| This is a pioneering study on the construction of fatherhood in the socio-cultural context of Hong Kong. Fatherhood is constructed socially and culturally, reflected in the thinking and practice of fathers. It is defined by, and simultaneously reproduces masculinity. In this study, fatherhood is critically examined using practice theory and the concept of gender performativity. The fieldwork, carried out from 2004 to 2006, consisted primarily of participant observation in men's groups, and interviews, in particular, in-depth interviews with 30 heterosexual biological fathers from different walks of life. This study finds that fatherhood in Hong Kong is constructed within the patriarchal ideology and structure across the societal, organizational, and individual levels. Patriarchy is rooted in the history of Hong Kong and continues to exist in contemporary society. In both the colonial and post-colonial periods, notions of masculinity and fatherhood in Hong Kong are seen to be extremely conservative and they highlight the role of the state in the adoption and reproduction of patriarchal ideology. While changes towards gender equality have occurred slowly after long-term struggle, a coherent gender policy has been lacking. This has contributed to a socio-cultural environment that encourages the naturalization and normalization of the patriarchal structure and practices in the family. The recent development of the "new good men" notion (in which men were redefined to be loving husbands, and caring fathers who shared housework and were involved with children) was found to be a front and was utilized as a means to resurrect men's power and status in the family. Three main paternal responsibilities were identified, namely economic provision, education, as well as establishing and maintaining a child-oriented family through marriage. In carrying out these responsibilities, men enjoyed the privileges and hegemony legitimized in the social structure. Failure in fulfilling the structural requirements resulted in the disruption of paternal power and masculinity but not subversion to the hegemonic structure. |
