"That's How They Label Us:" Gendered-Antiblackness and Black Fatherhood

Background: Conceptions of Black fatherhood in the public imagination has historically been framed within a deficit or deviance orientation. It is generally understood that Black fathers are incapable of constructing and performing prosocial fathering roles that facilitate and affirm the holistic development and well-being of their children. Past scholarship has defined societal barriers and challenges that Black men, and by extension Black fathers, face as racism or white supremacy. However, these frameworks often obscure the critical juncture of gender and race. This study argues that the historically problematic representation of Black fathers, and Black people at large, is rooted in gendered-antiblackness, and subsequently recommends how social work can possibly mitigate its effects.

Objective: This study explored how a gendered-antiblackness paradigm shapes the experiences, perceptions, and understanding of a group of mixed-income Black fathers. Secondarily, this framework explored how Black fathers understand this structural force and the ways in which this phenomena structures Black men’s conceptualization and practice of fatherhood. In this context, gendered-antiblackness is defined as the weaponizing of gender in service to antiblackness.

Methods: Drawing from a broader research project (N=30) examining Black fathers’ academic socialization of their children, this study included a subsample of ten fathers (n=10) who self-identified as Black and were evenly split along socioeconomic lines (i.e., middle-class and above [n=5] or working class or poor [n=5]). This study aimed to explore two overarching research questions:

1. How do Black fathers perceive how society views them as Black men and fathers?
2. How does their understanding of society’s view of them shape their fathering attitudes and practices?

Semi-structured interviews were utilized for data collection and data were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using thematic analysis.

Results: Interpretive analysis of the data generated three main themes: (1) Racialized Experiences, (2) Racialized Perceptions, and (3) Racialized Fathering Strategies & Practices. Themes highlight how gendered-antiblackness affected the experiences of these Black men, impacted their contemporary understanding of race and gender, and subsequently shaped their fathering attitudes and behavior.

Implications: For social work researchers and practitioners who focus on Black men and/or Black fathers, recommendations include adopting a radical or critical perspective when engaging in this kind of work, as historically inscribed power inequities and relations are fundamental to the lives of this population. Lastly, community-based social work practitioners must be intentional about creating and/or expanding support groups that center Black men and fathers at a community level. For programs like these, it is of crucial importance that critical consciousness raising be a core principle of community-based practice.