Kontrolowanie formy ciężarnego ciała

Honorata Jakubowska

doi:10.18778/0208-600X.58.05

Authors

Honorata Jakubowska Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza, Wydział Nauk Społecznych, Instytut Socjologii, Zakład Socjologii Życia Codziennego

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18778/0208-600X.58.05

Keywords:

pregnant body, discourse, control, aesthetics, femininity

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to present the main discourses controlling a pregnant body – biomedical and aesthetic and their internalisation. The first is related to the medicalization of the body during pregnancy and focuses on its surveillance from a perspective of a child’s health and life.
The second, which is described in this paper, concerns the image of female body and the patterns of femininity. The article is based on the in-depth interviews conducted with the pregnant women from 28 to 40 years old. The results of the author’s own study, as well as, the secondary data, reveal that the time of pregnancy does not liberate women from a pressure to embody the ideals of femininity, imposed by other women, physicians and media. Moreover, the pregnant body is treated as temporary form of embodiment and due to the practices undertaken by nine months, a body should return back to its “normal” form.

References

Alcalde M.C. (2011), ‘To make it through each day still pregnant’: pregnancy bed rest and the disciplining of the maternal body, “Journal of Gender Studies”, Vol. 20, No. 3, September, s. 209–221.
Google Scholar

Betterton R. (2006), Promising Monsters: Pregnant Bodies Artistic Subjectivity, and Maternal Imagination, “Hypatia”, Vol. 21, No.1, s. 80–100.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1527-2001.2006.tb00966.x

Bordo S. (1993), Unbearable Weight. Feminism, Western Culture and the Body, University of California Press, Berkeley.
Google Scholar

O’Brien Hallstein D.L. (2011), She gives birth, she’s wearing a bikini: mobilizing the postpregnant celebrity mom body to manage the post-second wave crisis in femininity, “Women’s Studies in Communication”, Vol. 34, No. 2, s. 111–138.
Google Scholar

Brooks-Gardner C. (2003), Pregnant women as social problem, [w:] D.R. Loseke, J. Best (eds.), Social problems: Constructionist readings, Aldine De Gruyter, New York, s. 188–195.
Google Scholar

Brubaker S.J. (2007), Denied, embracing, and resisting medicalization, “Gender and Society”, Vol. 21, No. 4, s. 528–552.
Google Scholar

Charles N., Kerr M. (1986), Food for feminist thought, “Sociological Review”, Vol. 34, No. 3, s. 537–572.
Google Scholar

Copelton D.A. (2010), Eating for two: How pregnant women neutralize nutritional deviance, [w:] A. Thio, T.C. Calhoun, A. Conyers (eds.), Readings in deviant behavior (6th ed.), Allyn and Bacon, Boston, s. 335–341.
Google Scholar

Cummins M. W. (2014), Reproductive Surveillance: The Making of Pregnant Docile Bodies, “Kaleidoscope”, Vol. 13, s. 33–51.
Google Scholar

Cunningham H. (2002), Prodigal bodies: pop culture and post-pregnancy, “Michigan Quarterly Review”, Vol. 41, No. 3, http://hdl.handle.net/2027/spo.act2080.0041.314 [dostęp: 7.08.2016].
Google Scholar

Draper J. (2003), Blurring, moving and broken boundaries: men’s encounters with the pregnant body, “Sociology of Health and Illness”, Vol. 25, s. 743–767.
Google Scholar

Dworkin S.L., Wachs F.L. (2004), Body panic: gender, health and the selling of fitness, New York University Press, New York.
Google Scholar

Earle S. (2003), Bumps and boobs: Fatness and women’s experiences of pregnancy, “Women’s Studies International Forum”, Vol. 26, No. 3, s. 245–252.
Google Scholar

Edin K., Kefalas M. (2005), Promises I Can Keep: Why Poor Women Put Motherhood Before Marriage, University of California Press, Berkeley−Los Angeles.
Google Scholar

Fox B. (2006), Motherhood as a Class Act: The Many Ways in Which ‘‘Intensive Mothering’’ Is Entangled with Social Class, [w:] B. Fox, Social Reproduction, McGill-Queen’s University Press, Montreal, s. 231–262.
Google Scholar

Foucault M. (1993), Nadzorować i karać. Narodziny więzienia, Wydawnictwo SPACJA, Warszawa.
Google Scholar

Gibas M. (2014), Pomiędzy sacrum a profanum – dychotomiczny charakter kobiecego ciała i jego wpływ na konstruowanie tożsamości kobiet rodzących, [w:] K. Wódz, J. Klimczak (red.), O współczesnych praktykach genderyzacji ciała, Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Śląskiego, Katowice, s. 78–107.
Google Scholar

