Learning to Care: Men’s Parental Caregiving for Sons and Daughters in Peru

Abstract

Research on men performing care has become a critical site to explore changes in masculinities. While studies have focused on caring masculinities, Stay-at-home-fathers, and involved fathers in the Global North, this study explores how Peruvian men conceive and perform care. While gender systems and relations in Latin America are changing, the involvement of men as caregivers has not yet been incorporated in efforts to achieve gender equality. Drawing on fourteen semi-structured interviews with male caregivers of adult children with severe mental illness in Lima, this study examines how local gendered expectations shape how men conceive and perform care. I argue that Peruvian men rework the relationship between care and masculinity by engaging with caregiving as a transformative experience. However, they also reproduce hegemonic masculinity, as caregiving becomes valuable when they share their journeys with peers to be casted in good light and regain status. Findings suggest that the men in this study conceptualize care as a skill to be learned; share their journeys as caregivers both to help other and regain status; and are more involved in caring for adult sons than for adult daughters. By providing evidence of experiences of impoverished men in the Global South, this study nuances and advances the scholarship on caring masculinities.

Keywords

hegemonic masculinity caring masculinities caregiving fatherhood mental health Peru

Introduction

Research on men performing care has become a critical site to explore challenges to and opportunities toward progressive transformations in masculinities. Interest has increased after the United Nations’ call for governments around the world to promote the involvement of men as fathers (Barker et al. 2012). Different frameworks have advanced, further nuanced, and complicated our conceptions of masculinities. While some men distance themselves from hegemonic masculinity (Bridges and Pascoe 2014), others incorporate values of care into their lives (Elliott 2015). Research has examined experiences of fathering at home (Chesley 2011; Doucet 2006), parental leave (Brandth and Kvande 2018), and caring for relatives with physical and psychosocial disabilities (Chesla 1991; Jackson 2021). However, studies have mainly focused on the experiences of men who are caregivers in the global North, and more research is needed to illuminate how men conceive caregiving elsewhere (Panter-Brick et al. 2014).

Important dynamics in Latin America, such as a strong feminist movement, a serious interest in the politics of care, and changes in gender systems and relations, have led to shifts in masculinities that offer opportunities to learn perceptions, ideas, and attitudes from men who care. Latin America and the Caribbean have a strong body of scholarship on masculinities, but caregiving has not been a central issue despite calls by multiple governments and policymakers to include men in efforts to achieve gender equality (Aguayo et al. 2016). Drawing from semi-structured interviews with Peruvian men who are caregivers of adult children diagnosed with schizophrenia, I examine how cultural and local gendered expectations of masculinity shape how men conceive of and perform care. By examining caregiving in relation to masculinity, I argue that these men rework the relationship between care and gender by engaging with caregiving as a meaningful and transformative experience, and therefore they challenge and subvert gendered expectations that imply that men do not engage in caregiving practices.

These men, however, also end up reproducing hegemonic masculinity, as caregiving becomes a valuable activity as long as they can share their journeys with peers to regain status. Further, caregiving is substantial and active when fathers care for their sons, yet rather passive when they care for their daughters. My analysis suggests that while men both subvert and reproduce gender roles, they eventually come to care about care. That is, participants engage in caregiving and recognize it as central in their lives. Caregiving can open up opportunities for men to reflect upon the value of care, their gender socialization, and their role in their families and communities. At the same time, this research illuminates both the challenges that men face while caring and the dominant gendered ideologies that are reproduced.

The Peruvian case sheds light on caring masculinities in the global South from a working-class perspective, one that is at the margins of power and privilege. Peru has approximately 33 million inhabitants and around 30 percent live in the capital city of Lima. The city has experienced internal rural-urban migration and uneven economic development (Matos Mar 1984), with inequality widespread among the poor regarding access to basic services, education, and the job market (Huber and Lamas 2017). The participants of this study live in the north of Lima, which consists of nine districts, three of which are among the five poorest in the capital (INEI 2018). The men in this study care either for a severely mentally ill adult son or daughter at home—the country is undergoing a mental health reform that has shifted to Community Mental Health (CMH) and care has to be provided at a Community Mental Health Center (CMHC), within the community, and inside the household (Gobierno del Peru 2018).

Drawing from fourteen semi-structured interviews, this study examines how Peruvian men conceive and perform care. By exploring how men engage in caregiving, this study makes two contributions. First, it provides evidence of caring masculinities from the Global South and from a working-class perspective. Critiques of caring masculinities have called for highlighting the experiences of men at the margins (Prattes 2022). In doing so, this study complicates the caring masculinities framework while contributing to the limited scholarship on caring masculinities in Latin America. Second, it shows that care becomes meaningful when men are able to share their journeys with peers. Participants embrace caring masculinity as long as it helps them regain status. This study suggests that the participants can end up subverting gendered roles and expectations while reproducing hegemonic masculinity at the same time. The latter has implications at a theoretical and practical level and should be considered from a public policy standpoint as men are typically more involved in caring for adult sons than for adult daughters. This article engages with the caring masculinities framework, scholarship on men who care, and the notion of involved fatherhood in the global North and South. This is then followed by the methods, the research findings, and a discussion of the significance of these findings.

Caring Masculinities

Drawing from debates on men’s relationships to gender equality and feminist theory, and critical masculinity studies, Elliott (2015) proposes the concept of caring masculinities. This concept describes masculine identities that reject dominance and embrace qualities of care. The rejection of ideals and expectations linked to hegemonic masculinity opens the possibility for men to embrace change and foster egalitarian relationships. By rejecting domination, men allow themselves to “embrace the affective, relational, emotional, and interdependence qualities of care” (252). Thus, caring masculinities is an effort towards gender equality as it seeks to integrate “values and practices of care and interdependence into masculine identities” (243). Caring masculinities scholarship has illuminated men’s incorporation of care practices and values in different contexts. Exploring the experiences of Canadian fathers on parental leave, Beglaubter (2021) argues that leave is an opportunity to bond with their child and respond to their children’s needs. Parental leave is an opportunity that some men can afford, incorporating care practices into their already accomplished masculine identity. Scheibling (2020) examines the intersections between fatherhood, masculinity, and care in North American dad bloggers. Although it is a space that reinforces traditional masculinity, blogging and activism provide a space for reflection and “evolving to become caring” (12).

