Heteronormativity,
Patriarchy and the
Nuclear Family Ideal
An Analysis of Queer Dutch Suburbia
Harriet ThompsonAbstract Abstract
This study uses feminist approaches to research and humanistic methods to understand the queer experience of Dutch suburban spaces. The core concepts of heteronormativity, patriarchy and the nuclear family ideal influence the way queer members of the suburban community experience and articulate romantic desires, the traditional gender labor divide and starting a family. This study finds that heteronormativity in suburban spaces promotes the privileging of heterosexuality in that participants felt that their queer sexuality reduced their chances of getting married. Additionally, it creates social scripts around romantic love so that the only viable option for a relationship is through monogamy. Patriarchy was shown to have limited impact in Dutch suburban spaces, as partners shared economic and domestic responsibilities. This could be because same-sex couples are not able to conform to normative gender roles; furthermore it could be related to high levels of gender equality experienced throughout the Netherlands. The nuclear family ideal is demonstrated to create discourses surrounding the correct way to be a parent, in which a good parent must dedicate their time to their children. However, for same-sex couples there are a series of complications and difficulties when starting a family which must be considered. Finally, this study looks at the exclusion and discrimination faced by queer participants in suburban spaces. This created a divide among participants which is demonstrated to be created by age and environment. Participants from Purmerend who were younger found suburban spaces to be constricting, and the urban environment to be open and accepting where participants from Ijburg, who were older, found the opposite.
Table of Contents 1. Introduction………..……….3 2. Suburban Literature………..………5 Suburbanisation………5 Heteronormativity……….………..…..7 Patriarchy………..9
The Nuclear Family Ideal………..11
Conclusions………13
3. Research Design……….………..14
Research Philosophy………15
Operationalisation………16
Secondary Data: Statistics………17
Primary Data: Interviews……….18
Ethics………..20
4. How do discourses of Heteronormativity, Patriarchy and the Nuclear Family Ideal shape the Suburban Socio-Spatial infrastructure?...21
4.1 Purmerend... ... ... ... ...21
Heteronormativity………22
Patriarchy………24
The Nuclear Family Ideal……….……….25
4.2 IJburg………..……….……….28
Heteronormativity………29
Patriarchy………31
The Nuclear Family Ideal……….……….31
5. How do discourses of Heteronormativity, Patriarchy and the Nuclear Family Ideal Influence Queer Suburban Lives?...34
5.1 Purmerend……….………..……….34 Marriage………..34 Monogamy……….36 Homonormativity………..37 Gender Roles………37 Queer Families……….38 Correct Parenthood……….39 5.2 IJburg……….………40 Marriage………..40 Homonormativity………..41 Gender Roles………42
Gender Differences in Parental Desires……….42
Queer Families……….43
6. Discrimination against Queer Suburban Lives……….45
6.1 Purmerend……….………45
Suburban Hate Crimes………45
Public Displays of Affection………46
Gay Lives as Entertainment………48
6.2 IJburg……….………48
Suburban Hate Crimes……….……….48
Public Displays of Affection………..……….49
Sexualisation of Lesbian Women………..……….50
Tolerance from a Distance……….……….51
7. Concluding Remarks………..52
8. Appendices………57
1. Introduction
This study uses feminist epistemologies to investigate queer lives within the suburban context in accordance with three discourses stemming from middle class suburban values: heteronormativity, patriarchy and the nuclear family ideal. There is still much debate over the appropriateness of the word ‘queer’ within academia based on its oppressive roots. However, according to Doty (1993: Xvi) ‘queer can be used to ‘suggest a range of nonstraight expression…[which] includes specifically gay, lesbian and bisexual expressions; but it also includes all other potential (and potentially unclassifiable) nonstraight positions’. Therefore, the word queer will be used in this study to describe any person who rejects heterosexual normativity.
Warner (1991) originally popularised the term heteronormativity, through his work on queer theory. It has been described as a concept that reveals the expectations, demands and constraints produced when heterosexuality is taken as normative in society by Chambers (2003). However, this view only considers social implications of heteronormativity overlooking the embodied dimension of what being heteronormative means to an individual. The definition of heteronormativity for this study has its roots in queer theory developed by Butler (1990). Queer theory challenges the normative social ordering of identities and subjectivities along the hetero-homosexual binary as well as the privileging of heterosexual as ‘natural’ and homosexuality as its deviant and abhorrent ‘other’ (Browne and Nash 2010). In this way, a heteronormative person would be someone whose sexuality lies on the extreme of the spectrum: a person who is both heterosexual and cis gendered. Cis meaning ‘same’, the opposite of Trans, a person who’s biological sex and socially constructed gender are aligned. Patriarchy can be defined as a social system in which men hold primary power (Malti-Douglas 2007). Within suburban spaces, patriarchy is responsible for the separation of the public sphere of masculinity and work from the private space of the home, femininity and domesticity (England 1993; Markusen 1981; Saegart 1981; Watson 1986; Wekerle 1984). While attitudes towards women and work have changed drastically in recent years, patriarchy works as an internalised system therefore it is still an important barrier to gender equality. Furthermore, patriarchy may be embedded into planning practices which according to Maginn (2011) privilege patriarchy and heterosexuality. A nuclear family consists of a pair of adults and their children, typically centring on a married couple (Encyclopaedia Britannia 2011). In the Netherlands, gay and lesbian parents were given the right to adopt children, along with the right to marry in 2001. Equal rights acts may produce a new homonormativity, described by Duggan (2002:179) as ‘a politics that does not contest dominant heteronormative assumptions and institutions, but upholds and sustains them, while promising the possibility of a demobilised gay culture anchored in domesticity and consumption’. Queer lives are becoming increasingly integrated into heteronormativity focusing on respectability, marriage, and family. This impact of homonormativity within suburban spaces is something that will be investigated and explored within this study.
This study uses a feminist approach, involving qualitative humanistic methods to gain an in-depth understanding of the embodied experiences of gendered individuals (Dowler and Sharpe 2001). Based on outcomes of a review of the current literature, the research design includes a combination of field observations, statistics and interviews in order to understand socio-spatial layout of the case study locations, as well as how participants interact with these spaces. This study aims to analyse the roles heteronormativity, patriarchy and the nuclear family ideal play in the socio-spatial layout of Dutch suburbia. Additionally, it will explore how these discourses impact the lives of queer participants and the extent to which Dutch suburbia produces discourses excluding queer lives comparative to the urban scene.
