Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
The effects of being a voluntarily childless female educator
(USC Thesis Other)
The effects of being a voluntarily childless female educator
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
Running head: VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 1
The Effects of Being a Voluntarily Childless Female Educator
by
Nicole Crawford
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
December 2019
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 2
Dedication
“There is no limit to what we, as women, can accomplish.”
- Michelle Obama
This dissertation is dedicated to all of the strong women in my family, especially my mother and
grandmother. I have witnessed your strength, wisdom, compassion, and vulnerability. Without
each of you, I would not have the drive to complete this journey. Thank you for your
unwavering support.
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 3
Acknowledgments
Writing this dissertation was both mentally and emotionally challenging. Without the
support and guidance from many people, I doubt I would have had the drive to finish.
To Paula Carbone, my amazing dissertation chair: Words cannot express the amount of
gratitude I have for you. Without your support, kind words of wisdom, and guidance I would not
have completed the program. I am eternally grateful for you. Thank you from the bottom of my
heart.
To Dr. Jenifer Crawford and Dr. Sarah Delgado: I am tremendously grateful to have you on my
dissertation committee, and I appreciate your willingness to serve on my committee. Thank you
for your guidance and support.
To my colleagues at THS: Your unwavering support kept me pushing through the hardest of
times. Thank you! Salina and Jen, you ladies are absolutely amazing. I love you both.
To my colleagues at OFL: Thank you to everyone at OFL, especially Mr. Calvin and Mrs.
Brooke, for being so understanding and supporting my journey to accomplish my goals. I want
to shout out the BSU and Ms. Wendy for being a great support system. Thank you.
To Stacy Zeljak: Here’s to almost 20 years of friendship. I am looking forward to our next
adventures! Thank you for always listening to me, offering a shoulder to cry on, supporting me,
and encouraging me to keep fighting. I love you.
To Pancho: Thank you for offering your endless love and cuddles. I love you, my most
handsome fat man.
To my family: Thank you for your support and encouragement. I love you all.
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 4
To my grandmother, Kay Kishi: You are the love of my life, my rock, and the greatest gift God
has given me. Thank you for always being there for me, accepting me for who I am, and loving
me unconditionally. You and grandpa are the greatest people I have ever known. I love you.
To my mother and father: I know that I can be one wild child, even as an adult, and I thank you
for your support through these times. Thank you for always being there to listen and guide me,
even when things get rough. And, of course, thank you for taking care of Pancho when I had to
spend countless hours working on this dissertation. I love you.
To the members of my USC cohort, TEMS Concentration, and especially Sean Delgado and
Genesis Aguirre: We made it! I cannot believe we are at the end of our journey together.
Congratulations to everyone! A special thank you to Sean and Genesis for being a phenomenal
support system for me. I don’t think I could have survived without you two! Fight On!
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 5
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the criticism and judgment voluntarily childless
female educators faced from three communities: family, friends, and society. The rationale for
this study was to gain greater understanding of the perceived treatment voluntarily childless
female educators received. To better understand the treatment, bias, and assumptions voluntarily
childless female educators faced, this study addressed the following research question: How do
female educators who are voluntarily childless perceive themselves to be treated by members of
society as a result of their choices to not have children? Through qualitative research methods,
15 semi-structured interviews were conducted with voluntarily childless female educators. The
data revealed that voluntarily childless female educators faced some sort of backlash for their
decision to remain childless. While some participants felt acceptance from their family or
friends or society, no participant felt complete acceptance from all three communities. The
backlash and criticism voluntarily childless female educators faced derived from family, friends,
and/or society. Participants faced ostracism by their social and/or cultural communities. They
also faced gender and social role biases, as well as assumptions about their reproductive health
and selfishness.
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 6
Table of Contents
Dedication ........................................................................................................................... 2
Acknowledgments ............................................................................................................... 3
Abstract ............................................................................................................................... 5
List of Figures ..................................................................................................................... 8
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ................................................................................. 9
Overview of the Study ........................................................................................................ 9
Background of the Problem ................................................................................................ 10
Statement of the Problem ................................................................................................... 11
Purpose of the Study ........................................................................................................... 11
Significance of the Study .................................................................................................... 12
CHAPTER TWO: A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE .................................................. 13
Gender Stereotypes ............................................................................................................. 13
Female Educator Stereotypes ............................................................................................. 29
Culture and Community ..................................................................................................... 42
Voluntary Childlessness ..................................................................................................... 52
Conceptual Framework ....................................................................................................... 73
Conclusion .......................................................................................................................... 78
CHAPTER THREE: METHODS ....................................................................................... 79
Research Design ................................................................................................................. 79
Sample and Population ....................................................................................................... 80
Participant Selection ................................................................................................. 80
Data Collection and Instrumentation .................................................................................. 82
Interviews ................................................................................................................. 82
Data Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 84
Credibility and Trustworthiness ......................................................................................... 86
Ethics .................................................................................................................................. 87
Limitations and Delimiations.............................................................................................. 88
Conclusion .......................................................................................................................... 88
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS ......................................................................................... 90
Context of Study and Findings ........................................................................................... 90
Identification as Minoritized or Privilege ............................................................ 93
Gender Identification ........................................................................................... 94
Perceptions of Impact of Not Having Children ................................................... 95
Missed Connections ............................................................................................. 98
Elderly Care ......................................................................................................... 99
Research Question .............................................................................................................. 100
Treatment .................................................................................................................. 100
Family Acceptance ............................................................................................... 101
Unacceptance from Family .................................................................................. 104
Cultural Community Acceptance ......................................................................... 106
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 7
Unacceptance from Cultural Community ............................................................ 108
Bias ........................................................................................................................... 110
Gender Roles ....................................................................................................... 111
Social Roles ......................................................................................................... 115
Assumptions ............................................................................................................. 119
Health Issues ....................................................................................................... 120
Selfishness ........................................................................................................... 122
Conclusion .......................................................................................................................... 125
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION, IMPLICATIONS, AND FUTURE RESEARCH ....... 127
Implications ........................................................................................................................ 128
Women’s Rights ....................................................................................................... 128
Female Educator Stereotypes ................................................................................... 130
Tomboy/Childless Educators ................................................................................... 131
Future Research .................................................................................................................. 132
Personal Connection ........................................................................................................... 134
References ........................................................................................................................... 135
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 8
List of Figures
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework ..................................................................................... 73
Figure 2: Participant Information ..................................................................................... 91
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 9
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Overview of the Study
The primary focus of this dissertation is to understand how female educators who are
voluntarily childless perceive themselves to be treated by members of society as a result of their
choices to not have children. I will explore how these women believe they are treated by
members of society, the biases they face because of historically constructed social and gender
roles, and the assumptions made by others about their health or their selfishness.
I decided to study this topic because I personally relate to it. From an early age, I decided
that having children was not a part of my life’s journey. As an adult female who is also an
educator, I constantly come across people who question my decision to not have children. I find
many people assume that since I was a woman, I would automatically want to have children.
Another assumption is since I am an educator who works with youth, this would create an innate
desire to want to have children. I also come across people who assume that I either have a major
health problem, such as infertility, or that I am a child-hater. None of these are the case. Simply
put, I love working with children and appreciate their sense of wonder, endless bounds of energy,
and their unwavering love and devotion, but I know in my heart that I do not want to be a
mother.
In the remainder of this chapter, I will explain the historical background of the problem in
order to establish the context for this study. I will then present the statement of the problem, the
purpose of the study, and significance of the study.
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 10
Background of the Problem
In this section, I will explore the historical background of the problem. First, I will
examine how society created expectations for female educators Next, I will explore gender roles
within the field of education.
Female Educator Expectations
Early in the life of the United States, men dominated the teaching force, but by the end of
the 19
th
century, women began to dominate the teaching force nationwide (Weiler, 1989).
Teaching became known as “women’s work” over the duration of the 19
th
century (Weiler, 1989)
and has continued with this label well into the 21
st
century. Many believed that women were
better suited to be teachers because they believed teaching required the ability to nurture and
guide students. Both of these skills were seen as feminine. At the same time, there was the
belief that women did not have to be paid as much as men (Weiler, 1989). In other words,
society believed that women were better suited to be teachers and they could afford to be paid
less solely because of their gender. These gendered stereotypes and sexist beliefs about women
began to change during the second wave of feminism that took place in the 1960s and 1970s.
While the first wave of feminism focused on women’s issues, such as the right to vote and right
to own land, the second wave of feminism focused issues of equality and liberation (Progressive
Women’s Leadership, 2018). The second wave of feminism used the strategies that the Civil
Rights era, the New Left, the anti-war (including Vietnam), and LGBT movements used in order
to challenge and change the status quo in the United States (Enke, 2003). Women began to give
“more attention to issues of racial, ethnic, sexuality, ability and diversity in the U.S. context as a
way of understanding women’s lives in a more complex way” (Elfman, 2009, p. 11). This meant
that women believed that teaching was not gender specific and they had the right to equal and
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 11
fair pay when compared to men. Yet, even with this shift, education continues to be perceived
as more of a woman’s field than a man’s field, as demonstrated by the fact that 76% percent of
teachers are women (National Center for Education Statistics).
Statement of the Problem
There is a gap in literature that examines how female educators who are voluntarily
childless perceive themselves to be treated by members of society as a result of their choices to
not have children. There is literature that addresses how men have historically dominated the
workforce and the professional force (Weiler, 1989). Meanwhile, there is also literature that
explores how women are expected to become caretakers and mothers, which displays the sexual
hierarchies of the United States’ society (Enke, 2003), as well as literature about the stereotypes
and labels that voluntarily childless women face (Bram, 1984). While there is literature available
about these topics, there is a lack of literature that covers all of these topics combined. The
problem is female educators who chose to not have children receive backlash for their decisions,
resulting in further marginalization. These women are not only marginalized, they are also
educators who are consciously choosing to not have children, which places them in a position of
judgment, ostracism, and scorn. They experience marginalization because of the intersection of
identities.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to examine how female educators who are voluntarily
childless perceive themselves to be treated by members of their community (educational, home,
and society more broadly). This dissertation is a qualitative study that will analyze data that will
be collected through semi-structured interviews. I will interview 15 participants that meet the
strict criteria for this study in order to answer my research questions.
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 12
The following research questions guided this study: How do female educators who are
voluntarily childless perceive themselves to be treated by members of society as a result of their
choices to not have children?
Significance of the Study
This study is important because it hopes to find the answer as to how childless female
educators perceive themselves to be treated based on the decision to not have children. This
study will fill the gap in literature that exists about this subject. Currently, there is no literature
available about this specific subject. There are four separate bodies of literature in research and
theory: gender stereotypes, female educator stereotypes, culture and community, and voluntary
childlessness, but there is a gap in literature that blends all three topics together. My hope is to
find answers to my research questions and offer information to other women who identify with
this study’s topic.
This study is organized into three chapters. Chapter One identifies the historical
background of this study’s problem, the statement of the problem, the purpose of the study and
its research questions, and the significance of this study. Chapter Two is a literature review that
explored four main topics: gender stereotypes, female educator stereotypes, culture and
community, and voluntary childlessness. It concludes with the study’s conceptual framework.
Chapter Three explains the study’s research design, the sample and population, data collection
and instrumentation, data analysis, limitations and delimitations of the study, credibility and
trustworthiness, and ethics. Chapter Four reports the findings of the qualitative study. Chapter
Five makes recommendations and suggestions for future research.
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 13
CHAPTER TWO: A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
This study will examine the decision process of female educators who decide to not have
children and the perceived effects of the decision. The following question will be asked: How
do female educators who are voluntarily childless perceive themselves to be treated by members
of society as a result of their choices to not have children?
In order to answer this question, I draw upon four bodies of literature in research and
theory: gender stereotypes, female educator stereotypes, culture and community, and voluntary
childlessness.
The purpose behind exploring gender stereotypes, female educator stereotypes, culture
and community, and voluntary childlessness is to gain more insight and understanding that will
help me answer my research questions. I also use the literature to build my conceptual
framework. I present the bodies in order and end the chapter with my conceptual framework,
which will serve as the foundation for sampling, data collection, and analysis.
Gender Stereotypes
In order to understand how gender stereotypes affected the success of minority women in
their pursuit of graduate-level education, I need to understand what the literature identifies as
gender stereotypes. Prentice and Carranza (2002) stated that gender stereotypes were linked to
the social roles and the power inequalities between women and men (p. 296). They also stated
that women were associated with more undesirable traits, such as gullibility and weakness.
Wood and Eagly (2015) identified masculine traits as self-reliance, assertive, and forceful while
feminine traits were categorized as affectionate, sympathetic, and warm (p. 462). Also, self-
categorization as a male or female produced self-stereotyping which involves the ascription of
typical gender attributes (p. 464).
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 14
I have structured my examination of gender stereotypes to view the impact gender
stereotypes have on women. I will establish two main ideas: women have been forced into
stereotypical roles and these roles are slowly beginning to change. First, I focus on a literature
review that examined how people used gender stereotypes to understand others and stereotypes
were based on perceived differences instead of actual differences between genders, which
reinforced gender roles. I then examine a quantitative study that showed how women were
believed to be driven by ideals and were stereotyped into roles such as caretakers and domestic
workers. After, I explore another quantitative study that looked at how gender schema theory
proved that gender schematic men held more misogynistic, stereotypical, and unidimensional
views of women. Next, I look at a different literature review that focused on how people used
gender identity and how gender identity was shaped by self-definition, traits, and behavior.
Finally, I reviewed a qualitative study that examined how gender roles were beginning to
disintegrate because of the change in the roles women held.
Ellemers (2018) examined literature to explore how gender stereotypes supported the
development and continuation of gender differences. While she did not explain her methodology
for identifying and gathering the literature, she did generate a theory. She posed the theory that
gender stereotypes that were upheld by society were based on the perceived differences between
genders instead of actual gender differences.
Ellemers (2018) separated the literature into three major themes based on the theory she
devised: the nature of gender stereotypes, making sense of the world, and resilience to change.
In the first major theme that emerged, the nature of gender stereotypes, Ellemers (2018) argued
that the nature of gender stereotypes was a “primary feature of person perception” (p. 277) that
created a fixed binary category to classify gender. She also examined the literature and found
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 15
how the literature classified perceived dominant traits, such as warmth and caring, as female,
while other traits, such as risky choices, as male. She also discussed how some occupations were
perceived to be gender driven, such as nursing (women) and police (men). She also noted that
even when people consciously tried to not enforce gender stereotypes, it was hard to shy away
from them because gender roles were consistently present in their daily lives, from disciplining
children to academic achievement expectations. Taking into consideration these perceived
gender stereotypes, as well as biological differences in hormones and brain functions, the author
argued that the gender stereotypes of men and women were not true. The nature of gender
stereotypes was based on societal perceptions, not actual differences, of gender. Ellemers (2018)
also claimed, “gender stereotypes implicitly impact the expectations we have about the qualities,
priorities, and needs of individual men and women, as well as the standards to which we hold
them” (p. 280). She stated that both men and women were negatively affected by stereotypes.
In the next theme Ellemers (2018) identified was making sense of the world. She
concluded that people, in order to make sense of the world, reverted to their gender biases in
order to understand other people. A way of making sense was by regressing back to these gender
stereotypes enforced the idea that men were superior to women. An example of this
phenomenon she discussed was a study conducted by Banaji and Greenwald (1995) that asked
participants to assess profiles of unidentified men and women. These participants relied on
gender stereotypes to supply a description of the unidentified men and women, even though they
were supplied with equal information about each participant. This demonstrated making sense of
the world because people projected their assumptions on to others to make sense of who they
must be when they do not have any information at all. She also concluded that women were less
valued in the workforce and their academic achievement was overlooked; these were ways in
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 16
which people made sense of the world. Ellemers (2018) also explained how gender stereotypes
were communicated implicitly and explicitly to youth through parental reinforcement and media.
Even daily conversations, through word choice and terminology, reinforced gender expectations.
Ellemers (2018) also used literature to support her position that non-verbal communication, like
body stance and posture, also conveyed gender stereotypes. According to Ellemers (2018),
women in leadership roles might have struggled with their identity as a leader and wife or mother
because of societal expectations.
The final theme Ellemers (2018) identified was resilience to change. This theme
discussed how men and women adapted their behaviors based on society’s expectations of
gender. Some men and women who placed a high importance on their gender role and yearned
to be a “good group member” (p. 288) realized the incapacitating effects of stereotypes.
Ellemers (2018) argued that as long as society accepted the gender roles of men and women, and
the continuation of this acceptance would support the facade of equal opportunity. She claimed
that the acceptance of gender roles supported the illusion that gender stereotypes depicted an
accurate image of what men and women’s roles should be. Ellemers (2018) also discussed how
challenging the status quo was seen as unacceptable. If a woman in particular complained, she
would be considered a troublemaker or complainer. The author also examined how people,
especially men, were uncomfortable with acknowledging their privilege and would even harass
others who questioned gender dominance. Finally, the author stated that people who were
privileged from gender stereotypes allowed this behavior to continue because it helped retain a
sense of hope. In other words, those who benefitted from privilege continued to have hope
because they were not restricted by gender roles. These ideas demonstrated resilience to change
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 17
because the stereotypes are resilient and do not change, even when the stereotypes were
identified.
The final section of the article, how we can benefit from this knowledge, Ellemers (2018)
discussed the harmful effects gender stereotyping had on people, from “our conceptions of self,
the demeanor we see as desirable, the life ambitions we consider appropriate, and the outcomes
we value” (p. 291).
Johnston and Diekman (2015) conducted a mixed methods study with three sub-studies
analyzing differences in gender traits. The authors distinguished two gender traits: ideals and
oughts. Ideals included “hopes, dreams, and aspirations,” while oughts included
“responsibilities, duties, and obligations” (p. 16). Study 1 tested the perceived motivations for
gender stereotypical traits, while Study 2 tested the perceived motivations for both gender
stereotypic and counter-stereotypic traits. Study 3 investigated whether perceptions of role
flexibility were related to motivation. Hypothesis 1 proposed that women were perceived as
more motivated by ideals over oughts, Hypothesis 2 argued that women were perceived as more
motivated by ideas than men, and Hypothesis 3 claimed that the women were motivated by
ideals over oughts occurred for both stereotypic and counter-stereotypic traits. Hypothesis 4
posed the idea that role flexibility was directly connected to perceived ideal motivation.
Study 1 had 137 participants that included 56 women and 81 men from a Midwestern
university who received partial credit for participating in the survey. 83 of the participants
participated in a survey and 54 participated in a research lab where participants answered
questions. The design was mixed design as it randomly assigned participants to either the survey
or the research lab and assigned to rate one target gender. This meant that participants were
asked to either focus on one specific gender, either male or female, and answer questions they
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 18
were posed with their specific gender in mind. Participants in the survey were told they would
complete various surveys on an array of topics and participants in the research lab were told they
would answer questions related to the perception of groups and roles in society. All participants
who participated in Study 1 completed a questionnaire and provided demographic information.
The questionnaire gave 10 stereotypic gender traits taken from previous gender stereotype
research. Participants rated how much the trait was an ideal or an ought. An example item from
the questionnaire stated:
How much of women’s sensitivity is because…
women hope, wish, or aspire to have this trait?
women feel a duty, obligation, or responsibility to have this trait? (p. 19)
The ratings for each item was counterbalanced and motivation ratings were made by a 7-point
Likert-scale. Ideal motivation and composite ought motivation ratings were averaged. Analysis
using ANOVA was performed. Johnston and Diekman (2015) did not explain what was asked in
the survey and lab. They also did not explain the results of the survey and the lab in detail.
Study 1 validated Hypothesis 1 because the study found gender stereotypic traits were motivated
by ideals over oughts. The study also validated Hypothesis 2 because women’s traits were found
to be more motivated by ideals over men and also less motivated by oughts than men.
Study 2 had 118 participants, 63 of whom were women and 55 whom were men, from a
Midwestern university who received partial credit for participating. Participants in Study 2 were
pulled from the same population as Study 1. Participants completed a questionnaire and
provided their gender. The questionnaire was nearly identical to the questionnaire in Study 1
except that it also had participants rate gender stereotypic and counter-stereotypic traits based on
their assigned target gender. The stereotypic traits were the same as Study 1. There were no
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 19
examples of items from the questionnaire given except that Likert-scale answer options ranged
from not at all to very much. Johnston and Diekman (2015) created the counter-stereotypic traits
in the questionnaire to be aligned with prior research that claimed traditional gender stereotypes
had higher agency for men and higher communion for women. Study 2 was designed similarly
to Study 1: Study 2 was mixed design, the ratings for each item were counterbalanced by a 7-
point Likert-scale and the scales demonstrated internal consistency, the perceived motivations of
each gender did not differ based on participant gender, and ANOVA analysis was performed.
Study 2 found women were motivated by ideals over oughts, across both stereotypic and
counter-stereotypic traits, which validated Hypothesis 1, 2, and 3. Men were found to be more
motivated by oughts than ideals while their counter-stereotypic traits were marginally more
motivated by ideals than oughts.
Study 3’s research was based on social role theory. The study explored the claim that
women were driven by ideals over oughts and that women faced greater role change than men
did. Based on social role theory’s idea that women and men had expected gender roles in
society, greater role change meant that women were able to deviate from the socially expected
role that women took and were able to branch into more male-dominated roles. Study 3 gathered
data about perceived role flexibility and how it related to ideal motivation. Johnston and
Diekman (2015) focused on the relationship between role flexibility and ideal motivators, but
they also examined how the gender gap would either widen or narrow over time. The
participants of the study consisted of 214 students, 136 women and 78 men, from a Midwestern
university who received partial credit for participation in a survey. Participants completed a
questionnaire and provided demographic information. Three participants were not included in
the final data analysis because data was missing data. The study was mixed-design and
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 20
participants were assigned one target gender and only focused on stereotypic traits of that
assigned gender. Johnston and Diekman (2015) had two main foci of the study: perceived
motivation and gender role latitude. For perceived motivation, participants ranked stereotypical
traits based on a specific time period (1950s, current day, 2050) on a 7-point Likert scale. Each
item was counterbalanced. For gender role latitude, participants were given two statements
provided by Johnston and Diekman (2015): This group was/is/will be flexible regarding the roles
adopted by members and Members of this group were able/are able/will be able to engage in
behaviors not normally associated with their group. Participants ranked their agreement with the
two statements on a 7-point Likert scale. After ANOVA analysis was performed on perceived
motivation, it found two important contributions. First, women were perceived to be motivated
by ideals than their oughts. Second, the data provided evidence that the ideal motivation is
related to role flexibility. This meant that women were perceived as having more flexible roles
over men, and the flexible roles were associated with ascription of ideal motivation which
validated Hypothesis 4.
Across all three studies, the participants believed that women’s traits were motivated by
ideals over oughts. This provided an initial documentation of the motivation behind gender and
gender stereotypes. In other words, women were perceived to be driven by their desires over
their duties. The ascription of ideal motivation of women, the idea that they are competitive and
warm because they hope, wish, or aspire to be, contained consequences for the justification of
the current roles of women and men.
Hudak (1993) created a quantitative study tested three hypotheses about gender
schematic men based on Bem’s (1981,1985) gender schema theory: 1) when compared to
aschematic men, gender schematic men held stronger stereotypes of women, 2) gender schematic
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 21
men held more misogynistic stereotypes of women, and 3) gender schematic men were more
unidimensional in their thinking of gender. Hudak (1993) found that masculine men regard
women as highly feminine and low on masculinity, which suggested that masculine men hold
stereotypic views of women. These men also held more misogynistic views of women, and also
held unidimensional views on gender, which proved all three hypotheses correct.
Hudak (1993) used a literature review to define multiple terms: schema, gender schema,
stereotypes, negative stereotypes, and dimensionality. Schema served as a framework to
organize and understand incoming information. Gender schema served as a framework that
categorized individuals as schematic or aschematic. Schematic meant that gender served as a
primary schema to sort and conceptualize information. Individuals that were aschematic were
less reliant on gender to sort and conceptualize information. Hudak (1993) also explained
gender schema theory stated that sex-typed (schematic) individuals held stronger schemas for
gender and assumed that genders were different in characteristics. Hudak (1993) used Bartlett’s
(1932) framework for stereotypes and claimed that humans stereotype others by human nature.
