Christmas time is a site of intensified domesticity, a reliance on traditional norms, and centring of family relationships. Christmas in the year 2020 was unique in this regard, given how the COVID-19 pandemic widely disrupted home life and shifted family relationships. Feminist researchers have previously noted how analysis of contemporary cultural artefacts, such as online media, can be a useful way of exploring how different relationships are constructed to serve various functions. Therefore, we thematically analysed 11 television advertisements on YouTube to investigate how family relationships are constructed through a lens of feminist psychology in the context of a COVID-19 Christmas. Our analysis generated three dominant themes. First, the television advertisements in our sample constructed nostalgia as women's work. Second, family relationships were positioned as a means of reclaiming power and purpose in an effort to instil a new normal. Lastly, television advertisements constructed family relationships as a critical site for representing gendered norms. We discuss these themes in relation to feminist scholarship on the function of family relationships, during COVID-19 and beyond.
AllenK. R.BliesznerR.RobertoK. A. (2011). Perspectives on extended family and fictive kin in the later years: Strategies and meanings of kin reinterpretation. Journal of Family Issues, 32(9), 1156–1177. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X11404335
2.
Ashburn-NardoL. (2017). Parenthood as a moral imperative? Moral outrage and the stigmatization of voluntarily childfree women and men. Sex Roles, 76(5), 393–401. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-016-0606-1
3.
BellaL. (1992). The Christmas imperative: Leisure, family, and women’s work. Fernwood Publishing.
4.
BennettJ. (2018). Narrating family histories: Negotiating identity and belonging through tropes of nostalgia and authenticity. Current Sociology, 66(3), 449–465. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392115578984
5.
BerkhoutS. G.RichardsonL. (2020). Identity, politics, and the pandemic: Why is COVID-19 a disaster for feminism (s)?History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences, 42(4), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40656-020-00346-7
6.
BraithwaiteD. O.BachB. W.BaxterL. A.DiVernieroR.HammondsJ. R.HosekA. M.WolfB. M. (2010). Constructing family: A typology of voluntary kin. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 27(3), 388–407. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407510361615
7.
BranickiL. J. (2020). COVID-19, ethics of care and feminist crisis management. Gender, Work & Organization, 27(5), 872–883. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12491
BraunV.ClarkeV. (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 11(4), 589–597. https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806
10.
BraunV.ClarkeV. (2021). One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis?Qualitative Research in Psychology, 18(3), 328–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238
11.
CarriganM.SzmiginI. (2006). “Mothers of invention”: Maternal empowerment and convenience consumption. European Journal of Marketing, 40(9), 1122–1142. https://doi.org/10.1108/03090560610681041
12.
CeuterickM. (2020). An affirmative look at a domesticity in crisis: Women, humour and domestic labour during the COVID-19 pandemic. Feminist Media Studies, 20(6), 896–901. https://doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2020.1789396
13.
ChoiP.HenshawC.BakerS.TreeJ. (2005). Supermum, superwife, supereverything: Performing femininity in the transition to motherhood. Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology, 23(2), 167–180. https://doi.org/10.1080/02646830500129487
14.
Curran-TroopH.GillR.LittlerJ. (2021). “Stay woke. Make moves” branding for a feminist future amidst pandemic precarity. In GwynneJ. (Ed.), Femvertising. Palgrave Macmillan.
DoucetA. (2001). “You see the need perhaps more clearly than I have”: Exploring gendered processes of domestic responsibility. Journal of Family Issues, 22(3), 328–357. https://doi.org/10.1177/019251301022003004
17.
DouglasS.MichaelsM. (2005). The mommy myth: The idealization of motherhood and how it has undermined all women. Simon and Schuster.
18.
DurkheimE. (1912). The elementary forms of religious life. Allen & Unwin Ltd.
19.
EvansS.Mikocka-WalusA.KlasA.OliveL.SciberrasE.KarantzasG.WestruppE. M. (2020). From “It has stopped our lives” to “Spending more time together has strengthened bonds”: The varied experiences of Australian families during COVID-19. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 2906. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.588667
20.
FischerE.ArnoldS. J. (1990). More than a labor of love: Gender roles and Christmas gift shopping. Journal of Consumer Research, 17(3), 333–345. https://doi.org/10.1086/208561
21.