This study uses two groups of participants from two locations in order to offer a comparison between Dutch suburban experiences, as well as to increase the reliability of results. The first location is Purmerend in North-Holland, located just north of Amsterdam. Purmerend began as a small fishing village, and was granted an urban charter in 1434 (Purmerend Museum n.d.). After 1960, the population in Purmerend started to grow rapidly increasing from around 10,000 to around 80,000 inhabitants by 2010 (CBS 2014). This growth changed Purmerend into a commuter town, in 2011 14,200 people travelled into Amsterdam for work. In this way, while Purmerend is a town of its own right, it can be seen to operate as a suburb of Amsterdam. Participants from the Purmerend group are between the ages of 25 and 30 and have either lived in Purmerend their whole life or recently (within the last year) moved away. The second location is IJburg, a new construction which was completed in 2003 located in the IJ lake to the East of Amsterdam. IJburg is a planned development aiming to have 18,000 homes for 45,000 residents as well as schools, shops, leisure centres, restaurants and a beach (Stadstel OOst n.d.). Participants from this group are aged 40 and older, and have made the conscious choice to move out of an urban space into the suburbs. The two groups highlight two different uses of suburban space, one by people whose parents chose to move to the suburbs and have interacted with suburbia as children, teenagers and now young adults and one who themselves chose to move to the suburbs based on various urban push and pull factors and interact with suburbia as adults. Outcomes of the data collection highlight the differences in experiences between the two groups. Group 1 from Purmerend, feel suburban spaces are oppressive and unaccepting of gay lives, which they compare to the openness they feel when in Amsterdam. Here urban spaces are seen as the ideal for expressing their sexual identity. By comparison, group 2 from IJburg find the familiarity with their neighbours in suburban spaces allows them to express their identity freely, whereas autonomy of urban spaces creates a feeling of unease and a lack of safety.
The maps below show both case study locations with relation to Amsterdam, taken from screenshots of google maps. IJburg is on the left, and Purmerend on the right.
2. Suburban Literature
There is an extensive body of literature focusing on the individual themes of heteronormativity, patriarchy, the nuclear family ideal and suburban space. The following chapter attempts to provide an overview of this literature, producing a cohesive argument linking all the aforementioned areas. It will conclude with areas in the literature requiring further investigation, therefore explaining the choices behind this study.
Suburbanisation
The process of suburbanisation became a significant urban feature during the latter half of the twentieth century according to Champion (2001), as cheap forms of mass transit loosened the ties between home and work. This process further accelerated as a response to changes in transport and personal wealth. According to Champion (2001), suburbanisation became the dominant element of urban change in the 1960s across Western Europe. Furthermore, Champion relates the success of the suburbs to the provision of an escape from the problems of city living, as well as allowing people to avoid limited life chances of the deep countryside. The term ‘suburb’ carries connotations of being something smaller than urban areas; they are ‘usually residential or dormitory in character, being dependent on the city for occupational, shopping and recreational facilities’ (Johnston 1981:331). In the Netherlands suburbanisation began in the 1960s, and statistics show the process is not likely to stop in the near future as more than 40% of families with children who are currently living in urban areas plan to move (SCP 2001). Suburban areas are generally characterised by middle class families. Karsten (2007) attributes this middle-class domination to their financial position allowing them to move away from urban areas. According to Champion (2001) suburbs were originally designed to meet the needs of families with the emphasis on the ‘male breadwinner’ and proving a healthy space in which
the mother could devote her time to bringing up her children and providing for her husband. Sharpe and Wallock (2007), analysed media representations of suburban areas in television and film, concluding that such representations reinforce this patriarchal suburban ideal. Karsten (2007) states that ‘over the life course, families adjust their housing situation to correspond with their financial resources and the spatial requirements of the household’. If homes in suburban areas are designed for families it can be assumed they are, for the most part, three or four bedroom properties. As children grow up and leave the family home, following from the hypothesis proposed by Karsten, it follows that elderly people will downsize and move away from suburban areas. This further reinforces the familial focus of suburban spaces.
A more recent trend within suburban literature is the urbanisation of the suburbs. Champion (2001) argues that since the 1960s, the suburbs have become eclipsed by other developments. Moreover, at the same time they have undergone a revolution which appears to render the original terminology obsolete. Champion terms this change ‘urban decentralisation’ defined as a shift in patterns of development from the mainly lateral expansion of the city’s built up ‘core’ to a much deeper penetration of house building into an extensive community hinterlands, or ‘ring’. Cervero (1989) recognises a ‘third wave’ of suburbanisation in the USA, characterised by the progressive disappearance of the ‘sub’ element of the process and a growth of industrial, commercial and retail activities in the suburbs. According to England (1993), the conception that the suburbs are distinct from the city is an overgeneralisation, over the last two decades most urban functions and economic activities have undergone a level of suburbanisation. This ‘new suburbanisation’ (Stanback 1991) with its ‘suburban downtowns’ (Hartshorn and Muller 1986) and ‘edge cities’ (Garreau 1991) is increasingly being seen as challenging to central cities, and threatens to turn the traditional metropolitan area inside out. The US census in 1991 found many suburbs feature corporate headquarters, high-tech industries, and superregional malls. Additionally, almost twice as many people commute to work within suburbs as commute between them and cities. According to Noah (1991) these rapidly expanding suburbs contain more office space than downtowns and most of the new jobs. As a result, suburbs moved to the forefront of American economic development, and are far less dependent upon cities than before (Gapp, Phillips and Elsener 1973). Sharpe and Wallock (2007) found this explosive growth had a profane impact both on the landscape and people’s conceptions of suburban life. Furthermore, they noted the shattering of the image of the suburbs as a ‘pastoral haven’ through the spread of homelessness, drug addiction and crime; even going so far as to claim that ‘suburbia is dead’. It is important to note that the majority of the aforementioned literature is America-centric and may not necessarily hold true for the Netherlands. However, available literature for the Netherlands in English is incredibly limited therefore the theoretical framework for this project must be brought in from elsewhere.
Heteronormativity
Maginn (2011) notes the dominance of white, middle class men in the planning profession, and therefore describes it as ‘patriarchal and heterosexist in character’. Moreover, Bell (1991) finds lesbian women and gay men have always remained the least visible ‘others’ in the eyes and words of geographers. This comes despite the acknowledgement that their lives are defined to a lesser or greater degree by both their sexuality and the reaction to that sexuality from other people. Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) populations challenge many of the cultural and social values underlying US housing and land use practice, including assumptions about family life (Peron 1977; Hayden 1984; Forsyth 2011). Furthermore, according to Valentine (1993) many lesbians and gay men may feel pressured into hiding their identity from others, adopting strategies to ‘pass’ as heterosexual in everyday places. Hodge (1995) speculates about the role of the place in the formation of gay men’s identity. According to Anderson and Gale (1992), places are constructed, they do not exist in isolation from cultural processes or people’s imaginations- places are more than locations on maps they are cultural creations with varying meanings to the different people that experience them. Therefore, the cultural construction of place involves the creation of identities for particular locations.