She also stated that not only were women more stereotyped than men, but masculine
characteristics were more valued over female characteristics. Finally, Hudak (1993) stated that
there was a debate between masculinity and femininity being unidimensional, bidimensional, or
multidimensional. She used Bem’s (1979) Bem Sex Role Inventory (BSRI) to discuss
dimensionality and argued that schematic individuals were more dependent are gender while
aschematic individuals were more adaptable.
Participants for the study included 215 primarily Caucasian men from working class to
professionals. Participation was voluntary and were assured of anonymity. Three surveys were
administered: BSRI, a questionnaire for assessing stereotypic views, and a questionnaire for
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 22
assessing gender beliefs. The BSRI was a 40-item form that categorized the masculinity or
femininity of the participant. The BSRI created 51 masculine cases, 51 androgynous cases, and
40 undifferentiated. Other cases were eliminated, fell between the medians, cross-sex, or
improperly completed. The first questionnaire that assessed the stereotypic views of the
participants had 10 masculine and 10 feminine traits from the BSRI chart along with 8 negative
items in a random order. Feminine characteristics held a stronger score than masculine
characteristics; the higher the score meant the higher the stereotypic views. Participants were
asked to estimate the percentage of women that fit each characteristic. This questionnaire found
that the majority of participants held stereotypic views of women (feminine ranged from 18.9%
to 91.5% while masculine ranged from 83% to 85.5%). The questionnaire that assessed gender
beliefs had participants think about a specific female who was described as feminine by
characteristics found on the BSRI femininity scale. Hudak (1993) believed that schematic
participants were less able to see androgyny in women, which proved the unidimensional
thinking about gender. Subjects were asked to estimate what percentage of women are feminine
and masculine (as defined by the BSRI scale). A high score would find the participant to believe
women were “both instrumental and expressive” (p. 286). The scores ranged from 8 to 99%.
The data was analyzed using MANOVA. There were four identified variables: perceived
femininity in women, perceived masculinity in women, perceived negative attributes in women,
and perceived androgyny in women. The three categories of subjects used were masculine,
androgynous, and undifferentiated. The categories indicated that masculine men regarded
women as highly feminine and low on masculinity. This suggested that masculine men were the
most likely to view women with stereotypic views which supported the prediction that they are
schematic with respect to gender. The perceptions of the undifferentiated group perceived
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 23
women as low on both femininity and masculinity. This suggested that femininity and
masculinity were not salient for them. The androgynous group had notably high perceptions of
women on both femininity and masculinity. This suggested that this group did not regard
women in stereotypic ways and they were able to see both feminine and masculine
characteristics in women.
The results from the study show that the hypothesis that gender-schematic men viewed
women in more stereotypic fashions. The hypothesis that gender-schematic men tend to be
unidimensional in their thinking was also supported by the data that showed the low averages
scores on masculine attributes given to women described as also having feminine attributes. The
final prediction that schematic men held stronger negative stereotypes of women was not
supported. Hudak (1993) argued that gender had a socially constructed meaning that did evolve
over time, making a schema for gender a non-fixed phenomenon.
Schmader and Block (2015) analyzed Wood and Eagly’s (2015) writing about gender
identity. Schmader and Block (2015) recommended multiple changes to Wood and Eagly’s
(2015) article in order to create a more robust conceptualization of gender-created constructs.
Wood and Eagly (2015) argued that there were two distinct research traditions to understand
gender identity. One stated that gender traits were associated with being either masculine or
feminine (known as agency and communion). The second argued that gender identity required a
person to categorize him/herself as male or female. Schmader and Block (2015) stated their
main objective for their article was to gain more clarity on the definition of gender and how
gender identity was shaped by individual definition, traits, and behavior.
Schmader and Block (2015) first explored the definition of gender. They stated that most
children identify with their gender by 2.5 years of age and there was a tendency to categorize
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 24
people by the “best” gender label. They also said that gender was used to capture the degree of
attitude or pride associated with the gender identity. Also, Schmader and Block (2015) argued
that the earliest way of studying gender was to identify masculine and feminine behaviors and
traits. They claimed that there was a tendency to identify males as “highly agentic ways” such as
“assertive, self-confident, and competitive” (p. 475). On the contrary, women were identified as
“highly communal”, described as “caring, compassionate, and cooperative” (p. 475). Both of the
gender stereotypes were reliant upon current stereotypes and roles they carried out.
There were three main points Schmader and Block (2015) discussed as to why they
advocated to separate traits and concepts of gender identity. First, they argued that agency and
communion were universal dimensions of human behavior instead of characteristics of gender
identity. Second, they stated that the traits of agency and communion can become disconnected
from gender over time. Schmader and Block (2015) stated that there has been a shift of how
men and women identified themselves. Although men rated themselves with lower communal
traits, women have come to identify with more agentic traits. The final argument was that when
traits were connected to gender, the traits became constrained. This meant people would only
accept traits that were related to their gender and reject those that are not. This could intensify
problems between genders because men and women may only accept traits that were considered
masculine or feminine because they only wanted to accept those that did not conflict with their
gender.
The article concluded with Schmader and Block (2015) advocating to have gender
identity shaped by behavioral and trait preferences. They identified four areas that helped
explain why agency and communion were identified with a specific gender. The first area was
that traits became one’s identity when they were endorsed by a group as a correct reflection of
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 25
the group’s characteristics. The second area was traits became a part of a person’s identity when
they allowed for intergroup differentiation. The third area explored why and when specific traits
were excluded from social identity. Schmader and Block (2015) found that men avoided
identifying with communal traits such as empathy and compassion. The final area stated that
biology did not play a role in gender identity and self-categorization. Schmader and Block
(2015) stated that the reasoning remained unclear as to why those who strongly identified with
their gender was because they were more prototypical of their gender or because they were more
likely to conform to society’s expectation of what constituted male or female.
Diekman and Eagly (2000) conducted a qualitative study that tested social role theory in
five experiments that examined perceived roles of men and women of the past, present, and
future. Social role theory argued that differential role occupancy in the family and occupations
fostered gender stereotypes by which each sex is expected to have characteristics that equip it to
function adequately in its typical roles (p. 1172). Diekman and Eagly (2000) argued gender roles
were eroding because of the increasing similarities in men and women, and because women’s
gender roles saw a greater change than men, mostly because of women’s increased participation
in the male dominated workforce. Women were beginning to demonstrate more stereotypical
male traits, such as more competitive and less nurturing, while males did not entered female
dominated professions.
There were five experiments conducted. Experiment 1 had 301 participants: 156 women
and 144 men, 1 gender unreported. The majority of participants attended either a public or
private Midwestern university. Experiment 2 had 188 participants: 85 women, 99 men, and 4
gender unreported. The median age for participants was 40 years, and 66.5% held a college
degree. Experiments 1 and 2 had majority European American participants (73.4% and 86.2%),
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 26
followed by Asian Americans (18.3% and 3.2%), African Americans (5.0% and 8.0%), then
Hispanic Americans (0.3% and 1.1%). For Experiment 1, participants were given questionnaires
in a classroom setting while others were randomly selected by asking every fifth person who was
sitting alone on a campus location to participate. Similar to Experiment 1, Experiment 2 asked
every fifth person sitting alone in a waiting lounge at a large metropolitan airport to participate.
There were 17 respondents whose responses were discarded from Experiment 2 because they
reported their citizenship as other than the United States. ANOVA was used for both
experiments. The research found that Experiment 1 and 2 confirmed Diekman and Eagly’s
(2000) hypothesis about dynamic stereotypes. The experiments demonstrated the perceptions of
increased role equality which was attributed to the increased ascription of masculine
characteristics to women. Women’s masculine personality traits in male-dominated roles were
increasing while men’s feminine personality traits in traditional female-dominated roles were
more stagnant. Women and men demonstrated these traits when it was found necessary based on
prior observations. Although Diekman and Eagly (2000) did not make it clear when and where
these traits were used based on prior observation, it might be assumed the traits were
demonstrated in the workforce.
Experiment 3 recruited 264 participants from a private Midwestern university. The
majority of the participants were European American (56.8%), then Asian American (27.6%),
African American (5.7%), and Hispanic American (1.1%). Diekman and Eagly (2000)
hypothesized that the stereotype of women should have been less dynamic in increased
masculinity and a less decreased femininity. Men’s stereotype should have been less dynamic
but some change in feminine traits should be demonstrated. This experiment was consistent with
the hypothesis that perceived convergence of the genders was significant on four dimensions:
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 27
masculine positive, masculine negative, feminine positive, and feminine negative. Masculine
positive had a linear interaction; masculine negative had a marginal interaction; female positive
had marginal interaction; negative female had significant interaction. The stereotype of women
was found to be more dynamic than the stereotype of men. This meant that both women’s
negative and positive masculine traits increased. This suggested that women were assumed to
relinquish their power and became subordinate in order to enter male-dominated roles. The
findings were consistent with Experiments 1 and 2, which demonstrated that the stereotype of
women was more dynamic than the stereotype of men. Instead of demonstrating an optimistic
view that women were becoming more like ideal men, participants’ beliefs demonstrated social
role theory’s prediction that women were increasingly perceived as manifesting men’s worst and
best qualities. Diekman and Eagly (2000) did not go into detail as to what traits qualified as the
best and worst, although they did mention that negative male traits could consist of sources of
power, abuse of power, and being egotistical (p. 1178).
Experiment 4 required participants to directly compare men and women on each
characteristic presented in the study. The previous three studies purposely avoided asking
participants to directly compare men and women. Ninety-seven participants from a Midwestern
university participated, 55 women and 42 men, most of whom were European American,
followed by Asian American, African America, and then Hispanic American. On a 7-point
scale, participants rated the likelihood of each gender possessing a particular characteristic in a
specific year, ranging from 1950 to 2050. ANOVA was used to test for the effects on estimates
of gender differences in gender-stereotypic characteristics. This experiment found that
participants believed that perceived roles became more egalitarian and the genders became more
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 28
similar in their characteristics. Participants also claimed they foresaw a decrease in gender gap
earnings, which demonstrated a belief of increased equality.
The previous four experiments were correlational. In order to augment the demonstration
of mediation, Diekman and Eagly (2000) fixed role distributions in participants’ minds instead of
allowing freedom of variation. This final study had 104 participants, 50 women and 54 men,
from the same private Midwestern university that was used in Experiment 1. The sample
consisted of majority European Americans (73.2%), followed by Asian American (18.5%),
African American (4.1%), and finally Hispanic American (1.0%). Diekman and Eagly (2000)
instructed participants to assume a specified division of labor existed in the future and then asked
them to rate the likelihood that the typical man or woman living in such a society would possess
gender-stereotypic characteristics. These labor division roles consisted of traditional roles, roles
similar to those of today, and equal roles. These roles included auto mechanics, high-level
business executives, secretaries, elementary school teachers, and household jobs such as child
care and cooking. Experiment 5 found a consistency between social role theory and the
participants’ perceived characteristics of men and women as interchangeable. Participants
believed that traits change based on a person’s social role. This meant that women could
demonstrate more masculine traits (or vice versa) based on the social role the person was filling.
The study applied social role theory to answer why stereotypes have certain
characteristics. This revealed that stereotyping social groups can be static or dynamic. The
study also showed that a group can have a trajectory of change over years. Stereotypes about
women were dynamic while stereotypes of men were static. This meant that while studying the
past, present, and future about implicit roles of women, the study found that women’s roles and
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 29
characteristics would become more like men, which could possibly allow women the access to
male-dominated roles and opportunities.
In conclusion, women are stereotyped into roles that focus on being a caretaker or
domestic worker (Ellemers, 2018; Johnston & Diekman, 2015). Based on the literature, it is
demonstrated that gender schematic men hold misogynistic and stereotypical views of women
(Hudak, 1993; Schmader & Block, 2015). Through the adoption of masculine traits by women,
women’s roles are becoming more dynamic and it seems that the roles are slowly changing
(Diekman & Eagly, 2000). In order to answer my research question, I examine the gender
stereotypes placed on female educators.
Female Educator Stereotypes
It is clear from the above literature that women’s roles are beginning to change, but
women are still somewhat expected to be caring and needed to fulfill “motherly” roles. As I am
focusing specifically on female educators and the issues they face, I turn to this literature next. I
first explore a theoretical article that examined the historical context of teaching as a male-
dominated profession. It also examined the struggles and stereotypes female educators faced.
Next, I examine two qualitative articles that focused on the sexism female educators
encountered. The first article looked at how gender, motherhood, and stereotypes affected
female educators and the struggles of balancing a professional and personal life as a female
educator. The second article explored the gender stereotypes and sexism female educators faced
with their male counterparts and male students in the classroom. Finally, I examine a qualitative
article that discussed how teacher/mothers perceived the effects of their dual roles.
Dillabough’s (1999) theoretical article looked to question gender and the history of male
dominance. She divided her paper into four main sections that explored feminist critiques, the
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 30
educational concerns of gender dualisms, examined feminist research and data, and concluded
the article with feminist political and social theory to create an alternative conceptual model to
assess gender roles in the identity formation of educators.
First, Dillabough (1999) examined the professional identity of the teaching profession.
She argued that the profession was used as a political device that de-skilled and de-
professionalized teachers. She also reviewed Kantian and Cartesian theories about the teaching
profession, both of which reflected distain for anything viewed as feminine. According to these
theories, women could not hold political identities because of their abundance of emotion and
lack of masculinity, which Dillabough (199) concluded demonstrated sexism. Dillabough (1999)
identified three tensions that emerged based on feminist critiques. First, the two theories of
Kantian and Cartesian argued that “rational men” (p. 378) were the ideal candidate for the
teaching profession. Second, the dominant belief that professional identity was premised on a
simplistic model of teacher development. Finally, the third tension was the consideration of
instrumental forms of training in teacher education. This meant that knowledge about teaching
was tied to specific gender codes that identified masculine ideals as the concept of teacher
professionalism.
Second, Dillabough (1999) focused on the contradictory and problematic issues of
women’s inclusion in the field of teaching. Women were viewed as moral vessels and could not
possess knowledge. There were gender dualisms that stated women were feminine, thus
representing women teachers as motherly figures. This also tied women to domestic work.
Other constraints were directly linked to women’s reproductive capacity and were continually
suggested to be mothers and guardians of the nation. Dillabough (1999) also discussed the
notion that women became “mother teachers” because of male-enforced limitations.
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 31
Third, she reviewed gender politics within the teaching profession. By doing this, she
focused on female educators and female student teachers. Dillabough (1999) argued that females
were exploited in teaching because there were gender hierarchies. She also argued that women
educators were “often employed in non-tenured, part-time or contractual posts, where teaching
and pastoral responsibilities are greater than they would be in permanent positions” and that
“women are sometimes overwhelmed by the extent to which they have been conceptualized as
service providers in education” (p. 383). According to Dillabough (1999), motherhood was seen
as a diminished status in order to further marginalize women. This was due to male hierarchies
and female submission. Dillabough (1999) argued that women were considered devalued
entities unless they were serving others. Women were faced with gender dualisms as educators
because women were subordinates, mothers, and scapegoats for what had not been yet achieved
in the educational field.
Finally, Dillabough (1999) concluded with an alternative framework to assess the
creation of teachers’ identities based on gender. She offered a feminist response and a
reconceptualization of the modern teacher. She argued that identity should be shaped by social
and structural relations within and beyond education. This framework offered two views of the
modern teacher: 1) teacher as an instrumental form of masculinity; 2) teacher as mother.
Dillabough (1999) stated that this provided a more complex tool to challenge views of the
modern teacher which formed a constructed view of women’s subordination. Dillabough (1999)
offered three conceptual notions to re-think gender roles. First, teachers could have conflicting
identities. Second, the commitment to difference avoided the difficulty of universalizing the
educator as masculine while also recognizing the value of particularity in women’s lives. Third,
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 32
there needed to be a stronger emphasis on human agency in educational theory in relation to
gender and the professionalism of women teachers.
In a qualitative study, Gannerud (2001) conducted semi-structured interviews with 20
female educators. The purpose of the study was to understand how female educators experience
their personal and professional lives and how gender impacts these things. The interviews
revealed six themes. These themes included how gender impacted the educator’s work, how
female teachers used their experiences as mothers inside the classroom, and how the teachers
were able to organize their work. Other themes included how teachers identified different
dimensions of their work, the importance of collegial relationships, and how gender affected
power and authority.
The qualitative study consisted of 20 female teachers who were interviewed on three
separate occasions over the course of 1 year. All teachers taught in primary schools and had
between 10 to 20 years of teaching experience. Half of the group worked in suburban schools
while the other half worked in traditional urban schools. Sixteen of the 20 female educators had
children. The first interview was based on previous research findings and personal experiences.
The next two interviews consisted of collecting more data to develop and deepen the
interviewee’s responses. Before each interview, the interviewees were given a tentative
interview agenda and a transcription of their interview. This allowed participants to read and
reflect on their answers.
The research design was a three-fold process that allowed reflexivity: intra-individual
reflection, inter-individual reflection, and self-reflection. Intra-individual reflection allowed
students to read their own answers and discuss or expand on them in upcoming interviews.
Inter-individual reflection consisted of presenting participants responses to others in the study.
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 33
This allowed all participants to reflect and comment on other’s responses. Finally, self-reflection
allowed Gannerud (2001) to think about her background, her role as the researcher, and how
these factors impacted the research process. After the interviews were analyzed for qualitative
data analysis, Gannerud (2001) created thematic categories.
The first theme of Woman and Teacher focused on how the interviewees experienced
consequences because of their gender in their life and career. A major idea mentioned by
participants was the predominance of female teachers and how some students would benefit with
a male teacher. Also, the participants had both positive and negative consequences related to
gender expectations. One benefit of being female was that participants stated they could easily
interact with parents. A detriment was that professional authority was questioned.
The second theme Motherhood and Teaching discussed how the roles of being a mother
and educator intersected. Some participants stated how they had better insight of pupils’ needs
because they were mothers. Others discussed how they would bring their experiences of
motherhood into discussions with parents. The participants who were childless had opposite
experiences. The childless teachers experienced negative reactions from parents who did not
want to listen to the teacher’s opinion or recommendation. The educators who had children were
able to discuss their separate roles in their private, parental, and professional roles. These
educators also stated they saw more of a distinction of the roles as they gained more teaching
experience. Gannerud (2001) also pointed out that teaching was seen as “women’s work and
related to mothering” (p. 61).
The third theme Organization of Everyday Work explores how female educators wanted
to organize their work. They put forth efforts to find a balance between their professional and
private lives, although most found that their private and professional lives merged. Some found
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 34
that by having private roles and responsibilities served as a means to avoid burn out and
becoming overwhelmed. Teachers without these roles found a harder time to avoid the
separation of professional and private responsibilities. Many participants found that the
organization of roles were preferable yet made them feel inadequate and stressed.
The fourth theme was Content and Meaning of Teaching as Work. This examined the
goals teachers set for students, most of which were long-term “life” lessons. The lessons were
both didactic and socio-emotional. Teachers reported they also changed or altered lesson plans
based on efforts to meet shifting demands. Even with the attempts to meet all students’ needs,
female teachers were exploited because of societal expectations of women being nurturers.
The fifth theme was Collegial Cooperation and Interaction explored how teachers
believed collegial relationships were important. Not only could teachers collaborate but they
could also engage in discussions about socio-emotional issues and offer emotional support to one
another. These personal relationships offered three pieces of importance to female educators.
First, it gave them the forum to discuss choices and reflect on their decisions. Second, these
discussions and relationships allowed female educators to gain more insight to the multiple
facets of teaching. Finally, these discussions created a common frame of reference for those
involved in the relationships. These types of interactions were excluded from what is considered
“work” which supports gender roles in schools.
The final theme was Power and Authority. This theme was directly identified by
participants in the study. The participants stated that there was a direct connection between
masculinity and authority, and this connection remained unquestioned because of social roles
and the implicit expectation of subordinate women. Although female educators claimed to have
a choice in creating classroom activities, they had very little power over contextual factors.
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 35
There were four dimensions of power and authority: mastery, authority, positional, and voice.
Mastery was development of professional knowledge. Authority was application of the
professional knowledge. Positional is based on status of ascribed categories (i.e., class, sex,
ethnicity). Voice was the possibilities of relevance. Gannerud (2001) stated that women’s
“positional authority is lower than that of a man in the gender order” (p. 64). In other words,
women’s positions in a school was seen as less than when compared to male counterparts.
Coulter (1995) conducted a year-long qualitative study that explored the sexism in
schools in Ontario, Canada. The study was based on group dialogue that the five female
educators contributed to. While there were no research questions to guide the study, Coulter
(1995) found it important for readers to “hear the voices of these feminist teachers directly” (p.
35) and used literature to support the common themes identified from the group discussions. The
study also included large portions of transcribed discussions.
The study consisted of group discussions with five volunteer first-year female educators
who self-identified as feminists. The study was created after a pre-service teacher thought of the
idea and approached Coulter to conduct the study. It was not stated how participants were found
for the study. Three participants worked at an urban school setting while two worked for a small
rural school. The disciplines taught ranged from French, English, fine arts, and physics. Their
ages ranged from mid-20s to mid-40s. Only one participant had a child. The group met about
every 6 weeks for 2 to 3 hours per meeting. Coulter (1995) taped and transcribed the
discussions. The group discussions were free-flowing and the group would sometimes agree to
focus on specific questions. On some occasions, participants would read an article that
connected to the issues and would be discussed in the group discussion. Participants’ identities
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 36
were hidden and pseudonyms were used. The participants themselves requested to remain
anonymous because the majority were employed under probationary contracts.
One main theme the study focused on was the problem of male colleagues and
professionalism. Under this theme there were numerous instances of disrespect, sexism, and lack
of support by administration. The participants acknowledged the under-preparedness they felt
when confronted with hostility and anger by male colleagues. Although participants’ teacher
preparation programs did attempt to educate these novice educators about gendered work, every
participant found themselves struggling to extinguish the attacks. One participant stated that she
felt her authority was questioned more because she was a female. These challenges to her
authority came from both male students and male colleagues. The group realized that each of
them found a “pattern of disrespect and distaste for women which could not be ignored” (p. 35).
Each participant also noted they experienced male attempts to “put her in her place” (p. 36).
Each participant also experienced being treated as a sex object. The female participants
explained how their male colleagues found them as an object for sexual desire and made double
entendre remarks and sexual innuendos.
Two participants discussed specific examples of when they tried to engage initiatives for
change because of the disrespectful and sexist male colleague behavior. Both participants found
their administration (both of whom were male) to be unsupportive. One participant gathered
multiple female teachers to meet with the male principal to discuss the insensitive behavior of
male colleagues, but was met with no support by her administrator. Another participant was
written up for insubordination after she stood up to her principal who discriminated her based on
gender. In both cases, the participants believed that their gender affected the efforts to engage
initiatives for change.
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 37
Another example of the problems the female participants experienced was that other
female educators excused their male counterparts’ behaviors, defended their behaviors, or simply
ignored the behaviors. Many of these female teachers did not want to confront male colleagues
for a number of reasons, including they needed to keep their teaching job, women were unwilling
to accept or acknowledge the sexism, or the need to ration their energy. One participant noted
that female students were treated differently in the fields of sports and technology because of
their gender. This participant noted that when she pointed out the gender bias, other teachers
“just laughed at her” and would not acknowledge that the school participated “in the perpetuation
of gender divisions” (p. 42).
The second major theme dealt with dealing with sexism in the classroom. It seemed that
there was not only a problem with sexism within the teaching staff, but also within the student
body. Multiple participants experienced male students, as young as seven years of age, using
language to establish dominance. For example, one participant was demanded by her male
students to stop using “Ms” because they wanted to know if she was married. Another
participant stated that she had boys who were 13 to 14 made suggestive comments to her about
taking her on a date or the male students would threaten to try to get her fired so a “pretty young
blonde” could be hired to take her teaching position (p. 43). Coulter (1995) noted that many
pieces of literature cited that students responded differently to female and male teachers, and that
it was been found that male students would made comments about teachers’ bodies, clothing, and
the way they walked. Participants also stated that they attempted to confront gender biases
through lessons and discussed gender biases when situations in the classroom happened.
Participants realized that gender roles were engrained into youth early on, and their attempts to
abolish gender biases were not accomplished.