While caring masculinities has been a useful framework to evidence transformations in masculinities, critics have warned against the concept being used to portray the experiences of privileged white men. Critics advocate for centering nonviolent caring masculinities at the margins that can end up informing privileged men’s experiences located at the center of power (Prattes 2022). Research on working-class men in the United Kingdom has found important overlaps between care and masculinity that highlight practices of solidarity (Elliott and Roberts 2022) while in Papua New Guinea men are able to show support and avoid violent responses to their partners’ HIV disclosure (Mitchell et al. 2021). The scholarship on caring masculinities in Latin America points to novel dynamics and arrangements between couples. For example, men’s involvement in childcare and domestic chores is rooted in discourses of complementarity and co-responsibility (Saldaña Muñoz 2018; Scavino Solari and Batthyány 2019). However, the circulation of discourses supporting men’s involvement can merge with traditional masculinity discourses that can eventually produce “machos ilustrados” (enlightened machos) (Telleria Huaylla 2011), that is, men who incorporate discourses of care and gender equality but reproduce hegemonic masculinity in their daily actions. In general, research on non-privileged caring masculinities points to changes in men’s relationships and experiences as well as tensions in incorporating caregiving practices amidst patriarchal societies.

Physical and psychosocial disabilities complicate caregiving and influence men’s experiences differently. Men who care for their cognitively impaired wives envision care as a job and thus separate their emotions from the caregiving tasks (Calasanti and King 2007). Further research has confirmed that men conceive care as a series of tasks to be completed (Hanlon 2012) and that men adapt to the caregiver identity but desire to remain in power (Ribeiro, Paúl, and Nogueira 2007). Men who care for adult children with psychosocial disabilities experience serious episodes of crisis (Howard 1998), stigma, and chronic feelings of worry (Nyström and Svensson 2004), alongside depression and poor a sense of well-being (Ghosh and Greenberg 2009). Men who engage in caregiving practices balance both a need to be in control and feelings of vulnerability. Overall, scholarship on caring masculinities evidences the possibility of men caring for family members and the potential challenges that arise while providing care in different circumstances.

Stay-at-Home-Fathers, Involved Fathers, and Peruvian Fathers

Research on stay-at-home-fathers (SAHFs) demonstrates the tensions between caregiving and masculinities across international contexts. Studies in Scandinavian countries evidence men’s desire to engage in caregiving at home regarding childcare and adopting discourses of gender equality (Johansson and Klinth 2008; Scambor et al. 2014). Norwegian fathers who take parental leave demonstrate enthusiasm regarding childcare despite the challenges and time-consuming activities (Brandth and Kvande 2018). In a study of Canadian men who are caregivers, it is evidenced that, during different times and contexts, men reject and embrace traits of hegemonic masculinity. Further, while men sometimes advocate for gender equality, they also emphasize gendered differences regarding caregiving (Doucet 2006). SAHFs in the United States mention high childcare costs as a primary motive for men to take on caregiving (Lee and Lee 2018), and a desire to stay at home given the husband’s lower job status and their spouse’s higher income (Chesley 2011). Studies from Latin America regarding SAHFs point mostly to generational changes, with younger men tending to be more involved in caregiving than older men (Martínez Salgado and Rojas 2016). Young Mexican men point to the emotional and affective qualities of fatherhood as its most desirable traits (Urbina Barrera 2016), while Argentinian working-class young fathers’ involvement in childcare is directed toward ludic and playful activities (Hasicic 2018).

The notion of “involved fatherhood” has been useful in exploring the changes and continuities regarding masculinities and fathering. Defined as “a fatherhood where men actively take part in children’s lives as well as in childcare and household work” (Forsberg 2007, 110) this notion has been incorporated into hegemonic models of masculinity, especially in Sweden (Hearn et al. 2012). However, research has also pointed to tensions in engaging with involved fatherhood. Men are often navigating between narratives of choice, involved fatherhood, and gender equality (Bach 2019), or trying to find moral intelligibility in justifying and articulating their involvement in childcare (Björk 2013). Contradictions between men’s discourse and practice have been evidenced. For example, men in the UK often recognize the gap between desiring involvement and actual involvement (Machin 2015), and involved fatherhood has been linked to structural issues and not men’s personal choice (Stevens 2015). Men’s involvement is an increasingly important issue in Latin America (Barker and Verani 2008). Research has shown how experiences of fatherhood and involvement are mediated by economic and racial constraints (Viveros Vigoya 2002) as well as a struggle to identify and follow the model of a “good father” (Castilla 2018; Olavarría 2001). While research on the notion of involved fatherhood has helped highlight the possibilities of caring masculinities and men’s involvement in caregiving, it has also evidenced the multiple differences in men’s engagement with this notion.

Masculinities studies in Peru have focused on fathers’ involvement in dialogue with the imperatives of hegemonic masculinity in the social imaginary (Callirgos 1996; Fuller 2001b; Villa-Palomino 2022). Research with middle and working-class men points to the importance of fatherhood in the consideration of masculinity in the eyes of peers (Fuller, 2001a), with working-class fathers emphasizing being breadwinners rather than providers of affect (Fuller 2000; Plataforma de Paternidades Peru 2016). Scholarship on Peruvian men’s emotions has pointed to the mandates to repress and control them, which stems from a patriarchal society (Ramos Padilla 2001), working-class young men balancing both violence and emotion management (Santos 2002), and middle and upper-class men engaging with aspects of hegemonic masculinity and resisting them through expressions of vulnerability and creativity (Rondan 2015; Villa 2015). SAHFs and men’s involvement in caregiving across different contexts provide important insights into men’s challenges, expectations, and anxieties. Yet the scholarship calls for further discussion on men’s motives and strategies to embrace caregiving, as well as a detailed account of the process of adapting to the role of caregiver. Exploring the experiences of men who engage in caregiving practices will illuminate the overlap between societal gender roles and expectations as well as evidence of the potentiality of Peruvian caring masculinities.