Doan (2011) investigates the impact of this on gender variant populations, claiming such groups are harmed by practices that fail to consider gender as continuum. This can be linked to a patriarchal tendency to see the world as a man’s world where gender effectively becomes a simple dichotomy of male and not-male. However, following queer theory (Butler 1990) people are infinitely more complex than this binary division. Instead, sexuality falls on a continuum embodying a wide range of sexualities and genders. Mill (1969) warned against the tyranny of the majority, arguing that sheer weight of numbers will never be sufficient to make any unjust act more just. According to Skeggs (2004) gender variations serve to destabilise traditional and heteronormative conceptions of gender roles. Doan (2011) found planning practices sanction those who do not fit into the neat dichotomous boxes of hetero-patriarchy as they move through public spaces. Social retribution is imposed on anyone who is seen as a ‘gender outlaw’ (Bornstein 1994) resulting in punishment in the form of harassment and violence. This is something that planning agencies, therefore, must take into consideration in order to reduce the vulnerability of gender variant and transgendered community members.
According to Chisholm (2000) cultural narratives place urban space as a ‘territory of sexual discoveries’. This leads to an overlooking of sexualities in suburban areas. Phillips, Watt and Shuttleton (2000) agree, arguing sexuality in non-metropolitan areas has garnered little attention. Bell (1991) further critiques the existing body of literature surrounding sexuality and space as focusing too heavily on the urban fabric (Castells 1983; Castell and Murphy 1982; Ettorre 1978; Knopp 1987, 19990b; Lauria and Knopp 1985; Ross 1990; Thomas 1986; Winters 1989; Wolf 1979). While it is important to note that these references are now
somewhat dated, the literature on sexuality and the suburbs is still limited. Until about a decade ago, suburbs were perceived as homogenous spaces filled with white, middle and upper income, heterosexual communities (Desert 1997; Harris 1999; Lynch 1992). According to Anacker (2011) there has been little attention on queer households in the suburbs. They are instead perceived as places where two-parent, nuclear, heterosexual families live in single-family, owner-occupied homes and where queer identity formation is inhibited (Altman 19822; Knopp 1992). Lynch (1987) found that in America, homosexuals are finding suburban life increasingly attractive; furthermore that the lure of gay ghettos and large cities has faded. Thompson (2014) found that an increase in tolerant attitudes towards homosexual and queer communities increased their integration with heteronormative lifestyles. Following this argument it makes sense that, as the gay community is not homogenous (Forsyth 2011), some wish to pursue heteronormative lifestyles by moving to suburban areas. Furthermore, Forsyth finds that gays and lesbians have relatively high incomes and therefore can afford suburban lifestyles. Hodge (1995) calls for sexuality and space research to be carried out away from high visible territories in inner cities. Moreover, commentators such as Bell (19910, Davis (1995) and Kramer (1995) argue that a fuller understanding of the relationship between sexuality and space will occur if other spaces such as the suburbs are studied. This study fits into this gap in the literature through its focus on queer suburban life.
It has already been established that suburban areas are designed and built to house families. This reinforced a cultural norm of ‘family life’ with patriarchy and heterosexuality high on the agenda (Watson 1986; Bell 1991). Tor (2008) examines contemporary Norwegian discourses about the upbringing of children, heterosexual romantic love, lifelong monogamy and ‘genetic’ parenthood. The use of the word genetic here is interesting, implying that there is a difference in experience between families who have conceived themselves and those who have adopted children. According to Tor, lesbian mothers and gay fathers challenge both the normative discourse of genetic parenthood, the normative construction of children as a result of romantic love, and the assumption that a child’s healthy psycho-social development depends on the parents’ complementary gender roles. These new patterns of intimacy represent a radical challenge to what has traditionally been seen as cornerstones of Western civilisation (Weeks et al 2001). However, it can be assumed that this is less of an issue in liberal Dutch society when compared to, for example, the USA where religion still plays an important role in contemporary society.
In the last few years, there has been a surge in studies examining ‘homonormativity’. Duggan (2002) first noted this theme when investigating new political conservatism particularly through the organisation ‘The Independent Gay Forum’ a right-wing group aiming to ‘forge into a new gay mainstream’. Duggan describes homonormalisation as ‘a politics that does not contest dominant heteronormative assumptions and institutions, but upholds and sustains them, while promising the possibility of a demobilised gay culture anchored in domesticity and consumption’. According to Duggan (2003), research focusing
on the study on family relationships of same-sex couples has created bias by implying these families are situated within a heteronormativity. This ideology is used to promote the normality of the traditional heterosexual marriage in the larger US culture through law, policy and enactment. Positioning gay and lesbian couples as ‘just like’ heterosexual couples and families effectively hides the differences in experiences, and therefore reinforces the invisibility of queer groups within geographical study. Homonormalisation is important in this study as equal rights acts, which have given gay and lesbian couples to right to adopt and marry, may promote an assimilation of queer lifestyles into heteronormativity. This study will therefore investigate the extent to which this happens in Dutch suburban spaces, and the impact of queer suburban lives.
Patriarchy
Patriarchy literally translates to the ‘rule of the father’ (Ferguson 1999), and is defined as a social system in which men hold primary power (Malti-Douglas 2007). According to Doan (2011), for centuries women were considered a faulty reflection of the male ideal. Beauvoir (1949) suggests that influential philosophers and theologians perpetuated this approach. Aristotle argued women are women by virtue of a lack of useful qualities, and St Thomas Aquinas declared that a woman is an imperfect man. Schwartz (1996) notes that the denigration of the father, or patriarch, lies at the heart of postmodernism with theoretical roots in Foucault and Derrida and is unrelievedly negative. The ‘assault on the father’ (Best and Kellner 1991) began in the late 1960s. Schwartz appears to take a very negative stance on feminist roots, seeming to perpetuate the idea that feminism is synonymous with ‘man hating’. For the purpose of this study, patriarchy can be seen as a social system in which men are favoured, and women face marginalisation and social inequality.
Gender is central to the allocation of resources, facilities and opportunities. Feminist geographers argue that it is essential to the structuring of urban spaces: the location of residential areas, workplaces and transportation networks and the overall layout of cities reflect patriarchal capitalistic society’s expectations of what types of activities take place where, when and by whom (England 1993). According to Doan (2011) planning retains its patriarchal credentials, and seems either reluctant or oblivious to the notion that our gendered and sexualised identities are more than a simply binary biological concept. Planning is now beginning to recognise the need to incorporate gender more centrally into planning theory and practice (Sandercock and Forsyth 1992) but the conceptualisation of gender commonly used is dichotomous and seemingly unaware of the tyranny of gender. Gender is constituted through space (England 1993) and Spain (1992) argues spaces are inherently gendered by social and cultural practices that determine the ways that men and women are permitted to use that space. England (1993) adds that the state, property developers, planners and architects have underwritten and designed post-war suburban housing and neighbourhoods based on patriarchal and heterosexist assumptions about ‘appropriate’ gender roles and subsequent social practices. Raising gender issues challenges
the entrenched practices of hegemonic masculinity embedded within the patriarchy according to Doan (2011).
