MarketWelfare queen
Company Profile

Welfare queen

"Welfare queen" is a derogatory term used in the United States to describe individuals who are perceived to misuse or abuse the welfare system, often through fraudulent means, child endangerment, or manipulation. The media's coverage of welfare fraud began in the early 1960s and was featured in general-interest publications such as Reader's Digest. The term gained widespread recognition following media reporting in 1974 regarding the case of Linda Taylor. It was further popularized by Ronald Reagan during his 1976 presidential campaign when he frequently embellished Taylor's story in his speeches.

Origin
The idea of welfare fraud goes back to the early-1960s, when the majority of known offenders were male. The emergence of the "Welfare queen" stereotype occurred during a period of significant social change in the United States. The Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and 1960s challenged racial segregation and discrimination, leading to legal and societal changes aimed at promoting racial equality. The term was coined in 1974, either by George Bliss of the Chicago Tribune in his articles about Linda Taylor, or by Jet magazine. Neither publication credits the other in their "Welfare Queen" stories of that year. Taylor was ultimately charged with committing $8,000 in fraud () and having four aliases. She was convicted in 1977 of illegally obtaining 23 welfare checks using two aliases and was sentenced to two to six years in prison. During the same decade, Taylor was investigated for alleged kidnapping and baby trafficking, and is suspected of multiple murders, but was never charged. Accounts of her activities were used by Ronald Reagan, beginning with his 1976 presidential campaign, although he never identified her by name or race. Used to illustrate his criticisms of social programs in the United States, Reagan employed the trope of the "Welfare Queen" in order to rally support for reform of the welfare system. During his initial bid for the Republican nomination in 1976, and again in 1980, Reagan constantly made reference to the "Welfare Queen" at his campaign rallies. Some of these stories, and some that followed into the 1990s, focused on female welfare recipients engaged in behavior counter-productive to eventual financial independence such as having children out of wedlock, using AFDC money to buy drugs, or showing little desire to work. Reagan's characterization of these individuals was used to justify real-life changes to policies and play a role in the shrinking of the social safety net. These women were understood to be overwhelmingly women of color in an effort to push racialized narratives. They were also understood to be social parasites, while engaging in self damaging behavior while draining society of valuable resources. Stories about able-bodied men collecting welfare continued to dominate discourse until the 1970s, at which point women became the main focus of welfare fraud stories (despite these early appearances of the "Welfare Queen" icon). ==In political discourse==
In political discourse
Prior to former President Ronald Reagan's campaign, in the 1960s, the Moynihan Report was created. This report addressed the ways that black people experienced poverty and tried to cite a cause of the inequality in income this group faced. Moynihan's central argument of the report was that the "breakdown" of the black family was the cause of poverty among African-Americans. This argument had two key points, which were black children growing up without a father, and in matriarchal systems, was damaging which contributes to deviancy in children. The report changed the thought process surrounding welfare, specifically concerning welfare laws and policy and the "solution" to poverty. Politicians began to place blame on gender and cultural differences between black and white people rather than welfare laws. While feminists and other activists fought against the ideas birthed from this report, the belief of a fractured black family began to take hold and influence policy. The term "welfare queen" became a catchphrase during political dialogue of the 1980s and 1990s. The term came under criticism for its supposed use as a political tool and for its derogatory connotations. Criticism focused on the fact that individuals committing welfare fraud were, in reality, a very small percentage of those legitimately receiving welfare. Despite the new system's time-limits, the welfare queen legacy has endured and continues to shape public perception and policy. For example, welfare payments are intended for temporary support (a maximum of five years) and restrict welfare support through work requirements and family caps to avoid the fear of "welfare queens" and other "undeserving" recipients from taking advantage of welfare benefits or from an overly generous welfare system encouraging financial and moral irresponsibility. Despite the fact that the majority of welfare recipients are white, welfare attitudes are primarily shaped by public perceptions of black people on welfare, which perpetuates racial tropes such as the "welfare queen" and blocks access to resources that are needed by these families. During Governor Mitt Romney's 2012 campaign, he alluded to the "welfare queen" stereotype again when he attacked President Barack Obama by spreading television advertisements vilifying President Obama's leniency on the "undeserving" poor through reducing the rigor of TANF requirements to primarily appeal to a white, middle class demographic who believe in cutting government spending on welfare programs to force people in poverty out of perceived laziness and into self-reliance. ==Gender and racial stereotypes==
Gender and racial stereotypes
