Sex Roles, VoL 6, No. 4, 1980

Women Who Farm: A Preliminary Portrait'

Jessica Pearson University of Denver

Nearly 500,000 women are engaged in farm work. Although the majority are unpaid family workers, in recent years greater proportions are in salaried and managerial positions. In-depth interviews with farming women in Baca County, Colorado, however, suggest that wage classification has negligible predictive value in explaining a woman's attitude toward farm work. Satisfactfon with doing "men's work" depends on early socialization experiences and the degree to which a woman adopts the traditional female value system. The relevance o f a masculinity-femininity dimension to distinguish women with career versus homemaking proclivities is demonstrated.

It is a rare woman who farms in America today. The number of women in agri- culture has diminished along with the overall decline in the number of farms and the total population of farm residents. About fifteen years ago, for example, slightly more than a million women farmed. They represented 4.8% of the total employed female population and 18.9% of all persons employed in farming (U.S. Department of Labor, 1975, pp. 84-87). Today, approximately 483,000 women over the age of 14 are employed in agriculture'(Garfinkle, 1975, p. 32). They represent approximately 1.4% of the total employed female population (U.S. Department of Labor, 1975, p. 84) and 15% of all persons employed in farming occupations (U.S. Department of Labor, 1975, p. 87).

FEMALE FARM EMPLOYMENT PATTERNS

Despite the prevailing pattern of decline, female agricultural employment has recently undergone an interesting change. Women appear to be moving away from traditional positions as unpaid family workers to self-employed and wage

An eaxlier version of this article was presented at the New Horizons for Women in Work and the Professions Panel of the Sociologists for Women in Society sessions at the Hotel Roosevelt in New York City, August 28, 1976.

561 0360-0025]80/0800.056150a.00/0 © 1980 Plenum Publishing Corporation

562 Pearson

and salaried agricultural positions. Thus, between 1970 and 1974, the number of female farm residents engaged in agriculture on a self-employed and managerial basis rose 42% and the number of salaried farm women increased 65% and the number of female unpaid family workers dropped by 23% (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1975, p. 11). The patterns were even more pronounced for females in agriculture who do not maintain a farm residence. In 1974 71% of these women were salaried, 17% were self-employed, and only 12% were unpaid family workers (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1975, p. 5),

Other trends are also indicative of a new role for women in agriculture. In recent years female enrollment in agricultural science programs has risen sig- nificantly. At the Kansas State University College for Agriculture, for example, female enrollment went from 112 in fall 1971 to 486 in 1975. While women comprised barely 8% of the college's total enrollment in 1971, they comprised 25% of the enrollment in 1975 (Dedmon, 1976). Nationally, the trends are parallel. Women pursuing educations in agricultural fields rose from 2.6% of all agricultural students in 1966 to 13.5% in 1974 to 25% in 1975 (Joyce & Lead- ley, 1977, p. 8).

Another development is in the organizational realm. In recent years a new rural advocacy group for women was formed that is uniquely issue oriented. Women for Agriculture, first organized in 1969 on a statewide basis in Oregon and Michigan and on a national basis in 1973, is actively involved in national lobbying and agricultural policy formulation. It appears to represent a signifi- cant departure from the auxiliary status of women in traditional farm organiza- tions such as the Farm Bureau, the Farmers Union, the National Cattlemen's Association and various other product associations (American Agri-Woman, 1976, p. 4; Moore, 1975, p. 88).

Finally, recent surveys indicate that women do indeed play a critical role in the operation of a sizable proportion of farming operations. Thus, to the question, "Does the wife of this family participate in most business decisions?" 75.8% of the 12,000 Successful Farming (1975) readers who responded did so affirmatively. And although the female respondents in an International Harvester survey rated their contribution, involvement, and responsibility outside the traditional sphere of the woman to be greater than men perceived, the role of women was ranked high by both sexes; 70% of the men and 86% of the women felt that the involvement of the farmwife in the farm had increased from what it was a generation ago, and 76% of the responding couples felt it was necessary for the farmwife to take an active role in the business side of the farm operation (International Harvester, 1975).

One can only speculate about the reasons for the new role of the agricul- tural woman. Changes in the age structure of the farm population provide one possible explanation for declines in the proportion of women who are unpaid family workers and increases in the proportion who are self-employed or salaried.

