Microsoft Word Socialized Choices 31-12 pod docx

Socialized Choices - Labour Market Behaviour of Dutch Mothers 
56 
p.195). Nonetheless, once again the question remains on which (values and) 
attitudes the initial behaviour was based, and whether these prior attitudes mainly 
correspond to or differ from later attitudes.  
Constraints or preferences? 
Other opponents emphasise that people come up against a number of barriers that 
limit their social actions in their everyday lives. Womens’ work decisions are 
much more multifaceted than the outcome of personal preferences alone 
(McDonald et al., 2006; Tomlinson, 2006), and stem from a conception of 
necessity rather than of preference (Debacker, 2008). When it comes to women’s 
choices, their educational achievements presumably have a bearing on their 
subsequent employment perspectives, as do their ethnic and social backgrounds 
(class), as well as their previous employment history and their age (Crompton, 
2006; Crompton and Harris, 1998; De Beer, 2007; Kangas and Rostgaard, 2007; 
Lareau, 2007). Tomlinson (2006) has shown that specific features of the social 
system, such as welfare policies, care networks and work status, together with the 
distributive character of the social system, can often override and undermine the 
carrying out of preferences (2006, p.381). Also Crompton (2006) has argued that 
the ability to overcome constraints is patterned by social structure and/or class, as 
is apparent in differences in educational levels, social networks or income. 
Crompton claimed, “that there is a wide range of macro and micro evidence 
available that suggest that in aggregate, class-differentiated attitudes and 
behaviour in respect of mothers’ employment may be interpreted as being a 
substantial part a response to class-differentiated constraints and opportunities 
available”  (Crompton, 2006, p.671).  Other studies emphasised that choices are 
frequently shaped in the (often hidden) context of inequality, as a result of pre-
existing gender assumptions about women’s appropriate roles at home and in the 
labour market (Charles and Harris, 2007; Duncan, 2005; Everingham et al., 2007; 
Halrynjo and Lyng, 2009; Komter, 1990a-b; McDonald et al., 2006). Duncan 
(2005) referred to these limitations as “gendered moral rationalities”, cultural 
constructions of choices, and constraints regarding motherhood and work.  This 
level of contextualisation bridges the gap between individuals’ preferences and 
constraints on the one hand, and the wider issues of societies’ structural and 
cultural features on the other. It examines how individual preferences or “free 
choices” are both socially and culturally shaped, reproduced and constrained 
(Halrynjo and Lyng, 2009, p.323). 
Hakim acknowledged these constraining influences, for example by showing 
that 41 per cent of home-centred women actually work out of financial necessity 
(Hakim, 2003c, p.131). She recognised that both structural and individual 
perspectives are necessary and complementary (Hakim, 2003c, p.237-240). 
Nonetheless, she aimed to emphasise the impact of preferences on behaviour, 
especially in the long-term, which is something that had previously been 
unrecognised in labour market studies. Ajzen and Fishbein (2005) also noted that 

---

Chapter 2 - Theoretical framework and hypotheses 
57 
the planned behaviour approach has its limits. Lack of volitional control and 
unforeseen circumstances can prevent people from carrying out their intentions 
(p.208).     
For the sake of clarity, this study is certainly not aimed at ruling out one 
approach in favour of the other. It would be unrealistic to deny the reciprocal 
relation between values or attitudes on the one hand, and preferences and 
behavioural experiences on the other. And it would be misleading too to 
concentrate only on attitudes in explaining labour market behaviour, and thereby 
neglect the macro-institutional surroundings, since these structures enable and 
constrain free activity (Layder, 1994).  Nonetheless, the scope of this study is 
above all dedicated to shedding light on the social embedding of mothers’ 
individual work preferences. Along these lines, the study theoretically and 
empirically examines the childhood-based and/or socially ingrained aspects of 
values and attitudes on a mother’s current work preference and subsequent labour 
market behaviour. This interpretation of values and attitudes corresponds with the 
exposure-based approach (Blunsdon and Reed, 2005; Bolzendahl and Meyers, 
2004) which assumes that values and attitudes are shaped by experiences in 
childhood, during the school period (young adulthood) and in early work 
experiences, and are relatively, but certainly not completely, resistant to change 
after that time.  The second hypothesis of this study is as follows:  
Hypothesis 2:  
A mother’s preferred number of work hours is influenced by her general 
gender values and by her personal gender and work attitudes. 
In this study, I keep the following definitions for general gender values and 
personal gender and work attitudes. ‘Gender values’ are termed as opinions or 
moral views about what is generally considered to be a desirable division of 
labour between men and women (in particular between fathers and mothers).
 
Personal gender attitudes are defined as the ideal division of labour with one’s 
own spouse. 
Traditional general gender values mean consent with the ideology of the 
traditional division of labour between men and women in general, also referred to 
as segregated family roles. A traditional personal gender attitude holds that a 
mother’s ideal is a family in which her partner works full-time and in which she 
is responsible for taking care of the household and children.  
Egalitarian general gender values imply that one approves with the idea that 
partners take an equal or symmetrical share of paid and unpaid labour. An 
egalitarian personal gender attitude means a personal ideal family life in which a 
mother shares the paid and unpaid tasks with her own spouse equally. 
Situated in between are the values and attitudes that fall between the 
traditional and the egalitarian - also referred to as transitional values and attitudes 
(Lavee and Katz, 2002). These attitudes are termed here as adaptive attitudes 

---