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 38
Claesson and Brice (1989) conducted a qualitative 2-phased study that examined how 18
elementary school teachers who were also mothers (known as teacher/mothers) perceived their
dual role. Although the study did not state a specific research question(s), the focus of the study
was to build upon role theory and the research related to parent and teacher roles by documenting
in detail how a group of early childhood teacher/mothers who were veterans as multiple role
takers experienced their dual role. Claesson and Brice (1989) identified three main conclusions:
roles complemented one another and the role interactions were beneficial, expectations involving
both roles were unrealistically high, and teacher/mothers believed they gained insights and
learned strategies from the benefit of their dual role.
Claesson and Brice (1989) identified role theory as the theory that helped guide their
research. They used role theory to define and understand the role of teachers and parents. Role
theory presumed that persons are members of social positions and hold expectations for their
own behaviors and those of other persons (p. 2).
This study took place over 3 years and included in-depth interviews. Claesson and Brice
(1989) used a school district that included 22 schools that served 17,000 students in a
metropolitan area of the south east in the United States. Claesson and Brice (1989) did not
explain why they chose this sample of schools to use for their participants. The participants had
to meet five criteria: 1) be a certified female teacher of kindergarten-third grade, 2) complete at
least 3 years of teaching before becoming a parent, 3) currently have at least one child between
3-12 years of age, 4) be the biological mother of at least one child, 5) live in a dual income
family. Eighteen of 32 eligible teacher/mothers participated. In the first phase of the study, 13
teacher/mothers participated in interviews. In the second phase, 18 teacher/mothers participated.
The original 13 participants from the first phase also participated in the second phase. An
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 39
additional five additional teacher/mothers joined the study. It is not stated how these additional
five were recruited for the study. The teacher/mother teaching experience ranged from nine to
20 years; five participants had earned M.Eds; nine completed graduate courses beyond their
bachelor’s degree; 12 had at least one child 7 years of age or younger. Six participants were
Black and 12 were Caucasian.
The 3-year study consisted of two phases. The first phase was exploratory. It aimed to
identify prevalent themes that emerged from the interviews and to define the nature of dual role.
The second phase was developed based on the results of the first phase. It aimed to investigate
in more detail how societal expectations affected teacher/mothers. At the end of the second year
of research, a telephone interview was conducted. This served as the final interview that
collected additional demographic data and feedback on how the study affected the participants.
Phase I consisted of exploratory interviews. The structure of the interview protocol on
how to collect data was: 1) the same issues and topics were covered with all participants; 2) the
order of questions was adapted to the individual interview; 3) individual perspectives were
allowed to emerge; 4) what informants could consider important issues were not assumed. In
order to create the interview questions, Claesson and Brice (1989) met with seven
teacher/mothers who were not a part of the study. This meeting was to help the researchers
design the study’s interview questions. The final interview guide consisted of 11 open-ended
questions. Claesson and Brice (1989) did not provide examples of the types of questions that
were asked. Phase I consisted of 13 teacher/mothers who participated in the interviews after
school in the teacher/mother’s classroom or place of choice. Each interview lasted
approximately 1½ hours. All interviews were taped and transcribed.
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 40
Phase I had four steps of analysis. Step 1 identified recurring topics and remarks of
interest. The second step arranged the responses in a sequence so the answers to each of the final
11 questions could be compared. Step 3 identified and selected the most common topics. The
final step included re-reading the transcripts and extracting statements from participants that
concerned expectations.
Phase II consisted of a 4-part interview. All participants followed the same procedure
and answered the same predetermined sequence of questions, the organization and analysis of
data was simplified, and the use of open-ended questions allowed for individual variation and did
not presuppose the investigators’ knowledge of what was most important to the participants.
There were 30 statements selected from Phase I that formed the basis for the four-part interview
schedule. The first part of the interview schedule was labeled Personal Agreement Rating
(PAR). Each of the 30 statements were rated on a 5-point scale of agreement-disagreement. The
second part of the interview consisted of asking the participants to explain their reasons for the
PAR responses. This provided qualitative data on the participants views about the 30 statements.
This part of the interview process was also taped. The third and fourth parts of the interview
process were designed to gather more information about the problems that participants might
perceive. In the third part, participants were asked to identify statements they related with. The
fourth part asked participants to select five statements from their previous selection that had the
most meaning to them, known as Five Most Important Statements (FMIS). Similar to Phase I,
the interviews lasted approximately 1 ½ hours and parts three and four were also audio taped and
transcribed.
The data analysis for Phase II consisted of four steps. Claesson and Brice (1989)
summated the scores for each statement then averaged the score. A numerical value was
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 41
calculated for each statement. These averages were then ranked. The second step rearranged the
interview transcripts so that the comments about the interview questions could be compared.
The third step was to calculate the rank in order of importance of the 30 statements to the
informants. A weighted score was applied based on the level of importance (5=1
st
choice; 4=2
nd
choice; etc.). The statements were then ranked based on the scores. The final step was to
compare each participant’s comments about her FMIS.
The study had three major findings. The first two findings dealt with the perceived
effects of the dual role on teaching and motherhood and the third finding dealt with the concerns
the participants employed in their lives as teacher/mother.
The first finding was that the two roles of teacher and mother complemented each other
and the role interaction was mostly beneficial. Of the 30 statements, five were related to specific
advantages to the dual role. Some of the advantages were that teacher/mothers were able to view
children as multi-faceted individuals, teacher/mother relationships with students were influenced
by their parental role, and they had a heightened awareness and sensitivity to the children after
they became parents. These teacher/mothers were able to see the different behavior patterns of
students and it made them more patient. Participants also stated that having knowledge about
child development theory was beneficial when interacting with parents of students. The
teacher/mothers felt that being a parent was an asset in their work as teachers, and
teacher/mothers felt parents were relieved to know that the teacher was also a mother. The
second finding discussed 10 statements associated with negative effects of the two roles. One
main problem was teacher/mothers had to deal with students’ personal problems that interfered
with instruction. Teacher/mothers believed these problems were prevalent because they had the
dual role of a teacher and a mother, which could create more demands placed upon them.
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 42
The final finding discussed the strategies teacher/mothers used for both roles. These
findings dealt with the insight teacher/mothers gained from their dual roles along with strategies
teacher/mothers used to cope with having dual roles. There were six strategies that were
prevalent: 1) participating in a support group was valued, 2) finding time for themselves was
important, 3) the husband’s participation was a major consideration, 4) exercise was helpful, 5)
participants learned to reorder priorities, 6) paying for help with housework was valuable.
In conclusion, female educators face sexism and gender stereotypes. Historically,
teaching has been a male-dominated profession that believed that men were rational and the ideal
candidate as an educator while women were viewed as motherly figures who were incapable of
possessing knowledge (Dillabough, 1999). While women have been able to break into the
educational forum, they still faced sexism and stereotypes by male counterparts and their male
students (Coulter, 1995; Gannerud, 2001). Women who are both educators and mothers hold
dual roles that translate into positive and negative experiences (Claesson & Brice, 1989). Given
that my research question focuses on the experiences of voluntarily childless women who are
teachers and are from minority groups, the next body of literature I explore focuses on the
experiences of minority women and the struggles they face because of gender stereotypes.
Culture and Community
After understanding that female educators are held to certain expectations because they
hold the dual roles of being female and an educator, I turn my attention to how another subset of
women are affected by stereotypes. Therefore, I next explore the experiences minority women
have in their daily lives. Including this literature is important because the majority of
participants included in this study identify as minority (i.e. Latinx, Asian, Middle Eastern, and
African American). I examine three literature reviews and one empirical study. The first
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 43
literature review examined how ethnic and gender stereotypes supported the cyclical nature of
gender and ethnic differences. The second literature review explored the marginalization and
oppression minority women faced and the negative impact White affect studies had on minority
women. The last literature review found that minority women reacted differently than White
women when faced with racism, sexism, and bias. Finally, I conclude this section with a study
that explored the stereotypes of nationalities and how the stereotypes were applied to men versus
women.
Sanchez-Hucles and Davis (2010) examined literature to explore how ethnic and gender
stereotypes supported the development and continuation of ethnic and gender differences.
Although Sanchez-Hucles and Davis (2010) explored how ethnicity, race, and multiple identities
affected women’s roles in leadership positions, for the purpose of this literature review I focused
only on the impact that ethnicity, race, and multiple identities had on women’s identities. While
Sanchez-Hucles and Davis (2010) did not explain their methodology for identifying and
gathering literature, they did generate a theory. Sanchez-Hucles and Davis (2010) posed the
theory that the intersection of gender, race, and multiple identities could help minority women
understand the unique challenges they faced.
Sanchez-Hucles and Davis (2010) reviewed literature that discussed the limitations
minority women faced and labeled the limitations in terms such as glass ceiling, concrete wall,
sticky floor, labyrinth, and glass cliffs. These terms entailed the thick barriers “posed by racism
combined with sexism that women of color encounter” (p. 172). Women also had to confront
issues of “child care needs, sexism, and discrimination on the basis of identity” (p. 172).
Literature also showed that research about gender and race lacked information in the past
because much of the research was conducted by White men who assumed there was gender and
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 44
racial equality, proving that there needed to have greater attention about the influence of gender
and race. Sanchez-Hucles and Davis (2010) discussed literature that demonstrated there was a
gender bias because men were expected to have “assertive masculine traits that connote
leadership” while women were perceived as less apt as leaders “because they are more likely to
demonstrate communal qualities such as compassion” (pp. 172-173). Minority women faced
these situations with a more complex difficulties that White women. White women were able to
move around barriers easier than minority women. These women of color also faced gendered
racism, which meant that women had to decide if the prejudice she faced was due to “race,
ethnicity, gender, or some other dimension of her identity” (p. 173). Minority women faced a
harder time identifying which aspect of their identity was responsible for the biases, which in
turn made it more difficult to create an appropriate response. Minority women also received
lower pay, had to learn how to maintain a positive self-image in the presence of micro-
aggressions, and were faced with covert discrimination and sexism.
Minority women also faced many stereotypes based on ethnicity and gender. African
American women were labeled Mammy, Sapphire, and Jezebel, while Asian women were
considered mail order brides (p. 173). Minority women cited stereotypes as the main problem to
career advancements. According to the literature, stereotypes were developed based on
race/ethnicity and gender. Also, minority women in particular faced more stereotypes about
gender and race than their White counterparts. African American women experienced greater
negative stereotypes due to racism and sexism. They were also more likely to “experience unfair
treatment in training and advancement, disengagement, discrimination, prejudice, and lack of
psychosocial and instrumental support” (p. 174). African American women were also less
accepted in organizations than White women. The literature stated that minority women faced
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 45
“multiple stereotypes associated with gender, race, and ethnicity that they trigger in others” (p.
174). Latina and Asian women also contended with negative stereotypes. Latina women were
excluded from executive positions. Asian women faced stereotypes that labeled them as
intelligent and diligent. They also faced cultural clash, where their backgrounds enforced
“modesty, humility, and harmony rather than self-promotion, self-assertion, and willingness to
provoke conflict in pursuit of one’s goals” (p. 175). This cultural expectation clashed against the
American values of self-promotion and self-assertion. Research showed that women of color
faced many more obstacles than White women, such as being socially invisible, perceived as less
credible, greater stereotyping, and more stress (p. 175).
Multiple identities consisted of gender, ethnic background, sexual orientation, and
disability. Literature on the intersection of multiple identities allowed researchers to study,
understand, and respond to how gender intersected with other identities and how those
intersections added to the experience of oppression and privilege (p. 176). Through analysis, this
showed the discrimination that minority women faced based on their multiple identities.
Garcia-Rojas (2017) explored how the voices of queer minority women were disqualified
by White affect studies. Garcia-Rojas (2017) argued that queer minority women were
marginalized due to their “race, gender, and sexual identities” (p. 255). By exploring the works
of Maya Chinchilla, Audre Lorde, and Natalie Martinez (who were either queer or a minority
woman), Garcia-Rojas (2017) demonstrated how the language of “self” helped decenter the
structures of power that marginalized and oppressed women, she argued that their conceptual
methodologies and theoretical analyses destabilized White affects, and the works reframed the
intersections of race, gender, sex, and class. For the purpose of this literature review, only the
sections that focused on minority women will be explored in further detail.
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 46
Language of self was developed by minority women in hopes of developing a language
that displayed the lives that these women experienced. This would show the expression,
evaluation, and articulation that presented the positionality within heteronormative, heterosexist,
and capitalist systems of oppression (p. 255). Minority women created the language as a system
to counter White affect studies. Unfortunately, the ideas about feelings and social emotions that
minority women theorized within their writings about self were denigrated or excluded because
of White affects.
White affect studies took place in the early 1990s, which shifted the conceptualization of
bio-politics, matter, and technologies. White affect disavowed minority women. Garcia-Rojas
(2017) aimed to demonstrate two ideas: 1) the affective turn contributed to the
institutionalization of White affect studies and 2) minority women enabled the shifts by
unsettling the dominant structure through the language of self (p. 258).
Audre Lorde theorized that “the erotic” served as a powerful tool that explored the
structures of power and oppression. It allowed others to examine the intersections of race, class,
gender, sexuality, and ability. Minority women were forced to align with the nation’s racist,
homophobic, and patriarchal norms, which disenabled minority women (p. 260). By using the
erotic, minority women were also able to detach from the “the structures of oppression that
vilify, devalue, and abuse their worth ‘within a western society’” (p. 261).
Natalia Martinez focused on the struggles Latinas faced with racist, homophobic, and
classist narratives; Latinas also experienced sexual, gender, and racial discrimination (pp. 263-
264). The experiences of anger, sadness, rage, and loss were not accounted for in White affect
studies. Martinez also wrote about the hurt, silenced, uncared and unaccounted feelings Latinas
had that were not acknowledged because of White affect studies. Latinas experienced
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 47
oppression, the sense of loss, longing, and pain (p. 265). All of these emotions and experiences
were not documented in history because of the White affect.
According to Maya Chinchilla, the ability to capture the dual identities of being Latina
and American was difficult. White affect studies did not display the struggles that Latinas from
Central and South American countries experienced, including the “histories of colonialism, civil
and cultural war, and transnational migration” (p. 265). Chinchilla, along with Lorde and
Martinez, displayed the future of minority women as undisciplined. This meant that by the use
of langue of self and the ethics of survival by experience, minority women would continue to
contest the structure of White affects and the social emotions institutionalized by White affect
studies.
Carter-Sowell and Zimmerman (2015) used Remedios and Snyder’s (2015) framework
and various pieces of literature to provide solutions to researchers who faced challenges in their
efforts to examine how minority women who lived in the United States responded to prejudice.
Carter-Sowell and Zimmerman (2015) found the reactions that minority women had toward
prejudice were different than the majority (i.e., Caucasian women), and minority women faced
many experiences of racism, sexism, and biases.
One challenge Carter-Sowell and Zimmerman (2015) identified that minority women
faced was the implementation of deficit-focused expectations over asset-based orientation.
Deficit-focused expectations led scholars to ignore existing stigmatization of minority women
that left relevant research questions unanswered. Asset-based orientation recognized the
strengths of an individual, an association, and an institution (p. 400). An example of asset-based
orientation for the Latino community was to promote positive programs, create new knowledge,
create beneficial collaborations, and lead others to a positive understanding of the Latino
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 48
community over creating intervention activities. This example, along with many more,
encouraged researchers to understand how minority women were “hidden in plain sight as
potential participants, research collaborators for interdisciplinary stigma research, and improved
scholarship” (p. 400).
Another challenge researchers faced was the lack of access to non-white female
participants on college campuses, although there was a growing trend of African American and
Latina students in colleges. This opportunity offered researchers a larger population to study that
needed to be taken advantage of. Not only were there minority women who were students on
college campuses, there were many other minority women that work on the campus itself who
were not being used in research. These women held positions in dining and hospitality services,
parking and transportation enforcement, and custodial positions. The women would also offer
stigma experiences that they could share, given the opportunity.
There was also a lack of measurement tools available to researchers to capture multiple
identities which created another challenge for researchers. Newly developed tools allowed
researchers to assess the race and gender stigma, as well as the multiple identities, of minority
women. Two tools that were recently developed tested the stereotype content model (SCM) and
the crossed-categorization contexts. SCM examined how stereotypes of social groups differ on
dimensions of warmth and competence. Crossed-categorization contexts explored how multiple
subgroups could be considered ingroups.
A final challenge that researchers faced was uncovering the hidden biases in workplace
settings, in policy practices, and in institutional transformations. Minority women needed to
navigate “exclusion, stigma, and disparities across multiple domains simultaneously, including
exclusion by colleagues along with the devaluation of and increased demand for service
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 49
activities” (p. 403). Carter-Sowell and Zimmerman (2015) explored how women were less
likely than men to enter the fields of science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM). More
importantly, there was a large lack of minority women in STEM fields. Research showed that
women, especially minority women, were exposed to “social exclusion, stigma, and self-doubt as
they navigate their careers” (p. 403).
Based on previous research, Carter-Sowell and Zimmerman (2015) created three
scenarios that demonstrated the biases minority women faced in the workforce and offered
explanations as to why minority women faced biases. One scenario focused on the intersection
of race, gender, and class differences. African American women stated that their White
colleagues would question their authority and credibility. They also stated that they faced many
negative stereotypes about their ethnic background, which in turn created biases with race,
gender, and class. Carter-Sowell and Zimmerman (2015) argued that since African American
women faced these biases, they also faced harsher penalties if they made a competence-related
mistake. Another scenario explored how representation and co-worker support affected negative
outcomes. Fox and Stallworth (2005) and O’Reilly, Robinson, Berdhal, and Banki (2014) found
ostracism in the workplace was experienced by nearly two-thirds of employees based on a
studies they conducted. Ostracism took many forms, including being purposely uninformed,
excluded from conversations, and the silent treatment. Minority women were the main recipients
of ostracism. Carter-Sowell and Zimmerman (2015) believed that minority women faced
ostracism because of male-dominance, regardless of the ratio of women to men. The final
scenario discussed confronting workplace discrimination and bullying. Carter-Sowell and
Zimmerman (2015) found that confronting a scenario of discrimination or bullying was
beneficial and inspiring. Research showed that minority women who confronted their attackers
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 50
felt the outcome was effective and beneficial, and had positive short- and long-term effects.
Reasons why minority women were discriminated or bullied was for a number of reasons,
including “race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, body size, and personal characteristics” (p. 407).
Eagly and Kite (1987) conducted an empirical study that examined stereotypes that
society held about men, women, and various nationalities. The study consisted of 154 women
and 149 men in a laboratory setting at Purdue University. Questionnaires were administered that
pertained to either one or two sets of 14 countries. Participants were administered two
questionnaires to the study’s subjects in groups of 25 participants. In the first questionnaire,
between 44 and 61 participants rated the nationality and citizens of 14 countries. In the second
questionnaire, all participants rated the 14 countries rather than the citizens.
The two sets of countries (28 in total) were as follows: Set One: Sweden, Great Britain,
Poland, West Germany, Japan, United States, Switzerland, France, Italy, East Germany, Spain,
the Netherlands, Soviet Union, and Canada. Set Two: Iran, Australia, Cuba, Egypt, Ireland,
Mexico, South Korea, India, Israel, Afghanistan, China, Saudi Arabia, Vietnam, and Denmark.
Set Two’s countries were specifically chosen because many of the countries held women in a
lower status when compared to the other industrialized countries. Also, all the countries chosen
for the study were based on a pretest sample. If the pretest sample demonstrated enough
knowledge of a country, the country was included in the study. If the pretest sample indicated
little or no knowledge of a country, that country was eliminated from the study. Countries that
remained were selected to represent as many continents and cultures as possible.
Nationalities were ranked on a probability scale ranging from 0-100 which indicated the
percentage the nationality possessed 41 of the attributes presented in the questionnaire. Some
attributes included intelligent, religious, conservative, passionate, and open-minded. Other
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 51
attributes included kind, active, dominant, poor, dirty, and independent. These attributes derived
from the Stapf et al. (1986) study and Eagly and Steffen’s (1984) study. Countries were ranked
on a scale ranging from 0-9 based on the degree the country possessed specific characteristics.
Some of the characteristics included high level of cultural development, cultural tradition,
politically independent, and geographically large. Again, the attributes derived from Stapf et al.
(1986) study.
The study found that males and nationality stereotypes ranked similarly while female
stereotypes were ranked differently. ANOVA analysis were conducted separately for each
country. Results were charted then the absolute distance between the ratings of the women and
the nationality with the absolute distance between the ratings of men and nationality. The
charting demonstrated that there was a difference between genders, with men being more similar
of their nationality than the women in 23 of the 24 countries.
The study found the stereotypes of nationalities are closer connected to men than women
of those nationalities. Countries such as Canada, the United States, and Western European
countries found that genders were more neutrally ranked, while other countries such as Iran and
Japan ranked women relatively lower. The study also found countries that were notarized as
threats and unwelcoming to Americans received less favorable rankings. These countries
included Iran, Egypt, Cuba, Israel, Afghanistan, and the Soviet Union. Women were perceived
as weak and lacked power in these countries as well. The study argued the halo effect could be
considered. This meant countries that were viewed unfavorably had negative qualities attached
to the country and its inhabitants, while countries viewed favorable had positive qualities
attached to the country and its inhabitants. Finally, the study found “national stereotypes are
similar to stereotypes of dominant subgroups and less similar to stereotypes of subordinate
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 52
subgroups” (p. 462). In each cultural community that was considered less favorable, the women
of that community also ranked lower.
In conclusion, the literature demonstrated the problems minority women faced because of
gender stereotypes within their communities. It was evident that the continuous issue of
stereotypes women faced was because these stereotypes were continually enforced and supported
(Carter-Sowell & Zimmerman, 2015; Sanchez-Hucles & Davis, 2010). The issues of racism,
sexism, and biases that minority women faced were different than their White female
counterparts, partially because of White affect studies (Garcia-Rojas, 2017). Finally, Eagly and
Kite (1987) explored the biases held toward cultural communities where women were considered
weak and less powerful.
Voluntary Childlessness
Women who choose to remain childless are also faced with many stereotypes and biases,
similar to the challenges that female educators and minority women face. I explore this specific
set of women in order to better understand the struggles that women who fall into the “childless”
category faced. First, I examine a literature review that explores what it means to be childless
and the three reactions from others that childless women face: disbelief, disregard, and deviance.
Next, I review a qualitative study that examined the techniques that childless men and women
used to deflect judgment from others. After, I look at a qualitative study that examined how
childless women understood and defined their sense of freedom, and it examined the positive
aspects of being child-free and the negative outlooks on motherhood. I then examine a second
qualitative study that examined the motivations to reman childless. Finally, I explore a meta-
analysis that looked at the possibility that childless women would want to possibly have children
in the future and its determinants.
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 53
Gillespie (2000) used an empirical study about voluntary childlessness to find the answer
to two research questions: To what extent and in what ways might cultural discourses of
motherhood and femininity have declined and transformed as women’s lives have changed? and
What might be the implications of this for constructions of femininity and identity in women?
Gillespie (2000) divided the study’s findings into three main findings: disbelief of explanations
of voluntary childlessness, disregard of childlessness as a valid choice, and conviction that
childlessness represented a deviant choice.
Gillespie (2000) explored literature that argued that motherhood is a large part of
feminine identity, it is a natural desire to have children, and those who are unfit for motherhood
are single, divorced, black, poor, lesbian or disabled (p. 224). Gillespie (2000) also mentioned
literature that was religiously driven, citing Christian beliefs that women were ordained by God
to bear children. There was also literature that discussed the political perspectives that believed
motherhood is a traditional value. Even modern science held the belief that feminine identity
included motherhood. Gillespie (2000) argued that “motherhood discourses can be seen to be
drawn from, and enmeshed in powerful, hegemonic ideological doctrines” (p. 225). This meant
that women had a natural desire to have children, motherhood was a social role that was
expected to be filled, and motherhood was directly linked to feminine identity. Women who did
not have children, on the other hand, were seen as “unnatural” and were “pitied or vilified” (p.
225). They were also seen as having some sort of physical or psychological illness, and they had
a “failed” body. Women who were involuntarily childless were “worthy of sympathy, resources
and support” while those who were voluntarily childless were “selfish, aberrant, immature, and
unfeminine” (p. 225).
