in our sampling, we observed gender

differences. These differences put forward three

other profiles that define personal space in an

alternative way to the integrated mom/dad.

As a contrasting category to the integrated

mom/dad we find the superparent, also represented

by both genders. Here personal space becomes a

state of mind that it is not attached to a

specific activity. Space is then identified with

mindfulness, thus enjoying the present moment and

making the most of it. Work is vocational but

flexible, and the transition towards parenthood is

taken as a key motivator, an impulse to make one’s

life better. Mindfulness comes with flow, and here

communication in the family does not take the form

of negotiation but of focused interaction and

togetherness. These interviewees are those with

higher level of education and with egalitarian

parental role models, pioneers in the practices of

care and pleasure.

The other two profiles, bubble mom and

balancing mom, are over represented by women. In

the former, personal space is indistinguishable

from the family, there is an identification of the

mother with the child which includes also the

fagocitation of work, which often times implies

abandoning a previous job and “reinventing”

oneself to be more hours physically present at

home. There is no negotiation because the partner

does not appear in the picture, similarly to what

Capdevila (in press) describes in the dicourse of

UK mothers around health issues. It is a fusional

relationship mother­child which is built against

the consumer society that commodifies emotions,

space and time, where “Mom knows best” (Capdevila,

in press). The bubble mom has transformed her

everyday life in a bubble of love and emotions in

childcare. Finally, the balancing mom is the other

side of the superparent: her relationship with

work is also vocational, but there is a discourse

of guilt that builds personal space as the missing

link in the communication patterns with the

family, constrained by rigid schedules and

locations at work and the multitasking that comes

with everyday life. Personal space then is time

for being with the loves ones, that the mother

seems to be trading for time at work outside the

household.

In our theoretical framework we have put

forward the existence of a social metonymy that

restricts the definition of personal space along

the gender divide in availability and

accessibility of personal time (Zerubavel, 1997;

Torns & Moreno, 2008). The literature makes clear

that there is a dominant Ideal Cognitive Model

where fathers are considered as integrated

parents, while mothers are bubble moms (maman

poule or mamá gallina). This ICM brings about the

definition of good parenting under the light of

gendered relations in everyday life.

Our exploratory analysis suggests that this

idealized cognitive model is a social metonymy for

the analysis of parenting, since it neglects the

diversity of activities and meanings attributed to

being a parent. On the one hand, we found two

other models, the superparent and the balancing

mom. Following the communicative approach of

everyday life (Evertsson & Nyman, 2011), in the

integrated mod/dad personal space is

individualized and negotiated, while in the other

three profiles it is shared and interactive, or

negotiated only in cases of a crisis, such as in

the balancing mom case.

On the other hand, gender differences cross

these categories of parenting, While fatherhood is

strongly represented in superparents and

integrated categories, and motherhood dominates

the bubble and balancing models, there is no clear

cut differentiation.

We claim that four background condition

explain the plurality of parenting; the

flexibility of work schedules and location, the

existence of good communication within partners,

the existence of positive care role models and the

availability of resources for care in case of

need. These social factors shape the construction

of personal space within an idealized cognitive

model.

Our discursive analysis of first time

parents, who have gone through a recent major

transition, explains in detail and from a socio­

cognitive perspective the changes on the in

availability and accessibility of personal space

and time by gender (Zerubavel, 1997; Torns &

Moreno, 2008).

The next step is to expand the interview

sample to 30 interviewees, according to the

existing typology. Another element to take into

account is the unemployment rate in Spain which

is 26% in 2014. Our complete sample should include

the corresponding proportions of activity: non

active (20%), a situation that can hide

unemployment or students, employed (40%), on

parental leave (20%), and unemployed (20%).

Finally, it would be not only interesting but

necessary to include in the sample single parents,

homosexual couples and other diverse forms of

parenthood beyond the mainstream models.

Biography

dafne.muntanyola@uab.cat has a Ph.D. in Sociology from the UniversitatAutònoma de Barcelona , Centre de Recerca en Treball i Vida Quotidiana(QUIT)

(2008), where she is currently teaching Cultural Consumption andEthnography. She has been an MA student at Stockholm University, and apostdoc reseracher in Nice and Madrid, as well as Fulbright Scholar atUniversity of California, San Diego (UCSD). Her research interests aredoing ethnography of creative environments, gendered parenthood and theanalysis of interactivity in everyday life from the perspective of cognitivesociology. You can see her publications at academia.edu.