Research Methods

This study is part of a larger project exploring the effects of the CMH on the lives of residents of Lima. My methods included long-term ethnographic fieldwork, participant observation, and semi-structured interviews with men who are caregivers for an adult son or daughter diagnosed with schizophrenia, a severe mental illness. To understand how gendered expectations influence how men conceive and perform care, this paper focuses on fourteen interviews —conducted between May and July of 2017— with men who are caregivers of adult children diagnosed with serious mental illness. Human subjects research approval was granted by the Institutional Review Board of the author’s home institution. At the time of the study, the participants were caregivers of their adult child diagnosed with a serious mental illness and were attending consultations at their local CMHC. Focusing on these men in particular allows for understanding how men negotiate the incorporation of notions of care to their identities and adapt to the role of caregiver. All participants were in a heterosexual marriage and none of them were employed at the time of the interview. Their household income was provided by their wives and was around the national minimum wage, which is 850.00 nuevos soles monthly (approximately $250) (INEI 2018). Participant ages ranged from 45 to 65 years old. Nine interviewees cared for an adult son; five cared for an adult daughter.

Participants were recruited at their local CMHC using a purposive sampling method which aimed for information-rich cases (Patton 2002). Informed consent was required and obtained for all interviews. Interviews took place in locations where participants felt safe and comfortable (i.e., parks, benches) and lasted between 45 and 90 minutes. Confidentiality was prioritized at all times. Before, during, and after the interviews, participants were reminded that they could opt out of the study without penalty. All interviews were conducted in Spanish, the participants’ and author’s native language. I am aware that my position as a Peruvian native, cisgender, middle-class, Spanish-speaking mestizo man living between Peru and the United States influenced the interactions with participants. Interviewees were enthusiastic to talk with me, and I always reminded them that I was born and raised in Lima. Power and privilege differentials were often addressed during the interviews. This is especially important as hegemonic masculinity was often negotiated during the interview process, and men often used discursive practices to locate themselves in what has been called an “imaginary position” (Wetherell and Edley 1999, 339) that portrays them as valuable and productive despite their socioeconomic circumstances. For example, participants often told me that I could learn and gain a lot from their experiences and that their experiences as caregivers needed to be heard and could be helpful to other men. Given my socialization in Peru from birth through adulthood, I was conscious of some of the cultural masculinity mandates to which participants referred. However, I did not assume that we had a shared understanding of these mandates and asked for clarification when needed.

Interviews were recorded and transcribed as soon as it was feasible. Before data analysis, I listened to the interviews again, checking for the accuracy of the written transcripts. Transcriptions were coded line by line using the NVivo 11 software. By following grounded theory principles, I prioritized the interplay between the researcher and the data (Strauss and Corbin 1998). In NVivo 11, I first read and analyzed each interview, then analyzed them while comparing them. Categories emerged as I read the transcripts, such as adapting to the role of caregiver and the importance of regaining status. I then developed codes in order to analyze patterns (Glaser and Strauss 1967). Thematic coding, analysis, and comparison of the data were useful in identifying central topics in the caregivers’ narratives (Charmaz 2006). Interviewees discussed the process of “learning” to care, how sharing their journeys helped them regain status, and their involvement in caring for their adult sons and daughters.

Findings

Gentler, Patient, Soft-spoken: “Learning” to Care at Home and in Public

The serious mental illness of their adult sons or daughters, lack of formal employment, and their spouses being the main source of household income led participants to adapt to the role of caregiver. All interviewees initially perceived this situation as an indicator of failing to fulfill their role as breadwinners. The men stated feeling emasculated, feminine, and uncomfortable at the idea of doing “women’s work,” and recalled approaching their mothers or sisters to take care of their adult child or to provide some help. The women could not help while also working to cover basic expenses for their own families. Men were in a state of uncertainty; one participant stated, “Wasn’t it supposed to be the other way? My wife at home, me bringing money in?” There was a strong sense of guilt and shame in the process of adapting to being a caregiver. Participants felt they were not fulfilling the gender expectations that society imposes upon them which, to an extent, they continued to feel responsible for meeting.

In this context, men conceptualized care as a skill that had to be learned, as something they were not equipped to do because of their gender socialization, and for which they felt unprepared. In the words of participants, “learning” to care encompassed both practical matters and affective companionship. One of the main challenges for men who cared for an adult daughter was related to hygiene and intimate care (for example, showering). One interviewee stated, “I made her take a quick shower, but wasn’t paying attention to her intimate parts, or how to shampoo her hair well.” Learning to care especially requires emotional development. Men also referred to the difficulties in becoming gentler or more soft-spoken. Patience was an important skill to develop as some adult children could not communicate clearly. “It’s just patience, patience, patience,” recalled one participant. Interviewees evoked the use of physical violence by their fathers when trying to teach them discipline. Refraining from the use of physical violence was something that participants had to learn, too. Men indicated that they do not use force or physical violence when dealing with their adult children; however, they recalled using corporal punishment when their adult children were younger (between 5 and 10 years old.)

Over time, learning to care offered the opportunity to cultivate and foster relationships with their adult children that men felt they could dedicate more time to. Men appreciated having time to take care of the household, having a flexible schedule, and, above all, spending time with their adult children—participants valued the opportunity to connect with their emotions and with their children. As one participant put it, “I’m glad to be able to feel the connection and regain lost time.” Another interviewee stated, “Caring [for my daughter] has made me feel surprisingly happy. I feel that I have established a relationship with her after so many years.” Men valued moments of happiness, connection, and emotional fulfillment with their adult children because it gave them a sense of security and control. However, men made sure to set emotional boundaries because their situation as caregivers often led them to feel vulnerable. Men made sure to cultivate an emotional connection but were aware that they should not “get lost in it,” because it could lead to high levels of anxiety when thinking about the future both for their child and for themselves. A participant stated that if he thinks too much, he will “get blocked by the anxiety and cry.” He later added, “I have to be like a soldado (soldier), I just do,” evoking an aspiration to a type of masculinity characterized by discipline.