Glaser B. (1978), Theoretical Sensitivity, The Sociology Press, San Francisco.
Google Scholar

Glaser B.G., Strauss A.L. (1967), The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research, Aldine Publishing Company, Chicago.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00006199-196807000-00014

Gow R., Lydecker J.A., Lamanna J.D., Mazzeo S.E. (2012), Representations of celebrities’ weight and shape during pregnancy and postpartum: a content analysis of three entertainment magazine websites, “Body Image”, Vol. 9, No. 1, s. 172–175.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2011.07.003

Graff A. (2008), Rykoszetem. Rzecz o płci, seksualności i narodzie, W.A.B, Warszawa.
Google Scholar

Hays S. (1998), The Cultural Contradictions of Motherhood, Yale University Press, New Haven, CT.
Google Scholar

Hryciuk R.E., Korolczuk E. (red.) (2012), Pożegnanie z Matką-Polką? Dyskursy, praktyki i reprezentacje macierzyństwa we współczesnej Polsce, Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego, Warszawa.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.31338/uw.9788323511175

Jakubowska H. (2008), Ciało biologiczne w interakcjach społecznych – pomiędzy napiętnowaniem a akceptacją, „Kultura i Społeczeństwo”, nr 3, s. 195–213.
Google Scholar

Jakubowska H. (2016), Doświadczanie ciężarnego ciała jako ciała przekraczającego granice – studium socjologii ucieleśnienia, „Przegląd Socjologii Jakościowej”, t. 12, nr 4, s. 100–117.
Google Scholar

Konecki K. (2008), Wizualna teoria ugruntowana. Rodziny kodowania wykorzystywane w analizie wizualnej, „Przegląd Socjologii Jakościowej”, t. 4, nr 3, http://www.qualitativesociologyreview.org/PL/archive_pl.php [dostęp: 1.04.2016].
Google Scholar

Lupton D. (2012), ‘Precious cargo’: foetal subjects, risk and reproductive citizenship, “Critical Public Health”, Vol. 22, No. 3, s. 329–340.
Google Scholar

Majka-Rostek D. (2010). Wizerunki ciężarnego ciała, [w:] E. Banaszak, P. Czajkowski (red.), Corpus delicti − rozkoszne ciało. Szkice nie tylko z socjologii ciała, Difin, Warszawa, s. 187–203.
Google Scholar

Marshall H., Woollett A. (2000), Fit to reproduce? The regulative role of pregnancy texts, “Feminism and Psychology”, Vol. 10, No. 3, s. 351–366.
Google Scholar

Nash M. (2005). Oh baby, baby: (Un)veiling Britney Spears’pregnant body, “Michigan Feminist Studies”, Fall 2005–Spring 2006, s. 27–49.
Google Scholar

Nash M. (2012), Making ‘postmodern’ mothers: pregnant embodiment, baby bumps and body image, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.
Google Scholar

Nash M. (2015), Shapes of motherhood: exploring postnatal body image through photographs, “Journal of Gender Studies”, Vol. 24, No. 1, s. 18–37.
Google Scholar

Neiterman E. (2013), Pregnant Bodies in Social Context: Natural, Disruptive, and Unrecognized Pregnancy, “Symbolic Interaction”, Vol. 36, Issue 3, s. 335–350.
Google Scholar

Oliver K. (2010), Motherhood, Sexuality, and Pregnant Embodiment: Twenty-Five Years of Gestation, “Hypatia”, Vol. 25, No. 4, s. 760–770.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1527-2001.2010.01134.x

Richardson P. (1990), Women’s experience of body change during normal pregnancy, “Maternal and Child Nursing Journal”, Vol. 19, No. 2, s. 93–111.
Google Scholar

Walczewska S. (1999), Damy, rycerze i feministki. Kobiecy dyskurs emancypacyjny w Polsce, Wydawnictwo eFka, Kraków.
Google Scholar

Wiles R. (1994). ‘I’m not fat, I’m pregnant’: The impact of pregnancy on fat women’s body image, [w:] S. Wilkinson, C. Kitzinger (eds.), Women and health: Feminist perspectives, Taylor and Francis, London, s. 33–48.
Google Scholar

Woliver L. R. (2002), The political geographies of pregnancy, University of Illinois, Urbana, Il.
Google Scholar

Young I.M. (1990), Throwing like a Girl and Other Essays in Feminist Philosophy and Social Theory, Indiana University Press, Bloomington−Indianapolis.
Google Scholar