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 54
According to literature, the shift in society of women opting out of motherhood happened
when women began to have access to birth control, safe abortion, and other contraceptive
measures. Women also began to join the work force in greater numbers. The wave of new
femininity developed and allowed women to become freer with their sexuality and
independence. This was seen in many magazines, television shows, and contemporary literature.
Research also showed that very few young women decide to remain childless and that it is a
process that takes place. Other research showed that several young women decided to remain
childless early in their life and upheld that decision with no regrets and had no intention of
changing their mind.
The qualitative study took place in 1996 in the South of England. Participants who
identified as childless were recruited from a Family Planning Clinic (FPC). The clinic held a 12-
week evening clinic and 266 consented to complete an introductory questionnaire. This allowed
the researchers to split the women into child-having and childless sub-groups. Of the 226
participants that completed the questionnaire, 25 women identified themselves as childless.
Their ages ranged from 18 to 51, all but one was White, all but two were heterosexual. 75% of
childless participants held a university degree, and 30% held a managerial position or
professional position. Identities were protected through the use of pseudonyms. Interviews were
semi-structured. After the interviews were conducted, three main themes emerged: disbelief of
explanations of voluntary childlessness, disregard of childlessness as a valid choice, and
conviction that childlessness represented a deviant choice.
Participants of the study stated that others disbelieved that they voluntarily chose to be
childless. Participants stated that others tried to give a superimposed meaning to the
childlessness, such as infertility. One participant noted that after she had to have a hysterectomy,
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 55
people accepted her childlessness as health issues, not out of choice. Another way others made
sense of participants’ voluntarily choice of childlessness was participants were labeled as “career
women” (p. 227). People viewed them as hard-nosed and overly driven to succeed. Gillespie
(2000) noted that others believed it was unfortunate for the women to be childless and
disbelieved participants’ choices as unreliable, hence the push to make up other excuses for the
lack of motherhood.
Participants also described that others disregarded their explanations of voluntary
childlessness. Participants stated that they were told by others that they would eventually change
their mind about their decision. They also stated that they were commonly viewed as immature
because they had not made the “normal adult decision to become mothers” (p. 228). This meant
that even though participants made the decision to not have children, others believed that they
would eventually mature, get married, and have children. Many participants were told that they
would change their mind about motherhood once “they met the right man” (p. 228). Participants
also discussed how meetings with physicians to sterilize themselves had a negative outcome.
Many found physicians unwilling to sterilize participants because physicians believed
participants would eventually change their mind, requiring a reversal of the sterilization. This
reinforced the belief that others knew what was best for participants, and that the decision to
remain childless was inappropriate and temporary. Some participants also stated that others
believed that they would eventually regret their decision to not have children.
The final finding was participants that chose to not have children were considered
deviant. Many participants noted how people questioned their decisions to not have children.
Others reacted to participants’ decisions as horrified, viewing participants as strange and treating
them like the black sheep. Also, participants stated that others believed them to be selfish and
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 56
unfeminine. The desire to not have children made participants feel deviant and abnormal (p.
230).
Park (2002) explored the techniques voluntary childless men and women used to validate
and manage their deviant identity in a pronatalist social context. Park (2002) used Goffman’s
(1963) ideas about information control among individuals with discreditable identities, Sykes
and Matza’s (1957) techniques of neutralization for those that violate dominant norms, and Scott
and Lyman’s (1981) accounts that were used to excuse or justify behavior as well. The
techniques Park (2002) found consisted of three main ideas: techniques of information control,
accounts of voluntary childlessness, and redefining the situation.
Park (2002) examined literature that evaluated pronatalist and social ideology. Childless
men and women were labeled as deviant. This label derived from a social stigma that was
strongly connected to pronatalism. In the examination of literature, Park (2002) found many
reasons to remain childless, such as the availability of contraceptives and increased female work
opportunities. The push for men and women to have children stemmed from major religious
groups. To have children also demonstrated an adult status, patriotic citizenship, and sexual
competence. There was a short cultural and social support to not have children during the
second wave of feminism, but political and social emphasis on family values in cultures overrode
this short-term support of childlessness, especially since motherhood was easily available for
those who were traditionally excluded from it, such as lesbians and infertile women. Park (2002)
discussed multiple studies that focused on voluntary childlessness, and found the common theme
of women being seen as unfavorable, less socially desirable, and less well adjusted (p. 24).
Also, according to these studies, childless women were viewed as less favorable than childless
men.
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 57
The study took an inductive approach to data analysis. Interviews were transcribed
verbatim and coded for themes. The themes were them empirically tested and modified through
questioning in later interviews and written follow-up questions. A cyclical process of data
collection, qualitative data coding, consultation of literature, refinement of interview questions,
and repetition of these steps was used. Data was collected from 22 face-to-face semi-structured
interviews from fourteen women and eight men. Two additional participants of a married couple
were included and submitted written responses to open-ended questions, making a total of 24
participants of 15 women and 9 men. This was a purposive sample. Participants were selected
through their acquaintance with the researcher, through referrals provided by friends, colleagues,
relatives, and other participants, and through the membership in the Childfree Network. Two
participants volunteered to participate in the study after learning about it. Additional recruitment
efforts were attempted to diversify age, social class, race, and ethnic variables, but was
unsuccessful.
Interviews with participants took place at their home or workplace and lasted between 45
minutes to 1 and a half hours. Members of couples were interviewed separately with the
exception of one couple. Interactions before and after the interviews were recorded in field
notes. Participants also completed a survey that collected data about income, parents’
educational levels and occupations, religious identity, and contraceptive use. Additional data
was collected from focus groups that consisted of seven individuals from the original 24
participants. The focus group was hosted in a banquet room at a local restaurant, lasted for 2
hours, and was audio recorded. The group data reflected the social interactions and participant
initiation of topics.
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 58
The study had multiple criteria that participants needed to meet in order to qualify.
Participants needed to be in a heterosexual couple that was either married or in a long-term
relationship for at least 5 years, or could be single, heterosexual, and over 30 years of age. All
participants could not have children currently and would not have plans to bear or adopt children
in the future. They also could not be involved in raising a child who was not biologically theirs,
and the decision to remain childless could not stem from biological/health reasons. The study
was restricted to heterosexual participants and it did not exclude individuals who were once
parents but no longer due to the child’s placement in foster care or adoption, or death. The age
of all participants was at least thirty, and couples had to be together for a minimum of five years.
Two exceptions to the criteria included a 21-year-old female and one couple who were together
for 4 years and 10 months. The 21-year-old participant offered the perspective of a young
articulator who had strong views on voluntary childlessness and opposed marriage.
Literature stated that the voluntary childless were more educated, more likely to hold
managerial positions and professional occupations, have relatively high incomes, less religious,
more likely to be the only child or firstborn, and less traditional in gender role orientation (p. 29).
Participants of this study generally fell into these categories. All participants were Caucasian,
ranging from 21 to 56 years of age. Participants lived in a variety of community settings, such as
large cities, small cities, and college towns. Six couples were married and both spouses were
interviewed, two couples cohabitated and both partners were interviewed, five couples were
married with only the wife interviewed, one couple married with only the husband interviewed,
and two single women interviewed. Women ranged in educational achievement. Some had
some college experience while others held a JD or PhD. degree. Men’s educational achievement
also varied, from a bachelor’s degree to JD degree. Female participants’ careers included social
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 59
workers, psychologists, and college educators. Male participants were self-employed artists,
landlords, and editors.
A large majority of participants experienced negative attributions that were attached to
voluntary childlessness, although the intensity to which these judgments were held varied. Some
participants stated that they were viewed as “selfish or self-centered, cold, materialistic” and
“different, strange”, and “people who don’t care” (p. 30). Women in particular felt judged
because they were expected by society to bear children. Some participants stated that they felt
there was more tolerance about their decision to not have children, and three participants
experienced positive evaluations. Participants also experienced a varied degree of social
pressure related to their decision to not have children. Some felt that it was a nonissue while
others felt that they were on display because they did not have children. Participants also
struggled with their decision to be childless because of the anticipation of others’ reactions.
One technique that childless adults used was information control. There were two types
of information control: passing and identity substitution. Passing meant that one could control
what information was being distributed. This option was used by younger participants who still
qualified in the child bearing years. Identity substitution presented stigmatized failing as another
less stigmatized attribute. In other words, participants could avoid stating outright that they did
not want to have children with another reason, such as infertility. Others would avoid the topic
of childlessness by bringing attention to another reason that they felt better equipped to defend.
A second technique was classified as justifications and excuses. There were two types of
justification that Park (2002) identified which was to condemn the condemners and self-
fulfillment. The first type meant that if people questioned a participant on why they did not have
a child in a negative or judgmental way, the participant would acknowledge their decision but
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 60
would deny negative qualities associated with the decision. For example, one participant
explained how people would question why she decided to not have children, and they would ask
who would take care of her in her older years. The participant would acknowledge that she did
decide to not have children, and also acknowledged that having a child just to have someone take
care of you in your later years was selfish and not a right reason to have children. Participants
stated that they felt it was more selfish to have children when many parents did not think about
the “responsibilities, costs in time, money, and energy” (p. 35) it took to have children. Excuses
minimized or absolved responsibility when the choice to not have children was challenged. A
major type of excuse was biological factors. One participant explained that she lacked maternal
instinct, which made her decision to be childless easy.
A third technique was to redefine the situation. This meant that when others challenged
participants why they decided to not have children, participants would bring alternative choices
into the discussion. One participant explained that becoming a parent was socially expected, and
people would question why he did not have children. The participant would then turn the
question of why others decided to have children, ultimately leading them to acknowledge that the
decision to become a parent was a choice. Then the participant would explain that it was, then,
his choice to not have children. This technique allowed participants to lead the questioner to
discern meaning and value to parenting, then the participant “demonstrated their alternative path
to that desirable trait or behavior” (p. 37). This technique enabled participants to question
having children, the marginalization of women who were not mothers, and the effects of
overpopulation.
Peterson (2015) conducted a qualitative analysis that consisted of 21 semi-structured
interviews with childless women of Sweden to explore how they defined the concept of freedom.
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 61
After Peterson (2015) reviewed literature about voluntary childlessness, she found a prominent
theme was freedom. Peterson (2015) attempted to explore the theme of freedom with two main
research questions: 1) How do Swedish voluntary childless women define their needs of
freedom? and 2) In what ways do they consider that a childfree lifestyle fulfills these needs,
while having children threaten them?
After reviewing the literature about voluntary childlessness, Peterson (2015) found
various reasons for women’s decisions to forgo having children, including the lack of maternal
instincts, dislike/disinterest in children, fear of childbirth, concerns of population growth, career
importance, and a more satisfying marriage (p. 183). The most frequent benefit of remaining
childless was the feeling of freedom. Within the idea of freedom, there were many definitions
such as greater opportunities for self-fulfillment, improved financial position, decreased
domestic responsibilities, more opportunities to be spontaneous, more opportunities to socialize
and build friendships (p. 183). Many pieces of literature cited that motherhood was oppressive
to women, and to not have children was liberating for females. Also, there was a growing trend
in Western civilizations to remain childless. There were some women who decided to remain
childless early on in their lives while other women pursued careers, education, or established a
certain lifestyle which reduced the possibility to have children.
The individualization theory argued that people’s lives were dependent on individual
decisions and choices. This theory became more popular with people’s choice to forgo
childbearing and increased divorce rates. Many people began to examine the occupational,
financial, and existential risks associated with society, which helped shape the decision to not
have children. Another key factor that contributed to the popularization of the individualization
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 62
theory was the accessibility to birth control. Birth control allowed women the freedom of choice
and power over their life and body.
The study consisted of semi-structured interviews with 21 Swedish women who defined
themselves as voluntarily childless. These participants were found through an online network.
The network had 35 members who each received a letter asking for permission to be interviewed.
One third of this population agreed. A handful of women were contacted to be interviewed after
appearing in the media where they openly discussed voluntary childlessness. Another handful of
women were recruited by using snowball techniques. The group of participants were
heterogeneous in aspects like age and socioeconomic status. They were classified as White,
European, with the median age of 39.6 years. All participants were heterosexual; nine of the
women were single and only one was married. Three were divorced; seven were cohabitating
with a man. Four were in a long-term relationship without living in the same household. All but
one participant lived in urban areas, and the education and occupations ranged from physician to
actress to author to engineer (p. 185). All participants were given pseudonyms and were
promised that no detailed information would be released.
The interviews lasted between 1 and a half and 2 hours. Fourteen of the 21 interviews
were conducted face-to-face. Four interviews were conducted over the phone because of
geographical distances. Three interviews were conducted in writing. The respondents received
the questions via email and responded in an electronic document within a week. The focus of the
interviews was to examine the experiences the childless participants had and to have participants
speak freely about their childfree life. Some themes that were covered were about the
motivations between remaining childfree, the attitudes about voluntarily childlessness, how
being childfree has affected personal relationships, and attitudes toward available contraceptives.
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 63
Peterson (2015) stated that she conveyed understanding and acceptance while being attentive to
the participant in order to establish openness.
The analytical process consisted of Peterson (2015) reading the interview transcripts to
identify themes in order to code the common narratives and different discourses. Transcripts
were re-read and codes were revised or collapsed into new categories. There were two dominant
themes found in the interviews: A life of one’s own and Voluntary childless women’s risk
biographies. Both themes had the idea that childlessness was liberation.
The first theme, A life of one’s own, derived from two interview questions: “What is the
best thing with living a childfree life?” and “What is most important in your life?” All responses
aligned with the idea of living a life of one’s own. This involved the ability to eat freely, sleep at
night, save money, the ability to socialize whenever, and to not feel imprisoned. Some
participants noted that geographical mobility, creative and intellectual pursuits, individual
freedom, and constructing a positive childfree identity was also important in their decision to not
have children. The geographical mobility meant that the participant had the ability to travel
globally and to live in a destination of her choice. Creative and intellectual pursuits meant that
more time could be dedicated to hobbies and being career-oriented was not important since the
participant was not responsible for a dependent. Individual freedom meant to not be controlled
by someone else and participants stated freedom was “being independent” and “being
autonomous” (p.186). Finally, creating a positive childfree identity meant that the participant
had a choice to not have children. The label of “childless” was viewed as condescending by
participants and that the term “implies missing something” (p. 186), and participants felt they
were “free from that burden [children]” (p. 186). To build a label that was a positive identifier
was important to participants in the study.
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 64
The second theme, Voluntary childless women’s risk biographies, was defined as the
decisions and calculations of possible consequences that self-focused individuals create. The
main idea in this theme was the conflict of choosing motherhood or freedom. Peterson (2015)
found that participants felt that becoming a mother was a loss of control and identity.
Participants stated that they defined motherhood as “being trapped” (p.187) and motherhood
negatively impacted the gender equality in a relationship. Participants also stated that taking the
risk of not having children put them at risk as being labeled as “child haters” (p. 188). Another
risk that participants noted was intimate relationships. Prior research showed that childfree
women were more likely to reject marriage and prefer to remain single which allowed total
independence. Four participants stated that they would prefer to not cohabitate with a partner in
order to remain completely independent and keep their freedom. Some participants even stated
they did not want to have a pet because it also made them feel trapped and they did not want to
take responsibility for a pet.
Park (2005) conducted a qualitative study that explored an area of research that was
underdeveloped: the motives behind adults choosing to be childless. The article used Weber’s
(1925) theory of action and broader conceptualization of motive to interpret the motivations
between twenty-three childless men and women. Park (2005) drew upon multiple pieces of
literature on recent research about voluntary childlessness and explored the four main topics:
incidence of and trends regarding this status; comparisons of the voluntarily childless with
parents on personal characteristics and psychological wellbeing throughout the life course, and
especially in older age; social reactions to the status, and techniques for stigma management
utilized by the childless by choice; and statements of reasons for the choice. There were six
main reasons participants chose to be childless: parenting models, personality and parenting
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 65
skills, career goals, an adult-oriented lifestyle, feelings about children, and population growth
concerns.
According to the research on voluntary childlessness, there is a growing trend of
voluntary childlessness. It is becoming a more popular decision to be childless, although it is
still a relatively unpopular choice. Early articulators are people who decide to remain childless
at an early age while postponers are childless after a series of delays in marriage. The voluntary
childless were found to be more educated, employed in managerial positions, earned a higher
income, more likely to live in urban areas, less religious, less traditional in gender role
orientations, and less conventional (p. 374). Literature on life and marital satisfaction and
mental health of adults with children versus adults without children had conflicting information.
Some studies showed a higher rate of happiness within the voluntary childless, while other
studies showed no difference. Those who chose to not have children went against the pronatalist
ideology. They were seen as “less socially desirable, less well-adjusted, less nurturant, and less
mature, as well as more materialistic, more selfish, and more individualistic” (p. 376). The
voluntary childless used techniques to cope with social expectations such as passing, identity
substitution, and redefining the situation. Finally, the reasons to be childless was empirically
grounded and comprehensive but the research remained at a descriptive level.
Park (2005) used Weber’s (1925) theory to provide a theoretical perspective to classify
and interpret the motives of the voluntary childless. Weber described verstehen methodology as
a way to understand human life. Weber believed that sociology was the study of action, not
behavior, that derived from a habit or instinct. He also believed that individuals, not a collective
group, was a unit of analysis in a study of social action. Weber believed that there were four
main types of actions: affectual, traditional, value-rational, and means-ends. Affectual action
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 66
was determined by an individual’s emotional state. Traditional action was an automatic reaction
to stimuli. Value-rational action occurred when a choice is made based on a belief set of values,
regardless of the probabilities of success. Finally, means-ends was explained as being when
rational processes were used to make a decision. This meant a person considered alternative
means to an end, they weighed the consequences to various ends, and they assessed the
importance of each end. Park (2005) used Weber’s (1925) theory to define motive as “as a
complex of subjective meaning and affect that energizes action and seems to the actor an
adequate explanation for the conduct in question” (p. 384).
The study used the techniques of grounded theory development with an inductive
approach to data analysis. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and coded for themes. The
themes were them empirically tested and modified through questioning in later interviews and
written follow-up questions. A cyclical process of data collection, qualitative data coding,
consultation of literature, refinement of interview questions, and repetition of these steps was
used. Data was collected from 21 face-to-face semi-structured interviews from thirteen women
and eight men who are childless. Two additional participants of a married couple were included
and submitted written responses to open-ended questions, making a total of twenty-three
participants of fourteen women and nine men. This was a purposive sample. Participants were
selected through their acquaintance with the researcher, through referrals provided by friends,
colleagues, relatives, and other participants, and through the membership in the Childfree
Network. Two participants volunteered to participate in the study after learning about it.
Additional recruitment efforts were attempted to diversify age, social class, race, and ethnic
variables, but was unsuccessful. These efforts included contacting friends, colleagues, and
prominent members of regional African American and Hispanic organizations in an attempt to
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 67
recruit a more diverse pool of participants. Another effort included outreach to a regional
Planned Parenthood to involve lower-income participants, but was met with no results.
Interviews with participants took place at their home or workplace and lasted between
forty-five minutes to one and a half hours. Members of couples were interviewed separately
with the exception of one couple. Interactions before and after the interviews were recorded in
field notes. Additional data was collected from focus groups that consisted of seven participants
from the original twenty-three participants. The focus group was hosted in a banquet room at a
local restaurant, lasted for two hours, and was audio recorded. The group data reflected the
social interactions and participant initiation of topics.
The study had multiple criteria that participants needed to meet in order to qualify.
Participants needed to be in a heterosexual couple that was either married or in a long-term
relationship for at least five years, or could be single, heterosexual, and over 30 years of age. All
participants could not have children currently and would not have plans to bear or adopt children
in the future. They also could not be involved in raising a child who was not biologically theirs,
and the decision to remain childless could not stem from biological/health reasons. The study
was restricted to heterosexual participants and it did not exclude individuals who were once
parents but no longer due to the child’s placement in foster care or adoption, or death. The age
of all participants was at least thirty, and couples had to be together for a minimum of 5 years.
All participants were Caucasian, ranging from 31 to 56 years of age. Participants lived in
a variety of community settings, such as large cities, small cities, and college towns. Six couples
were married and both spouses were interviewed, two couples cohabitated and both partners
were interviewed, five couples were married with only the wife interviewed, one couple married
with only the husband interviewed, and one single woman interviewed. Women ranged in
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 68
educational achievement. Some had some college experience while others held a JD or PhD.
degree. Men’s educational achievement also varied, from a bachelor’s degree to JD degree.
Female participants were social workers, psychologists, and college educators. Male participants
were self-employed artists, landlords, and editors.
The first reason participants elected to remain childfree was because of parenting models.
This meant that parental figures that participants were exposed to growing up shaped their
decision to not have children. Some participants recalled negative experiences with their
parental figures which made participants decide to not have a similar experience. Other
participants noted that they had very positive experiences with parental figures but outside
factors, such as stories from family members and friends about the horrors of raising a child,
influenced their decision to remain childless. Most participants felt parenthood was
“burdensome, fearful, disappointing or stressful, or as demanding of extraordinary qualities or
talents” (p. 389). Weber’s (1925) means-ends was represented in this reason because of
participants’ careful attention in their decision-making process and the acknowledgment of the
consequences of parenting roles.
The second reason to avoid having children dealt with personality and parenting skills. A
significant number of participants stated that they had personality traits that opposed good
parenting. These personality traits included being an “anxious person, sensitivity, impatience,
and perfectionism” (p. 389). It seemed that Weber’s (1925) affectual action was being
implemented because participants referred to their emotional states when they made their
decision to remain childless, but they also referred to their personality profiles to make a sound
decision, which means that Weber’s (1925) means-ends was again displayed in the decision-
making process.
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 69
The third reason participants elected to not have children was because of career
satisfaction and success. Female participants stated that they did not feel they could adequately
balance their professional life with parenting responsibilities. The decision to not have children
allowed female participants to fully embrace their identity as a working professional. These
decisions to not have children in order to focus on careers demonstrated Weber’s instrumentally
value-rational action. Participants demonstrated the decision that being childless was desirable
in order to meet the goal of career success.
The fourth reason was to have an adult-oriented lifestyle. Participants felt that parenting
required many sacrifices in their careers and lifestyle. Not having children meant that
participants could continue to have an adult-centered existence that was satisfying and a lifestyle
that participants wanted to continue. Some participants also wanted to establish a lifestyle of
leisure, which was something they would not be able to accomplish if they had children. Male
participants cited financial responsibility as a main reason to live an adult-oriented lifestyle.
Based on Weber’s (1925) theory of action, these were value-rational actions that participants
took.
The fifth reason participants opted for a child-free life was based on their feelings about
children. Almost half of female participants noted their discomfort or disinterest in children.
Some female participants stated they lacked maternal instinct, and they also feared the pain of
childbirth. These reasons demonstrated Weber’s (1925) affectual action. Participants noted their
lack of sentiment steered them away from wanting a child, making the action emotionally driven.
The last reason dealt with population growth concerns. Participants felt that by not
having children, it would improve the well-being of humans and other species because the world
was overpopulated and the environment was becoming more and more damaged. Some
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 70
participants were globally aware of the effects overpopulation had on the planet. This reason
demonstrated value-rational action because the decision was driven out of ethical beliefs.
Craig, Donovan, Fraenkel, Watson, Hawley, and Quinn (2014) conducted a meta-analysis
study to explore whether childless women wanted to have a baby and compared age-specific
estimates of if they wanted to have biological children to the probability of having a biological
child by the age of 45. Craig et al. (2014) also tested for potential determinates of the desire to
want biological children. They hypothesized that the likelihood of a childless woman wanting a
biological child varied based on factors that included demographics, socioeconomic status,
health, living arrangements, and religious activities. Craig et al. (2014) used interview data from
the 2006 through 2010 National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG) as their data sample. They
also discussed statistical data about the decline in birth rates, infertility issues in older men and
women, and reasons why women chose to postpone having children or ruled out having
biological children altogether.
Craig et al. (2014) first examined how birth rates were decreasing as women born after
1960 were less likely to want offspring. Experts argued that this was because women joined the
workforce and pursued educational opportunities. Craig et al. (2014) also discussed the affects
ageing had on women’s bodies. For example, the discussed how fertility peaked in late teenage
and early 20s, while after the age of 35, there was a steep decline in fertility. It was also found
that the older men and women were, the less likely they were to find a partner who wanted to
have a child. Some reasons to postpone childbearing or forgoing it altogether was for health
reasons (such as cancer and chemotherapy) or to pursue higher education. Other reasons
included the costliness of children, and the benefits versus detriments of having children when
compared to a woman’s career, their health, and their lifestyle.