In public, participants try not to express emotions and instead follow societal gender scripts. Participants reported differing degrees of perceived marginalization based on the scrutiny of community members that rendered the public performance of care arduous for them. One participant recalled the strong sense of embarrassment he felt the first time he went out with his adult son, referring to it as “enfrentar de una vez toda la verguenza” (taking all the shame in at once). Men who cared for adult daughters reported looks of doubt, distrust, and concern for their daughters. Another interviewee remembered how awful those looks felt, “as if I was a stranger or a threat to my own daughter.” At the waiting room of their local CMHC, feelings of awkwardness and embarrassment were also intense. Men reported looks of distrust and sometimes looks of surprise from health providers. One participant summarized this feeling by stating, “It is like they are wondering ‘What is he [his emphasis] doing here?’” Another stated bluntly, “People expect fathers to be absent or uncaring.”

While these fathers mentioned feelings of shame, embarrassment, and guilt, they also adapted to their new role by conceiving it as an activity they had to learn. For the interviewees, learning to care was both a process of adaptation and discovery. By learning to care, participants had to become gentler, more patient, and more soft-spoken while also reflecting on their upbringing in a patriarchal society. Learning to care meant being attuned to their emotions—which participants appreciated—while also making sure not to get overwhelmed by them. In public, men reported struggling with feelings of doubt and distrust. Still, they developed strategies to make care a valued activity.

The Chosen One: Talking About Care, Performing Masculinity

Care became central for participants’ identities when they could share their journeys as caregivers with peers such as friends and other relatives. Talking about their caregiving activities allowed participants to portray themselves as doing something valuable and productive for themselves and others, and therefore they were able to navigate the pressure of masculine ideals and the stigma they faced for being a caregiver. In their discourses, participants conceived of care as a valuable activity, often linked to the sacrifices they had to make, such as waking up early, taking their adult children to their consultations, and planning the activities for the day and the rest of the week. Participants incorporated care into their stories as an activity that gives them a sense of meaning, value, and productivity. By sharing their experiences, men used their caregivers’ journeys as a form of currency to regain status in the eyes of their peers. Men often mentioned that they “knew” or were “pretty sure” about how some of their peers saw them. When asked about these assumptions, an interviewee stated that he was pretty sure his friends saw him as “failing, or not being man enough. I know this because I used to think the same if I saw an older unemployed man who stays at home.” In this context of gendered expectations and mandates of hegemonic masculinity, sharing the caregiver journey proved useful for men to feel valued and even admired by their peers; however, they first had to endure mockery. “The jokes ceased with time and when conversations turned more serious,” remembered one participant. He then added, “Sometimes they [his friends] ask me for advice.” Another participant proudly stated that he is “the chosen one”, the person his friends go to for advice when they are facing a difficult situation at home with their partners or children. He stated, “It is a lot of responsibility, to be the one they choose to have these kinds of conversations with. I mostly listen and tell them that they must provide for their family economically and affectively.”

The participants feel satisfaction in sharing their journeys with other men at social gatherings or in private conversations. Interviewees often mentioned that although they unexpectedly became caregivers, the opportunity taught them “valuable lessons” they felt they should use to help others. These lessons were often conveyed with the objectives of regaining lost status and portraying themselves as changed men who are challenging traditional models and expectations of masculinity. One participant actively reached out to close peers that he felt were neglecting their families. He recalled, “Friends ask me why I can’t go out to drink. I tell them: ‘I’m helping my family. And you? What are you doing for your family? Are you going to be drinking all your life?’” Another participant always made sure to tell his friends at social gatherings to always be ready to become a caregiver or be in charge of the household if they become unemployed or something unexpected happens. “I always tell my friends that they have to be man enough to take care of these things,” he mentioned.

Feeling valued and productive encouraged men to share their stories, although during the interviews it was clear that they preferred to share the positive ones, the ones where the men were successful in a particular activity. When asked whether they also shared parts of their caregiver journey that exemplified emotional challenges and feelings of anxiety or sadness, some participants stated that they would rather keep those aspects of their stories to themselves. An interviewee mentioned that he does not talk about those feelings because it reminds him of how difficult it is to deal with anxiety about the future. “I would like to forget those feelings, so no, I don’t share them. I keep them to myself,” he stated. Another participant mentioned that sharing those aspects would not help their peers and would instead scare them away from becoming caregivers. He added, “I don’t see how talking about that [anxiety, fear] would help them. When I talk to them I want them to see that this [being a caregiver] is possible, that a man can do this.”

The participants’ testimonies highlight the sharing of their caregiver journeys as a crucial activity. In a way, talking about their success with care is an opportunity for them to perform traditional masculinity while challenging it at the same time. Sharing their journey was mobilized by the participants to regain lost status, to feel and be seen as productive and valuable members of society, and to position themselves as men who could provide guidance to others. Participants appreciated the admiration and respect they got from peers when being asked for advice. Men had the desire to help others with the valuable lessons they had learned by being caregivers, although they mostly shared the stories where they were cast in a good light. Participants’ quests for status are often directed at other men. Next, we will see how men are more involved in caring for other men—their adult sons—than they are with their adult daughters.

Great Expectations for Sons, Passive Care for Daughters

Evidence from this study suggests that the gender of the adult child, as well as local gendered expectations, influence the intensity of care provided. For the participants, care becomes valuable when they are able to share their stories with other men to regain status. Similarly, participants’ provision and involvement in caregiving is more intense when it is directed to other men: their adult sons. While men who cared for adult sons placed great expectations on them, emphasizing recovery and subsequent re-inclusion to society (usually by re-entering the education system or the job market), those who cared for adult daughters focused on providing “quality of life,” broadly conceived. These expectations are shaped by local gendered scripts as well as the participants’ understanding of serious mental illness and recovery. Men in this study understood recovery as “a time for when things return to normal, not only for my son but for everyone,” as one participant stated.