Women Who Farm 563

As a result of past high net outmigration of young farm adults of childbearing age and the extension of national birthrate decreases to farm areas, the farming population has steadily become more elderly. For example, from 1960 to 1974, the proportion of farm residents who were 55 years old and over rose from 18% to 25% (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1975, p. 3). Because men are less likely to live as long as women, it is safe to infer that the aging of the farm population is accompanied by a rise in the number of middle-aged and elderly farm widows. Lacking sons on the farm to continue farm management responsibilities (given the high net outmigration of young farm adults in the 1950s and 1960s) and reluctant to give up the farm, women are forced to assume the role of farm owners and managers. They then become classified as self-employed farm workers.

Another possible explanation has to do with changes in the economic organization of farming. As the scale of the farming enterprise and its degree of specialization have grown, so has its rationalization and formalization. Many family farms have incorporated to enjoy certain tax advantages. Farmers pay their children, both boys and girls, wages to minimize their own income taxes; and, to reduce forthcoming inheritance taxes, wives may be paid wages. Large- scale conglomerates have also moved into agricultural production and have in turn hired farm labor. More recently, giant food processing corporations and farm suppliers have incorporated farmers themselves, with the result that more farmers contract with a corporation to produce set amounts of food at certain prices (Hightower, 1975, pp. 128-156). Each of these economic modes of agricultural organization lends itself to salaried work relationships. The structure of the new farming enterprise is compatible with the remuneration of farm laborers, even family members.

Attitudinal factors may also be relevant. Since 1970 there has been a shift of population to rural and smaller urban communities. Survey research has shown that many people prefer rural or small town residence to that of the metro city (Fuguitt & Zuiches, 1973, pp. 21-41). Although heavily agricultural counties in the United States are not sharing in the growth patterns enjoyed by rural areas not dependent upon agriculture, out-migration from farming areas has lessened considerably. For example, while heavily agricultural counties lost 12,000 people between 1970 and 1973, these same counties declined 11.5% in the 1960s with a decade out-movement of 200,000 people (Beale, 1975, p. 13). Out-migration of farm females has always exceeded that of farm males (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1972). The recent attitudinal shifts in residential prefer- ence may have brought many women back to areas where agricultural employ- ment is the only employment option and/or resulted in the retention of women who would otherwise have migrated to metropolitan areas and big cities. In either case, the women are likely to be familiar with mores of the nonfarm labor market and the wage relationships that predominate in such settings.

564 Pearson

Finally, women may be propelled into the fields in salaried and managerial roles because of certain economic forces: the mechanization of agriculture and the growing shortage of skilled farm labor. Air-conditioned tractor cabs, hydraul- ics, power steering, and the like have made farm machinery as easy to handle as the family car. Agricultural mechanization has frequently obliterated the need for full-time hired hands. But busy times occur during the agricultural cycle when extra help is needed. During these peak times o f planting and harvesting, wives and daughters may be employed to great advantage in driving tractors and operating grain trucks.

Whatever the reason, there has been considerable change in woman's con- tribution to agricultural production. In early agricultural America, any "self respecting farmer . . . . felt that his women-folks must not work outside. That was men's work and too hard for women" (Atkeson, 1924, p. 127). Early twen- tieth-century chronicles of the farm woman and farm life indicate that the tra- dition against out-of-door work for women had eroded.

The farm woman is seeing that the old system often kept her at tasks far harder than those out-of-doors, without any of the benefits of fresh air, sunlight, and pleasant surroundings. She is now demanding a release from some of the indoor drudgery by machinery or cooperative effort or hired help so that at least a part of her day can be spent at outdoor work which is economically profitable. When the milk is sent to the creamery and the weekly wash to the cooperative laundry, she can take the children with her and spend the morning with her chickens or her raspberries and really enjoy herself. (Atkeson, 1924, pp. 127-128)

But the taboo against women working in the fields was still strong: "Of course if the breaking of the old American tradition should result in the women work- ing the fields regularly as the European peasant women do, it would be unfor- tunate, but the American farmer and his wife are too sensible and have too wide an opportunity at other kinds of work ever to hitch the woman to the plow" (Atkeson, 1924, p. 128).

Although researchers have long noted that farm women, in comparison to their urban counterparts, spend longer hours working in and outside the home (Blood, 1958; Crawford, 1927), that the cooperation of wives is critical to the success of the farming enterprise (Wilcox, 1932), and that farmwife aspirations are critical to the adoption of improved farm practices (Wilkening & Guerrero, 1969), her contribution has been generally treated as "integrative-supportive" rather than as a participant in production (Strauss, 1960). Rarely has attention focused on the woman's individual situation as a producer or a partner in pro- duction (Joyce & Leadley, 1977).

The third quarter of the twentieth century finds women in the fields, oper- ating farm machinery and making farm decisions. Unprecedented proportions of them are being paid for their work or farming in a self-employed capacity.