Feminist geographers view suburban areas as spaces which have reinforced patriarchal values through the privatisation of the family, and the promotion of traditional gender roles. Within Western contexts, literature has firmly shown that suburbanisation is not a gender neutral spatial process (Hirt 2008). According to Frank (2005) suburbs were created to enforce typical bourgeois way of life. This revolves around the idea of a nuclear family with a male head of household and a full time housewife and mother. This unpaid, domestic work delegated women to the private residential sphere therefore acting to spatially exclude them. England (1993) states that post-war residential suburbanisation was hinged on the notion of dichotomous spheres, the ‘private’ sphere of consumption and reproduction, being the domain of women, and the ‘public’ sphere of production, waged work and political activity being associated with men. This was further entrenched by the rise of ‘professional experts’ particularly doctors and psychologists emphasising the need to ‘rebuild’ the family. The extent of the private/public and therefore male/female segregation promoted Saegart (1981) to talk about ‘masculine cities’ and ‘feminine suburbs’ as women were gradually squeezed out of the labour force into their ‘proper place’ within the private sphere of the home (Markusen 1981; Watson 1986; Wekerle 1984). England (1993) further argues that as suburbs were built farther and farther from the central city, where most of the paid jobs were, men’s commutes grew longer decreasing the amount of time they could spend with their family. This in turn increased the isolation felt by women, especially as there was often only one car which was used by men commuting to their jobs in the central city.
Hirt (2008) notes that the suburban dream of escape, and quaint single-family living in green settings arose in part from a renegotiating of gender roles during the 18th and 19th centuries. Through this process, men asserted their dominance over civic business life in the city, and women assumed the role of guardians of suburban domestic life. Once built, suburbs further solidified these gender roles, as women became more removed from the city they faced even greater impediments to participating in public life (Hayden 2003; Spain 1992; Spain 1982; Fishman 1987). Hirt (2008) reaffirmed the link between gender and suburbanisation in a post-communist context through examining female experiences of Bulgarian suburbs. She found a diverse range of experiences, some women have chosen to be full times homemakers, and some lament becoming more dependent on male relatives however others feel liberated from the ‘double burden’. According to Frank (2005) assumptions about gender roles are instrumental in the layout and design cities have received, urban structure in turn make these conditions applicable to the way overall gender relations are negotiated. The privatisation of the family, as outlined above, increased domestic labour for women especially as suburban housing was not designed to facilitate the communalisation of domestic labour (England 1993). According to Markusen (1981) the design of suburban communities and houses reinforced the notion that women’s place was
in the home doing the housework and raising children. This provided men with a private retreat largely maintained by women, and helped to reinforce specific life-styles that ultimately perpetuated inequalities between men and women.
The previous literature has described how suburban spaces can be considered as promoting a patriarchal society through relegating women to the private sphere of the home, and reinforcing the association with women and domesticity. However, it is important not to overlook the diversity of experiences. According to England (1993) suburban women are usually presented as the innocent, passive victims of built environments. However, this oversimplifies the complex interrelationship between people and spatial structures. England writes from a feminist viewpoint, stressing the importance of human agency, stating suburban women should be treated as active and strategizing people able to alter their sociospatial relations and create neighbourhood support networks to better meet their needs and those of their families. Lives of women in general have changed radically over the past few decades (Saegart 1981). There has been dramatic growth in the number of women in paid work. This has been linked to stagnation of real wages, and the increasing difficulty with which households can be maintained on one income (Bianchi and Spain 1986). Moreover, smaller families and rising divorce rates have made paid employment relatively more important for women (Gerson 1983). England connects equal opportunities and educational achievement to a shift in women’s expectations. Most women no longer view their paid labour force participation as intermittent, and since the early 1980s women have been more likely to search for full-time rather than part-time employment. However, this represents a challenge for modern suburban women. As has been demonstrated, suburban design reinforced traditional gender roles therefore women who do not conform to such roles face spatial restriction, such as limited child care opportunities and access to appropriate paid employment (England 1993).
The Nuclear Family Ideal
Families and suburban spaces have become almost synonymous with each other, to the point that suburban spaces perpetuate the idea they are only suitable for family residence. Suburbanisation is described as a process in which family ties are strengthened (Gans 1967; Willmott and Young 1967; Hummon 1990). According to Karsten, Lupi and Stigter-Speksnijder (2013) in western civilisation, urban planning policies stimulated suburban family life and moving to a suburban location seems a ‘natural’ choice for families just starting out. Donatelli (2001) examines the role of the minivan as a nexus for bringing together a whole bunch of social scripts surrounding the nuclear family. According to Donatelli, the minivan created a well-defined discursive space for defining familial and suburban social relations in a conservative way. The vehicle creates a ‘myth’ of harmony, with everyone sitting in their seats even at a time when divorce rates have increased, teenagers have lived increasingly independent lives and two-career families are hard pressed to find time for both professional and domestic commitments. In this way, it
becomes a site for the performativity of family values, and an extension of the suburban home. Anacker (2011) uses the example of queer suburbs to challenge the perception of suburban spaces being the home of the nuclear family and the epicentre of heteronormativity.
The emphasis on the importance of the nuclear family in suburban areas impacts the lives of working mothers, suburban women still have more difficulty in managing their work-life balance than urban women (Jarvis et al 2011; De Meester et al 2007, 2011). As mentioned before, changes in the suburban landscape, and also expectations of women have changed the lives of these suburban women. Over the last decade, companies have moved out of the centre of the city, bringing employment closer to the suburban family (Harris and Larkham 1999; Phelps et al 2006; Hanlon et al 2009). Consequently, the number of working mothers has increased, along with transportation and other facilities and socio-economic diversity (Dowling 1998, England 1993). Karsten, Lupi and Stigter-Speksnijder (2013) found mothers in Dutch suburbs are more likely to be employed than mothers in the Netherlands as a whole, 60% of all Dutch mothers are an active part of the workforce compared to 80% found by their survey. Moreover, they found that while the employment rate of mothers in the suburbs is increasing, the use of kindergarten and after-school care is declining, favouring a pattern of families taking care of their children themselves. The traditional suburban life with a housewife staying at home to take care of the children is disappearing in the Netherlands, however Karsten, Lupi and Stigter-Speksnijder (2013) found full time employment for both parents is rare. In some cultures there may be pressure on women to start families. Women are socialised to be mothers and undertake child raising opportunities (Chodrow 1978; Dinnerstein 1976) and are led to believe that children will bring them happiness (Gilbert 2007). However, there is a strong link between motherhood and depression (Evenson and Simon 2005) and motherhood imposes a cost on earnings and career status (Baker 2010). According to Read, Crockett and Manson (2012) the good mother ideal perpetuated in Western societies requires women to always be available to their children and to see to the needs of their children at the expense of their own. Moreover, women are expected to do this naturally, willingly, and largely unaided (Lupton and Schmied 2002; Newman 2009; Richards 1997; Wearing 1984). The overwhelming prevalence of families and family services within suburban spaces could contribute to such pressures on women to not only have children, but to conform to the ‘good mother’ ideal.