The recovery of their adult sons implied going back to school and finishing or continuing their studies, finding a job to “become a professional,” and starting a family. One participant pointed out, “This illness is just a momentary obstacle. My son is going to finish school. I want him to pursue a technical career so he can study for 2 years and get a job quickly.” Another stated, “His mom and I tell him every day that we love him, that we want him to become a professional, to wear a suit.” On the other hand, caregivers’ expectations for adult daughters often included not being a burden to the household: staying at home, not getting pregnant, and finding a trustworthy family member or friend to take care of her as the parents aged.

Men who cared for an adult son were more involved in care practices. First, they went to most of their sons’ appointments at their CMHC and tried to remain engaged in their overall progress. Participants were eager to interpret any irregular behavior from their adult sons as a manifestation of serious mental illness and were ready to take them to the doctor at any moment. Second, care at home was more intensive. Men focused on keeping their adult sons eating well and engaging them in household activities, such as cleaning their room, helping with the preparation of food, and overall giving them a sense of being more independent. Third, participants spent more time outside and went out more with their adult sons. They left the house to get fresh air and to get a glimpse of what “normal” life is like, to observe what people do during their day. A participant shared, “I try to show him the life of the city, people shopping at the mall, eating out as a family. ‘You can do that too,’ I say to him.” The main fears that men who are caregivers of an adult son reported were for the illness to become more debilitating, and for men not to be able to provide care as they got older.

In contrast, men who cared for adult daughters did not give them a sense of being independent and rather prioritized finding someone to care for them in the future. Compared to men who are caregivers of an adult son, those who care for adult daughters reported missing appointments at their CMHC. They blamed the lack of money for transportation, feeling tired, and feeling embarrassed in the waiting room. Doubt and suspicion about the “realness” of their daughter’s illness were also reported. Participants described their daughters as lying, being manipulative, and being lazy. One interviewee stated, “It was very hard to believe. Sometimes I think that she just wants attention.” This stood in stark contrast with men who cared for an adult son, who reported no skepticism towards their illness. Care at home for daughters was passive, and primarily involved trying to keep them from getting agitated. One interviewee stated, “I prefer that she is at home. I try not to bother her. The nurse says to include her in some activities, but I prefer that she is resting.” Men did not go out as much with their adult daughters. When they did, it was mostly to take a walk around the neighborhood, go to the market, attend church, or visit a relative. Participants feared going out with their daughters to crowded places because they worried they might get hurt, get lost, or run away. The main concern of participants was their adult daughters desiring to start a family or to otherwise become pregnant.

As this finding suggests, gender expectations shape not only how the participants imagine different pathways of recovery for their adult children, but also their degree of involvement, and consequently the intensity of their care practices. Men who cared for adult sons tended to treat them with the expectation that they would eventually become productive and valuable members of society, often highlighting going to school, getting a job, and starting a family. On the contrary, men who are caregivers of adult daughters tended to have lower expectations for recovery and re-inclusion to society and viewed their daughters as lacking agency.

Discussion

The experiences of the participants explored in this study offer new insights into caring masculinities at the margins of power and privilege. Examining the experiences of working-class men who are caregivers, I show that local and gendered expectations regarding masculinity influence how men conceive and engage in caregiving in complex ways. While engaging in caregiving, men are able to challenge and subvert traditional models of masculinity. However, they also reproduce hegemonic masculinity in their discourses and practices. While participants appreciate caregiving as a transformative practice, it becomes meaningful and useful to them as long as they are able to share their journeys with other men in order to regain status, feel productive, and be able to provide advice to others. Moreover, participants hold greater expectations of recovery for their sons and subsequently are more involved in caring for them than for their adult daughters.

Men in this study did not choose to become caregivers; they were pushed into care by their socioeconomic and family circumstances. Socioeconomic constraints were evident when participants asked family members to help them care for their adult children, but their relatives could not afford to leave their jobs to help. While upper- and middle-class Peruvian families are able to outsource care by hiring a domestic worker, this would have been disastrous for these participants’ finances because it would have cost them between one-half and three-quarters of their household income. Paying attention to class and socioeconomic status nuances and complicates the caring masculinities framework, as the participants’ experiences contrast with those men in the United States and Europe who become caregivers by choice (Beglaubter 2021; Brandth and Kvande 2018). By exploring caring masculinities beyond the middle class it is possible to shed light on the complexities and diversity in caring masculinities (Prattes 2022), particularly in Latin America, where discourses of complementarity and co-responsibility are starting to shape the performance of caring masculinities (Saldaña Muñoz 2018; Scavino Solari and Batthyány 2019).

Given that the participants had internalized local gendered expectations and masculinity mandates, it was hard for them to engage in caregiving. In this context, men felt that they had to “learn to care,” which meant for them a process of transformation, discovery, and reflection. Studies have portrayed caregiving for men as an opportunity to bond with their children and become attuned to their needs (Beglaubter 2021), to become a caring man (Scheibling 2020), and to gain valuable insights (Wiens and Daniluk 2009). While the Peruvian cases here echo these findings, it also extends them by highlighting, in detail, the aspects of masculinity that undergo change. Participants point to the need to become a patient, soft-spoken person, who refrains from engaging in corporal punishment. However, it is important to note that those who care for adult daughters were less involved in their caring practices and didn’t give them a sense of being independent.

For Peruvian men, caregiving is both disruptive and transformative, and learning to care implies practical matters as well as issues of emotional development. Research elsewhere portrays men who are caregivers keeping their emotions to themselves (Schilling, Schinke, and Kirkham 1985) and remaining stoic (Ribeiro, Paúl, and Nogueira 2007), but this was not the case in the present study. Participants report different degrees of appreciation for the opportunity to provide care and spend time with their adult children. For example, interviewees have stated that they feel “surprisingly happy,” or felt that they have “regained lost time” with their adult children. However, it is important to note that the participants are aware they don’t want to “feel too much” because it can lead to them feeling anxious about the future, vulnerable, and overwhelmed. The participants’ working-class background made them appreciate care, and at the same time emphasize strict discipline and domain over their emotions, or, as one participant put it, “be like a soldado” (soldier). The distance that the participants want to have from their emotions echoes the findings of studies of men who care for adult children with psychosocial disabilities (Ghosh and Greenberg 2009; Nyström and Svensson 2004).