The purpose of this article is to provide an initial portrait of women who engage in farming - what they do, why they do it, how they feel about their

Women Who Farm 565

farming involvement, and whether women in different wage classifications have different attitudes towards farm work.

INFORMATION COLLECTION

Eleven interviews were conducted with women engaged in farming. A larger number of interviews was conducted with men. The research reported here is part of a larger study currently in progress on the contemporary American farmer and his or her work and lifestyle. The women referred to in this article are reputed to do farm work by their fellow county residents. They were re- peatedly recommended as examples of women farmers. No attempt was made to determine the representativeness of the women surveyed. All the interviews were conducted with residents of Baca County, Colorado. Baca County is in the southeastern corner of Colorado. Closeby, to the east lies Kansas; to the south, Oklahoma, New Mexico, and Texas. Forty years ago, Baca County was part of the Dust Bowl. Although the area has become fairly prosperous since then, it retains many of the scars from that era. It is slightly more depressed than the farming communities in the corn belt. Because of the dry, hostile farming en- vironment, Colorado farm holdings are generally larger than those found in Iowa, Illinois, Missouri, eastern Kansas, and eastern Nebraska, where rain is plentiful. Still, Baca County is representative of diversified contemporary farm- ing. It is a market center for dry farmers, who raise wheat and cattle feeds such as milo, oats, and hay, and irrigation farmers who grow corn and alfalfa. There are also beef producers, alfalfa dehydrators, and feed lot operators. In 1970, the Baca County population was 5,674. (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1970, p. 315).

The interview format was open-ended and unstructured. A tape recorder was played and the women talked about their lives and their work. The inter- views ran from one and one-half hours to more than six hours. The interviews were conducted in a variety of settings and circumstances: in living rooms while the women relaxed and in pick-ups and grain trucks while they worked.

PORTRAITS OF WOMEN IN FARMING

The interviews revealed that self-image rather than wage classification was critical in determining the attitudes of women toward farm work. As numerous studies of college and professional women have shown, female orientation to homemaking and activities typically identified as female has strong implications for the occupational preferences and occupational commitments of women (Hoyt & Kennedy, 1958). Female identification along a masculinity-femininity

dimension has been shown to distinguish women with career-oriented and home- making proclivities. Such identification also affects the fundamental definition

566 Pearson

of the appropriate female sex role. Typically, homemaking-oriented women or women employed in "female" occupations reflect characteristics and attitudes that are considered feminine in our society. Career-oriented women or women in "masculine" occupations, on the other hand, possess more masculine character- istics and have redefined their sex role to include characteristics and behavior appropriate to both sexes in our culture (Rand, 1968).

The masculinity-femininity dimension is useful to distinguish the orienta- tions and attitudes of women engaged in a heavily "masculine" occupation such as farming. Women who enjoyed farming and were committed to farming eschewed traditional female values and role expectations. Regardless of their employment status, women who enjoyed farm work shared a set of values with their male counterparts. They enjoyed the outdoors, the satisfactions of grow- ing crops, battling with the elements, contact with animals, and the indepen- dence of farm work. These are identical to the satisfactions of farming articu- lated by the men who were interviewed. Additionally, women who enjoyed farming seemed to dislike many tasks traditionally reserved for the farm female: cooking, housekeeping, gardening, canning, and sewing. They tended to be less religious than more traditionally feminine women and less exclusively involved in child rearing as a mode of expression and identity. These likes and dislikes, behaviors and attitudes, were the same for self-employed, salaried, and unpaid farm women.

Women who disliked farm work, on the other hand, displayed an opposite set of values. They exhibited extreme value similarity, despite the differences in their employment and wage classifications. They indicated dislike for having to work "like a man" and their consequent inability to maintain feminine standards of dress and grooming. They were troubled by their inability to main- tain their homes as they would like to and to engage in traditional female activi- ties and interests: gardening, churchgoing, cooking, and listening to music. They also felt less capable to do farm work and reluctant or uninterested in making farming decisions.

The following excepts illustrate some of the different reactions women who farm have to the work they perform.

Self-Employed Female Farmers

B. R. began farming six years ago when her husband became incapacitated. None of her children was willing or able to assume farm responsibilities. As a result of mismanagement and a disastrous Internal Revenue audit, the farm was plunged into critical financial condition. Faced with either losing the farm or taking control of it, B. R. chose the latter. Her decision, however, has not been a comfortable one.

