F eminist and g ender t heories

Figure 7.4
Chodorow’s Basic Concepts and Theoretical Orientation
4

SOCIOLOGICAL THEORY IN THE CONTEMPORARY ERA
Nonrational
Rational
Object
relations
Figure 7.4
Chodorow’s Basic Theoretical Orientation
Collective
Individual
Unconscious
drives
Psychosexual
development
Normative
family
structure

---

Feminist and Gender Theories  

351
an emphasis on the social and cultural milieu that preexists the individual and shapes the 
gender roles to which he or she conforms. So, too, in conjunction with object relations 
theory, Chodorow emphasizes the importance of the significant persons who are the object 
or target of another’s feelings of intentions (at the level of the individual); as a sociologist, 
though, she recognizes that the objects to which individuals attach themselves are sanc-
tioned in preexisting social patterns (at the collective level).
In terms of action, Chodorow is primarily nonrationalistic in orientation. As a psycho-
analyst, she underscores that people attach themselves to particular things because of uncon-
scious desires, which, by definition, reflects the nonrational realm, since the unconscious is 
not open to strategic or other cost/benefit calculations. In addition, however, the normative 
gender patterns that children internalize in the process of social interaction also speak pri-
marily to the nonrational realm.
In sum, as shown in Figure 7.4, it is Chodorow’s psychoanalytic framework that sets her 
apart from other feminists and results in her individualistic/nonrationalistic theoretical ori-
entation. However, there are sociological roots to this theoretical orientation as well. Akin 
to symbolic interactionists (see Chapter 5), who also exhibit a primarily individualistic and 
nonrationalistic approach, her theory emphasizes how we learn to direct our desires in 
socially appropriate ways in social interaction (see Figure 7.4).
Of course, it is precisely this individualistic and nonrationalistic approach that infuriates 
nonpsychoanalytic feminists, particularly neo-Marxist feminists. These folks have no truck 
with either the individualistic or the nonrationalistic orientation that psychoanalytic femi-
nism exhibits, for they see the (individualistic) emphasis on (nonrationalistic) unconscious 
motivation and psychic structures as an irritatingly long way from the (rationalistic/collec-
tivistic) politico-economic roots of gender inequality and oppression. They consider macro-
level social structures, power dynamics, and the political and economic basis of gender 
inequality far more important than “unconscious desires” and psychological developmental 
concerns. Collins (1990/2000:6) also criticizes Chodorow for relying so heavily on white, 
middle-class samples and promoting the notion of “a generic woman who is White and 
middle-class.”
Reading
Introduction to The Reproduction of Mothering
The following selection is extracted from Chodorow’s most highly acclaimed book, The 
Reproduction of Mothering (1978). The selection begins with a brief excerpt on the effects 
of early mothering and the preoedipal period. In this section, Chodorow outlines how the 
infant’s early relation to its mother profoundly affects not only its sense of self and its later 
object relationships, but also its feeling about women in general (ibid.:77). The next excerpt 
you will read focuses on mothering, masculinity, and capitalism. Here, Chodorow explains 
how women’s mothering in isolated nuclear families in contemporary capitalist societies 
“prepares men for participation in a male-dominant family and society [and] for their lesser 
emotional participation in family life” (ibid.:180–81). The final excerpt you will read is 
from the conclusion of the book. Chodorow criticizes conventional feminist and social psy-
chological theories for relying too much on conscious intention and recaps her particular
version of psychoanalytic theory, highlighting psychic organization and orientation.

---

352