In public, performance was a difficult task as participants had to engage with traditional models and expectations of masculinity. While participants were undergoing a transformation as caregivers in their households, they realized that the public sphere was still a place where traditional discourses of men as economic providers for the family circulated (Callirgos, 1996; Fuller, 2001a; Olavarría, 2001; Viveros Vigoya, 2002; Author). While some studies observe that men who are caregivers tend to receive positive praise and recognition (Doucet 2006; Ribeiro, Paúl, and Nogueira 2007; Ribeiro and Paúl 2008), this study reinforces findings evidencing that men still tend to face varying degrees of marginalization in the community (Nyström and Svensson 2004). The men in this study reported suspicious and doubtful looks when performing care in public, especially when caring for an adult daughter. While participants in this study conceived care as a positive and transformative experience, regional and national cultural masculinity mandates encouraged men to seek to regain the status they felt they lost when becoming caregivers. Men abide by local hegemonic masculinity mandates to be productive and to refrain from engaging with their emotions that encourage them to gain control and have power over their situation (Barker and Verani 2008). Consequently, men develop a pragmatic approach to care and often feel in charge of care (Calasanti and King 2007; Chesla 1991).

This study finds that care becomes central to men’s identities when they are able to talk with peers and share their journeys as caregivers. Contrary to research in the Global North that states that men keep their experiences to themselves (Ribeiro, Paúl, and Nogueira 2007; Schilling, Schinke, and Kirkham 1985; Wintersteen and Rasmussen 1997), and in the Global South that suggests that men often repress their emotions and experiences (Castilla 2018; Fuller 2001b; Ramos Padilla 2001), participants in this study actively seek to share their stories and talk about care with peers. Caregiving becomes valuable and meaningful when participants share their journeys with other men and cast themselves in a positive light as men who challenge traditional masculinity, men who are productive members of society, and men who can provide advice to other men in difficult situations. This study extends literature on involved fatherhood (Björk 2013; Forsberg 2007) and the quest for “good fatherhood” in Latin America (Olavarría 2001), evidencing that by sharing their journeys as caregivers, men are simultaneously seeking to regain status and justifying their actions as involved fathers caring for their adult children. Peruvian men sharing their caregiver’s journey suggest challenges to traditional masculinity. For example, by fostering conversations where peers can open up to them and tell their problems, they can offer a model of care, while at the same time reproducing traditional hegemonic masculinity—such as when an interviewee tells their friend that they must be “man enough” to take on caregiving and therefore becoming an authoritative guide in parenting to other men.

This study exposed striking differences in men’s involvement in caregiving as well as their expectations for their children’s recovery, which were shaped by the gender of the adult child and local gendered scripts. Participants reported different intensities of involvement in care and were found to be more involved in caring for adult sons than for adult daughters. Participants who cared for adult daughters generally had more lax care practices that focused on “quality of life,” broadly conceived. This study calls for more research on the quality of care that men provide sons and daughters with mental illness and their different levels of involvement, as “care can be given with or without care” (Noddings 2013, xiv). Research on men’s caregiving involvement for daughters in the Global South is crucial. As this study evidences, men are not as involved in caring for daughters as they are for sons and don’t give daughters a sense of independence by, for example, including them in household chores. Conceiving adult daughters as lacking agency has multiple implications regarding caregiving, autonomy, and the chronicity of the mental illness.

Since understandings and expectations of recovery relied on gender stereotypes, adult sons were expected to eventually become productive, whereas adult daughters were expected to remain passive receivers of care. While research has focused on similarities and differences between men and women performing care (Hong and Coogle 2016), on the gap between men’s desire to be involved fathers and the actual reality of caregiving (Machin 2015), and that men’s involvement is usually directed towards playful activities with children (Hasicic 2018), this study evidences the influence that the gender of the care receiver has on the expectations and intensities of care provided. This finding warrants more research to elucidate how the gender of the care receiver influences the caregiver’s practices across contexts.

This study further expands studies of caring masculinities (Elliott 2015) by examining Peruvian working-class men who care for an adult child with severe mental illness. This research highlights the influences of class, gender, and power that are at the center of the challenges, tensions, and negotiations between traditional ideals of masculinity and the incorporation of qualities of care. The findings of this study suggest that the incorporation of caring masculinities into the identities of working-class men from the Global South is met with complex and unavoidable challenges regarding class and local cultural understandings of gender roles. Socioeconomic constraints plus the severe mental illness of their adult children further complicate the possibilities of the participants in embracing a caring identity and rejecting masculinist values, yet to some degree, they make an effort to do so. Participants in this study struggle to find a balance between being a caregiver while maintaining their status as valuable and productive men in the eyes of their peers. The findings of this study call for more research on men who are caregivers in the Global South. In this way, this will not only contribute to a better understanding of caring masculinities across cultures but also offer valuable insights that can end up informing social policy involving men as caregivers and validate the experiences of men who care.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the Tinker Field Research Grant.

Corrections (February 2024):

Reference Villa, J. (2015) and its citation is added in the article since its original publication.

ORCID iD

Julio Villa-Palomino

Author Biography

Julio Villa-Palomino is a sociocultural medical anthropologist at the Department of Anthropology at The University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. He is interested in issues of care, mental health, gender, and psychiatry.

References

Aguayo

Kimelman

Saavedra

Kato-Wallace

. 2016. Hacia la Incorporación de los Hombres en las Políticas Públicas de Prevención de la Violencia contra las Mujeres y las Niñas. Santiago: EME/CulturaSalud: ONU Mujeres/UNFPA/Promundo/EME-CulturaSalud.

Bach

A. S.

2019. “The Ambiguous Construction of Nondominant Masculinity: Configuring the “New” Man through Narratives of Choice, Involved Fatherhood, and Gender Equality.” Men and Masculinities 22, no. 2: 338–359.