Women Who Farm 567

If I had a choice, I would not farm. When you're farming like I am, you work like a man does. I leave the hourse around 6 in the morning and I get in, oh, 8:30 to 9 at night. I can't keep up my house like I'd like to have it. I love to cook but not when I'm as busy as I am. So I don't. And I don' t like wearing jeans. I liked my nice clothes. I had expensive tastes and clothes is a real thing with me. I liked good music. I'd go to Denver for a concert. And so when I began hauling fertilizer and going to the field, people said, "What in the heck's going on out there?" But when you get to a position that you have to swim or sink, I guess you'd rather swim. Circumstances make a difference.

B. R. feels unsure o f her fa rming abi l i ty a l t h o u g h she feels fa rming can be

l ea rned in the " s choo l o f h a r d k n o c k s . " Still, she agonizes over fa rming decisions.

There's a lot of farming decisions that eludes me. I have lots of problems with it yet. I've had some difficulty getting men to work for me. They want to take over and I hate buying cattle because I'm not a real good judge of cattle. I really can't tell how much they weigh. And I sometimes feel sorry for myseff that people do thus and thus, push junk off on me, because I 'm a woman and they don' t think I'd know the difference. Looking back, if I had known what would be involved, I don ' t think I would ever go ahead with it.

In the end, B. R. falls b a c k o n he r rel igion. She prays for guidance and is

conv inced t h a t i f she has fa i th , she will be p r o t e c t e d . She worr ies about~ the

fu tu re of the farm. A l t h o u g h a daugh te r has, in he r words , " t h e b ra ins for farm-

ing ," B. R. is conv inced it wou ld wreck he r daugh te r ' s marr iage: "He r h u s b a n d

i sn ' t i n t e re s t ed in do ing it h i m s e l f and I believe the m a n should l ead . "

F. K., On the o t h e r h a n d , has m a n a g e d a f a rm on he r o w n f r o m the t ime she

g r adua t ed h igh school and her dad got sick and he r m o t h e r " c o m e up and

cried on (her ) s h o u l d e r " to come h o m e and fa rm. She wears overalls and a m a n ' s

shirt . She is f iercely c o n f i d e n t o f he r abi l i ty to do a n y t h i n g t h a t any " d a m n m a n

can d o . "

My dad started me driving a team of horses before I was 5 years old and I've never been sorry. I still like to work. I don' t like to sit around. I'm no cook and I never did like the housekeeping part. I love the outdoors. It gets awful cold sometimes in the winter, but I still like it. And the freedom you have. If you work in town, you have somebody blowing down your neck all the time. But out here on the farm, I can arrange my work ahead of time so I can take one day off maybe once in a while.

No aspect o f fa rming in t imida te s F. K. She regards he r se l f as a f a rmer and

rejects any concess ions or a c c o m m o d a t i o n s t h a t are made on the basis o f sex.

A woman can do anything a man can do. Mechanic or otherwise. I like most of farming. There's a few jobs that you don' t particularly l i k e . . , picking up pipe when it's hot and relaying it again. But it 's not too bad. I've done worse things. Like digging a ditch. I take my turn right along with the men. A lot of time, you go to this store and that, the men will step back for me to be waited on in front of them and I don' t do that. I take my turn right along with the men. Other women down there, why they've stepped in front of the men. But I think every- body ought to take their turn. And I think the men appreciate it, probably.

568 Pearson

So s t rongly does F. K. i den t i fy w i th a mascul ine self-image, t h a t she would

have p re fe r red to have b e e n b o r n a man .

I haven't been in church since I got out of high school. One reason is I don ' t think I've had a dress on since I got out of high school. I never like them. Never enough pockets to put things in. Most generally these married women, when they get together, why all they talk about is their kids so I can't talk to them. It's boring. I suppose the life I lead, it would probably have been more convenient if I'd have been a man. But I've never wanted to be a man bad enough to go and get an operation.

Salaried Female Farm Laborers

J. S. has been a fa rm labore r for the past 14 years. She and he r h u s b a n d

b o t h work for the same fa rm outf i t . T h e y h i red themselves ou t a f te r the i r o w n

a t t e m p t at f a rming was unsuccessful . Af t e r th ree years o f be ing unab le to grow

a crop, t hey were forced to qui t . Needing the m o n e y and lacking o t h e r employ-

m e n t oppo r tun i t i e s , J. S. was forced to t u rn to f a rm labor .

Well, really, there's not too much to do around here but farm work. We, course, we needed the money. And, well, the way I started was with Mary. Her husband passed away. Mary and her husband had been good friends of ours for years. Her husband passed away and she thought she wanted to keep farming. She was a friend. She needed the help. We needed the money. That's the main reason.