Another important theme in the literature surrounding suburban parenthood is using children to form a social network. Maginn (2012) found parents used childrearing to connect and interact with like-minded neighbours. This involvement was applicable particularly to traditional families with stay-at-home mothers supporting each other raising children. Karsten, Lupi and Stigter-Speksnijder (2013) found the presence of many informal child care arrangements in suburban spaces, revealing a vibrant social life. Having children is therefore a trigger for social interaction based on shared lived experiences associated with childrearing. Karsten, Lupi and Stigner-Speksnijder further found a social network based
around child sitting. In this way, a new family community is constructed, in which working fathers and mothers are the active participants. This reflects the social reproduction of middle-class lifestyles found in contemporary suburbs elsewhere, as in the master-planned estates in Australia (Rosenblatt et al 2009; McGuirk and Dowling 2011). According to Bould (2003) it has been assumed by many commentators that the move to the suburbs destroyed the traditional urban neighbourhoods and resulted in a nonconnected family lifestyle. Suburban neighbourhoods came to represent the antithesis of the old urban spaces in which families were no longer linked by nearby kin and ethnic and church ties (Dizard and Gaslin 1990; Parsons 1955). Many critics have focused on the physical layout of the suburbs as an impediment to more connected lifestyles (Kelly 1993; Putnam 2000; Bould 2003). However, the findings by Karsten, Lupi and Stigter-Speksnijder (2013) and Maginn (2012) contradicts this. Instead new networks and relationships are formed, stemming from the presence of children. It could be argued that such practices exclude members of suburban communities who do not wish to have children themselves. For this reason, this research will aim to reach childless residents in order to understand how the presence of the nuclear family ideal impacts their interaction with suburban spaces and suburban lifestyles.
Conclusions
The current literature surrounding heteronormativity, patriarchy, the nuclear family ideal and suburbia highlights several key themes. There has been a substantial change in the role and purpose of suburban spaces since their development in the 1950s. Originally, they developed as places for starting a family which relied on urban spaces for employment, school, and entertainment. In contrast, contemporary suburban spaces are places of their own right following the decentralisation of urban areas. However, discourses of heteronormativity and patriarchy are still reproduced and reinforced by planning practices through building homes for families. Reviewing the current literature has highlighted the following aspects of suburbia which will form the basis of this study. Heteronormativity firstly promotes the privileging of heterosexuality and also encourages the idea that marriage is the best choice to settle down. This study will therefore look at hetero and homosexual marriage rates in suburban spaces, as well as the extent to which participants feel excluded from suburbia. Feminist geographers claim patriarchy in suburban spaces manifest through couples conforming to traditional gender roles surrounding working patterns. Same sex couples however cannot follow such norms so this study will look at how such couples navigate these patriarchal discourses. The nuclear family ideal creates ideas, and some believe it creates ideas of correct motherhood and may condemn working mothers. Therefore, this study will investigate the extent to which Dutch suburban spaces are dominated by the nuclear family, and how working and non-working mothers experience such discourses.
The conceptual scheme below displays the relationship between the independent variables and each of the research questions. Each bullet point represents an outcome, and every outcome is influenced by age, environment and social connections of participants.
In order to explore the aforementioned problems, this study will answer the research question ‘How do discourses of heteronormativity, patriarchy and the nuclear family ideal impact queer suburban lives?’ through answering the following sub questions:
1. How do discourses of heteronormativity, patriarchy and the nuclear family ideal shape the socio-spatial landscape?
2. How do discourses of heteronormativity, patriarchy and the nuclear family ideal impact queer lives?
3. Do members of the queer community feel excluded from Dutch suburban spaces?
3. Research Design
Based on the conclusions of chapter two it is clear that there is a gap in the literature surrounding the queer experience within suburban spaces. Moreover, there is some debate over whether the legalisation of gay marriage and the introduction of gay adoption rights have integrated queer lives with heteronormativity. This research design uses qualitative approaches and a feminist epistemology in order to explore and understand the lived experiences of queer members of the Dutch suburban community.
Data collection will involve a collaboration of primary sources in the format of interviews, and secondary sources taken from the Purmerend and Amsterdam Gemeente. This data will be used to answer the following research questions:
1. How do discourses of heteronormativity, patriarchy and the nuclear family ideal shape the suburban landscape?
2. How do these discourses impact queer suburban lives?
3. To what extent do members of the queer suburban community feel excluded from suburban spaces?
Research Philosophy
An analysis of previous work conducted within suburban spaces shows most projects take a humanistic stance on data collection. Johnston (1986) describes this approach as focusing on an individual as a thinking being, rather than dehumanised responder to stimuli. Such approaches include the notion of ‘phenomenology’ which proposes people should be studied free of any preconceived theories on how they should act (Johnston 1986). Taking such an approach to research changes the traditional power dynamics and instead places the participants as experts in the field. In the context of this study, this is important as the researcher lies outside the community being studied. Giving power to the participants rather than the researcher helped to grant access to this community. Moreover, such approaches help data collection as participants are allowed to share which ever elements they feel are important. This minimises researcher subjectivity as decisions over topics covered were at the discretion of participants.
This study aligns itself with feminist epistemologies in geographical research. Geography and Gender introduces the idea of feminist geography as a geography which ‘explicitly takes into account the socially created gender structure of society; and in which a commitment both towards the alleviation of gender inequality in the short term and towards its removal through social change towards real equality, in the longer term, is expressed (Womens Study Group of the IBG: 21). While there are many different approaches within feminism, the school can be divided into two broad themes: radical feminism and socialist feminism. Radical feminism regards the subordination of women by men as the fundamental inequality in all human societies. The Dialectic of Sex by Firestone (1970) argues that a division of labour between the sexes proceeded and gave birth to the division of labour by class and race. Furthermore, she argued that the elimination of sexual oppression should lead to the elimination of other oppressions. According to Firestone the primary cause of conflict in society is located in the struggle between men and women over the social relations involved in biological reproduction. Under this argument, pregnancy and breast feeding have put women at a disadvantage therefore enabling men to gain the upper hand. Socialist feminism, however, rejects the notion that men are the enemy arguing men and women should unite in class struggle. Moreover, socialist feminism moves away from a view of history and geography in which patriarchy is portrayed as some kind of constant
which does not vary according to other characteristics of the societies in question (Coot and Campbell 1982:31). It is such socialist themes that are more fitting with the approach of this study. Here, patriarchy and heteronormativity are not seen as being the fault of men. Instead, they are perpetuated through societal discourse at the hands of both men and women. Furthermore, this paper is written under the belief that in order to reach a society based on gender equality it is imperative that all members of the population are included, and their voices heard.