Barker

Greene

Nascimiento

Segundo

Ricardo

Taylor

Aguayo

Sadler

Das

Singh

Figueroa

J. G.

Flores

Jewkes

Morrell

Kato

. 2012. Men Who Care: A Multi-Country Qualitative Study of Men in Non-traditional Caregiving Roles. Washington, DC: International Center for Research on Women (ICRW) and Rio de Janeiro: Instituto Promundo.

Barker

Verani

. 2008. La Participación del Hombre como Padre en la Región de Latinoamérica y el Caribe: Una Revisión de Literatura Crítica con Consideraciones para Políticas. Brasil: Promundo.

Beglaubter

2021. “‘I Feel Like It’s a Little Bit of a Badge of Honor’: Fathers’ Leave-Taking and the Development of Caring Masculinities.” Men and Masculinities 24, no. 1: 3–22.

Björk

2013. “Doing Morally Intelligible Fatherhood: Swedish Fathers’ Accounts of Their Parental Part-Time Work Choices.” Fathering 11, no. 2: 221–237.

Brandth

Kvande

. 2018. “Masculinity and Fathering Alone during Parental Leave.” Men and Masculinities 21, no. 1: 72–90.

Bridges

Pascoe

C. J.

. 2014. “Hybrid Masculinities: New Directions in the Sociology of Men and Masculinities.” Sociology Compass 8, no. 3: 246–258.

Calasanti

King

. 2007. “Taking ‘Women’s Work’ ‘Like a Man’: Husbands’ Experiences of Care Work.” The Gerontologist 47, no. 4: 516–527.

10.

Callirgos

J. C.

1996. Sobre Héroes y Batallas: Los Caminos de la Identidad Masculina. Lima: Escuela Para el Desarrollo.

11.

Castilla

M. V.

2018. “La Construcción de la “Buena Paternidad” en Hombres Jóvenes Residentes en Barrios Pobres de Buenos Aires.” Revista Punto Género 10: 110–132.

12.

Charmaz

2006. Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide through Qualitative Analysis. London; Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications.

13.

Chesla

C. A.

1991. “Parents’ Caring Practices with Schizophrenic Offspring.” Qualitative Health Research 1, no. 4: 446–468.

14.

Chesley

2011. “Stay-at-Home Fathers and Breadwinning Mothers: Gender, Couple Dynamics, and Social Change.” Gender & Society 25, no. 5: 642–664.

15.

Doucet

2006. Do Men Mother? Fathering, Care, and Domestic Responsibility. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

16.

Elliott

2015. “Caring Masculinities: Theorizing an Emerging Concept.” Men and Masculinities 19, no. 3: 240–259.

17.

Elliott

Roberts

. 2022. “Caring Masculinities Among Working-Class Men in Blue-Collar Occupations in the UK: Understanding Biographies of Care.” Gender, Work and Organization 1–17. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/gwao.12936.

18.

Forsberg

2007. “Negotiating Involved Fatherhood: Household Work, Childcare and Spending Time with Children.” NORMA 2, no. 2: 110–126.

19.

Fuller

2000. “Significados y Prácticas de Paternidad entre Varones Urbanos del Perú.” In Paternidades en América Latina. Lima: Fondo Editorial - Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú.

20.

Fuller

2001a. Masculinidades: Cambios y permanencias: Varones de Cuzco, Iquitos y Lima. Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, Fondo editorial.

21.

Fuller

2001b. “The Social Constitution of Gender Identity Among Peruvian Men.” Men and Masculinities 3, no. 3: 316–331.

22.

Ghosh

Greenberg

. 2009. “Aging Fathers of Adult Children With Schizophrenia: The Toll of Caregiving on Their Mental and Physical Health.” Psychiatric Services 60, no. 7: 982–984.

23.

Glaser

B. G.

Strauss

A. L.

. 1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine Pub. Co.

24.

Gobierno del Peru . 2018. Plan Nacional de Fortalecimiento de Servicios de Salud Mental Comunitaria 2018-2021. Lima, Peru: Ministerio de Salud Dirección General de Intervenciones Estratégicas en Salud Pública - Dirección de Salud Mental.

25.

Hanlon

2012. Masculinities, Care and Equality: Identity and Nurture in Men’s Lives. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire; New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

26.

Hasicic

2018. “Jóvenes y Cuidado: Un Análisis Sobre las Prácticas de Crianza y Cuidado de Padres Varones de un Barrio Popular del Gran La Plata (Argentina).” Polis. Revista Latinoamericana, Article 50.

27.

Hearn

Nordberg

Andersson

Balkmar

Gottzén

Klinth

Pringle

Sandberg

. 2012. “Hegemonic Masculinity and Beyond: 40 Years of Research in Sweden.” Men and Masculinities 15, no. 1: 31–55.

28.

Hong

Coogle

C. L.

. 2016. “Spousal Caregiving for Partners with Dementia: A Deductive Literature Review Testing Calasanti’s Gendered View of Care Work.” Journal of Applied Gerontology 35, no. 7: 759–787.

29.

Howard

1998. “The Experience of Fathers of Adult Children with Schizophrenia.” Issues in Mental Health Nursing 19, no. 4: 399–413.

30.

Huber

Lamas

. 2017. Deconstruyendo el Rombo: Consideraciones Sobre la Nueva Clase Media en el Perú. Lima: IEP Instituto de Estudios Peruanos.

31.

INEI . 2018. Mapa de Pobreza Monetaria Provincial y Distrital 2018. Lima: Instituto Nacional de Estadistica e Informatica.

32.

Jackson

A. J.

2021. Worlds of Care: The Emotional Lives of Fathers Caring for Children with Disabilities. Oakland, California: University of California Press.

33.

Johansson

Klinth

. 2008. “Caring Fathers: The Ideology of Gender Equality and Masculine Positions.” Men and Masculinities 11, no. 1: 42–62.

34.

Lee

J. Y.

Lee

S. J.

. 2018. “Caring is Masculine: Stay-At-Home Fathers and Masculine Identity.” Psychology of Men and Masculinity 19, no. 1: 47–58.

35.

Machin

A. J.

2015. “Mind the Gap: The Expectation and Reality of Involved Fatherhood.” Fathering: A Journal of Theory, Research, and Practice About Men As Fathers 13: 36–59.