She is dissatisf ied w i t h farm work . Were a l ternat ives available, she would

gladly qui t t he fields.

I wouldn't, if I had choices of occupations around h e r e . . , it wouldn't be this. I like to keep the books and that kind of work. I've had a little bit of training in it. Not much. But I drove a school bus for a while and I did some of that. I worked in the office at filing and typing and one thing and another, and I really liked that. But there's not any of that around here. Driving the tractor gets tire- some and boring. At first I was petrified of hauling wheat. Those truck loaders are dangerous. If you blow a tire or something like that.

It 's just that the work is so confining. It's such long hours and could be 24 hours a day, seven days a week. If we're planting or harvesting or something, why I work Sundays. I work from 7 in the morning til 8 at night in the summer. Lots of times it's 9 or later. It all depends. During harvest, well, I haven't been home before 10:00 for two weeks. And several nights midnight. But you're still back to work at 7 the next morning. I'm not that attached to the farm. I'm getting too old to do this. If it was my ground, yeah, But why should I work that hard for somebody else? It's a job, you know. I'm just a hired hand.

J. S. also regrets t h a t she c a n n o t fulfill her female role expec t a t i ons to he r

sa t is fact ion. She sees he r role in a p r imar i ly t r ad i t iona l l ight: m o t h e r , house-

keeper , and h e l p m a t e .

Women Who Farm 569

I used to go home and maybe work till midnight cleaning or baking or things. I can't do it anymore. Therefore, my house isn't as clean as I would like it. I can see dirt on my windows. And it bothers me. We were raised Christian people. Sunday school and church was a must no matter what. But I've gotten away from that now. And it bothers me. I miss church, but I think if I get Sunday off it's my one day to catch up. So I don' t go. I used to have long nails. Polished and one thing another. But long nails definitely aren't safe around this kind of work and they get torn off and dirty. And I wouldn't want long hair around this kind of work. I'm a mother. When my daughter needs me, I go in the morning to help her. Sometimes It's hard to get away, but I don' t care if they fire me. My kids come first. And if they want to get somebody else, that 's fine and dandy. Because my kids is all that's important to me. That's all I care about.

J. T., on the o t h e r h a n d , does n o t see her fa rm work as i n c o m p a t i b l e w i th

he r role as m o t h e r and wife. Dur ing he r farmgir l ch i l dhood , she w o r k e d in the

fields and p e r f o r m e d few o f the chores associa ted w i t h female social izat ion.

I didn't do a damn thing in the house growing up. I never scrubbed floors or cooked. My mother did not want me to be an ordinary, down-home type of per- son. She wanted me to be somehting different. To be a career woman. The work that I contributed growing up was working outside. I raised sheep for fairs to make money to go to college and I worked in the fields. Did tractor jobs for the neighbors. That sort of stuff.

Af te r h igh school , she lef t t he fa rm to a t t e n d college. Subsequen t ly , she

w o r k e d in a large ci ty for eight years , mar r i ed , h a d a chi ld , and d ivorced he r

h u s b a n d . At t h a t po in t , she r e t u r n e d to he r pa r en t s ' fa rm. She w o r k e d in a near-

b y t o w n and s u p p o r t e d he r chi ld un t i l she m e t he r cu r r en t h u s b a n d , a farmer .

Af te r mar ry ing , she m o v e d to his fa rm. She cu r r en t l y drives a t r a c to r for he r

h u s b a n d ; does odd jobs a r o u n d the fa rm ; and he lps vacc ina te , b r a n d , and d e h o r n cat t le .

I've clone pretty much what I've wanted to do and I fight like heck when I have something to do that I don' t want to do. In Chicago, I had this really fine job. I made a lot of money and I really enjoyed it. I sent my first husband through graduate school. There you saw a lot of women working and their husbands keep- ing house. It was different. You felt equal somehow.

The women in these small communities are so damned suppressed, it makes me sick to my stomach. They keep house, mow the lawn, wash the clothes, do all that stuff, and work out in the fields. The men go out and work on the farm and work physically hard. But the women work hard everywhere. They don' t have a great deal of respect for themselves and they fear their husbands. And the men have zero respect for their wives because their wives fear them. The women don' t fight back and they're jealous of people that do.