Bibliography

Alonso, Luis Enrique. 1998. La mirada cualitativa en sociología. Madrid:Fundamentos.

Alonso, Luis Enrique and Carlos Fernandez. 2013. Los discursos delpresente. Madrid: Siglo XXI.

Appignanesi, Lisa. 2009. Mad, Bad and Sad. London: Virago Press.

Barthes, Roland. 1977. Fragments d’un discourse amoureux. Paris: Ed. duSeuil.

Bateson, George; Don D. Jackson, Jay Haley, and John Weakland. 1956.“Toward a Theory of Schizophrenia”, Behavioral Science, vol.1, n.4.

Bauman, Zigmund. 2003. Liquid Love. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Beck, Ulrich. 1986. Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. London:Sage Publications.

Beck, Ulrich and Elisabeth Beck-Gernsheim. 1995. The Normal Chaos ofLove, Cambridge: Polity Press.

Berger, Peter and Thomas Luckmann. 1966. The social construction ofreality. New York: Anchor Books.

Björnberg, Ulla and Anna Karin Kollind. 2003. Att leva själv tillsammans.Malmö: Liber.

Galligan, Carol. 1989. Mapping the Moral Domain: A Contribution ofWomen's Thinking to Psychological Theory and Education. HarvardUniversity Press.

Bianchi Suzanne, Melissa Milkie, Liana Sayer and John Robinson. 2000.“Is anyone doing the housework? Trends in the gender division ofhousehold labor.” Social Forces, 79.

Biehle, Suzanne and Karin Mickelson. 2012. “Provision and receipt ofemotional spousal support: The impact of visibility on well-being”, Coupleand Family Psychology: Research and Practice, vol. 1, n.3.

Bluhm, Robyn; Anne Jaap Jacobson and Heidi Lene Maibom. (Eds). 2012.Neurofeminism: Issues at the Intersection of Feminist Theory andCognitive Science. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Bolton, Sharon. 2009. “Getting at the heart pof the emotional laborprocess: a reply to Brook. Work, Employment and Society, vol. 23, n. 3.

Bourdieu, Pierre. 1994. Raisons practiques. Paris: Seuil.

Bradley, Harriet. 2014. “Class Descriptors or Class Relations? ThoughtsTowards a Critique of Savage et al”, Sociology, n. 48 (March).

Brook, Paul. 2009. “In critical defence of emotional labor: refutingBolton’s critique of Hochschild’s concept”. Work, Employment andSociety, vol. 23, n.3.

Callejo, Javier. 2013. “El sentido de mi tiempo”, Libro de Actas del XICongreso Nacional de Sociología, Federación Española de Sociología,Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Julio.

Capdevila, Rose. In press. “Negotiating health, mothering and‘choice’”. Psicologia della Salute.

Carrasco, Cristina; Cristina Borderías and Teresa Torns. 2011. El trabajode cuidados, Madrid: Los libros de la catarata.

Castells, Manuel. 1997. The power of identity. The information age:economy, society and culture. Volume II, Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.

Castelló, Laia. 2011. “La gestió quotidiana de la cura: una qüestió degènere i classe”. PhD Dissertation, Bellaterra, UAB, abril de 2011.

Champagne, Patrick. 1990. Faire l’opinion. Paris: Minuit.

Cicourel, Aaron. 2013. “Origin and Demise of Socio-cultural Presentationsof Self from Birth to Death: Caregiver ‘Scaffolding’ Practices Necessaryfor Guiding and Sustaining

Communal Social Structure Throughout the Life Cycle”, Sociology, vol.47, n. 1.

Clark, Andy. 2008. Supersizing the mind. Cambridge University Press.

Coltart, Carrie and Karen Henwood. 2012. “On paternal subjectivity:Qualitative longitudinal and psychosocial case analysis of men’s classedpositions and transitions to first-time fatherhood”, Qualitative Research,vol. 12, n.1.

Corbin, Juliet and Anselm Strauss. 1990. “Grounded Theory Research:Procedures,

Canons, and Evaluative Criteria”, Qualitative Sociology, vol. 13, n. 1.