36.

Martínez Salgado

Rojas

O. L.

. 2016. “Una Nueva Mirada a la Participación Masculina en el Trabajo Doméstico y el Cuidado de los Hijos en México.” Estudios Demográficos y Urbanos 31, no. 3: 635–662.

37.

Matos Mar

1984. Desborde Popular y Crisis del Estado: El Nuevo Rostro del Perú en la Década de 1980. Lima: Instituto de Estudios Peruanos.

38.

Mitchell

Kelly-Hanku

Mek

Trumb

R. N.

Persson

Worth

Bell

. 2021. “Caring Masculinities in the Context of HIV Serodiscordant Relationships in Papua New Guinea.” Men and Masculinities, 24, no. 2: 326–344.

39.

Noddings

2013. Caring: A Relational Approach to Ethics and Moral Education. Berkeley: University of California Press.

40.

Nyström

Svensson

. 2004. “Lived Experiences of Being a Father of an Adult Child with Schizophrenia.” Issues in Mental Health Nursing 25, no. 4: 363–380.

41.

Olavarría

2001. Y todos Querían ser (Buenos) Padres: Varones de Santiago de Chile en conflicto. Santiago: FLACSO-Chile.

42.

Panter-Brick

Burgess

Eggerman

McAllister

Pruett

Leckman

J. F.

. 2014. “Practitioner Review: Engaging Fathers--Recommendations for a Game Change in Parenting Interventions Based on a Systematic Review of the Global Evidence.” Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, and Allied Disciplines 55, no. 11: 1187–1212.

43.

Patton

M. Q.

2002. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications.

44.

Plataforma de Paternidades Peru . 2016. Ser Papá en el Perú: Estado del Arte de los Estudios Sobre Paternidades en el Perú. Lima: Plataforma de Paternidades Perú.

45.

Prattes

2022. “Caring Masculinities and Race: On Racialized Workers and ‘New Fathers’.” Men and Masculinities 25, no. 5: 721–742.

46.

Ramos Padilla

M. Á.

2001. “La Paternidad y el Mundo de los Afectos.” Fem 25, no. 219, Article: 219.

47.

Ribeiro

Paúl

. 2008. “Older Male Carers and the Positive Aspects of Care.” Ageing and Society 28, no. 2: 165–183.

48.

Ribeiro

Paúl

Nogueira

. 2007. “Real Men, Real Husbands: Caregiving and Masculinities in Later Life.” Journal of Aging Studies 21, no. 4: 302–313.

49.

Rondan

2015. “¿Construyendo una Masculinidad «alternativa» desde la Escuela Peruana? Una Aproximación a la Socialización Masculina del Joven en un Colegio Limeño de Orientación Alternativa.” Debates En Sociología 41: 103–131.

50.

Saldaña Muñoz

2018. “Relaciones de Género y Arreglos Domésticos: Masculinidades Cambiantes en Concepción, Chile.” Polis. Revista Latinoamericana, Article 50.

51.

Santos

2002. La Vergüenza de los Pandilleros: Masculinidad, Emociones y Conflictos en Esquineros del Cercado de Lima. Lima: CEAPAZ.

52.

Scambor

Bergmann

Wojnicka

Belghiti-Mahut

Hearn

Holter

Ø. G.

Gärtner

Hrženjak

Scambor

White

. 2014. “Men and Gender Equality: European Insights.” Men and Masculinities 1, no. 5: 552–577.

53.

Scavino Solari

Batthyány

. 2019. “Caminos Hacia la Corresponsabilidad: Los Varones en el Cuidado Infantil en Uruguay.” Cadernos Pagu 56: e195621.

54.

Scheibling

2020. “‘Real Heroes Care[‘: How Dad Bloggers Are Reconstructing Fatherhood and Masculinities." Men and Masculinities 23, no. 1: 3–19.

55.

Schilling

R. F.

Schinke

S. P.

Kirkham

M. A.

. 1985. “Coping with a Handicapped Child: Differences Between Mothers and Fathers.” Social Science and Medicine 21, no. 8: 857–863.

56.

Stevens

2015. “Understanding Discursive Barriers to Involved Fatherhood: The Case of Australian Stay-At-Home Fathers.” Journal of Family Studies 21, no. 1: 22–37.

57.

Strauss

Corbin

. 1998. Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.

58.

Telleria Huaylla

2011. Masculinidades (Hilvanando). La Paz: Solidaridad Internacional Bolivia.

59.

Urbina Barrera

2016. “Paternidades, Crianza y Cuidado Infantil en los Discursos de Jóvenes Carones en Ciudad Juárez, Chihuahua.” Nóesis. Revista De Ciencias Sociales 25, no. 50–1: 119–142.

60.

Villa

2015. “Cuerpo, Masculinidad y Estilo En Jóvenes de Sectores Altos de Lima.” Debates En Sociología 40: 61–91. https://doi.org/10.18800/debatesensociologia.201501.003

61.

Villa-Palomino

2022. “Masculinidades Peruanas: Una Revisión.” Anthropologica 40, no. 49: 211–235. https://doi.org/10.18800/anthropologica.202202.010

62.

Viveros Vigoya

2002. De quebradores y Cumplidores: Sobre Hombres, Masculinidades y Relaciones de Género en Colombia. Profamilia Colombia: Universidad Nacional de Colombia.

63.

Wetherell

Edley

. 1999. “Negotiating Hegemonic Masculinity: Imaginary Positions and Psycho-Discursive Practices.” Feminism and Psychology 9, no. 3: 335–356.

64.

Wiens

S. E.

Daniluk

J. C.

. 2009. “Love, Loss, and Learning: The Experiences of Fathers Who Have Children Diagnosed with Schizophrenia.” Journal of Counseling and Development 87, no. 3: 339–348.

65.

Wintersteen

R. T.

Rasmussen

K. L.

. 1997. “Fathers of Persons with Mental Illness: A Preliminary Study of Coping Capacity and Service Needs.” Community Mental Health Journal 33, no. 5: 401–413.