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 71
The NSFG was a cross-sectional survey of men and women from the ages of 15 to 44 that
was conducted by the University of Michigan’s Institute of Social Research. The study took
place from 2006 to 2010 under contract with the National Center for Health Statistics. The
probability sample was nationally representative and included an over-sampling of Hispanic,
Black, teenage, and female respondents. The over-sampling had little effect on the mean
respondent’s characteristics. The in-person interviews were administered in English and Spanish
and took approximately one and one-half hours that covered an array of topics about sexual and
reproductive health. Participants of the study had their privacy protected by HIPPA Privacy
Rule. There was a total of 5,410 participants.
Two statistical analyses were conducted in addition to the descriptive statistics with and
without sampling weights. First, Craig et al. (2014) estimated weighted mean responses to the
interview questions. The weighted likelihood of wanting a child was estimated by using the age
of first live birth and the age at the interview among all female NSFG participants. Craig et al.
(2014) estimated the proportion of women with no live births by age and controlled for censoring
at the age of interview and took the ratio proportion at age 45 and each younger age. This age-
specific ratio represented the likelihood of never giving birth by age 45. This estimator also
assumed survival until age 45 and was nationally representative.
The second statistical analysis was a series of three logistical regression estimates on the
odds of wanting a baby. Each estimation incorporated the complex sampling design of NSFG.
Craig et al. (2014) tested the association between stated preference and respondent demographic,
socioeconomic status, health characteristics, living arrangements, and religious activity. The
sample was stratified at age 30 and re-estimated in each subsample.
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 72
Craig et al. (2014) found that women born after 1960 had a decline of wanting a child.
The difference between women who wanted a child someday and women who would have a
baby by the age of 45 increased after the age of 25. By the age of 32, less than half of the
interviewed women wanted a child by 45. At 39, the majority of women wanted a baby someday
but only 7% had one by 45. Women who were older when interviewed were less likely to want a
baby someday. High school graduates and students were less likely to want a child when
compared to women with lower educational achievement. The annual income also affected the
likelihood of having a child. The annual income of $20,000 or less showed a lower desire to
have children. Women who immigrated to the U.S. within the past 5 years of the interview also
demonstrated a higher desire to have a baby in the future. Catholic women were more likely to
want a child than any other religion. Living with a significant other also increased the likelihood
of wanting a baby.
Hispanic women had greater odds of wanting a baby when compared to White and non-
Hispanic women of other races. The likelihood of wanting a baby was similar between White
and Black women. At the age of 30, there was a splitting sample. Older Black, non-Hispanic
women were more likely to want a child when compared to older White, non-Hispanic women.
Younger black, non-Hispanic women were less likely to want a baby when compared to younger
White, non-Hispanic women. This suggested an intersection between age and race.
In conclusion, women faced many judgments and reactions from others with their
decision to remain childless (Gillespie, 2000). Women used techniques to deflect the judgments
from others (Park, 2002). Women who did not have children defined their freedom and explored
the positive impact that being childless had on their lives and the possible negative aspects of
motherhood (Peterson, 2015). There were many motivations for these women to remain
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 73
childless (Park, 2005). In total, studies showed that the majority of women who were childless
decided to remain childless (Craig et al., 2014).
Conceptual Framework
In this section of my paper, I will present my conceptual framework. According to
Maxwell (2013), the conceptual framework is a model of what the researcher planned to study
and a tentative theory that the researcher was investigating (p. 39). The conceptual framework I
designed guided my study and how I collected, analyzed, and interpreted the data.
My conceptual framework is built upon the perceived reactions that voluntary childless
female educators from others. These perceived reactions are either acceptance by society,
family, and friends, but with a covert feeling of treatment, bias, and/or assumption from others,
or the outright non-acceptance by society, family, and friends and is shown by the overt
treatment, bias, and/or assumptions. The framework consists of main concepts that derived from
the literature review. Figure 1 serves as a model of the conceptual framework.
Figure 1. The perceived reactions that childless female educators who have decided to pursue
graduate-level education receive from others.
How voluntarily childless female educators
who have decided to not have children
perceive themselves to be treated
Not accepted by
society, family, and
friends
Accepted by society,
family, and friends
Treatment
Social Ostracism
Cultural Ostracism
Bias
Gender Roles
Social Roles
Assumptions
Health Issues
Selfish/Self-Centered
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 74
As Figure 1 illustrates, perceptions that female educators have when they decide to not
have children may exist along a continuum. At the end of the continuum is the perception that
society, family, and friends do not accept her decision to not have children. With this non-
acceptance, there are overt feelings that she has. These feelings derive from societal and cultural
treatment. She also experiences biases for her decision to be a voluntarily childless female
educator. These biases are based on gender role expectations and society’s expectations.
Finally, she perceives that others make assumptions about her health—that she must have
experienced health issues—or that she is selfish or self-centered. These same feelings connect to
the voluntarily childless female educator who is at the other end of the continuum, one in which
she believes herself to be accepted by society, family, and friends. Yet even at this end of the
continuum, it is likely that the voluntarily childness female educator perceives, below the surface
of acceptance, resonating and covert feelings of slight unacceptance based on the treatment,
biases, and assumptions that lie beneath the acceptance.
Treatment
This section focuses on the two types of treatments that minority voluntarily childless
female educators perceive they face when they decide to pursue graduate-level education. The
first type of treatment is social ostracism. Social ostracism deals with people in society not
wanting to interact with the female educator because of her decision to not have children and to
pursue graduate-level education. According to Park (2005), childless women are seen as “less
socially desirable” (p. 376). This is possibly due to pronatalist beliefs in the United States which
encourage high birth rates. By choosing to not have children, they are going against the
pronatalist belief system (Gillespie, 2000; Park, 2002), thus exposing these already minority
women to additional scrutiny and social ostracism by society, family, and friends. I will conduct
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 75
one-on-one interviews to gain understanding of what the term “social” means to participants,
what it means to be “less socially desirable,” and specific examples of scrutiny and social
ostracism participants have experienced.
The second type of treatment is cultural ostracism. Cultural ostracism deals with the
cultural expectation for women to have children and the backlash toward women to decide to not
have children. There are cultural pressures for women to have children (Park, 2005), and for a
woman to choose not to have children goes against cultural norms (Gillespie, 2000). A woman’s
femininity is culturally defined by a woman’s selfless act of having children (Gillespie, 2000;
Park, 2005). These cultural pressures include religious beliefs. Within all major religious
groups, procreation is promoted and celebrated (Craig, 2014; Park, 2002). The cultural pressure
for women to have children is another reason why voluntarily childless educators receive
backlash for their decision to pursue graduate-level education. I will conduct one-on-one
interviews to gain understanding of what the term “cultural” means to participants, the types of
cultural norms that participants believe are expected of them (including religious pressures), and
specific examples of scrutiny and cultural ostracism participants have experienced.
Bias
This section focuses on the two main biases that voluntarily childless female educators
face. The two types of biases, gender role bias and social role bias, are based off of social role
theory. According to Koenig and Eagly (2014), social role theory is the “social perceivers’
beliefs about social groups in their society derive from their experiences with group members in
their typical social roles” (p. 371). In other words, stereotypes within groups of people are
reinforced. Gender roles play a part of the bias that voluntarily childless female educators face.
In many countries, women are expected to fulfill the gender role of homemaker. By being a
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 76
homemaker, women demonstrate specific gender traits such as kindness, concern for others, and
being “motherly” (Kite, 1996). This means that women are expected to be nurtures because of
their gender role. For these women to choose to pursue graduate-level education, it breaks the
gender role that society expects them to fill. Women who break the gender roles receive
backlash (Johnston & Diekman, 2015). By conducting one-on-one interviews, I plan on
investigating what gender roles participants believe are expected of minority women (including
gender stereotypes), what the vision of a homemaker is, and the specific traits women are
expected to display because of their gender.
By the electing to not have children, these women are also going against social norms.
Society places emphasis on traditional family values that reinforce the natural social roles of men
and women (Gillespie, 2000; Park, 2002) which includes women being the caretaker of the
family. Women who have not fulfilled the role of mother have been identified as not fulfilling a
“normal adult female role” because having children is what women do and being a mother is
what women are (Gillespie, 2000). The role of motherhood believes that women want to display
their femininity by having children (Gillespie, 2000). Also, similar to the backlash of gender
role bias, voluntarily childless female educators face backlash for going against social norms
(Park, 2002). In the one-on-one interviews, I expect to uncover what participants believe are
social norms, what they believe a traditional family is, what societal expectations have of
women, and the backlash participants received from family, friends, and colleagues in the
graduate programs because of their decision to return to school instead of fulfilling society’s
norms.
Assumptions
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 77
This section focuses on the two assumptions that minority voluntarily childless female
educators who have decided to pursue graduate-level education face. The first assumption that
they face is the assumption that the woman has health issues. Peterson (2015) argues that society
believes that a woman who is healthy and normal would want to have a child because that is the
true definition of what a woman is (p. 183). Thus, women who do not have children are deemed
unhealthy and norm violators (Park, 2002). Many assume that women who do not have children
have infertility issues (Gillespie, 2000). By conducting one-on-one interviews, I expect to gain
insight as to any experiences participants have had about health assumptions from others, if they
have experienced the feeling of being unaccepted because of assumptions about their health, and
possible ostracism or backlash because of their decision to not have children and instead pursue
their education once others learn it is not because of a health reason that participants chose to not
have children.
A second assumption that minority voluntarily childless female educators face is the
assumption that they are selfish or self-centered for not wanting children and instead wanting to
pursue higher education. Many believe that motherhood is a selfless act, and to not want to be a
mother is considered selfish or self-centered (Gillespie, 2000; Park, 2002; Peterson, 2015).
Although women who choose to not have children do so for a number of reasons, such as
freedom, these labels are placed on women who do not want to have children along with other
assumptions such as they are child-haters (Peterson, 2015). I believe the one-on-one interviews
will shed light on the reasons why participants believe they are assumed to be selfish or self-
centered by others, any experiences participants have gone through because of this assumption of
selfishness, and if they have ever been assumed to dislike children because they consciously
chose to not have any.
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 78
Conclusion
This chapter explored the literature about gender stereotypes, female educator
stereotypes, minority women, culture and community, and voluntary childlessness. This
literature review identified the gap in literature about the intersection between the multiple
identities of minority female educators who opt to remain childless but choose to pursue
graduate-level education. These bodies of literature helped develop my conceptual framework.
The conceptual framework will serve as the foundation for sampling, data collection, and
analysis. The next chapter will discuss the research methodology that informs this study. It will
include the research design overview, the population and sample, and a description of the data
collection and analysis.
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 79
CHAPTER THREE: METHODS
This chapter describes the qualitative approach, instrumentation, and data collection and data
analysis that will be applied in this study. This chapter is divided into seven sections: research
design, sample and population, data collection and instrumentation, data analysis, credibility and
trustworthiness, ethics, and limitations and delimitations of the study. The purpose of this study
is to examine how voluntarily childless female educators who decide to pursue graduate-level
education perceive themselves to be treatment by other members of society for these choices.
This qualitative case study is informed by the following research question: How do female
educators who are voluntarily childless perceive themselves to be treated by members of society
as a result of their choices to not have children?
Research Design
This study was guided by qualitative research methods. Qualitative research was most
appropriate for this study because qualitative research examined “how people interpret their
experiences, how they construct their worlds, and what meaning they attribute to their
experiences” (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016, p. 5). This study was a case study because it was an “in-
depth description and analysis of a bounded system” (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016, p. 37). The
bounded system was minority and voluntarily childless female educators’ perceptions of the way
they were treated by members of society as a result of their choice not to have children.
This case study focused on the participants’ interpretations of the way others in society
think of them as a result of their choice to be voluntarily childless. Since I was the primary
instrument for data collection, this study was an inductive process because I gathered data to
build a theory, and rich description was used instead of numbers to convey what I learned about
the phenomenon; therefore, this study qualified as qualitative (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). I used
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 80
semi-structured interviews, which was used to gain participants’ perspectives (Maxwell, 2013). I
used semi-structured interviews which allowed me to understand participants’ perspectives on
how and why society treated them based on their choice to not have children.
Sample and Population
Participant Selection
I used purposeful, maximum variation sampling. According to Merriam and Tisdell
(2016), maximum variation sampling allowed for a greater range of participants. There were two
benefits of using maximum variation sampling, which included documenting diversity and
identifed common themes across the diversity. I opted to use maximum variation sampling
because I sought to capture an array of women’s views regarding the subject I was studying.
Given the small sample size, it was necessary that the participants are as representative as
possible. Maxwell (2013) stated that purposeful sampling achieved representativeness of the
setting and individuals, and purposeful sampling captured the entire range of variation. This
meant that I had to define the dimensions of variation of the population that were most relevant
to my study and systematically select individuals and settings that represented the important
variations of these dimensions. I also planned to use a type of sampling that was introduced by
Foster (1991). This type of sampling was called community nominations. This meant that
people from a specific community (i.e., participants in the study) nominated others to participate
in a study that meets my specific set of criteria. By this type of sampling, I was able to create a
list of potential participants who meet the specific set of criteria. Community nominations and
the snowballing effect (Creswell, 2014) put me in touch with a significant number of possible
participants for this study. Since this study focused on voluntarily childless minority female
educators, I was able to compose a specific set of criteria that participants need to meet. I was
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 81
looking for a unique sample of women who were childless by choice and who were currently
educators. Finally, random sampling was not applicable to this case study.
Since this study used maximum variation sampling, I looked for voluntarily childless
female educators. The participants for this study met the following criteria:
1. Female having been female at birth and identifying as female.
2. Single, married, divorced, or in a long-term relationship.
3. At least 25 years of age or older (Park, 2002; Park, 2005). This places participants at
an acceptable marrying and child-rearing age, and also at an age where women would
be entering graduate-level education. There is no maximum age limit of the
participants.
4. Without children in their personal lives. They cannot fulfill a step-parent role to a
minor (but can be a step-parent to an adult or independent child) or participate in any
sort of parental role (e.g., legal guardian) (Park, 2002, 2005).
5. Childless. They cannot have been pregnant or given birth, even if they do not care for
the child (i.e., the child is in foster care or was given up for adoption). The
expectation is to study a voluntarily childless female educator who has never
experienced pregnancy at all.
6. Straight, lesbians, bisexual as all women in each of these categories have the
opportunity of adoption, artificial insemination, and surrogacy.
7. Of any religion or of no religion (e.g., agnostic or atheist) as beliefs do not matter.
8. Confident that they will not be considering having a child in the future.
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 82
9. Full-time educator in either elementary or secondary education, but the grade level,
school type (e.g., traditional public, private, or charter) or affiliation (district, charter
management organization) of where participants are employed is not a factor.
Data Collection and Instrumentation
The focus of this study on understanding the way that voluntarily childless female
educators perceived they were treatment by others based on these choices.
As the researcher, I was the primary instrument of data collection and analysis (Merriam
& Tisdell, 2016). I collected data through semi-structured interviews with participants that met
the study’s criteria.
Interviews
I interviewed 15 participants using semi-structured interviews. Interviews lasted
approximately 1 to 1.5 hours each. The purpose of using semi-structured interviews was to gain
access to the relevant data that allowed me to answer my research questions, but also flexible
enough to pursue lines of inquiry as they appeared in each participant’s case and had the
interview open enough so I could ask participants to explain their responses in more detail. I
used semi-structured interview because it allowed for more flexibility, it required specific
information from participants, and was guided by a list of questions to explore my research
question in more detail (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The major reason I used interviews was to
gain insight from multiple perspectives, learned how events are interpreted, and to bridge
intersubjectivities (Weiss, 1994). For the semi-structured interviews, the questions was crafted
purposefully.
The purpose of interviews was to gain perspectives of others (Patton, 2002). During the
interviews, I used an interview guide (Patton, 2002) to guide the semi-structured interviews. The
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 83
types of questions in the interview was based off of Patton (2002): feeling questions, opinion and
values questions, and background and demographic questions. The questions I asked was guided
by my conceptual framework. Therefore, I was seeking to understand the participants’
experiences as women in the field of education and as women who have chosen to forgo having
children. More specifically, I focused on treatment, bias, and assumptions. Treatment focused
on the way participants were treated by society and their culture. Bias examined both gender
bias and social role bias. Finally, assumptions explored two assumptions: participants either had
health issues or they were assumed to be “child haters.”
I used probes, listened for markers, and asked follow-up questions based on each
participant’s answers (Patton, 2002). I also took notes during each interview (Patton, 2002)
based on important information participants disclose and themes that were deriving during the
interview. In addition, I wrote reflective notes after each interview, documenting my
impressions of each participant, the way I perceived the participant to experience the questions,
the tone and tenor of her response, and any biases that I noticed emerging during the interview. I
was sure to bring a critical lens so that I could pay attention to the way that power, race,
socioeconomic status, and gender played roles in the way that participants believed they were
treated by others in relation to their choices.
The selected participants were notified, and the researcher identified herself, restated the
background and purpose of the interview, and scheduled a place, time, and date to conduct the
interview. Each participant was informed that their real names was not be used and would be
replaced with pseudonyms.
The interviews took place at locations that allow participants to openly and freely discuss
their beliefs with a minimum amount of distraction. For the purpose of this study, the site where
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 84
the interviews were conducted was relatively open. I met at the voluntarily childless female
educator’s classroom after school or at a location that is convenient to them, such as their home.
Another location included a private room at a local library. The ideal was to conduct face-to-
face interviews, but if the participant was unable to meet in person, we used the telephone to
conduct interviews. Considering the personal information participants divulged, I preferred a
location that was private and quiet with a minimum number of distractions, which ruled out
public locations such as cafes and coffee shops. Ideally, I needed a location that was quiet and
private that allowed for participant confidentiality. After receiving the granted permission of
participants, the interviews were audio recorded for posterity. Since I audio recorded each
interview (Patton, 2002; Weiss, 1994), the interview location needed to have a quiet
environment. This allowed the researcher to focus more on the participant and not solely on
writing down verbatim notes, even though detailed notes were taken during and after the
interview (Patton, 2002). The recordings also assisted with filling in missing gaps when
transcribing and reviewing the interviews. The recordings were professionally transcribed onto a
Microsoft Word document using Rev software. The participant did not have to agree to have
their interview taped in order to participate in the study.
Data Analysis
The goal of this study was to understand the how minority female educators who chose to
not have children perceive they were treated by society because of these choices. The intent was
to accurately portray participants’ beliefs about their treatment by others based on their choices.
The data was collected through participant interviews. Data analysis was an on-gong process
that required critical reflection and questioning Creswell (2014). After each interview, I used
critical reflection and analytic memos to document what I heard that are most important
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 85
information from participants who were interviewed. I also used my critical reflective notes and
analytic memos monitor and check my own biases as the study continued (Bogdan & Biklen,
2007). I began my analysis while I collected the data. I used the analytic tools of questioning,
such as probing, and the use of personal experience (Corbin & Strauss, 2008) during each
interview. Lastly, I used Creswell’s (2007) six-step method of data analysis. This method
consisted of data management, reading and marking margin notes, describing, coding,
interpreting, and representing and visualizing data.
I coded each interview that connected to my conceptual framework about treatment, bias,
and assumptions. Treatment consisted of social and cultural ostracism. Social ostracism was
when others did not want to interact with participants because of their decision to not have
children. Cultural ostracism was when the participant’s culture shamed her for not wanting
children. Bias consisted of gender and social roles. Gender roles, formed by social role theory,
enforced the idea that women should be mothers and homemakers. Social roles focused on
traditional family values and women served in the role of caregivers. Finally, assumptions
consisted of health issues and selfishness/self-centeredness. Health issues were the assumption
that the woman were not choosing to not have children; it was assumed that she had a health
issue that did not allow her to bear children. Another assumption was that if a woman did not
have or want children, she was considered selfish or self-centered. When the participant
acknowledged any of these treatments, biases, or assumptions, I recorded it in my notes while the
interview was taking place and it will be included in the coding as a major theme.
To analyze each interview, I used open coding and searched for the themes that emerged.
I completed cycles of coding since conceptual themes may not have been identified during the
first reading (Harding, 2013), and it allowed large amounts of data to be condensed into more
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 86
focused themes (Miles, Huberman, & Saldana, 2014). The interviews were transcribed into a
Microsoft Word document. I used the Google Highlight Tool to facilitate the examination of the
interview where the results were organized into small detailed categories in an open coding
process (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). During open coding, I used an inductive approach to identify
empirical codes. As new information was identified, new codes were created. After no new
codes were identified, a second step of deductive axial coding was initiated (Corbin & Strauss,
2008; Miles, Huberman, & Saldaña, 2014). During the axial coding process, the researcher
grouped similar pieces of open codes, creating larger pieces of data or themes. The final step in
the coding process was selective coding (Corbin & Strauss, 2008) where main themes were
identified.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
Patton (2002) emphasizes that the trustworthiness of a study’s data is directly connected
to the trustworthiness of the researcher who collects and analyzes it. Merriam and Tisdell (2016)
stated that a study’s credibility and trustworthiness needed to be approached through careful
attention about the way data is collected, analyzed, and interpreted. In order to create a study
that was credible and trustworthy, I needed to ensure that my personal biases would not affect
the data collection and analysis (Maxwell, 2013). One way I identified my personal biases was
through reflexivity where I critically reflected on myself as the researcher (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). Critical reflection required considering a problem from multiple perspectives (Jay &
Johnson, 2002). Since I identified with the study’s participants as a voluntarily childless female
educator, I needed to make sure my personal biases did not interfere or affect the study, so the
critical reflection helped hold myself accountable so that it did not skew the study’s data. While
I was collecting data in each interview, I asked myself questions while I was taking notes. Some
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 87
questions I asked in order to critically reflect included: What does this reveal about the social
and cultural dimensions of women? How does this information/data inform and renew my
perspective? What are the implications of this information when viewed from other
perspectives? How does this information/data reflect my personal biases about women who have
made this choice? How can I consciously address these biases I have internalized? (Jay &
Johnson, 2002). If themes were established based on several sources of data or perspectives
from teachers, then the process of triangulating the data added to the credibility of my study
(Creswell, 2014). Member checks were completed during interviews to ensure there was no
misinterpretation of the data and that my personal biases were identified (Merriam and Tisdell,
2016). Lastly, a research journal will be describing in detail how data was collected, how
categories were derived, and how decisions were made throughout the inquiry. This research
journal will serve as an audit trail (Merriam and Tisdell, 2016).
Ethics
The credibility and reliability of a study were reliant upon the researcher’s ethics
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Since this study entailed collecting data from people, it was
empirical that I conducted this study as ethically as I could. I used Merriam and Tisdell’s (2016)
Ethical Issues Checklist, which delineated the following: “explaining the purpose of inquiry and
employed methods, reciprocity, promises, risk assessment, confidentiality, informed consent,
data access and ownership, interviewer mental health, ethical advice, data collection boundaries,
ethical and methodological choices and ethical versus legal issues” (pp. 264-265). As a
researcher, it was also important that I established rapport and trust with my participants and
upheld the study’s integrity (Creswell, 2014).
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 88
Another means of upholding an ethical research study was by submitting this dissertation
proposal to the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at the University of Southern California. The
names of all participants were altered and their identities were not disclosed in any reporting of
the findings. All respondents were asked for permission to digitally record their interviews, and
the recorder was left out in plain view. Requests to comment off the record were honored. The
transcribed interviews were stored in a secure location and will be destroyed one year after the
interview date in order to protect confidentiality (Creswell, 2014).
Limitations and Delimitations
The limitations of this study were beyond the researcher’s control and could possibly
affect the results of the study. A major limitation of this study was truthfulness. Some
participants may not fully divulged their honest thoughts and opinions on the interviewed
subjects, which cannot be controlled by the researcher.
A major delimitation of this study was time because the study’s duration was relatively
short. Another delimitation were interview times because they were determined by the
voluntarily childless female educators in order to accommodate their busy schedules. Also, since
I am a novice researcher, my interview protocols and the research itself were delimitations
because I created the interview protocols and conducted the research myself.