Traditionally, the epistemology of feminist geographies has advocated a humanistic approach to knowledge production supporting the use of qualitative methodologies to understand embodied experiences of participants (McLafferty 2010). Some have argued there is no place for positivism, empiricism and quantitative methodologies (Hanson 2002; McLafferty 2002; Taylor 1990) whilst others have called for the integration of such practices, particularly GIS, within critical feminist geographies (Sui 1994; Miller 1995; Yapa 1998; Johnston 1999). This study utilises quantitative as well as qualitative methods. However following from feminist approaches the main body of the research uses qualitative, and humanistic methods aiming to critically understand the lived experiences of participants. The quantitative methods are used to provide an overview of the situation rather than explaining the reasons behind this.
Operationalisation
The key concepts central to this project are heteronormativity, patriarchy and the nuclear family ideal. These are all fluid concepts, difficult to pin down and find a researchable aspect. For this reason, an operationalization table was used to make more sense of these concepts. An operationalization table, as seen below, starts with a concept or the idea being studied, then breaks that into a dimension or the specifiable aspect of the concept and finished with a measure which is something observable.
Concept Heteronormativity Patriarchy Nuclear Family Ideal Dimension 1. Marriage
2.Privileging of heterosexuality
3. Acceptance of queer lives 4. Homonormativity 1. Women associated with domesticity 2. Stay at home mothers 3. Gender Divide 1. Having children 2. Marriage
Measure 1.1 Number of married couples
1.2 Perceptions on marriage/partnership 2.1 Number of hetero and homo marriages
2.2 Would opinions differ if hetero 3.1 Comfortable in expressive affection 3.2 Hate crimes 1.1 Parental working patterns
2.1 Use of day care facilities
3.1 Do children’s shops promote gender divide through marketing e.g pink for girls
1.1 Suburban households with children 1.2 do participants have/want to have children 2.1 important to marry before starting a family
4.1 Number of same-sex marriages
4.2 Queer desires to marry/start a family
Secondary data: Statistics
The collection of secondary data aimed to gain an overview of the population and landscape of Purmerend. Furthermore, it was interpreted in order to answer the first question; how do discourses of heteronormativity, patriarchy and the nuclear family ideal shape the suburban landscape?. Secondary data was seen as the best choice of research due to the short time frame of this study. Census data was used initially to understand the social fabric and social experience in Purmerend and IJburg, this was following by field visits and observations to understand how this influences planning of Purmerend and IJburg.
The Central Bureau for Statistics regularly collects survey data relating to a multitude of societal aspects, and processes them to be used in practice, by policy makers, and for the purpose of research (CBS 2015). This expertise and great depth of information will be advantageous to this study, as attempting to collect all this information would be time consuming, furthermore language may have become an issue. Following from the operationalization table, there are several dimensions of each key concept that were measured. Marriage statistics, were used to ascertain the impact of heteronormativity on society in Purmerend. It is clear from the literature that the two biggest impacts of patriarchy on suburban lives are the segregation of women to the domestic sphere, and the domination of the idea that women should be primary care givers for their children. In order to understand the impact of this, participants were asked how they manage (or envisage managing) job and children. Moreover, participants opinions on day care facilities was used to monitor the lives of working mothers. The final concept of the nuclear family ideal is somewhat easier to operationalise, and the main dimensions to be measured include the number of families with children, and how many participants have or would like to have children.
Statistical and census data was used to understand the social fabric of the suburban case studies. In conjunction with this, field visits were conducted to understand how the suburban space was constructed to meet the needs of residents. This was done in three stages: firstly facilities are services that directly served the heteronormativity, patriarchy and the nuclear family ideal such as wedding shops, shops selling products marketed to a particular gender and shops selling items for children or play parks were noted; secondly, a survey of the commercial aspect of the space was completed to understand what key user this spaces was targeted at; thirdly, residential streets were visited in order to look at density and quality of housing, and well as looking for features that serve the three core discourses such as gardens for children.
The table below displays which statistics were used for each location, and which were unavailable.
Statistic Purmerend IJburg Amsterdam
Marital Status Available (not partnerships)
Available Available
Age Structure Available Available Available
Household Type Available Available Available
Same-Sex Marriages Unavailable Available Available Socio-Spatial land use
map
Unavailable Available Unavailable
Primary Data: Interviews
In order to understand the experiences of queer members of suburban society, in-depth semi-structured interviews will be used. This method will collect information pertaining to the answers of the second and third research questions: how do discourses of heteronormativity, patriarchy and the nuclear family ideal influence queer suburban life?; to what extent do gay people feel excluded from Dutch suburban spaces?.
Qualitative interviews are a method for uncovering and exploring the meaning that underpin people’s lives, routines, behaviours and feelings (Rubin and Rubin 1995). There are two approaches to qualitative interviewing; neopositivist and romantic. Neopositivism establishes a context-free truth on reality through following a research protocol and searching for responses relevant to that (Arksey and Knight 1999). Under the neopositivist approach ‘the interview conversation is a pipeline for transmitting knowledge’ (Holstein and Gubrium 1997:113). In contrast, the romanticism advocates genuine human interaction, based on the idea that establishing trust, rapport and commitment is a prerequisite to explore the experienced social realities of participants (Arksey and Knight 1999). While the romantic view may reveal a greater depth of knowledge (Miller and Glassner (1997), participants may only tell a partial truth, or present the truth in a way favourable to them (Alvesson 2001). This romantic approach is well grounded in feminist philosophies that underpin this research. Furthermore, it is better suited to the aims of the interview stage of data collection which focus on lived experiences of participants.