A l t h o u g h she considers m o t h e r h o o d p r o b a b l y the mos't "sa t i s fy ing th ing

(she has) d o n e , " he r i d e n t i t y is n o t en t i re ly c o n t a i n e d in he r role as m o t h e r and

h o u s e k e e p e r . She en joys work ing o n the fa rm, bu t she refuses to be an unpa id

fami ly laborer . Having w o r k e d and ea rned a living in her years in the ci ty , J. T.

k n o w s t h a t her l abor is salable, t h a t she "has a b ra in and skills t ha t peop le will

pay me to use . "

570 Pearson

I go out now and work quite often. They pay me for going out there, which is really important to me. Housekeeping to me is really a job. I figure I do enough on the scale of "Are you doing enough to eaxn your keep?" Going out to the farm is extra. So I should get paid for it. I feel that they'd hire someone else to do what I do and so they should pay me. It's nice. I have always earned money of my own and I don' t see why my labor is worth less because I've moved to a farm.

Unpaid Family Workers

C. M. shares every aspect o f fa rm m a n a g e m e n t and ope ra t i on w i th her

h u s b a n d . ("We jus t w o r k it t oge the r , wha teve r ' s h a p p e n i n g . " ) Her mothe r - in - l aw

keeps house and minds the ch i ldren . ( " M o r n does all t he h o u s e h o l d s tu f f cause

she 's wi th u s . " ) Her fa rming i nvo l vem en t can be t raced to her ch i ldhood . Her

a n t i p a t h y to h o u s e w o r k can also be t raced to ch i ldhood .

My father, he didn't provide too well for us when we was kids. So Mom and I done most of the farming and, course, that's where I learned. Necessity put me there. That's where I got the experience. And that's what I like to do now. The only thing I can remember doing mostly in the house was carrying in the water and the wood. Other than that, I was mostly out. My sister did a lot of house- work and, of course, that 's what she does today. She never did get out in the fields so much. She just don't like it that much. I'm not much good in the house, but I know how to farm.

T h r o u g h h a r d work and d e t e r m i n a t i o n , C. M. has ove rcome her poo r

origins. She believes in the indiv idual ' s abi l i ty to t r anscend his or he r s i tua t ion

and suppor t s the w o m e n ' s l ibe ra t ion m o v e m e n t because it has w idened hor i zons

for w o m e n .

I suppose I must feel proud of myself. I could look anybody in the eye. When you live below average, you feel a little inferior. So when you get up where you're with the average person, you feel you're just as good as anybody else. I really don't think there's anything that you can't do if you really want to. So many women, doing the cooking' and raisin' a family is the only important thing. I'm not saying they're not important, but that 's all they can think they were put on this earth for. There's kooks in every organization, but for the most part, I think women's lib is great. You can go almost anyplace now and be what you felt like you wanted to be.

P rosper i ty has no t d a m p e n e d C. M.'s e n t h u s i a s m for fa rm work . She opts

to s tay in i t because she pos i t ive ly en joys it. She expresses likes t ha t are ident ica l

to those given b y m e n w h o en joy farming:

Farming is always something different. About the time you get tired of the plow- ing, you get to plantin', and when you get tired of plantin', you get to cultivatin'. It's always something different. You put in a lot of hours, of course, but it's something you like to do or you wouldn't do it.

L. D., however , is n o t p leased to have to drive t rac to rs and haul grain

at harves t t ime. Indeed , she is glad t ha t in the last two years he r h u s b a n d f inal ly

b e c a m e 'prosperous e n o u g h to p e r m i t he r to be excused f rom fa rm work . She re-

Women Who Farm 571

calls, w i thou t affect ion, the dust and dirt o f farming. She also admits that she

was t reated "l ike a hired h a n d " when she helped her husband. Rather than being

consul ted about farming decisions, L. D. recalls that "he told (her) what to do . "

It's pretty hard to get help, and then lots of times you don't need help all year around. So us, the family, the whole gang, would gel together and get the job done. I drove a tractor and a grain truck. For years and years. I 'm retired now. (Laughs) We got rich enough that he don't have to drag me out there anymore.

No, I didn't like it. I was glad to get retired. I like it in my house. And I have a garden and a fruit orchard. This year I want to learn how to make some wine with our grapes. And I sew. They were teaching this decoupage in town last year and I went in to take classes. (Laughs) It's lots better than messing around with an old tractor. And our grandchildren come and stay with me, so I like that. I only did all that dirty work because we was so kinda hard up. Labor being so high, we had no choice. But, no, it's not something you enjoy.

Despite her years o f farm work, L. D. never became a par tner in making

farm decisions.

I just did, more or less, what he told me. But I didn't figure when to plant or what to plant. That was up to him. He's the farmer. I wasn't all that, you know . . . . Well, I was interested in how the farm done each year but not in making the decisions. Not in making the mistakes. (Laughs) I really don't know all that much about farming. I can make straight rows on a tractor, but I can't mechanic it or do other things.