Conclusion
This chapter gave a summary of the research design, sample and population, data
collection and instrumentation, data analysis, credibility and trustworthiness, ethics, and
limitations and delimitations of the study. There was little research with regard to the
intersection of gender, female educator stereotypes, culture and community, and the effects of
being voluntarily childless, which created the need for this study. This was a qualitative study
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 89
that included audio recorded and transcribed semi-structured interviews of 15 participants. The
study used multiple measures of data collection and analysis, such as critical reflection, analytic
memos, and two cycles of coding, and maintained a code of ethics to ensure credibility.
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 90
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS
The purpose of this qualitative study was to gain insight into the ways in which female educators
who decided to remain childless believed themselves to be treated as a result of their decision to
remain childless, and the perceived treatment because of this decision. The research question for
this study was: How do female educators who are voluntarily childless perceive themselves to be
treated by members of society as a result of their choices to not have children?
A total of 15 semi-structured interviews were conducted with female educators who have
decided to remain childless. The female educator participants were two elementary school
assistant principals, one elementary school teacher, three middle school teachers, five high
school teachers, two English Language Intervention teachers, one high school Intervention
Specialist, and one high school Speech Pathologist. In this chapter, I present the findings of the
study. This chapter will contain a brief description of the background information on the
interview participants and the findings in relation to the research question are presented and
discussed.
Context of Study and Findings
In order to contextualize the findings, I provided a description of the interview locations
and the female educators that participated in the study. After that, I present the findings.
The majority of the interviews conducted took place at the participants’ home or
classroom, the interviewer’s home, or a local library. Two interviews took place on the
telephone because of location restrictions.
All participants involved in this study were female and identified as female. Their ages
ranged from 26 years of age to 58 years of age. The ethnic background of participants varied
(see Figure 2) and can be classified as Caucasian, Latinx, Asian, African American, and Middle
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 91
Eastern. Participants identified as either heterosexual or homosexual. Participants’ marital
status ranged from single to being involved in a long-term relationship (4+ years) to married.
Their years in education ranged from three years to twenty-five years of
experience. Participants’ roles in education also ranged, from being a teacher to administration
to intervention specialists.
Participant Age Ethnicity Religion Marital
Status
Sexual
Identity
Years in
Education
Role in
Education
#1 35 Caucasian Jewish Single Heterosexual 12 Assistant
Principal
(Elementary
School)
#2 58 Caucasian Protestant Married Heterosexual 12 English
Language
Intervention
#3 37 Caucasian Christian Long-term
relationship
Heterosexual 14 Assistant
Principal
(Elementary
School)
#4 35 African
American
Spiritual Single Heterosexual 10 High School
Teacher
#5 44 African
American
and
Caucasian
Christian Married Heterosexual 6 High School
Teacher
#6 45 African
American
Atheist Married Heterosexual 6 High School
Teacher
#7 41 Filipino
American
Christian Single Heterosexual 7 Middle
School
Teacher
#8 33 Chinese
American
No
religion
Long-term
relationship
Heterosexual 7 Middle
School
Teacher
#9 52 Singaporean
/Chinese
American
No
religion
Long-term
relationship
Homosexual 25 Elementary
School
Teacher
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 92
#10 48 Mexican
American
Catholic Long-term
relationship
Homosexual 19 Speech
Pathologist
(Elementary
School)
#11 50 Peruvian
American
Catholic Single Heterosexual 13 Middle
School
Teacher
#12 39 Mexican
American
No
religion
Single Heterosexual 19 High School
Teacher
#13 26 Mexican
American
and Italian
American
Christian Single Heterosexual 3 High School
Teacher
#14 33 Persian
American
Christian Long-term
relationship
Homosexual 8 High School
Teacher
#15 36 Armenian
American
Christian Single Heterosexual 7 High School
Teacher
Figure 2. Participant information.
Figure 2 presented the general information about each participant, including their age,
ethnicity and religion they identify with, their marital status, their sexual orientation, years of
experience in education, and the role they play in education. The most important finding from
Figure 2 was the correlation between ethnicity, religion, and sexual orientation with how
participants described how they were treated because they were voluntarily childless.
There were three commonalities that emerged from the data about the participants during
the study. The first detail was that all three Caucasian participants were aware of their
“privilege” because they were the “dominant” class in American society. The second
commonality was all participants identified as female, but not as a “girly” girl growing up. All
participants mentioned that they played with Barbie dolls growing up, although to various
degrees of exposure and enjoyment. The final commonality was all participants recognized there
were benefits and detriments for being voluntarily childless.
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 93
Identification as Minoritized or Privileged. The other participants were considered minorities
in American society, identifying as African American, Asian American, Latinx American, and
Middle Eastern. The three participants who were Caucasian (Participants #1, 2, 3) were very
aware of their privilege. Sanchez-Hucles and Davis (2010) claimed that white women were able
to maneuver around barriers easier than minority women. Participant #3 identified that her
experience as a woman would have been much different, had she been a different ethnicity:
“I think that maybe my access to opportunities may have been different if I had not been
a white female…”
This showed that Participant #3 was aware of the fact that she had a privilege and more
opportunities, while recognizing minorities’ opportunities may have been limited.
Participant #2 shed light on two beliefs she held. First, she felt that gender held more
importance than race. Second, she recognized that she was a part of what she considered the
dominant class because she was Caucasian, and her experience may have been skewed because
of her dominance:
“I think it's clear across the board and doesn't matter. I also think that gender trumps race
in terms of how people are treated. But then again, I'm Caucasian, I'm the dominant class,
so how would I know?”
Although Participant #2 believed that gender was more impactful than race, she realized that her
opinion may not hold much weight because she is already a part of the dominant class.
Participant #1, also recognized that her experiences in American society would have been
different, had she been a difference ethnicity. She claimed:
“I think my experience would have been completely different. For all purposes, I'm a
white female. Yes, there are things that aren't great for females that are a struggle, but I
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 94
make no mistake, I know that being a black female, being a Latino female, is way harder
in this society.”
Participant #1 recognized that being a minority in American society was much more of a struggle
than being a white female. All three Caucasian women recognized their position in America
based on their ethnicity and that their perceptions of treatment may have been skewed because of
their dominance. In contrast, none of the minority participants acknowledged feeling privileged
or dominant in regard to their ethnicity. On the contrary, many minority participants mentioned
that their ethnicity/culture affected their experiences being women and being educators.
Gender Identification. All participants identified as female, yet none felt that they were
considered “girly girls” growing up. Many participants identified as tomboy. Thirteen of the 15
participants identified as tomboy, one identified as alternative (she cut her hair short, had
piercings, and listened to female musicians), and one considered herself a semi-tomboy.
Representative of the data, Participant #14 claimed that she wanted to be a tomboy
because she realized that her brother received better treatment from her parents. She stated:
“I have a younger brother who got at the time, I thought and I guess even still think, he
had it so much easier than I did because he was a boy. I wanted to be more like him so
that I wouldn't be pushed so hard and if I did something wrong, it was like, "You're
grounded for six months." He could go out and do something way worse and nothing
would happen to him. I always wanted to be more of a tomboy so that I would be treated
more fairly against my brother.”
Participant #14 wanted to be a tomboy because she witnessed the different treatment between
herself and her brother, presumably because of their gender. She perceived that her brother
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 95
received more lenient treatment and more freedom, while she was reprimanded if she did
something wrong and was pushed to succeed.
Participant #4 mentioned how her mother tried to make her conform to the mother’s
expectation of what a female entailed, and the participant was not happy about her mother’s
pressures. The Participant #4 stated,
“I was more of a tomboy, not a girly girl. Definitely not too much of the girly. I would
feel my mother trying to get more girly-ness out of me, but I wasn't a feeling it.”
This demonstrated that the participant did not want to conform to become a girly girl. Although
the participant described how her mother wanted her to be more feminine, the participant
identified as a tomboy and did not want to conform to the gender expectation. While all
participants had various reasons to be a tomboy, all 15 adapted their identities in some way that
did not qualify, in participants’ views, as “girly girl”.
An ancillary find about the participants in this study was that all 15 participants played
with Barbie dolls as children. When each participant was questioned about imaginative play in
their childhood, all 15 participants mentioned that they played with Barbies. Some participants
were very awkward with Barbie play, while other participants thoroughly enjoyed playing with
their Barbie dolls. While all 15 participants played with Barbie dolls, this imaginative play did
not influence participants to make the decision to have children.
Perceptions of Impact of Not Having Children. The final detail was all 15 participants shared
what they perceived as the many benefits of not having children, as well as multiple detriments
for not having children. In the interviews, participants identified many benefits for not having
children. There were three main perceived benefits that participants discussed: freedom, money,
and time. The first benefit, freedom, allowed participants to have the freedom to travel and the
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 96
luxury to do as they pleased. 11 participants of this study mentioned freedom as a benefit.
Participant #2 stated:
“So it has given me a lot of freedom, too, which is mine. And that was when I first made
the decision to not have children. I took a good look at myself and thought, "I'm
impulsive. That's just who I am. And being stuck for 18 years ..." You know, if I keep a
job for three years it's pretty much a miracle because I get bored and restless and I want
to go do something else. So, I really thought about, "You're going to be a mother for 18
years or more," and I didn't want that long-term commitment.”
This participant realized that she needed the freedom and liberty to live a life that best fit her
lifestyle, which did not include children. Participant #2 was conscious of the fact that she
wanted her freedom and did not want to commit to a lifetime of a “mother” role. Other
participants of this study echoed Participant #2’s feelings. Participant #6 stated:
“One of the biggest reasons I know that my husband and I said to not have children is our
freedom. And you know, that sounds terrible to some people. But we love to travel, we
love our life, we like picking up and leaving whenever we want. We just didn't want to
change our lifestyle.”
Similar to the Participant #2, Participant #6 also loved the idea that she had the flexibility to
enjoy having the freedom to travel, to live her own life, and to not have to change or adapt
because she had a child. Participants #3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, and 14 also mentioned the benefit
of having the freedom to travel.
Another benefit that participants noted was the benefit of having financial freedom. 13 of
the 15 participants mentioned the benefit of not worrying about their finances. Participant #5
stated:
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 97
“When I get money, I can save it. I can take care of myself. With teaching, self-care is
such an important thing. I can get massages. I can go to an expensive gym. I can get a
facial when I want to. That helps me be a better teacher. Yeah, and just having that
security of money in my bank account that I don't have that stress of oh, my God, my
kid's college. I have to save for my kid's college or anything like that.”
This participant recognized that she had the benefit of being able to spend her hard earned
income on herself and not have to have the worry of a child. She was able to pamper herself
with luxuries such as massages and gym memberships, which the participant argued actually
made her a better teacher. Above all else, she did not need to have the extra stress of worrying
about finances for a child. Another participant held similar beliefs to Participant #5. Participant
#12 claimed:
“All my money is mine. I love to travel so once I got myself financially stable then that's
what I do… It's my money and I do what I want.”
Participant #12 had a passion to travel, and she had the luxury to do so because she was
childless. She discussed the financial freedom she had to spend her money the way she wished.
Many other participants (Participants #1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 14, and 15) mentioned that they
also enjoyed traveling, so having the monetary means to travel because they did not have the
extra cost of a child was a benefit.
A final perceived benefit of being voluntarily childless was having extra time. Eight
participants stated that time was a benefit of not having children. Participant #8 mentioned:
“Time. Time is the biggest thing. Money is just secondary. But honestly, I'm so tired
from work, because being a teacher, it's physically, mentally, and emotionally
exhausting. When I come home and I'm able to just plop myself on the couch and veg out
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 98
for a couple of hours, I do think to myself, "I wouldn't be able to do this if I had a
child." Not just a baby but even a teenager, because I would have to tend to somebody
else. So time is the biggest thing.”
This participant realized that because her job as a teacher was so demanding, she needed time to
herself to recharge. She was aware that she would not have this luxury if she had children. The
participant was also aware of how demanding her job was, both physically and mentally. A
second participant mirrored Participant #8’s beliefs. Participant #13 said:
“So definitely, I have time. I have time to breathe. I do feel like teaching is a stressful
job. And I'm able to decompress at the end of the day, and I don't think I would be able
to do with kids.”
Again, a benefit to not having children was having time. Participant #13 realized that if she had
a child, she would not be able to have time to herself to destress from the demands of her
job. Participants #2, 4, 5, 11, 12, and 14 also stated that they felt time was a benefit.
While participants shared their perceptions of the many benefits to not having children,
such as freedom, money, and time, participants also identified a few commonly shared
detriments to not having children: missing out on the connection and bond that a mother and
child shares, along with the memories, and elderly care.
Missed Connections. First, seven of the 15 participants mentioned that they realized that they
would be missing out on making memories with a child of their own, along with missing out on
the bond that a mother and child shared. Participant #1 stated:
“I think that you miss probably the most special connection you can have with someone.
I think you don't get that and you can't get that from having a dog, you just can't. You
don't get that, that is the reality.”
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 99
Participant #1 recognized that she would be missing out on the connection that women share
with their children. This loss, according to this participant, has no way of being supplemented,
not even with the love of an animal. Participant #4 claimed:
“There a connection, there is something that parents have, those parents who are like, I
would die for my kids and I would kill for my kid and stuff like that….So whatever that
love is, I will never have that. I have a mother daughter love, I have a sisterly love, I
have a friend love, work love. I would never have whatever that parent love is.”
Similar to the previous participant, Participant #4 recognized that she was lacking the bond that a
mother and child shared. While she had many other types of love, she realized that she would
never have the special love a mother had toward their child, and vice versa.
Elderly Care. Another detriment that eight of the 15 participants mentioned was they were
concerned about who would care for them when they were elderly. Participant #2 admitted:
“Now that I'm getting older I'm realizing that I could skip the children pretty easily.
Skipping the grandchildren, which of course I didn't consider that when I made the
decision, but not having the grandchildren, I worry about my care. Who's going to care
for me when I get older? Not having the children, that's fine, but now that I realize that
I'm not going to have grandchildren, I'm starting to wonder about that. Who's going to be
there for me?”
Participant #2, who was the oldest of the study at 58 years of age, worried about who would take
care of her when she was older. While Participant #2 was relatively young, she was beginning to
realize the impact that her decision to not have children had. A younger participant, Participant
#8, who was 33 years old, echoed similar worries that Participant #2 had. The younger
participant stated:
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 100
“Also, I do think about, as I get older, I know this sounds terrible, but some people have
their kids to have them take care of them when they're older.”
Similar to Participant #2, Participant #8 was also worried about who would care for her in her
old age. The idea of elderly care was a common worry amongst the participants. While this
detriment seems problematic, this did not deter participants’ decisions to remain childless. None
of the detriments, like the missed mother/child connection and elderly care, did not deter
participants from their decision to remain voluntarily childless.
Participants shared commonalities about the benefits and detriments of being voluntarily
childless. These commonalities between participants shed light on their backgrounds and
provided context to their gender identification as female, while it also solidified the feelings
about not wanting to have children.
Research Question
What follows is the research question and the themes that emerged from the data. The
following research questions guided this study: How do female educators who are voluntarily
childless perceive themselves to be treated by members of society as a result of their choices to
not have children?
An examination of the data revealed that, on the surface, each participant received some
sort of backlash because of their decision to remain childless. A deeper examination of the data
revealed that the backlash participants received came from different sources for each participant.
There were three main themes that derived from the analysis: treatment, bias, and assumptions.
I start with the first theme, Treatment, then follow with the theme of Bias, and conclude
with Assumptions.
Treatment
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 101
The first theme explored the treatment participants experienced from their social circles
and cultural communities. Social circles consisted of participants’ family, friends, and society.
DeWall et al (2010) argued that people wanted to be accepted by their peers, and “the need to
belong is among the most fundamental of all human needs” (p. 168). If a person was rejected by
their social circle, they could feel “disliked, unappreciated, excluded, or devalued” and it also
“lowers self-esteem, and may result in antisocial behaviors such as aggression or withdrawal”
(Buckley, Winkel, & Leary, 2004, p. 14). The literature indicated that acceptance was important
to individuals, and those who are not accepted experience negative consequences.
Participants of this study were either accepted by their social circles, which included their
family, friends, and/or society, or not accepted by their social circle and experienced social
ostracism. The treatment each participant received, whether it was acceptance or non-acceptance
for their decision to remain childless, came from participants’ social circles or cultural
communities.
Family Acceptance. Of the 15 participants interviewed, 11 of the women discussed feeling
some sort of acceptance from family, friends, and/or society. All 11 participants made a
statement about their families accepting their decision to remain childless. There were four
participants who did not mention feeling accepted by their family. These four participants
(Participant #3, 6, 12, and #15) varied in ethnicity. One participant identify them: was
Caucasian, one was African American, one was Latinx, and one was Armenian American. Their
ages also ranged, from 35 years old to 58 years old. Their religions were Christian, Catholic, and
atheist (see Figure 2, above).
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 102
Eleven participants mentioned their family’s acceptance of their decision to not have
children. Participant #1, who discussed being completely accepted and supported by her family,
stated:
“I think they genuinely just want me to be happy, for me to be happy, not because of
what society says. I think that they know that this is the way I'm happy.”
This participant shared that her family supported her decision to remain childless and they did
not question her decision. She stated that her family wanted her to be happy, regardless of
society’s expectations.
Another participant agreed that her family supported her decision, albeit there was a
feeling of slight disappointment. Participant #9 said:
“Being Asian, the idea is that you get married, have children, and be a good wife and
mother. The idea that I am not going to have children definitely upset my parents at first,
as well as the rest of my family, but they are definitely coming around to the idea. It’s
more like they are warming up to the fact that children aren’t a part of my life, and they
realize they need to accept it.”
Participant #9 perceived that her parents wanted their daughter to follow the traditions of their
culture and live up to their expectations about starting a family. Although Participant #9
discussed that her family was disappointed, she did share that her family ultimately supported
her decision to not have children.
The youngest participant of the study, who was 26 years old, stated that her family was
not aware of her decision to remain childless. While her family was unaware of her decision,
Participant #13 did share her perception of what their reaction would be:
“I believe they're going to accept me. I just think it's going to take a moment to process
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 103
just because it is normal for people of my culture to have big families.”
Although Participant #13 did not inform her family of her decision to remain childless, she
believed that her family would accept her decision to not have children. She also acknowledged
that it might take her family members a time to process the information, especially since her
culture typically had large families.
There were four out of the 11 participants that mentioned their friends supported their
decision to not have children. One of the four participants, Participant #4, shared that her friends
supported her decision to remain childless. She said:
“My group of friends, I don't feel judgment from them, because they're all educated and
so they waited a long time to have children. Most of them still don't have children or they
just had a child... I think that the more educated people are, the more understanding they
are of women who choose not to have children.”
Participant #4 perceived that her friends accepted her because of two reasons. First, she shared
because her friends were educated. Second, she discussed that her friends also do not have
children or they waited a long time to have children. She also noted that the more educated
people were, the more understanding they demonstrated about women choosing to not have
children.
Six out of the 11 participants discussed their acceptance by society, beyond their families,
to not have children. Participant #6 stated:
“I think now it's so much more common for people not to have kids that I don't think it's
the same, I don't think people are as thrown off by it… in all honesty, I really don't feel
like I've had any negative. The older I get and the more common it becomes, I actually
feel like there's more support out there, you know?”
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 104
Participant #6 commented that it was becoming more common for women to not have children,
and because of this, she did not perceive any experience of society judging or criticizing
her. She also believed that the older she became, the more support she felt. Participant #6 was a
45 year old African American woman. While fairly young, she was one of the older participants
of this study. Participant #6 also mentioned:
“But I think because I'm older, I don't feel like I've had any negative repercussions. I
don't feel like people look at me differently. I don't feel like conversations happen
differently because of it. So I think I'm just either very lucky or it's just maybe I don't
remember how I would've felt 15 years ago had you asked me this question. But sitting
here today, I don't feel like anybody's punished me personally or community-wise or race
wise or religion wise. Maybe I'm just, it might be because maybe I'm numb to it. Well
maybe because I just don't care what other people think, but I don't feel it.”
Participant #6 acknowledged the fact that she was older so she did not necessarily face the same
ostracism that a younger woman would have faced. But she also mentioned that she might not
recall being treated differently in her younger years.
Unacceptance from Family. The participants of the study also experienced unacceptance from
family, friends, and society. The forms of unacceptance were typically comments made to the
participants. One example of unacceptance was from Participant #14, who stated:
“I don't need you to ask your leading questions or take in your suggestive tone of
disapproval about what you think I'm doing with my life or who I'm doing it with. You
do you and let me do me.”
Participant #14 was referring to various people, including her family, friends, and society, all of
whom she perceived were judging her decision to remain childless. She mentioned that it
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 105
seemed the tone people used when they spoke to her, as well as the questions they posed to her,
held an air of judgment and condensation to it. Ten other participants in the study mentioned
that the tone others took with them, as well as the many questions people asked once people
realized the participants were voluntarily childless, were judgmental and skeptical.
Seven participants mentioned that because they were in the field of education, people
automatically assumed that they would want children. Gannerud (2001) discussed how teachers
without children experienced negative interactions with people, especially parents who would
not rely on a childless educator’s advice. The negative backlash the childless educators received
varied, but a majority of participants perceived judgment from society. Participant #4 claimed:
“As soon as you tell someone that you are not going to have kids, it's almost like this
shade you, how dare you? You're a teacher. You take care of my kids are the longer
you're not having any of your own, how dare you?”
Participant #4 was explaining her experience working with people from society, as well as
parents she interacted with throughout her teaching career. Participant #4 is just one example of
what the childless female participants described they experienced when people spoke to them.
The participants also mentioned that they could feel the backlash and unacceptance of their
decision to remain childless from others, even if it was unspoken. An example of this was from
Participant #6:
“I'm sure people have thought things they haven't said out loud like, "Why would you be
a teacher if you don't want to have kids?"
According to Participant #6, although the unacceptance was not outright spoken, she described
sensing the judgment from others. The overall feeling of unacceptance the seven participants felt
was summed up in the following statement from Participant #15:
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 106
“People are always surprised when I say I don't have children, just because as a teacher, it
comes with that stereotype that you're caring, and nurturing, and how do you come about
it if you don't have children? And so, it's just ... they're always shocked that you don't,
and I think it just comes with the natural stereotype as a woman that you're supposed to
automatically have kids and be married.”
All seven participants mentioned in some capacity the idea that others assume that since the
participants are in the field of education, the others assumed that the participants would want
children. This was based on the societal stereotype that women are expected to get married and
have children. Gillespie (2000) discussed that society believed women should be married and
have children, thus conforming to the “ideal mother” (p. 224). When people, albeit family,
friends, or society, realized that the participants in the study did not want to have children and
were in the field of education, there was a sense of shock. These participants’ sense from others
was because of the societal expectation that women were expected to get married and have
children, and women who did not conform to the expectation were not accepted.
Cultural Community Acceptance. Voluntarily childless female educators also faced
acceptance from their cultural communities. Some participants were accepted by their cultural
communities, which included their religious community. Other participants who were not
accepted by their cultural communities experienced cultural ostracism.
Participants experienced acceptance and/or unacceptance in their cultural
communities. These communities include the ethnic community the participant identifies with,
including their religious community. In this study, there were three Caucasian participants, three
African American participants, three Asian American/Pacific Islander participants, four Latinx
participants, and two Middle Eastern participants. There was one Jewish, one Protestant, seven
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 107
non-denominational Christian, one atheist, three that did not identify with a religion, and two
Catholic participants. (see Figure 1, above).
Only four of the 15 participants stated that they felt accepted by their cultural
communities. One participant was African American (Participant #6), one was Caucasian
(Participant #3), one was Persian American (Participant #15) and one was Latinx (Participant
#12). Three of the four participants mentioned that they believe that younger generations of their
cultures were more accepting of their decision to remain childless than the older
generations. Only Participant #15 did not mention that she believed younger generations of her
culture were more accepting than the older generation. Sanchez-Hucles and Davis (2010)
discussed that white women had the luxury to maneuver around barriers easier than minority
women. Moreover, minority women faced non-acceptance with more difficulties and had to
identify if the barriers they faced were due to their ethnicity, their gender, or because of another
facet of their identity. The majority of the participants of this study were minority women.
Participant #6 who described cultural acceptance for her decision was African American.