Research projects investigating the queer experience often face major barriers when attempting to recruit participants. Heslin (1972) notes this social visibility of queer participants is the first methodological problem faced by any research project. According to Croteau (1996) such participants experience, or anticipate experiencing, discrimination based on sexual orientation and therefore make the choice to keep it hidden. However, in Dutch society this experience or anticipation may be to a lesser extent. The Netherlands was the first country to legalise gay marriage, and according to Robb (2004) legal and
institutional emancipation of homosexuality is almost complete. While there is always a time lapse between legal and institutional acceptance, and social acceptance it can be assumed that social acceptance of homosexual and queer lives in the Netherlands is at a much higher level than other countries. Participants for this study were recruited using the snowballing method as advocated by Lee (1993). This is based on the idea that the target participants are involved in a ‘network’ based on shared characteristics (Faugier and Sargeant 1997). In this case, personal connections were used and once a participant was contacted they were asked to pass on contact details for other people who may be willing to be part of this study. Participants were recruited in two groups. The first group were aged between 25 and 30 and had either lived in Purmerend their whole lives or recently (within the last year) moved to Amsterdam. The group totalled seven participants who varied in terms of class and educational achievement. The second group, from IJburg, was comprised of participants aged 35 and older and totalled eight making fifteen participants in total. This group was more homogenous that the first group as they all lived in close geographical proximity in IJburg in the more affluent part of the settlement indicating higher educational attainment and higher class status. However, one major limitation faced by the participant recruitment was the failure to reach people of non-Western backgrounds. This is important to bear in mind when interpreting results as they may be significantly skewed towards the experience this one particular group.
The table below shows background information on each participant:
Home town
Gender Sexuality Education Ethnicity Household Structure
Age Relationship Status 1 Purmerend Male Gay University
Bachelors
Caucasian Living alone
27 Boyfriend 2 Purmerend Female Lesbian University
Bachelors
Caucasian Living alone
26 Girlfriend 3 Purmerend Female Bisexual HBO Caucasian Living with
Parents
25 Girlfriend 4 Purmerend Male Gay HBO Caucasian Living with
parents
27 Boyfriend 5 Purmerend Male Gay HBO Caucasian Living with
friends
28 Single 6 Purmerend Female Lesbian University
Masters
Caucasian Living with friends
29 Single 7 Purmerend Male Gay None Caucasian Living with
boyfriend
29 Boyfriend 8 IJburg Male Gay University
Bachelors
Caucasian Living with Husband
40 Married 9 IJburg Male Gay University
Masters
Caucasian Living with Husband
41 Married 10 IJburg Female Lesbian University
Bachelors
Caucasian Living with Partner + 2 children
37 Partnership
Bachelors Partner + 2 children 12 IJburg Male Gay University
Bachelors
Caucasian Living alone
62 Single 13 IJburg Female Lesbian University
Bachelors
Caucasian Living with Girlfriend
43 Girlfriend 14 IJburg Female Lesbian University
Masters
Caucasian Living with Partner + 1 child
45 Partnership
15 IJburg Female Lesbian University Bachelors
Caucasian Living with Partner + 1 child
47 Partnership
Using the operationalisation table, the interview was designed to ask open ended questions investigating each of the dimensions of heteronormativity, patriarchy and the nuclear family idea (see appendix 1 for interview topic list). The interview opening with a series of straight forward questions to ease the participant into the interview process and make them feel more comfortable. Building up a relationship between the , participant and researcher is an important element of feminist research, and these question aim to achieve this. The main body of the interview was divided into two halves, each pertaining to a research question. The first half aimed to answer the question: how do discourses of heteronormativity, patriarchy and the nuclear family ideal impact queer suburban lives? The word ‘impact’ here refers to the social aspects of queer lives that may be different because of the choice to live in a suburban area as opposed to a city centre. The questions are centred on two themes. Firstly, marriage which aims to understand the participant’s thoughts on the institution, how they articulate these, and how the institution impacts live in Purmerend. Secondly, children which prompts the participant to discuss families and the relationship families have with Purmerend. The second half of the interview aimed to answer the question: to what extent do members of the queer suburban community feel excluded from suburban spaces? Questions in this half of the interview take a more critical stance, attempting to explore the problems created by discourses of heteronormativity, patriarchy and the nuclear family ideal for queer lives. Topics for discussion include hate crimes, acceptance of homosexual lives and non-traditional families, and the provision of facilities and services for gays and lesbian in Purmerend. Each interview was then transcribed and divided into themes based on those highlighted in chapter 2 for analysis.
Ethics
Queer participants have been recognised in the literature as a ‘vulnerable group’ (James and Platzer 1999; Martin and Meezan 2003; Mustanski 2011) and therefore in need of additional protections. Following the Belmont report (1974), the principle of ethnical research is based on a respect for other persons. This includes treating participants as autonomous individuals capable of making informed decisions and providing additional protections to those with diminished authority. Further to the involvement of queer participants, this study
investigates personal experiences based on sexuality and therefore may reveal sensitive information. Unfortunately, homophobia is still plays a role in contemporary society. For this reason, it is important to protect the identities of participants who reveal aspects of their sexuality. According to Brannen (1988) confidentiality is especially important when using unique and personal data that may be collected during interviews which can make participants easily identifiable. For this reason, the identities of all participants were kept anonymous, and names are not used at any point in this paper. Moreover, it was made clear to all participants at every stage of the data collection, that their participation was completely voluntary and they have the right to withdraw any information given at any point until the 22nd May 2015. It is interesting to note that James and Platzer (1997) found any information that was withdrawn was background information. While this has little impact on the results, it restores power to the participant making the relationship ‘less hierarchical’. This is important when working with ‘vulnerable’ groups as they may already been powerless within wider society.
4. How do discourses of Heteronormativity, Patriarchy and the Nuclear Family Ideal shape the Suburban Socio-Spatial infrastructure?
The following chapter will use a combination of statistics and field observations in order to understand the socio-spatial structure of Purmerend and IJburg before beginning in depth analysis of participant’s experiences of these spaces. Presented in graph format, three sets of statistics are used to substantiate claims made: marital status, age distribution and household type. Each graph contains information for Purmerend, IJburg and Amsterdam as a whole which is used as a bench mark for comparison.
4.1 Purmerend
Field observations in Purmerend involved three stages: observations in the city centre to establish the typical user and use of the space, observations in the residential areas to gain an understanding of the planning and design practices put into practice, and selecting one block of shops that appeared representative of the city centre in order to count the facilities available and the audience they serve. The space chosen for this purpose was directly in the city centre involving Westerstraat, Padjedijk, Hoogstraat and Nieuwestraat and 60 facilities were surveyed. Figure 2 shows the results which paint a picture of the typical user of Purmerend city centre. The three types of shop which stand out as being most popular include women’s fashion, restaurants and bars and electronics. The prominence of women’s fashion shops points to women being the most common users of the space. The second most popular facilities are restaurants and bars, it is important to note that even when visiting Purmerend mid-week these facilities were still full and busy, highlighting leisure consumption patterns in Purmerend. The theory of the leisure class was first introduced by Veblen in 1899, building on Marxist theories of social stratification and stating that the bourgeoisie who own the means of production have employed themselves in economically unproductive practices of conspicuous consumption and leisure. In contrast
the proletariat, or working classes, who are usefully employed in productive, industrial occupations, support the whole of society. Following from this theory, the main users of space in Purmerend city centre are the bourgeoisie or middle classes whose focus is leisure consumption rather than economic production.