Daly M. 2011. “What Adult Worker Model? A Critical Look at RecentSocial Policy Reform in Europe from a Gender and Family Perspective”, Social Politics, vol.18, n. 1.

Débord, Guy. 1967. La Société du Spectacle. Paris: Buchet-Chastel.

Delphy, Christine and David Leonard. 1992. Familiar exploitation,Cambridge: Polity Press.

Duvander, Ann- Zofie; Trude Lappegård and Gunnar Andersson. 2010.“Family policy and fertility: fathers’ and mothers’ use of parental leave andcontinued childbearing in Norway and Sweden”, Journal of EuropeanSocial Policy, vol.20, n.1.

Espwall, Majen, Klass Borell and Roine Johansson. 2001. ”Att förhandla iunderläge – en studie av kvinnor med diffusa muskelsmärtor”, NordiskSosialt Arbeid, n. 2.

Evertsson, Lars and Charlott Nyman. 2011. “Unpacking the Concept ofNegotiation in Research on Couples and Families”, International Journalof Humanities and Social Science, vol. 1, n. 10 (August).

Fauconnier, Gilles. 1994. Mental spaces. Cambrdige, MA: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Fraser, Nancy. 2013. Fortunes of Feminism: From State-ManagedCapitalism to Neoloberal Crisis. London: Verso.

Gabb, Jacqui; Martina Klett-Davies, Janet Fink and Manuela Thomae.2013. Enduring Love? Couple Relationships in the 21st Century, London:Open University.

Geisler, Esther and Michaela Kreyenfeld. 2011. “Against all odds: fathers’use of parental leave in Germany”, Journal of European Social Policy,21,1.

Gonzalez, Maria José; Irene Lapuerta; Teresa Martín and Marta Seiz. 2014.“What contributes to a satisfactory work family balance? A longitudinalanalysis of Egalitarian First Time Parents in Spain”, Oral paper presentedin the 7th European Society for Family Relations (ESFR) Conference inUniversidad Autónoma de Madrid, September.

Habib, Cherine. 2012. “The transition to fatherhood: A literature reviewexploring paternal involvement with identity theory”, Journal of FamilyStudies, Vol. 18, doi: 10.5172/jfs.2012.18.2-3.103

Hakim, Catherine. 2011. Honey Money and the Power of Erotic Capital.London: Alle Lane.

Huppatz, Kate. 2009. “Reworking Bourdieu's `Capital': Feminine andFemale Capitals in the Field of Paid Caring Work”, Sociology, n. 43.

Khazan, Inna, James P. Mchale and Wendy Decourcey. 2008. “ViolatedWishes About Division of Childcare Labor Predict Early CoparentingProcess During Stressful and Nonstressful Family Evaluations”, InfantMental Health Journal, vol. 29, n.4.

Garfinkel, Harold. 1967. Studies in Ethnometodology. Los Angeles: PolityPress.

Giddens, Anthony. 1992. The Transformation of Intimacy. StandfordUniversity Press.

Goffman, Erwin. 1961. Asylums. New York: Anchor Books.

Haas, Linda; Karin Allard and Philip Hwang. 2002. “The impact oforganizational culture on men’s use of parental leave in Sweden”,Community, Work, and Family, vol.5, n.3.

Hobson, Barbara; Jane Lewis and Birte Siim. (eds.) 2002. ContestedConcepts in Gender and Social Politics, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Kan, Man Yee, Oriel Sullivan and Jonathan Gershuny. 2011. “GenderConvergence in Domestic Work: Discerning the Effects of Interactionaland Institutional Barriers from Large-scale Data”, Sociology, vol.45, n.2.

Lakoff, George and Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.

Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, fire and dangerous things: What categoriesreveal about

the mind. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Lapuerta, Irene, Pau Baizán and María José Gonzalez. 2011. “Individualand institutional constraints: an analysis of parental leave use and durationin Spain”, Population Research and Policy Review, vol. 30, n.2.

Letablier, Marie Thérèse. 2007. “El trabajo de ‘cuidados’ y suconceptualización en Europa”, in Prieto, Carlos (dir.), Trabajo, género ytiempo social. Madrid: Hacer-UCM.