Participant #6, who stated:
“I feel like I'm, no pun intended, in the minority. That I haven't felt any repercussion for
my decision. And I think that's, I think that's unusual and I'm okay with that.”
Participant #6 was aware that she did not receive backlash from her cultural community, and she
realized that it was pretty unusual to receive acceptance for her decision to not have children.
Participant #12, a Latinx American woman, shared that the younger generation was
supportive, and said:
“I think the younger generation really doesn't care. They're just like, ‘Well, okay. You
don't have kids. You don't have kids. You have kids, you have kids.’ It doesn't matter.”
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 108
This demonstrated the acceptance within the younger generations of their cultural
community. She did not face the rejection from her cultural community with the younger
generation. Participant #12 also stated:
“...it's the older generation where they feel like if you don't have kids your life is not
complete. And so, yeah, the older people will like, "What? You don't have kids?" Like,
"Oh my god."”
While Participant #12 noted that she perceived acceptance by the younger generation in her
cultural community, she recognized that the elders within her community still held the
expectation for her to have children. A majority of the participants felt some sort of judgment or
ostracism from their cultural communities. Johnston and Diekman (2015) discussed that society
held specific roles for men and women, and it was not acceptable for genders to deviate from
their prescribed roles.
Unacceptance from Cultural Community. 13 of the 15 participants stated that they felt
ostracism from their cultural communities. This derived from their ethnic groups and their
religious groups. Participant #7 stated that she perceived her Filipino community judged her:
“So I do think I'm viewed differently and to me it's almost to my advantage, because I'm
maybe seen as Americanized. And I guess with that stereotype it's like, independent, you
don't have to get married or have kids. It's like maybe going against the grain in a way.”
Participant #7 was speaking about her Filipino community. She recognized that her community
viewed her differently because of her “Americanized” choices, which included not having
children. She acknowledged that she was not following the cultural community’s norms.
Participant #15, an Armenian American stated:
“I am looked upon outside of the traditional women. I am like an outcast. I am
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 109
something that is not of norm of the community, of our community. So I feel like I'm
looked down upon and kind of talked about, like, what's wrong with her? What ... yeah.
What's wrong with her? Why doesn't she want to do what a majority of her peers do?”
This participant acknowledged that her Armenian community questioned her choice to not
follow the stereotypical role that they held for women. This participant perceived that her
cultural community looked down on her and judged her for her decision. Similar to Participant
#7, she acknowledged that she, too, was not following her culture’s norm of getting married and
having children. Because of her decision to remain childless, Participant #15 experienced
cultural ostracism.
Another type of cultural ostracism is within participants’ religious communities.
Although the participants in this study practiced different religions, they had a collective feeling
of ostracism. Participant #1, who was Jewish, stated:
“Call it the Jewish community, but people here are trying to set me up. People have a
hard time fathoming why someone wouldn't want to find someone, and get married and
have kids… I half the time say I have a boyfriend because I don't even want to deal with
it.”
This participant did feel that her religious community tried to push their ideologies onto her. In
order to protect herself, as well as avoid the conversation about her personal life, Participant #1
would lie to her religious community about being involved in a relationship. By lying, she
shared that she was able to avoid facing her religious community’s judgment and ostracism about
being a single, childless female.
Participant #2, who was Protestant, claimed:
“I actually have been called to task by other people of my religion saying that I am going
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 110
against God's will… Yes. And that it's God's will for women to have children, and so,
why am I so rebellious that I went against God's will? So there again, that has been used
as a club to convince me that I need to do it.”
Participant #2’s religious community made her feel ostracized by their comments made toward
her. The religious community believed that God ordained women to recreate human life, and for
the participant to go against God’s will was unacceptable. Participant #1 was labeled rebellious
and felt pressure to follow traditional beliefs.
Bias
The second theme explored how society upheld certain roles for men and women, and
these roles demonstrated the uneven balance of power between genders and reinforced the
continuation of the existing conditions (Prentice and Carranza, 2002). Women were considered
“homemaker” and “selfless” while men were considered “employee” and “self-assertive” (Eagly
and Kite, 1987). This study explored participants’ experiences with gender and social roles.
Participants were accepted by their social circles, which included their family, friends,
and/or society, or not accepted by their social circle because of society’s gender role
expectation. If participants were not accepted by their social circles, the biased treatment each
participant received for their decision to remain childless derived from society’s gender roles and
social roles. Hudak (1993) stated that gender was socially constructed, meaning that society
created the roles each gender was expected to fulfill. Participants who did not fulfill society’s
gender expectation, such as being a mother, experienced ostracism. Ellemers (2018) argued that
gender expectations were shaped by the way boys and girls are educated and continued to
develop over the course of their lives. This means that gender and social roles are taught and are
not inherent.
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 111
Gender roles. 11 participants experienced acceptance and support by their social circles,
regardless of their gender. Four participants did not mention feeling unaccepted because of their
gender. While they did not mention feeling unaccepted because of gender role expectations, it
may not mean they did not experience it. There were no actual statements from the four
participants that said they felt accepted by their social circles, regardless of gender.
While the majority of the study’s participants experienced acceptance, all 15 participants
mentioned that they were aware that society held certain expectations for women, particularly the
idea that women were expected to get married and have children. Participant #10 stated:
“People definitely think that for a woman to not have a child is out of the norm. I guess it
is a stereotypical idea that women need to get married and have kids.”
This statement demonstrated the belief that women were expected to follow traditional gender
roles of getting married and child rearing. Participant #10 was aware that her decision to remain
childless was going against the stereotypical gender roles of women. Men, on the other hand,
did not experience the same pressures and judgment that women faced to get married and have
children. An example of this was from Participant #5 who argued:
“You're a bachelor. I don't think that if a man has a really good career and is financially
well-off that they're looked down upon for not having kids. I think for women, totally.
They're looked at like, oh, you're loose. I feel like people think that I'm selfish and that
I'm a slut…”
This participant felt that men were congratulated for being career driven and financially
successful and not judged for not having children. On the other hand, women were judged for
not having children and were viewed as promiscuous.
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 112
Also, participants held a common belief that men were held to a different expectation
than women. Three participants mentioned the difference in treatment between themselves and
their brothers. Participant #1 stated that she believed that men and women were treated different
when they were childless. She stated:
“I think for a man it's not really questioned. I think for a man maybe people think he
didn't meet the right woman. I don't think it's really questioned even though he has made
the conscious decision not to have it. I think for a woman, because you don't really need
the man, even though a man could adopt on their own, there is more of a curiosity behind
it, of a feeling like it's more out of the norm.”
Participant #1 felt that men were not questioned by society about their choice to remain
childless. There was an assumption that the man did not find the right woman. Women, on the
other hand, were questioned because not having children was going against the gender role
expectation.
Other participants mentioned their experiences of being held to the traditional women’s
role of being a housewife. 10 out of 15 participants mentioned the typical gender role of mother,
housewife, cook, and cleaner. Participants mentioned that the expectation was gender driven,
very traditional and outdated, yet many members of society continued to hold that expectation of
women. One of the comments Participant #9 made was:
“Men are definitely expected to be the breadwinners and the women are expected to
cook, clean, and take care of the children.”
This statement indicated the idea that society still held the belief of the traditional gender roles of
man as breadwinner and woman as housekeeper. Participant #15 stated:
“...they think that I'm supposed to be in charge of the house and women are not supposed
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 113
to work because we're supposed to take care of the house, cook, clean, take care of kids.”
Whether it was a cultural expectation or a societal expectation, nearly all participants were in
agreeance that the traditional gender roles of women to cook and clean and be a housewife were
outdated, and yet there was an expectation for them to conform to the gender role expectation
from their culture or society.
There were two interesting labels of childless women that emerged from the study’s
interviews. One label was childless women were identified as promiscuous while men were not.
A second interesting label was women who did not have children were assumed to be lesbians.
First, four of the 15 participants mentioned that there were gender labels about how many
sexual partners a woman could have. The four participants stated that there was a distinct
difference between how men and women were viewed based on their sexuality. For example,
Participant #12 argued:
“Males do not. It doesn't matter. They can have 10 baby mommas and who cares? A girl
has 10 baby mommas and she's a whore. So, yeah. No, definitely the male will not get
as much [pushback] as we do.”
This demonstrated the difference between men and women. A man was able to have multiple
sexual partners and children from multiple women and not be judged. Women, on the other
hand, would be judged and labeled a whore. While the judgment was unfair and biased, it
remained, even in current society.
Second, women were assumed to be lesbians if they were childless. Eight of the 15
participants mentioned that others assumed that the participants were lesbians. An example of
this assumptions was from Participant #4, who stated:
“They assume I am a lesbian, which is annoying because there's lesbians who have kids.”
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 114
This participant was explaining that people have assumed that she was a lesbian because she was
childless. This participant was annoyed by the comment because the label was not true, and it
was a false assumption to make about her. Also, just because someone may be a lesbian does not
mean that they have to be childless. Participant #11 commented:
“I even got asked if I was a lesbian… I know many lesbian couples or lesbians that have
children. I don't particularly think that your who I'm going to have sex with has anything
to do with your choice of having a child or not. I don't think it is.”
Participant #11 had a label placed on her because of gender roles. This label was not only
incorrect, it also demonstrated ignorance about lesbians and lesbian couples. The idea that a
lesbian or lesbian couple could not have a child because they were gay was untrue.
Participant #14, who did identify as lesbian, stated that she has experiences sometimes
severe backlash and judgment because she does not have children. One comment the participant
made was:
“"She doesn't want to have kids because she's gay." Or, "She's a lesbian and God doesn't
want her to have kids." Or, "If you do choose to have kids, your kid's gonna have gay
moms." It's like, "Okay, and?" There's so many different religious undertones that
dominates people's concept of sexuality and then, not being a mother, and sometimes
people try, and force a linear connection when there isn't one to be made.”
The participant realized that because she was a lesbian and did not have children, people
believed that it was a way that God was able to punish her. The religious beliefs and the gender
role expectation of women allowed people in society to label and judge the participant. While
Participant #14 was able to acknowledge that there was no linear connection between gender
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 115
(including sexuality) and being a mother, it was apparent that others in society could not see the
distinction.
Another participant stated how her mother’s expectation of gender roles prompted her to
ask the participant if she was a lesbian. Participant #8 stated:
“Even in high school, my mom asked me if I was a lesbian, because I hung out with
a lot of boys still. Just, she said that my mannerisms were very masculine, even to the
point that I walk. She commented, "You're walking too heavy. You need to walk more
ladylike."”
This participant was Chinese American and her mother was an immigrant from Asia. Her
mother carried the traditional Chinese customs about gender and expected the participant to
adhere to the gender roles. Her mother considered her walk to be too masculine and because the
participant had many male friends, coupled with the fact that she was not married and did not
have children, her mother believed that she might be a lesbian.
Social Roles. Participants also faced societal roles. Participants were accepted by their social
circles, which included their family, friends, and/or society, or not accepted by their social circle
because of society’s roles of women. Diekman and Eagly (2000) argued that women’s roles
could become more like men’s, which would give women the opportunity to fulfill male-
dominated roles and opportunities. Unfortunately, the information gathered in this study did not
support the idea that women would be able to fulfil men’s roles in society any time soon.
None of the participants mentioned in their interviews the feeling of being completely
accepted by their social circles because of the social roles women are expected to adhere
to. There were multiple reasons women felt unaccepted by their social circles. Eight of the 15
mentioned that they felt that as women, especially as educators, there was an expectation for
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 116
them to be nurturing. While some participants agreed with this expectation, others felt the
expectation was unfair. Participant #8 agreed with females as nurturers and stated:
“I honestly feel like I can be more open with my students because a female educator,
they're seen as more nurturing. I mean, most of the educators in any state, they're
females. I mean, it's a predominantly female career. Because females are seen as more
nurturing, of course.”
Participant #8 felt that because she was a female educator, it allowed her to be a more caring and
nurturing teacher. The participant also believed that females are viewed as more nurturing, so
she does acknowledge that it is a societal role. A second participant, Participant #3, who also
agreed with this role expectation stated:
“I think both men and women can be phenomenal educators, but there's something about
the makeup of being a woman. You have that natural instinct to be nurturing. Most
women have that ability that comes naturally to them. I think that that comes across very
naturally in the educational field because people that want to nurture are truly coaches
and will take the time to do things step-by-step and have very high level of patience for
not just one kid, but a large group of students. So being female, a lot of these educators
wear their hearts on their sleeves and they do things with their whole heart. And just the
female dynamic, we are more emotionally driven and rooted, and I think that that serves
us well in this capacity.”
Again, Participant #3 was in agreeance with the prior participant. Participant #3 believed that
women were natural nurtures, as well as more emotionally driven. Some could see that quality
as a detriment, but this participant believed that it allowed teachers to be better educators
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 117
and they could benefit from this societal role. Participant #1, who did not feel it was fair to
expect female educators to be nurturers, said:
“I can understand why they would assume that way, because the majority of female
teachers have children. And they work with children, because they're nurturing. But,
again, it's unfair to just assume that we want children just because we're in this nurturing
role.”
This participant disagreed with the idea that female educators need to be nurtures. She also
believed that it is unfair to assume that female educators want children because they are fulfilling
a seemingly nurturing role. Participant #1 believed that the label of teacher as nurturer was
incorrect and the role expectation that all female educators wanted children was
untrue. Participant#15 also disagreed with the role expectation and claimed:
“People are always surprised when I say I don't have children, just because as a teacher, it
comes with that stereotype that you're caring, and nurturing, and how do you come about
it if you don't have children? And so, it's just ... they're always shocked that you don't,
and I think it just comes with the natural stereotype as a woman that you're supposed to
automatically have kids and be married.”
Similar to the previous participant, Participant #15 also believed that the society’s role
expectation that all female educators were nurturing and wanted children was not true. The
participant found that society members assumed that she wanted or already had children because
she was a teacher, and the participant found society members to be taken by surprise because she
was childless.
All 15 participants also stated that they believed that society held different social roles for
men than they did for women. Each participant mentioned that they realized that society was
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 118
more lenient with men in regard to parenthood. While men could get married and have children,
society seemed more understanding when men were not married or did not have children. On
the opposite side, the participants felt that society held the expectation that women had to be
married and have children. Participant #13 argued:
“I don't think it's questioned as much with men. More because their biological clock isn't
ticking. With women, it is. So, when we get up to 35, 40, that's when people start to
wonder. With men, they could have kids any time. I think also with men, it's more ... I'm
trying to think of the word. It's okay for them to get married and settle down at an older
age than women.”
This meant that men who are not married or have children did not experience members of society
questioning their life choices, while women experienced society questioning their life choices
because of the social roles women are expected to adhere to. Participant #15 believed that
women were held to the societal expectation that they had to be married and have children:
“I think just women are more prone to... like the societal stereotypes that that's what
women are supposed to do. Women are supposed to find a man, get married, and pop out
some kids… there's a certain stigma or certain thing that you're supposed... you're a
female, you're supposed to get married, you're supposed to have kids.”
This participant’s social circle held her to the expected role of mother and wife. Participant #7
had a similar comment:
“And I think I'm think right now about my family members, like my aunts and uncles,
when they would ask about, "Oh when are you getting married?" Because naturally after
that if I were married then they would ask when are you having, "When are you having a
baby?"
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 119
This statement from Participant #7 showed the social role expectation that women were expected
to get married and have children. It seemed that the automatic assumption that a woman would
get married then have children. This stigma that was applied to women was very dated, and yet
it was still carried into current society. Participant #13 also discussed her social circle in college:
“Well, I'm just thinking 'cause I went to a Lutheran college where the whole thing was ...
Of the scene was ring by spring. And what that meant was all senior girls were supposed
to married, sorry, engaged, by the end of spring semester their senior year...And that was
just kind of the norm. And those are the friends that are having babies early and just are
having babies. Some of them, yes they did finish college, but some of them aren't in the
workforce because they have kids and because they had kids at a young age. So, I guess
religion in that sense. That was the whole norm, to be married young, to have kids young,
and then your husband would go work.”
This participant discussed her experienced in college. Many of her friends in college abided by
the social role of women, and the participant’s friends got married and had children young
because it was expected of these young women. This showed that although the social role of
women being wives and mothers are outdated, the practice was still carried out by some women.
Assumptions
The final theme that developed from this study dealt with assumptions from family,
friends, and society that participants faced as childless female educators. Mollen (2006) stated
that gender role expectations largely informed how people perceived childless women, and there
are typically negative assumptions placed on childless women. The assumptions made about
participants for their decision to remain childless came from assumed health issues or assumed
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 120
selfishness. Participants were accepted by their family, friends, and/or society, or not accepted
because of assumed health issues.
Health Issues. Gillespie (2000) discussed that childless women were viewed by others as
“unnatural” and were “pitied or vilified” (p. 225). They were also seen as having some sort of
physical illness and infertility issues. 11 of the 15 participants stated that they experienced
people asking them if they had health issues, specifically female reproductive issues, because
they did not have children. Participant #14 said:
“I'm not a real woman because of my decision to not want to have my own kids or to
have kids at all… People assuming that there's some reason why. Like, "Oh, did you
have a bad childhood?" Or, "Do you have reproductive issues? But they have fertility
stuff." It's like, "Dude, I don't know if I'm shooting blanks, I've never tested because I
don't care."”
This participant’s experience demonstrated how society would make assumptions about women
who did not have children. Those women would be considered “not a real woman” because of
their choice to remain childless. Furthermore, people would also assume that the childless
woman has reproductive issues. For many childless women in society, this was the assumption
others made about them.
Participant #11 discussed her experiences dating men and their apparent disapproval that
she was childless. She stated:
“...they automatically assume that there is something wrong with me and I can’t
physically have children.”
Participant #11 continued, claiming:
“Dating. Don't do it that much anymore because men ask, "So you're not going to have
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 121
children?" Like, "No." "Well, it hasn't happened yet?" "No." I think that, ... They say,
"What's wrong with you to ... "”
Participant #11 consciously made the decision to not date because of the assumptions men made
about her because of her choice to childless. While it was a personal choice for women to have
children, it seemed that family, friends, and society would question a woman’s choice when they
decided to not have children. Dating also seemed like a difficult experience for Participant #11
because of the scrutiny and assumptions men placed on her when they found out that she was
childless.
Other participants made statements about labels they had placed on them, such as
Participant #5’s experience:
“I feel like people look at me and they just assume that I'm like this old maid with
non-functioning woman parts.”
Participant #5 meant that people assumed that since she did not have children, her reproductive
system did not work. Four participants mentioned the terms “old maid” and “spinster” when
they discussed their experiences of people questioning their decision to remain childless. Seven
out of the 15 participants mentioned being asked the question “What’s wrong with you?” when
others found out the participant was a childless female. An example of this was from Participant
#4:
“Some people question if something's wrong with me. I said nope perfectly fine. Go see
a gynecologist as often as I need to, everything's good.”
Since Participant #4 faced such personal questions about her female reproductive system, she
had to go as far as informing people that she regularly visited her doctor and nothing was
physically wrong with her. While that might seem extreme and overly personal to share such
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 122
information, nearly half of the participants interviewed in the study was asked the question
“What’s wrong with you?”
Participant #14 discussed her experience of people searching for excuses for her to not
have children. The participant discussed:
“Or, "She has reproductive issues" and people often times try, and make sense of choices
that they wouldn't make that I have made myself. Almost make excuses sometimes.”
While Participant #14 also faced assumptions that she had reproductive issues, people also
seemed to have to make an excuse for her choice to not have children. Although it may seem
odd that people in this participant’s family, friends, or social circle looked for excuses, it did not
seem out of the ordinary for many participants.
Selfishness. A second assumption participants faced was selfishness or self-centeredness.
Participants were accepted by their family, friends, and/or society, or not accepted because of
assumed selfishness or self-centeredness. Park (2002) argued that women who did not have
children felt judged because of their choice to remain childless. There was an air of pressure for
women to have children, and they faced judgment and backlash for their decision to not have
children, such as being labeled selfish.
11 of the 15 participants experienced family, friends, or society believing them to be
selfish or self-centered because of their choice to not have children. Only four participants did
not mention that they felt that people believed them to be selfish or self-centered. Although they
did not mention this, they also did not state that they felt fully accepted by their family, friends,
or society. Participant #2 shared her experience of people assuming her to be selfish:
“I definitely think that people think that they have a stereotype about a childless woman.
That they're either selfish, or irresponsible, or something wrong with them.”
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 123
Participant #2 was aware of the stigma attached to childless women, especially the idea that they
were considered selfish. Five participants mentioned that they recognized that being childless
could make people assume that they were selfish or self-centered, but that label did not bother
them. Instead, they understood why people would think that of them. Participant #1 stated:
“Some people can call that very selfish, and I get it. For me, I just never saw myself
being able to put someone else in front of me in a way that you need to do for a child. I
don't think that's wrong, I think that's honest, as selfish as it sounds.”
This demonstrated that the participant recognized that others may assume she was selfish, and
she understood why. Participant #14 echoed the idea, stating:
“I can do whatever I want, and it's so selfish and I don't care.”
Similar to Participant #1, Participant #14 also recognized that her being childless could be
considered selfish, but she did not care. Some participants stated that they believed that having
children was actually a more selfish act than not having children. An example of this idea was
from Participant #10:
“People say that I am selfish, that I don’t accept responsibility, and all that other
nonsense. I don’t think it’s selfish to not have children. Quite the opposite. It’s selfish to
have children, especially in the times we live in now, and not being able to really care for
a child.”
This participant felt that the wanting to have children was a selfish act if the parent did not
consider the responsibility and commitment it took to raise a child. She felt that not being able
to properly care for a child, especially considering the current state of society, was a selfish act.
Participant #7 also believed that is was selfish to want children and not properly care for
them. She connected it to her experiences with teaching, stating:
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 124
“I feel like it would be more selfish if I had a child and didn't care for it the way I think it
should be cared for. Being a teacher I feel like I can be judgmental about how these
kids, how I assume these kids are treated at home or how things are at home, because I
see it in the classroom. It's like if you behave a certain way then I don't think, there's a
chance you might not be getting reprimanded at home, or the parenting skills are
lacking.”
Participant #7 recognized that she critiqued others parenting styles, and she knew that it would
be selfish of her to have children if she would not raise her children in what she considered was
an appropriate style.
Finally, Participant #4 eloquently stated her stance on the assumed selfishness she
experienced from family, friends, and society. This participant first identified:
“I have been told that I can be self-centered because of my choice. I don’t know how my
choice to not have children makes me selfish, but apparently to others it does. I’m not
sure why people assume these things, but they need to mind their own business.”
The participant was aware of the label of selfishness that others placed onto her because of her
choice to remain childless. She did not understand why people considered her to be selfish, and
felt that it was her personal choice to not have children and it was none of anyone else’s
business. The same participant then stated about the assumed selfishness:
“I think what they really do mean is self-centered. And I think I need to just start
correcting them instead of going along with the conversation of being selfish, but
definitely self-centered.”
Participant #4 realized that although she may or may not agree with being selfish, she believed
that the correct term to label her with was self-centered. The dictionary defined selfish as “(of a
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 125
person, action, or motive) lacking consideration for others; concerned chiefly with one's own
personal profit or pleasure” while self-centered was defined as “preoccupied with oneself and
one's affairs.” While some may believe that selfish is the label to use for females who are
voluntarily childless, it seems that the correct label is self-centered. The participants of this
study did not seem to lack consideration for others; on the contrary, they seemed to be concerned
with their own matters.
Conclusion
I argued in the conceptual framework that voluntarily childless female educators were
either accepted by family, friends, and society, or they were not accepted by family, friends, and
society. I argued that whether the voluntarily childless female educators were accepted or not,
they each faced some sort of treatment, bias, or assumption. The treatment consisted of social or
cultural ostracism, the bias consisted of gender and social role expectations, and the assumptions
consisted of health issues or selfishness. Findings from this study reveal that all 15 voluntarily
childless female educators experienced some sort of treatment, bias, or assumption from their
family, friends, and society. While some participants faced less harsh treatment, bias, and
assumptions, others faced more severe scrutiny.
Nearly each participant held mixed feelings of acceptance and non-acceptance from
family, friends, and society. Some participants would mention they experienced acceptance,
others would mention they experienced non-acceptance, and a few simultaneously experienced
both acceptance and non-acceptance. This is demonstrated in the data collected in the semi-
structured interviews of the 15 female educator participants.
