In Childers' paper she discusses the importance of men fulfilling their roles as strong paternal figures within their families in France. Her argument further discusses how the male head of the household, known as the pere de famille, became a subject in the way the French Third Republic viewed families in regards to suffrage and working condition reform.
She tells us that since 1913, paternity began to be connected to political discourse in order to construct a productive nation that pressured men to form families. Furthermore, political discourse during interwar France began to attack the rights that single men had. As examples of not fulfilling their paternal role, single men's voting rights were attacked. Reformers advocated for a change in how much a single man's vote was worth in comparison to that of a father's. Arguably a father needed more weight to his vote because he was representing not just himself, but a whole entire family. Historically single men had already dominated voting rights, and using previous political disasters as example, conservatives believed that a shift of rights to paternally experienced voters would produce effective and enlightened reform. This can easily be summarized by showing that there was pressure to give father's more representation because they were viewed as elite and the incompetence of single men throughout history was used as a way to push for this change (pg.94).
In order to reform working conditions, men used their status as fathers to advocate for change. If the state expected a father to support his family not only monetarily, but by educating his children, men would have to have time to be home and do that (pg.95). In addition to helping his wife with the children, a change towards a eight-hour work day would allow him time to educate himself. A father with the ability to read political literature weekly meant he would be a model citizen to the French government. This tactic for reform shows a example of modernity in the equalizing of parental roles. A man is now expected to help out and not just be the breadwinner for the home. However a father will still be expected to work, and to even teach his sons that this is important (pg.98). By asking father's to do more they were seen as valuable in reconstructing the state after the damage done during the Great War.
This article fits under several themes for this class, but primarily focuses on the state expectations for father's and also a father's relationship to his family. Although the Catholic church is mentioned a little bit throughout the work, the state's pressure on men to fulfill a paternal role dominates the paper. Family relationship is the other important theme because it mentions how important men were in their families and that the amount of experience men obtained from being a father could not be supplemented by any other activity.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I agree with Kristina's argument. The article displayed France's emphasis on the nuclear family through the issue of voting rights. A married man--the ideal man in France at the time--deserved to have more votes in order to represent his family. Single men, on the other hand, were to be afforded fewer votes because of their limited familial responsibilities.
I found it interesting that women's suffrage was put on the back-burner in order to benefit the greater issue of family rights at the time.
Another appropriate theme is gender, as the focus is on manhood.
I agree with Kristina’s argument but also think that this topic focuses on a higher degree of morality or a return to morality. The nuclear family is used in this sense because a father who is actively involved in family life and has a sense of educational and moral responsibility to his children, will be more inclined to contribute to society. He will not only educate himself on the politics of France but also help his children to become involved and opinionated. I’m sure conservatives were more than happy to support fathers in fulfilling their roles because often those families were the ones who were might have been more conservative in nature. Whereas the single men might have been seen as unconventional and possibly more liberal. I think this paved the way for the modern view of the importance of a paternal figure in the household. It is interesting how this change occurred when in the past single men had always had so much power.
Post a Comment