DISCUSSION

With few except ions, farm society w o m e n have been all but ignored in the

writings o f social analysts. [See Kahn, 1973, for in-depth interviews wi th the

coal miners ' wives who were operatives in text i le mills and o ther industries in

the Appalachian region. For in fo rmat ion on farm wife 's decision-making role as

it affects the acceptance o f agricultural innovat ions , see Wilkening and Morrison

(1963) , Wilkening and Bharadwaj (1968) , Beers (1937) , and Sawer (1973).] In-

terest in w o m e n and their work experiences has been or iented to urban and pro-

fessional settings.

Farm society, however , is a fascinating l abora to ry for the s tudy o f sex

roles and identi t ies, one fraught wi th contradict ions . The most valued qualities

o f the front ier w o m e n were strength, toughness, and resourcefulness (Sherman,

1937, pp. 36-45). Sex was no barrier to female par t ic ipat ion in all the rigors and

hardships o f daily life.

With the mechaniza t ion of agriculture and the increase in fa rm prosperi ty ,

women ' s " p r o p e r " place became more exclusively the home . Marriage, mother-

hood , and child rearing were emphasized above all else. Reinforced by the strong

currents o f fundamental is t Christ iani ty, the message to w o m e n is that their

p roper place is in the h o m e (Smuts, 1959, p. 6).

572 Pearson

Table I. Women Employed in Agriculture by Place of Residence and Class of Worker, April 1974 and 1970 (in thousands) a

Farm residents 14 years old and over employed

in agriculture

Nonfarm residents 14 years old and over

employed in agriculture

1970 1974 1970 1974

N % N % N % N %

Self-employed 59 13.7 84 20.5 28 12.7 44 16.8 Wage and salary 46 10.5 76 18.5 153 69.5 186 71.0 Unpaid family 326 75.6 250 61.0 39 17.7 32 12.2

Total b 431 99.8 410 100.0 220 99.9 262 100.0

aSource: U.S. Bureau of the Census (1975, Table C and Table 5). bTotals do not always add up to 100% because of rounding.

Today, the roles of farm women are varied. Most do not work outside the home (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1974). Most are responsible for home main- tenance, food production, and child care. Over and over again, women report that their job is to "have three hot meals ready for him [their husband] ." The male sphere of activity is confined to economic production. Not surprisingly, farm men have been consistently more resistant to sharing in household tasks than their urban counterparts (Blood, 1958).

About 500,000 women, however, are engaged in farm work. As Table I shows, greater proportions tend to be in salaried and managerial positions than in traditional posiions as unpaid family workers. Interviews with farming women, however, suggest that wage classification has negligible predictive value in ex- plaining a woman's attitudes toward farm work. The interviews show that satis- faction with doing "men's work" depends on the degree to which a woman adopts the traditional female value system. Women who define the female role in'purely domestic terms farm because of economic necessity. Rather than share in the decision making, they tend to assume a subservient role and are directed by their husbands. Nor do these women see farming as particularly enjoyable; they express few of the satisfactions that men overwhelmingly express with re- gard to farming activities. These women complain of the rigors of farming, the physical discomforts, the difficulty it presents in maintaining their housekeep- ing standards. When such a woman assumes a decision-making role, it is by dint of necessity. Widowed, or through some other unfortunate circumstance, left to manage a farming operation, she is strong because she has to be. She s~ill believes that the proper role for women is to follow and for men to lead.

Women who like to farm - be they managers, salaried employers, or un- paid family w o r k e r s - reject at least some traditional female behavioral and attitudinal proscriptions. Most typically, they dislike housework. Many appear to have been raised in homes where they avoided traditional female socialization

Women Who Farm 573

patterns. Some worked with their fathers raising crops, rather than with their mothers. Others were sheltered from the more dreary housekeeping chores by mothers who vicariously pushed them out of the confines of kitchen work. Some of these women have also enjoyed exposure to urban society and its more equalitarian aspects. In a farm work capacity, they seek to participate in basic farm decisions. They also enjoy their work for the same reasons men do. They do not agonize over the limitations farm work imposes on their performance in more tradit ional spheres of activity: the home, the church, the school, the com- munity. And they tend to be less religious and somewhat more supportive of

female rights. In short, differences in farm work att i tudes and satisfaction levels are

linked directly to the sex-role definitions with which women most closely iden- tify. Even in the masculine occupational world of agriculture, women can be identified on along a masculinity-femininity dimension. The more satisfied fe- male farmers have defined the feminine role to accommodate behaviors neces- sary and appropriate to farming. Early socialization experiences and possible ex- posure to urban environments where sex-role expectations are more flexible seem to be critical in the generation of sex-role identities compatible with "doing men's work." Conclusive determinat ion of the background factors and socialization experiences that are compatible with the female farming experi- ence, however, await future research.

