Abstract
This chapter is a report on a study of the father’s role in rural Chinese society and how it is interpreted in the home, articulating of the joys and sorrows of fatherhood in its positive and varied forms. On the one hand, the study attempts to examine the fathers’ different understandings of their role at home and the diversified ways of interpreting that role. On the other hand, the study seeks order in the fathers’ different understandings of their role and their interpretations of that role. The end product of this search for change in order and order in change reflects the pains, conflicts, helplessness, initiative, and creativity of the fathers. This study suggests that conventional concept of the father’s role as the economic provider of the family is changing in the conventional rural Chinese families. The data tell of the flexibility, changeability, and plurality of the father’s role. In the rural Chinese families, fathers are relentlessly endeavouring to debate the definition of their role with society. Some fathers have even broken through the constraints of society’s definition of their role at home and tried to give play to their creativity and interpret their role in new ways (such as detachment, manipulation, and transformation), based on their own interpretation of the role and their own preferences. What’s more, the changing process is a kind of struggles in between oneself, the family members, and others’ views. More interestingly, the way that father presents today may lead to a very complicated family roles system, and changing father roles may bring an important movement in future China.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Ao, Y. L. (1996). Modern parents. Taipei: Xinli Chubanshe.
Babbie, E. (1994). The sociological spirit. Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
Berger, P. L. (1986). Invitation to sociology. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.
Bertaux, D. B. (1982). The life course approach as a challenge to the social sciences. In T. Hareven & K. J. Adams (Eds.), Ageing and life course transitions (pp. 127–150). London: Tavistock Publications.
Blumer, H. (1995). Society as symbolic interaction. In D. McQuarie (Ed.), Readings in contemporary sociological theory (pp. 206–213). London: Prentice Hall.
Cooley, H. C. (1995). The self as sentiment and reflection. In S. E. Cahill (Ed.), Inside social life: Readings in sociological psychology and microsociology (pp. 16–17). Los Angeles: Robury Publishing Company.
Eggebeen, D. J. (2002). Sociological perspectives on fatherhood: What do we know about fathers from social surveys? In C. S. Tamis-Lemonda & N. Cabrera (Eds.), Handbook of father involvement: Multidisciplinary perspectives (pp. 189–207). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Jarrett, R. L., Roy, K. M., & Burton, L. M. (2002). Fathers in the “Hood”: Insights from qualitative research on low-income African-American men. In C. S. Tamis-Lemonda & N. Cabrera (Eds.), Handbook of father involvement: Multidisciplinary perspectives (pp. 211–249). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Laing, R. D. (1971). The politics of the family and other essays. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Lamb, M. E. (1986). The changing roles of fathers. New York: Wiley.
Marciano, D. T. (1986). Why are men unhappy in patriarchy? In R. A. Lewis & M. B. Sussman (Eds.), Men’s changing roles in the family (pp. 17–29). New York: Haworth.
Mead, G. H. (1986). The Self. In R. A. Wallace & A. Wolf (Eds.), Contemporary sociological theory: Continuing the classical tradition (pp. 193–197). London: Prentice-Hall.
Osherson, S. (1986). Finding our fathers: The unfinished business of manhood. London: Collier Macmillian Publishers.
Palkovitz, R. (2002). Involved fathering and men’s adult development. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associate.
Parke, R. D. (1981). Fathering. London: Fontana Paperbacks.
Parke, R. D., & Brott, A. A. (1999). Throwaway dad: The myths and barriers that keep men from being the fathers they want to be. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Parsons, T. E., & Bales, R. F. (1955). Family, socialization, and interaction process. New York: Free Press.
Phillips, A. (1995). The trouble with boys. In P. Moss (Ed.), Father figures: Fathers in the families of the 1990s (pp. 11–13). Edinburgh: HMSO Publications.
Roggman, L. A., Fitzgerald, H. E., Braddley, R. H., & Raikes, H. (2002). Methodological, measurement and design issues in studying fathers: An interdisciplinary perspective. In C. S. Tamis-Lemonda & N. Cabrera (Eds.), Handbook of father involvement: Multidisciplinary perspectives (pp. 1–30). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Ruddick, S. (1992). Thinking about fathers. In B. Thorne & M. Yalom (Eds.), Rethinking the family (pp. 176–190). Boston: Northeastern University Press.
Seel, R. (1987). The uncertain father: Exploring modern fatherhood. Bath: Gateway Books.
Tong, C. K., & Chan, K. B. (2001). One face, many masks: The singularity and plurality of Chinese identity. Diaspora, 10(3), 361–389.
Wrong, D. H. (1976). Skeptical sociology. London: Heinemann Educational Books.
Zhong, S. J. (1993). To be a competent parent. Taipei: Laureate Book.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Siu-sing, W. (2013). Listening to Fathers. In: Kwok-bun, C. (eds) International Handbook of Chinese Families. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-0266-4_22
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-0266-4_22
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-0265-7
Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-0266-4
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawSocial Sciences (R0)