11 participants acknowledged some sort of acceptance from family, friends, and society,
while only four participants did not mention feeling accepted by family, friends, and society.
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 126
Seven participants mentioned they experienced people assuming they wanted children because
they were in the field of education. While only four participants mentioned they felt some sort of
acceptance from their cultural community, 13 of the 15 participants also mentioned they
experienced some sort of ostracism from their cultural community. 11 participants experienced
people questioning if they had health issues, and 11 participants also stated that they experienced
their family, friends, or society believing them to be selfish for not having children. 11
participants felt some sort of acceptance from their social circles, regardless of gender.
All 15 participants mentioned that they were conscious of the roles society held for
women and men. 10 participants stated that society expected women to fulfill the role of
housewife, which included the duties of cook and cleaner. Four participants stated that there was
a biased expectation about how many sexual partners a woman could have, and eight participants
experienced people labeling them lesbians because they did not have children. All 15
participants did not feel complete acceptance from their social circles because of social role
expectations. Eight women experienced people assuming they were nurturing because they were
educators. Finally, all 15 participants acknowledged that society held different social role
expectations for men, including society being lenient with men in regard to parenthood, getting
married, and being career driven.
Finally, it is important to note that each participant in the study experienced
marginalization. Whether it was their marginalization based on gender, or the decision to not
conform to societal expectations, participants found themselves being treated insignificantly or
deemed powerless within their societal groups. Participants were compartmentalized and
labeled, rendering them silenced.
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 127
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION, IMPLICATIONS, AND FUTURE RESEARCH
This dissertation examined how female educators who were voluntarily childless
perceived themselves to be treated by members of society as a result of their choices to not have
children. This study used qualitative methods via 15 semi-structured interviews. I collected data
from the semi-structured interviews that shed light on the following research question:
● How do female educators who were voluntarily childless perceived themselves to be
treated by members of society?
To answer this question, I conducted 15 interviews with female educators who were voluntarily
childless. Each interview lasted at least one hour, with the longest interview lasting nearly two
hours. All participants met my interviewee criteria. Maximum variation sampling was used for
two purposes. First, to capture an array of women’s perspectives. Second, to identify common
themes across the participant diversity.
The primary findings of the study found that voluntarily childless female educators
experienced social and/or cultural ostracism. Also, they faced biases based on gender and social
roles. Finally, there were assumptions made about the voluntarily childless educators,
specifically that they had health issues or they were selfish.
In my conceptual framework, I argued that female educators were either accepted or not
accepted by members of their communities, including family, friends, and society. Whether
women felt accepted or not, they experienced some sort of treatment, bias, or assumptions from
their communities. The acceptance or non-acceptance was also connected to the cultural and
gender stereotypes that families, communities, and society held. The treatment stemmed from
social and/or cultural ostracism, bias derived from gender and/or social roles, and assumptions
made were health issues and/or selfishness. The participants of this study were female educators
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 128
were in a traditionally female role, yet they pushed against the stereotyped expectations that were
held for females, including becoming mothers.
Implications
This dissertation explored how female educators who were voluntarily childless
perceived themselves to be treated by members of society. In this part of the chapter, I will
discuss potential implications for the findings. The boundaries women may succeed in
dismantling in their professional lives could not eradicate the impact of being judged and not
accepted for their decision not to conform to expectations of having children. The overall
implications addressed the social and gender stereotypes and how they affected women’s rights.
Second, the implications argued that there were female educator stereotypes about them being
nurturers and motherly, and they were judged when others found out the educator was childless.
The final implication was there may be a connection to tomboy female educators and their
success as educators.
Women’s Rights
Johnston and Diekman (2015) explored social role theory and the impact the theory had
on men and women. Social role theory, according to Johnston and Diekman (2015), believed
that men and women were held to specific gender roles in society. One implication that derived
from this study connects to social role theory. The study found that participants perceived that
the use of archaic gender stereotypes that women are expected to uphold was applied to their
decision not to have children. There are gender roles and social roles women are expected to
fulfill, especially ideologies such as mother, homemaker, wife, cook, and cleaner. While these
roles may seem outdated, numerous participants stated that their social groups still expected
them to fulfill these roles, even in our modern times. This study found that society still expected
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 129
women to get married, have children, and run a household. Many participants felt judged and
ostracized because of their choice to not conform. This would impact any female in a
professional role, and participants of this study were no exception. Per Fox and Stallworth
(2005) and O’Reilly, Robinson, Berdhal, and Banki’s (2014) studies, ostracism in the workplace
was experienced by nearly two-thirds of employees. The ostracism took many forms, including
being purposely uninformed, excluded from conversations, and the silent treatment. Moreover,
minority women were the main recipients of ostracism. This is important because the majority
of the participants in this study are minority women.
Although women have succeeded in breaking many boundaries, such as earning the right
to vote, the choice to use birth control methods, and access to the workforce, this study found
that women were still held to a certain expectation to be mothers, which displays the gender
hierarchies of the United States’ society (Enke, 2003). This demonstrates another barrier that
women still need to fight to overcome. It may be a gender expectation, a cultural expectation, or
a societal expectation, but it is unfair to expect all women to conform to the role of wife and
mother, especially since women have been able to make strides in so many arenas big claim –
needs a citation or data from study as evidence to support. Over half of the participants in this
study discussed they felt pressure to conform to society’s expectations to get married and have
children. All participants discussed that while society pressured women to get married and have
children, men are treated with leniency and not held to the same expectation. Also, this study’s
participants believed that men were not questioned the same way women are when they are
childless. Many participants in the study believed that they are considered “old maids” and
“spinsters” since they do not have children, while men are congratulated on being career driven
and “stallions” for not settling down and having children. This highlights the differences that
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 130
genders have: women are labeled negatively while men are congratulated. This demonstrates
the unfair expectations that women are held to in society and the on-going need for women to
earn equal rights as men.
This study also found that when participants did not conform to their cultural and societal
expectations, people assumed that the participant had reproductive issues, they were selfish, or
that they were a lesbian. Again, while women’s rights have made many accomplishments and
gained rights in many ways, this unfair label as infertile or selfish or gay. Gillespie (2000) found
that society felt that women who are unfit for motherhood are lesbian, which supports the
findings of this study. Different cultures and American society needs to understand that it is a
woman’s right and choice about whether or not they want to be mothers, and there is nothing
wrong with choosing to be voluntarily childless.
Female Educator Stereotypes
A second implication that came from this study is female educators are stereotyped as
nurturers and assigned “mother” roles. This second implication connects to the first implication,
Women’s Rights, because it is another expectation that society holds for women. Since women
are expected to be mothers, it is a natural assumption to believe that all female educators would
also be nurturing toward their students. Some participants of the study did believe that being
female allowed them to be more motherly and caring toward their students, while other
participants felt it was an unfair expectation. Park (2005) argued that childless women were seen
as “less socially desirable, less well-adjusted, less nurturant, and less mature, as well as more
materialistic, more selfish, and more individualistic” (p. 376). While participants in this study
would disagree with Park’s (2005) findings, society seems to have a different opinion about
childless female educators. Based on Park’s (2005) study, female educators should be, amongst
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 131
many expectations, nurturing. While these qualities seem important for a female educator to
possess, it is not a requirement and childless female educators should not be held to that
expectation.
Along with assuming that female educators were nurturing, participants also experienced
people shaming them when they found out that participants were voluntarily childless.
Participants discussed feeling judged and questioned after their colleagues and students’ parents
realized that participants did not have children of their own. Gannerud (2001) also discussed the
negative reactions childless educators faced from parents. This study’s participants were
stereotyped, to some degree, to be less effective and/or less knowledgeable about children
because they were voluntarily childless.
These negative judgments that female educators face, whether it is the expectation that
female educators need to be nurturing and motherly, or female educators are questioned about
their expertise when they do not have children, are unfair. The participants in this study found
that any expectation they were held to that was based on the concept of motherhood was biased.
These assumptions are detrimental to the female educator population because it set a president
that female educators are only effective if they have specific traits or only if they were mothers.
Tomboy/Childless Educators
While there is no empirical data to support this implication, this study revealed that
participants believed that they were better educators for a multitude of reasons. One possible
reason that all participants have in common is that they all identified as tomboy, semi-tomboy, or
alternative growing up. None of the participants identified as a “girly” girl. While this may be a
coincidence, it is important to note that all participants had these same characteristics.
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 132
Also, while there is also no empirical data to support this implication, this study also
revealed that childless educators can possibly be stronger educators because they do not have
children. Many of the participants mentioned that they had the freedom to relax and recharge
their metaphorical battery. This down time allowed the participants to decompress, and
participants recognized that they would not be able to do that if they were mothers. Participants
stated that they knew that they could not be able to come home from their demanding jobs and
destress in their own ways, which included massages, vegging out on their couch, or just taking
the time for themselves to relax. Peterson (2015) also identified these benefits, as well as many
others, in her study of voluntarily childless women.
Finally, there may be some justification to tomboy educators who do not want children.
Since they do not want children, this may make them better educators because they may be more
dedicated to their job as educators. These tomboy childless educators will not have to take
pregnancy leave to have a child, they do not have to take sick days if their child is sick, and they
do not have to overexert themselves because they have children at home to care for. Instead,
they can relax and recharge. While this study did not provide data to support this argument, it
does seem to have some validity to it. Also, while this may be the case, this study is not
advocating for the educational workforce to return to the olden days of all female staff who were
dismissed when they were married or had children, or to support a male dominated
administrative leadership that mistreats female teachers (Tydack, 1974).
Future Research
There is a need for further research to determine the impact culture and society holds in
voluntarily childless educators lives. Nearly all participants in this study mentioned that they felt
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 133
ostracism from their cultural and social communities. There is a need to research in further
detail about the impact this ostracism has on voluntarily childless female educators.
A second need for further research is to examine how women’s roles in society further
changes with time. There are many archaic roles that the participants mentioned they felt they
needed to fill, such as wife and mother. There needs to be studies conducted in the near and far
future about the changing roles of women. Will women still be held to the customary roles of
wife and mother? Or will society allow women to make their own choices without judgment and
criticism?
A third need for future research is exploring childless female educators’ counter-stories
and experiences, specifically looking at their multiple identity’s intersectionality. Also, research
needs to evaluate the value of women’s work and the changing social construct of how
femininity has recently been connected to motherly love dominant discourses. Historically,
women’s positions have been devalued in many arenas, including education, politics, and
positions of power. Can there be a shift in power for women? Also, how can women’s roles in
society change and be seen as something more than just motherhood?
A fourth area of future research can focus on examining how voluntarily childless female
educators can practice self-care in terms of fostering better career opportunities in the shape of
professional development and other opportunities for self-improvement. This study found that
childless female educators practiced self-care like traveling and giving themselves time to
decompress, but there needs to be more research about other means of self-care. The research
would be empirical rather than theoretical.
A final need for future research is to create more studies that combines gender
stereotypes, female educator stereotypes, culture and community, and voluntary childlessness.
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 134
Currently, there is a gap in literature that explores how female educators who chose to not have
children receive backlash for their decisions, which would result in further marginalization.
Studies need to examine how women are not only marginalized, they are also educators who are
consciously choosing to not have children, which places them in a position of judgment,
ostracism, and scorn. Future studies need to examine why voluntarily childless female educators
experience marginalization because of the intersection of identities.
Personal Connection
The reason I chose this topic for my dissertation is because I personally connect with the
study’s topic. I am a voluntarily childless female educator who faced many of the same negative
ostracism that the literature discussed and the participants in the study experienced. I realized
that there was a gap in literature about women who were educators who were childless and
ostracized by their social and cultural communities. I have faced ostracism by family, friends,
and society. I found myself continually questioned about my choice to be an educator and not
have children. While some people have been supportive of my decision, I realize that many
people made assumptions that I was selfish, I would change my mind once I got married, or that
I would regret my decision later in life. I believe this study will give support to other women
who are like me, educators who love children and want to be positive role models for their
students, and yet not want to dedicate their lives to having a child of their own. At the end of the
day, it is ultimately a woman’s choice on whether or not she wants to have children, and she
should not be judged based on her decision to be voluntarily childless.
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 135
References
Berg, H., & Ferber, M. (1983). Men and women graduate students: Who succeeds and
why? The Journal of Higher Education, 54(6), 629–648.
doi:10.1080/00221546.1983.11780187
Bogdan, R. & Biklen, S. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theories
and methods (5
th
ed.). Boston: Pearson.
Bram, S. (1984). Voluntarily childless women: Traditional or nontraditional? Sex Roles, 10(3),
195–206. doi:10.1007/BF00287774
Branigan, A., Freese, J., Patir, A., Mcdade, T., Liu, K., & Kiefe, C. (2013). Skin color, sex, and
educational attainment in the post-civil rights era. Social Science Research, 42(6), 1659–
1674. doi:10.1016/j.ssresearch.2013.07.010
Buckley, K., Winkel, R., & Leary, M. (2004). Reactions to acceptance and rejection: Effects of
level and sequence of relational evaluation. Journal of Experimental Social
Psychology, 40(1), 14–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1031(03)00064-7
Burton, L., Bonilla-Silva, E., Ray, V., Buckelew, R., & Freeman, E. (2010). Critical race
theories, colorism, and the decade’s research on families of color. Journal of Marriage
and Family, 72(3), 440–459. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00712.x
Carter-Sowell, A., & Zimmerman, C. (2015). Hidden in plain sight: Locating, validating, and
advocating the stigma experiences of women of color. Sex Roles, 73(9), 399–407.
doi:10.1007/s11199-015-0529-2
Claesson, M., & Brice, R. (1989). Teacher/Mothers: Effects of a dual role. American
Educational Research Journal, 26(1), 1–23. doi:10.3102/00028312026001001
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 136
Contreras, R., & Valverde, L. (1994). The impact of Brown on the education of Latinos. Journal
of Negro Education, 63(3), 470–81. doi:10.2307/2967197
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory.
Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Coulter, R. (1995). Struggling with sexism: Experiences of feminist first-year teachers. Gender
and Education, 7(1), 33–50. doi:10.1080/713668455
Craig, B., Donovan, K., Fraenkel, L., Watson, V., Hawley, S., & Quinn, G. (2014). A generation
of childless women: Lessons from the United States. Women’s Health Issues, 24(1),
e21–e27. doi:10.1016/j.whi.2013.09.005
Creswell, J.W. (2014). Research Design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Dewall, N., C., Twenge, J., Bushman, B., Im, C., & Williams, K. (2010). A Little Acceptance
Goes a Long Way: Applying Social Impact Theory to the Rejection–Aggression
Link. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 1(2), 168–174.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550610361387
Diekman, A., & Eagly, A. (2000). Stereotypes as dynamic constructs: Women and men of the
past, present, and future. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(10), 1171–
1188. doi:10.1177/0146167200262001
Dillabough, J. (1999). Gender politics and conceptions of the modern teacher: Women, identity
and professionalism. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 20(3), 373–394.
doi:10.1080/01425699995326
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 137
Dorey-Stein, C. (2018, June 2018). A brief history: The four waves of feminism. Progressive
Women’s Leadership.
https://www.progressivewomensleadership.com/a-brief-history-the-four-waves-of-
feminism/
Eagly, A., & Kite, M. (1987). Are Stereotypes of Nationalities Applied to Both Women and
Men? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(3), 451. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/209840242/
Elfman, L. (2009). A “second wave of feminism”: as women’s studies programs mature, they are
incorporating issues of race and sexuality. Diverse Issues in Higher Education, 26(2).
Ellemers, N. (2018). Gender stereotypes. Annual Review of Psychology, 69(1), 275–298.
doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-122216-011719
Enke, A. (2003). Smuggling sex through the gates: Race, sexuality, and the politics of space in
second wave feminism. American Quarterly, 55(4), 635–667.
doi:10.1353/aq.2003.0038
Foster, M. (1991). Constancy, connectedness, and constraints in the lives of African-American
teachers. NWSA Journal, 3(2), 233–261.
Gannerud, E. (2001). A gender perspective on the work and lives of women primary school
teachers. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 45(1), 55–70.
doi:10.1080/00313830020023393
Garcia-Rojas, C. (2017). (Un)Disciplined futures: Women of color feminism as a disruptive to
white affect studies. Journal of Lesbian Studies, 21(3), 254–271.
doi:10.1080/10894160.2016.1159072
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 138
Gillespie, R. (2000). When no means no: Disbelief, disregard and deviance as discourses of
voluntary childlessness. Women’s Studies International Forum, 23(2), 223–234.
doi:10.1016/S0277-5395(00)00076-5
Harding, J. (2013). Qualitative Data Analysis from Start to Finish. Thousand Oaks: Sage
Publications.
Hudak, M. (1993). Gender schema theory revisited: men’s stereotypes of American women. Sex
Roles, 28(5), 279–293. doi:10.1007/BF00289886
https://blacklivesmatter.com/
Jay, J., & Johnson, K. (2002). Capturing complexity: a typology of reflective practice for teacher
education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(1), 73–85. doi:10.1016/S0742-
051X(01)00051-8
Johnston, A., & Diekman, A. (2015). Pursuing desires rather than duties? The motivational
content of gender stereotypes. Sex Roles, 73(1), 16–28. doi:10.1007/s11199-015-0494-9
Kite, M. (1996). Age, gender, and occupational label: A test of social role
theory. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 20(3), 361–374. doi:10.1111/j.1471-
6402.1996.tb00305.x
Koenig, A., & Eagly, A. (2014). Evidence for the social role theory of stereotype content:
observations of groups’ roles shape stereotypes. Journal of personality and social
psychology, 107(3), 371–92. doi:10.1037/a0037215
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3
rd
ed.). Thousand
Oaks: Sage Publications.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4
th
ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 139
Miles, Huberman, & Saldaña (2014). Chapter 4: Fundamentals of qualitative data analysis.
Qualitative Data Analysis: A methods sourcebook (3
rd
ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage
Publications.
Mollen, D. (2006). Voluntarily childfree women: Experiences and counseling considerations.
Journal of Mental Health Counseling, 28 (3), 269-284.
https://doi.org/10.17744/mehc.28.3.39w5h93mreb0mk4f
Park, K. (2005). Choosing childlessness: Weber’s typology of action and motives of the
voluntarily childless. Sociological Inquiry, 75(3), 372–402. doi:10.1111/j.1475-
682X.2005.00127.x
Park, K. (2002). Stigma management among the voluntarily childless. Sociological
Perspectives, 45(1), 21–45. doi:10.1525/sop.2002.45.1.21
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage
Publications.
Peterson, H. (2015). Fifty shades of freedom. Voluntary childlessness as women’s ultimate
liberation. Women’s Studies International Forum, 53(C), 182–191.
doi:10.1016/j.wsif.2014.10.017
Prentice, D., & Carranza, E. (2002). What women and men should be, shouldn’t be, are
allowed to be, and don’t have to be: The contents of prescriptive gender
stereotypes. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26(4), 269–81. doi:10.1111/1471-
6402.t01-1-00066
Purdie-Vaughns, V., & Eibach, R. (2008). Intersectional invisibility: The distinctive advantages
and disadvantages of multiple subordinate-group identities. Sex Roles, 59(5), 377–391.
doi:10.1007/s11199-008-9424-4
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 140
Sanchez-Hucles, J., & Davis, D. (2010). Women and women of color in leadership:
Complexity, identity, and intersectionality. American Psychologist, 65(3), 171–181.
doi:10.1037/a0017459
Schmader, T., & Block, K. (2015). Engendering identity: Toward a clearer conceptualization of
gender as a social identity. Sex Roles, 73(11), 474–480. doi:10.1007/s11199-015-0536-3
Schwartz, R., Bower, B., Rice, D., & Washington, C. (2003). “Ain’t I a woman, too?”: Tracing
the experiences of African American women in graduate school. Journal of Negro
Education, 72(3), 252–68.
Tyack, D. (1974). The one best system : a history of American urban education . Cambridge,
Mass: Harvard University Press.
U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. (2018). Digest of
Education Statistics, 2016 (NCES 2017).
Weiler, K. (1989). Women’s history and the history of women teachers. Journal of
Education, 171(3), 9–30. doi:10.1177/002205748917100303
Weiss, R. S. (1994). Learning from Strangers: The art and method of qualitative interview
studies. New York. The Free Press.
Wiecek, William M. and Hamilton, Judy. (August 23, 2012). Structural racism, workplace
discrimination, and the United States Supreme Court, 1971-1989. UC Davis Legal
Studies Research Paper No. 309. Available at
SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2135149 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2135149
Wood, W., & Eagly, A. (2015). Two traditions of research on gender identity. Sex
Roles, 73(11), 461–473. doi:10.1007/s11199-015-0480-2
VOLUNTARILY CHILDLESS FEMALE EDUCATORS 141
Zeligman, M., Prescod, D., & Greene, J. (2015). Journey toward becoming a counselor
education doctoral student: Perspectives of women of color. The Journal of Negro
Education, 84(1), 66–79. doi:10.7709/jnegroeducation.84.1.0066
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the criticism and judgment voluntarily childless female educators faced from three communities: family, friends, and society. The rationale for this study was to gain greater understanding of the perceived treatment voluntarily childless female educators received. To better understand the treatment, bias, and assumptions voluntarily childless female educators faced, this study addressed the following research question: How do female educators who are voluntarily childless perceive themselves to be treated by members of society as a result of their choices to not have children? Through qualitative research methods, 15 semi-structured interviews were conducted with voluntarily childless female educators. The data revealed that voluntarily childless female educators faced some sort of backlash for their decision to remain childless. While some participants felt acceptance from their family or friends or society, no participant felt complete acceptance from all three communities. The backlash and criticism voluntarily childless female educators faced derived from family, friends, and/or society. Participants faced ostracism by their social and/or cultural communities. They also faced gender and social role biases, as well as assumptions about their reproductive health and selfishness.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Civic engagement in American schools: an evaluation study
PDF
Authors of our story: Black female students' experience during their first year at a predominantly White institution through a syncretic lens of critical race feminism and Afro-pessimism
PDF
Critical pedagogy as a means for student learning and empowerment
PDF
College academic readiness and English placement
PDF
Multimodal composing and teacher preparation
PDF
The role of teachers in academic discussion
PDF
A community cultural capital approach: bilingual teachers’ perceptions and impact in their dual immersion classrooms
PDF
A community cultural capital approach: bilingual teachers' perceptions and impact in their dual language immersion classroom
PDF
Puncturing discourse: Russian heritage learner language and identity in higher education
PDF
The effect of opportunity gaps: the charge for culturally relevant pedagogy in middle school social studies classes
PDF
Barriers encountered by women entering K-12 headships in California private schools
PDF
The opportunity gap: culturally relevant pedagogy in high school English classes
PDF
""Having the right info"": College readiness as college knowledge among minoritized students in an urban education setting
PDF
Perceptions of accessing Part C early intervention services
PDF
Recognizing whiteness: the journey of White educators to unpack racial identity and heighten racial consciousness
PDF
Hail to the chief: an exploration of female chief executives’ successes
PDF
The impact of conflict and resilience on leadership: a mixed methods study of female elementary principals leading change
PDF
Improving first-generation students' sense of belonging at university
PDF
Exploring the influence of implicit bias among police officers and minoritized citizens
PDF
Noncredit programs: catalyst for development of social capital in adult students
Asset Metadata
Creator
Crawford, Nicole Lynn
(author)
Core Title
The effects of being a voluntarily childless female educator
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Education (Leadership)
Publication Date
12/04/2019
Defense Date
12/04/2019
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
acceptance,assumption,backlash,bias,criticism,cultural community,educator,female educator,Judgment,OAI-PMH Harvest,ostracism,society,Treatment,voluntarily childless
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Carbone, Paula M. (
committee chair
), Crawford, Jenifer (
committee member
), Delgado, Sarah (
committee member
)
Creator Email
nicolelcrawford@gmail.com,nlcrawfo@usc.edu
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-240269
Unique identifier
UC11674157
Identifier
etd-CrawfordNi-7992.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-240269 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-CrawfordNi-7992.pdf
Dmrecord
240269
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Crawford, Nicole Lynn
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA
Tags
acceptance
assumption
backlash
bias
cultural community
educator
female educator
ostracism
voluntarily childless