McDowell, Linda. 2014. “Gender, work, employment and society: feministreflections on continuity and change”, Work, employment and society, vol.1, n. 13 (January).

Meil, Gerardo; Cristina García, Maria Ángeles Luque and Luis Ayuso.2007. El impacto de los permisos parentales en la carrera profesional.

Madrid: Universidad Autónoma de Madrid.

Miguelez, Fausto; Josep Maria Antentas; Oriol Barranco and DafneMuntanyola. 2007. “La postura de los sindicatos ante la conciliaciónlaboral y personal-familiar”, PAPERS, n.83.

Miller, Daniel and Sophie Woodward. 2012. Blue Jeans: the Art of theOrdinary, California: University of California Press.

Moreno, Sara. 2007. “Temps, treball i benestar: una aproximació des de lavida quotidia-

na”, PhD Dissertation, Bellaterra, UAB, september.

Moreno, Sara. In press. “The gendered division of housework time.Analysis of time use by type and daily frequency of household tasks”, Time& Society.

Moss, Peter. and Margaret O’Brien. 2010. International Review of LeavePolicies and

Related Research 2010, London: Department of Business, Innovation andSkills.

Myykänen, Johanna and Marja Leena Böok. 2014. “Photo-narratives ofFinnish mothers and fathers: shared parenthood but gendered householdduties”, Oral paper presented in the 7th European Society for FamilyRelations (ESFR) Conference in Universidad Autónoma de Madrid,September.

Parella, Sonia. 2003. Mujer, inmigrante y trabajadora: la triplediscriminación. Barcelona: Anthropos.

Portes, Alejandro. 2010. Sociología ecnonómica. Una investigaciónsistemática. Madrid: Centro de Investigaciones Sociológicas.

Ricoeur, Paul. 1973. “The task of hermeneutics”, Philosophy Today, 18.

Romero, Pedro; Dafne Muntanyola and Jesús Rogero. 2013. “Decision-Making Factors within Paternity and Parental Leaves: Why SpanishFathers Take Time Off from Work”, Gender, Work and Organization, Vol.20, n. 6 (November)

Rosch, Eleanor. 1978. “Principles of Categorization” in Rosch, Eleanorand Barbara B. Lloyd (eds), Cognition and categorization, University ofCalifornia, Berkeley.

Savage, Mike; Fiona Devine; Niall Cunningham; Mark Taylor; Yaojun Li;Johs Hjellbrekke; Brigitte Le Roux; Sam Friedman and Andrew Miles.2013. “A New Model of Social Class? Findings from the BBC's GreatBritish Class Survey Experiment”, Sociology, n. 47 (April).

Savage, Mike; Fiona Devine; Niall Cunningham; Sam Friedman; DanielLaurison; Andrew Miles; Helene Snee and Mark Taylor. “On Social Class,Anno 2014”, Sociology, DOI: 10.1177/0038038514536635 (June online).

Schütz, Albert. 1962. Collected Papers I The problem of social reality. TheHague: Maurice Natanson, Phaenomenologica.

Strauss, Anselm. 1978. Negotiations. London: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Torns, Teresa. 2004. “De la imposible conciliación a los permanentesmalos arreglos”. Ponencia presentada en el VIII Congreso Español deSociología, Federación Española de Sociología, del 23 al 25 de septiembrede 2004, Alicante.

Torns, Teresa. 2008. “El trabajo y el cuidado: cuestiones teórico-metodológicas desde la perspectiva de género”, Empiria. Revista deMetodología de Ciencias Sociales, n.15

Torns, Teresa and Sara Moreno. 2008. “La conciliación de las jóvenestrabajadoras: nuevos discursos, viejos problemas”, Revista de estudios dejuventud, n. 83 (December).

Treas, Judith. 2008. “The dilemma of gender specialization: Substitutingand augmenting wives’ household work”, Rationality and Society, n. 20(July).

Veblen, Thorsten. 1899. The Theory of Leisure Class. New York:MacMillan.

Zerubavel, Eviatar. 1997. Social Mindscapes: An Invitation to CognitiveSociology. Harvard University Press.

labrys, études féministes/ estudos feministasjuillet /décembre / 2014 -julho/dezembro 2014