The following section will outline how each of the key discourses of heteronormativity, patriarchy and the nuclear family ideal appear to influence socio-spatial structure in Purmerend.
Heteronormativity
As outlined previously, in order to be ‘heteronormative’ a person should be both heterosexual and cis gendered. The privileging of heteronormativity manifests through a society which prefers those who are heterosexual and cis gendered. More than this, it is reflected in a society’s preference of those who comply with heteronormative discourses for example, getting married, living monogamously, and starting a family.
In Purmerend city centre a window display featuring a variety of wedding cake toppers was noted. The display was advertising the shops range of wedding themed decorations, which highlights how important the shop keeper deems these products in terms of sales. What is interesting to note is that the shop carried a small selection of same-sex couple wedding decorations (see figure 2), as well toppers featuring black couples. Therefore there must be some level of demand, albeit small, for homosexual couples who are planning a wedding. This demand could highlight the homonormalising practices that Duggan (2002) describes in which homosexual lives are becoming further integrated into heteronormativity through conforming to traditional institutions of marriage and families. Additionally, this reflects
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Wo m en s fashio n He alth a n d B eau ty Child re n s s h o p s Me n s clo th es Ele ct ro n ic s In terior H air Salo n Bike Bak e ry Re sta u ra n t/Bar Op ticie n s G en era l C lot h in g Oth er Sta tio n ar y Sh o e s Pa rty S h o p Acc u o n ta n t
Shop Type, Purmerend City Centre
Frequency
Purmerend has at least some level of acceptance of homosexual marriage, however most participants noted a ‘tolerance from a distance’ which will be discussed in the chapter 6.2. According to the shop keeper, the same-sex couple toppers were not particularly popular; however she believed that this was more due to people not being aware that the shop was here not because of the lack of demand for the product. There are no other wedding shops in Purmerend, which arguably reflects the decline in a desire to get married in the Netherlands; Statistics Netherlands (2011) found marriage rates have declined since 1999 noting a 10% drop between 2001 and 2011.
The most prevalent marital status, as demonstrated by figure 3, in Purmerend is unmarried, which constitutes 45% of the population compared to 41% married as demonstrated by figure 3. Other marital statuses include divorced (9%) and widowed (5%) and unfortunately there is no information on the number of partnerships. Comparative to Amsterdam, a higher proportion of Purmerend population have chosen to marry (+19%), supporting the idea that suburban spaces are dominated by married couples. However, Purmerend follows the same pattern as Amsterdam in that the most popular marital status is unmarried, followed by married, then divorced. This reflects wider shifts in Dutch cognition in which people are moving away from the traditional institution of marriage. Therefore, marriage holds less significance in Dutch society comparative to other nations; however the large gap between the percentage of married couples in Purmerend and Amsterdam shows it still does hold some relevance within suburbia.
Patriarchy
Patriarchy is a social system in which men hold power (Malti-Douglas 2007). In Purmerend it was found that patriarchy enforces normative gender roles through children’s toys and party decorations which perpetuate the idea of ‘pink is for girls and blue is for boys’. Figure 4 shows the clear divide in products designed for boys versus those for girls evident in most stores. While the shops carried a selection of gender neutral products, the vast majority were clearly targeted at a particular gender. This division reinforces the notion of a heteronormative binary opposition of the sexes producing a discourse of hegemonic masculinity as well as ideas of normative masculinity and femininity. Such discourses are dangerous to children who grow up as gender variant (i.e. not fitting into gender dichotomy) and do not feel they fit into these neat heterogeneous boxes of masculinity and femininity. Grossman and D’Augelli (2006) found their participants reported feeling transgender at puberty and that as transgender youth they were both invisible and vulnerable, especially in relation to mental health issues. The continuation of ‘pink for girls, and blue for boys’ discourses reinforces this invisibility and vulnerability of transgender youth. Producing a binary division between the genders from such a young age can put children who do not identify with normative gender expressions at risk from bullying. Moreover, it can create an idea that there is a significant divide between the genders which may persist into later life and prevent society reaching a state of complete gender equality. However it is interesting to note that following the Frozen film franchise there was a selection of blue toys clearly marketed towards girls as shown by figure 5. Figure 5 also shows a selection of dolls, similar toys to this made up most of the selection of ‘girls toys’ in the shop. The proliferation of
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Marital Status Purmerend Marital Status IJburg Marital Status Amsterdam
dolls for girls may reinforce maternal discourses producing the idea that girls and women are supposed to want to become mothers. This enforces the connection between femininity, maternal desires, and domesticity as outlined in chapter 2. This agrees with the conclusions of Chodrow (1978) and Dinnerstein (1976) who found women are socialised to be mothers and undertake child raising opportunities. This association of women and motherhood can be damaging to women who do not have children, either because they choose not to, they are unable to have children, or if they are homosexual. While it is legal for homosexual couples to adopt children, the process is difficult and complicated which may put some couples off. Bell (1991) posits that lesbian women are excluded by society’s negative view of women who do not marry and have children. The prevalence of the association with femininity and motherhood, as taught to children from a young age, may serve to reinforce this exclusion and marginalisation of lesbian women.
Nuclear Family Ideal
Purmerend can be described as a city designed for families. This is evidenced by the low-density housing with gardens, prevalence of family friendly establishments, and stores selling children’s clothes or toys. Figure 6 shows the distribution of different age groups in Purmerend. The first thing to note looking at this graph is that largest population group (tied with 50-64 years) is 0-19 years. This gives an indication of the extent to which Purmerend is dominated by children. However, there is not a significant difference between the number of children in Purmerend and Amsterdam (-2%), this could be related to the idea that the suburbs are no longer as strongly associated with children as when they first developed.
Now, urban areas are also seen as suitable spaces for raising children. Looking at figure 7, showing the percentage of different household types, there is a large difference in the percentage of households with children in Purmerend (27%) and Amsterdam (16%). This shows there are a higher number of families in Purmerend, as the population of children is spread across more households. Therefore, while children may not be dominant in Purmerend, families are. This domination of is confirmed by participants of this study who felt they were “always surrounded by families” despite not themselves having children. The second item of importance when looking at figure 6 is the drop in the age group 20-34, and the corresponding rise in that age group in Amsterdam. One explanation of this could be that young people move to urban areas for University and employment. This negates the idea of the urbanisation of the suburbs presented by Champion (2001). Under such theories, suburban spaces become locations of industrial, commercial and retail activities which serve to raise suburban employment rates. If young people are leaving Purmerend for Amsterdam, this could show the minimal impact of urbanisation; however it could also be related to socio-cultural pull factors of urban areas.
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 0-19 years 20-34 years 35-49 years 50-64 years 65+ year % of population Purmerend % of population IJburg % of population Amsterdam