REFERENCES

American AgrhWomen, 1976, 2(1, April). Atkeson, M. M. The woman on the farm. New York: Century Company, 1924. Beale, C. L. Where are all the people going - Demographic trends. Paper presented to First

National Conference on Rural America, April 14-17 1975. Beers, H. W. A portrait of the farm family in central New York State. American Sociological

Review 2(October), 591-600. Blood, R. O., Jr. The division of labor in city and farm families. Journal o f Marriage and

Family Living, 1958, 20(May), 170-174. Crawford, I. Z. The use o f time by farm women. University of Idaho Agricultural Experi-

ment Station, Bulletin 146, 1927. Dedmon, J. Women bolster ag school enrollment. Denver Post, July 5, 1976. Fuguitt, G. V., & Zuiches, J. J. Residential preferences and population distribution: Results

of the national survey. Where will all the people go? Report of the Subcommittee on Rural Development of the Committee on Agriculture and Forestry, U.S. Senate, October 23, 1973. Pp. 21-41.

Garfinkle, S. H. Occupations of women and black workers, 1962-74. Monthly Labor Re- view, 1975, 98(11, November), 1-18.

Higbtower, J. Eat YourHeart Out. New York: Crown Publishers, 1975. Hoyt, D., & Kennedy, C. Interest and personality correlates of career-motivated and home-

making-motivated college women. Journal o f Counseling Psychology, 1958, 5, 44-49.

International Harvester. What is the role of today's farm women? International Harvester Farm Forum, 1975, 2(4).

574 Pearson

Joyce, L. M., & Leadley, S. M. An assessment of research needs o f women in the rural United States. Literature review and annotated bibliography. University Park: Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, The Pennsylvania State University, April 1977.

Kahn, K. Hillbilly Women. New York: Doubleday, 1973. Moore, T., St. Wanted: Women in agriculture. The Grower, Kansas City, August 16, 1975. Pearson, J. Research note on female farmers. Rural Sociology, 1979, 44(1). Rand, L. Masculinity or femininity? Differentiating career-oriented and homemaking-

oriented college freshman women. Journal o f Counseling Psychology, 1968, •5(5). (Reprinted in A. Theodore (Ed.), The professional woman, Cambridge, Mass. Schenk- man, 1971. Pp. 156-166.)

Sawer, B. J. Predictors of the farm wife's involvement in general management and adoption decisions. Rural Sociology, 1973, 38(4, Winter), 412-425.

Sherman, C. B. Rural fiction as interpretor of rural fife. Rural Sociology, 1937, 2(March), 36-45.

Smuts, R. W. Women and work in America. New York: Columbia University Press, 1959. Strauss, M. A. Family role differentiation and technological change in farming. Rural

Sociology, 1960, 25, 219-228. Successful Farming. What's happening to life in rural America? Des Moines, Iowa: Success-

ful Farming Planning Issues, 1975. U.S. Bureau of the Census. Colorado. General social and economic characteristics. Wash-

ington D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office, 1970. U.S. Bureau of the Census. Current population reports, Series P-27, No. 43. Farm popula-

tion of the United States: 1971. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972.

U.S. Bureau of the Census. Current population reports, Series P-27, No. 45. Farm popula- tion of the United States: 1973. Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office, 1974.

U.S. Bureau of the Census. Farm population of the United States: 1974. Current popula- tion reports, Series P-27, No. 46. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1975.

U.S. Department of Agriculture. Agricultural statistics: 1975. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1975.

U.S. Department of Labor. 1975 handbook on women workers. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1975.

Wilcox, W. W., Boss, A., & Pond, G. Relation of variations in the human factor to financial returns in farming. Minnesota Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 288, Minne- apolis, June 1932.

Wilkening, E. A., & Guerrero, S. Consensus in aspirations for farm improvement and adap- tion of farm practice. Rural Sociology, 1969, 34, 182-196.

Wilkening, E., & Bharadwaj, L. Dimensions of aspirations, work roles, and decision-making among farm husbands and wives in Wisconsin. Journal o f Marriage and the Famgy, 1967, 29(November), 703-711.

Wilkening, E., & Morrison, D. E. A comparison of husband and wife responses concerning who makes farm and home decisions. Marriage andFam~y Living, 1963, 25(August), 349-351.