What IS a mother, anyway? And why do we care? Historically, American mothers do not get much attention despite the public’s’ overwhelming hypersensitive nature regarding American racialized single-motherhood. This topic, unlike many, is probably not any better represented within printed or academic work than it is online.
Rogue or Fad monger, single mothers would have a hard time NOT being affected by society’s perception of them. Sadly, academics have neglected single mothers. However, there are sources it out there, the question is how helpful are they really?
How useful these sites are depends on what you are seeking. Clearly, some people just want to blog about diapers and formula – Others want to understand social implications to current thought patterns, or perhaps how we (Americans) ever adopted those patterns in the first place. The later group might be out of luck.
Internet resources are becoming the new answer to public questions. From health concerns to pets (and yes, even children) raising the internet is the go to source. Thus, it makes sense for academics, whose desire is to capture broad audiences, to adapt their methods to the new technology. In the case of mothering, online academic sources are hard to find.
Don’t misunderstand – There are endless sources on “studies” – drug addiction in children from single-parent homes, the age of sexual intercourse in homes without fathers, from welfare to work – single mothers’ journey out of poverty…..EH. These are relevant issues, but they are skewed by the simple fact that historical context is made secondary (if not completely ignored) to statistical numbers.
For those seeking knowledge on mothering, who do not have access to printed journals (or who do not where to look) the expansive search capabilities found online make the internet a probable source.
A simple Wikipedia search for “mothering” turns up an interesting combination of biological definitions and social role analysis. The most interesting section of Wiki’s article on mothers is the Social Role of Mothers – where stereotypical statements are asserted as rational fact. For example, “Mothers are more likely than fathers to acknowledge their children’s contributions in conversation.”1 While referred to as the “sociology of motherhood” statements like this actually tell us NOTHING about mothers.
Far from perfect, information sources’ utility should not be disregarded due to its weaknesses. A strength found within this article is the structural guidance, one can easily skim through and seek out the type of information they desire – i.e. Where did the term mother come from? Famous mother figures in history, or statistical information associated with mothering. Sources such as this allow readers to make directional choices.
Another method for info searching is the classic Google attempt. All the sites it pulls up are pretty useless. However, it does seem a new subculture is arising, dare I say “natural mothers” might attempt a social takeover soon? One example is Mothering.com Their focus is on the natural family, the daily tasks mothers encounter and basically selling the idea that their definition of mothering (breast-feeding, diaper free babies, and sharing their bed with their kids). It is hard to argue that these are relevant “mothering” issues, but again, for those seeking real knowledge, we need academics to step up and produce material which will add meat to the soup, if you will.
Missing from the mix is the impact societal perceptions of single mothers have had on not only the mothers but their offspring. This counter-stereotype information is more likely discussed by scholars of family or social history. Expansion is needed on in-depth historical analysis pertaining to mothering (single-motherhood particularly).
Academics have scrutinized the internet (and everything online) because it does not undergo the same canonical peer-review process. However, there are way it is reviewed, criticized and critiqued that are advantages. For instance, the comment feature found on many blogs and forums gives the audience an opportunity to express concern if topics are not supported with source material, or if the author has neglected a side of the argument. It goes without saying you can do this in printed media (book reviews, etc), however, the process is longer.
All of this said just to say – the internet has potential to house both academic and “domestic” aspects of motherhood. Hopefully, with digital history expanding, soon answers to 19th century social implications of rearing children outside of wedlock will be just as accessible as how to make your own cloth diapers.