FisherA. N.RyanM. K. (2021). Gender inequalities during COVID-19. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 24(2), 237–245. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430220984248
22.
FreemanL.BellS. (2013). Women’s magazines as facilitators of Christmas rituals. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 16(3), 336–354. https://doi.org/10.1108/13522751311326134
23.
FriedanB. (1963). The problem that has no name from the feminine mystique. Feminist Theory: A Reader, 100(9), 198–203.
24.
FrithH.RileyS.ArcherL.GleesonK. (2005). Imag(in)ing visual methodologies [editorial]. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 2(3), 187–198. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088705qp037ed
25.
FurnhamA.LayA. (2019). The universality of the portrayal of gender in television advertisements: A review of the studies this century. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 8(2), 109. https://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000161
26.
GeertzC. (1966). Religion as a cultural system. In BantonM. (Ed.), Anthropological approaches to the study of religion (pp. 1–17). Routledge.
27.
GillR. (2007). Postfeminist media culture: Elements of a sensibility. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 10(2), 147–166. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367549407075898
28.
GillR. (2008). Empowerment/sexism: Figuring female sexual agency in contemporary advertising. Feminism & Psychology, 18(1), 35–60. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959353507084950
29.
GilliganC. (1993). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women’s development. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674037618
30.
GoodwinR.HouW. K.SunS.Ben-EzraM. (2020). Quarantine, distress and interpersonal relationships during COVID-19. General Psychiatry, 33(6), e100385. https://doi.org/10.1136/gpsych-2020-100385
31.
GreenE.SingletonC. (2013). “Gendering the digital”: The impact of gender and technology perspectives on the sociological imagination. In Orton-JohnsonK.PriorN. (Eds.), Digital sociology (pp. 34–50). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137297792_3
32.
HendersonA.HarmonS.NewmanH. (2016). The price mothers pay, even when they are not buying it: Mental health consequences of idealized motherhood. Sex Roles, 74(11–12), 512–526. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-015-0534-5
33.
HermerénL. (1999). English for sale: A study of the language of advertising. Lund University Press.
34.
HermesJ.HillA. (2020). Television’s undoing of social distancing. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 23(4), 655–661. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367549420927724
35.
HjálmsdóttirA.BjarnadóttirV. S. (2021). “I have turned into a foreman here at home”: Families and work–life balance in times of COVID-19 in a gender equality paradise. Gender, Work & Organization, 28(1), 268–283. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12552
36.
hooksb. (1991). Homeplace: A site of resistance. In hooksb. (Ed.), Yearning: Race, gender and cultural politics (pp. 41–51). Turnaround Books.
37.
JacksonD.MannixJ. (2004). Giving voice to the burden of blame: A feminist study of mothers’ experiences of mother blaming. International Journal of Nursing Practice, 10(4), 150–158. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-172X.2004.00474.x
38.
KayJ. B.WoodH. (2020). Cultural commons: Critical responses to COVID-19, part 2. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 23(6), 1019–1024. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367549420952098
39.
KempC. L. (2021). #MoreThanAVisitor: Families as “essential” care partners during COVID-19. The Gerontologist, 61(2), 145–151. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnaa161
40.
KohltF. (2020, November 10). “Over by Christmas”: The impact of war-metaphors and other science-religion narratives on science communication environments during the COVID-19 crisis. SocArXiv, https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/z5s6a[preprint]
41.
KramerA. M. (2011). Kinship, affinity and connectedness: Exploring the role of genealogy in personal lives. Sociology, 45(3), 379–395. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038511399622
LazardL.CapdevilaR.DannC.LockeA.RoperS. (2019). Sharenting: Pride, affect and the day-to-day politics of digital mothering. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 13(4), e12443. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12443
44.
LiuQ.LuoD.HaaseJ. E.GuoQ.WangX. Q.LiuS.YangB. X. (2020). The experiences of health-care providers during the COVID-19 crisis in China: A qualitative study. The Lancet Global Health, 8(6), e790–e798. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(20)30204-7
45.
ManzoL. K. C.MinelloA. (2020). Mothers, childcare duties, and remote working under COVID-19 lockdown in Italy: Cultivating communities of care. Dialogues in Human Geography, 10(2), 120–123. https://doi.org/10.1177/2043820620934268
46.
MartinJ. (2021). Keep crafting and carry on: Nostalgia and domestic cultures in the crisis. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 24(1), 358–364. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367549420958718
47.
MasonJ.TipperB. (2008). Being related: How children define and create kinship. Childhood (Copenhagen, Denmark), 15(4), 441–460. https://doi.org/10.1177/0907568208097201
48.
McBrideM. C. (1990). Autonomy and the struggle for female identity: Implications for counselling women. Journal of Counselling and Development, 69(1), 22–26. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6676.1990.tb01448.x
49.
McDowellL. (2004). Gender, identity and place: Understanding feminist geographies. Polity.
50.
MeinS. (2020). COVID-19 and health disparities: The reality of “the great equalizer”.Journal of General Internal Medicine, 14(8), 1–2. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-020-05880-5
51.
NentwichJ. C. (2008). New fathers and mothers as gender troublemakers? Exploring discursive constructions of heterosexual parenthood and their subversive potential. Feminism & Psychology, 18(2), 207–230. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959353507088591
52.
OlsonL. N.Baiocchi-WagnerE. A.Wilson-KratzerJ. M.KratzerJ. M.SymondsS. E. (2012). The dark side of family communication. Polity.
53.
PauwelsL. (2011). An integrated conceptual framework for visual social research. In MargolisE.PauwelsL. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of visual research methods (pp. 3–24). Sage.
54.
PetrassiD. (2012). “For me, the children come first”: A discursive psychological analysis of how mothers construct fathers’ roles in childrearing and childcare. Feminism & Psychology, 22(4), 518–527. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959353512442928
55.
PickC. M.KoA.WormleyA.KenrickD.VarnumM. E. W. (2021, March 9). Family still matters: Human social motivation during a global pandemic. PsyArXiv, https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/z7mjc[pre-print]
56.
PrimeH.WadeM.BrowneD. T. (2020). Risk and resilience in family well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic. American Psychologist, 75(5), 631–643. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000660
57.
ReaveyP. (Ed.) (2011). Visual methods in psychology: Using and interpreting images in qualitative research. Routledge.
58.
RileyS.EvansA.RobsonM. (2018). Postfeminism and health: Critical psychology and media perspectives. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315648613
59.
ScodariC. (2013). Roots, representation, and resistance? Family history, media and culture through a critical lens. The Journal of American Culture, 36(3), 206–220. https://doi.org/10.1111/jacc.12025
60.
ShawS. M.HavitzM. E.DelemereF. M. (2008). “I decided to invest in my kids’ memories”: Family vacations, memories, and the social construction of the family. Tourism Culture & Communication, 8(1), 13–26. https://doi.org/10.3727/109830408783900361
61.
ShieldsS. A. (2015). The legacy of transformational moments in feminist psychology. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 39(2), 143–150. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684315574502
62.
SikkaT. (2021). Feminist materialism and COVID-19: The agential activation of everyday objects. NORA: Nordic Journal of Feminist and Gender Research, 29(1), 4–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/08038740.2020.1825119
TurnerL. H.WestR. (2015). The challenge of defining “family”. In TurnerL. H.WestR. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of family communication (pp. 10–25). Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483375366.n1
65.
VachhaniS. J.PullenA. (2011). Home is where the heart is? Organizing women’s work and domesticity at Christmas. Organization, 18(6), 807–821. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508411416404
66.
VenturiniF. (2020). Social movements’ powerlessness at the time of COVID-19: A personal account. Interface, 12(1), 43–46.
WagnerJ. (2011). Visual studies and empirical social inquiry. In MargolisE.PauwelsL. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of visual research methods (pp. 49–72). Sage.
69.
WarnerH. (2018). Creativity, craft and Christmas: Textual negotiations and the politics of Kirstie’s crafty Christmas. The Journal of Popular Television, 6(1), 119–133. https://doi.org/10.1386/jptv.6.1.119_1
WhileyL. A.SayerH.JuanchichM. (2020). Motherhood and guilt in a pandemic: Negotiating the “new” normal with a feminist identity. Gender, Work & Organization, 28(2), 612–619. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12613