Political scientist Franklin Gilliam has argued that the welfare queen stereotype has roots in both race and gender: The trope of the welfare queen may be analyzed from the framework of intersectionality to better understand how race, class, gender, and other identities shape individuals' and groups' privileges and disadvantages. The media's image of poverty shifted from focusing on the plight of white Appalachian farmers and on the factory closings in the 1960s to a more racially divisive and negative image of poor blacks in urban areas. All of this, according to political scientist Martin Gilens, led to the American public dramatically overestimating the percentage of African-Americans in poverty. By 1973, in magazine pictures depicting welfare recipients, 75% featured African Americans when in fact African Americans made up 35% of welfare recipients and only 12.8% of the US population. Van Doorn states that the media repeatedly shows a relationship between lazy, black, and poor suggesting why some Americans are opposed to welfare programs. From the 1970s onward, women became the predominant face of poverty. Additionally, some believe that black single women on welfare are irresponsible in their reproductive decisions and may continue to have children to reap welfare benefits. However, as analyzed from the United States General Accounting office data, there is no greater likelihood of these occurrences with women on welfare. With primary narratives regarding poverty being driven by the myth of the meritocracy (the ideologies that are centered in self-reliance and hard work being enough to pull oneself out of poverty), the "welfare queen" trope illustrates the result of adding racial and gender dimensions to these inaccurate claims. By stereotyping single black mothers as "welfare queens," the interpersonal, structural, and institutional barriers that prevent adequate resources and opportunities for them which lead to or reinforce poverty are not addressed. The lack of accountability seen by institutions and structures within the U.S. government promotes individualistic and neoliberal ideals that put societal failures onto the individual rather than analyzing institutional barriers that might be preventing any necessary changes within the welfare system. ==Impact of the stereotype==
Impact of the stereotype
The "Welfare queen" stereotype has had profound and far-reaching consequences, particularly during the 1990s and beyond. In the 1990s, partly due to widespread belief in the "welfare queen" stereotype, twenty-two American states passed laws that banned increasing welfare payments to mothers after they had more children. The impact of the "Welfare queen" stereotype extended to welfare policies, affecting poor single mothers. These policies often failed to provide adequate access to contraceptives or abortions, limiting welfare benefits for women with children through family caps. This restricted women's reproductive autonomy and perpetuated the cycle of poverty. The stereotype's underlying belief that having children outside of marriage leads to reliance on welfare further marginalized black single mothers. Champlin argues that the current welfare system punishes poor single mothers by not providing adequate access to contraceptives or abortions, if a woman does not wish to get pregnant, or having family caps that limit welfare benefits for women with children. It seems that regardless of whether a woman chooses to have children or not, her capabilities in achieving those desires are severely restricted by the policies and attitudes of the welfare system, which places the blame of poverty on the women and reinforces the cycle of poverty. This racial trope fostered resentment against black families, portraying single-parent or non-normative households as unfairly exploiting the welfare system. As a result, policies provided inadequate resources to these families, trapping them in poverty and stigmatizing them. This reduction in the welfare safety net ran contrary to the intended goal of supporting the well-being of mothers and children. The stereotype of the welfare queen appears to run counter to these ideals: the portrayal of a single, unemployed woman with a lack of procreative and financial responsibility and an overreliance on government benefits. Roberts and others point to one of the reasons being the devaluation of maternal work, particularly surrounding black single mothers. They explain that, due to society's perception of black single mothers as "unfit" for mothering or as deviations from the ideal maternal figure in a two-parent, heteronormative family structure, the importance of black mothering is often neglected and undervalued, resulting in separating black mothers from their children in requiring them to participate in the workforce. This reflects similar themes from slavery, where enslaved mothers were often forced to be apart from their children in order to serve their enslavers' labor needs. Additionally, in requiring mothers to work, discussions about their children and their wellbeing are lost from the focus of these conversations. Instead, they are positioned as not a priority, as compared to the productivity required from their mothers, and their wellbeing is at the expense of these work requirements for their caregivers. Roberts argues that this implies that society does not place value in the children of mothers on welfare and the potential for their growth and development. Rather, these children are seen as already lost in what society deems valuable. They are not viewed as being worthwhile to be invested in and that they will likely to grow up and perpetuate the same moral "deviance" and culture of poverty as their mothers. ==Movements for welfare reform and destigmatization==
Movements for welfare reform and destigmatization
In the 1960s, black- and female-led movements for adequate welfare benefits and a resistance against negative stereotypes started to be seen throughout the United States in local and community contexts. By organizing political demonstrations, creating welfare resource guides, advocating against restrictive welfare requirements (such as a disqualification for welfare benefits if there was an adult male figure in the household), and challenging the idea of a heteronormative, two-parent family structure being the gold standard for a functional and self-reliant household, these women (who referred to themselves as mothers to highlight the value of their labor at home) aimed to provide greater autonomy and reduce stigmatization for mother welfare-recipients. Theories from sociology, psychology, communications, and folklore studies highlight how efforts to refute these stereotypes can do the opposite by introducing false information to readers even when countering it. However, using moral reframing theory, active perspective taking, anti-legends, and counternarratives, these risks can be mitigated, and more accurate depictions of poverty and welfare can replace the stereotypes. In a study that interviewed 60 middle- to high-income black mothers, many of the mothers expressed ways they tried to counter the stereotype of the welfare queen that may be placed on them by others. Further, interviews with aid recipients revealed that the stigma of welfare and the welfare queen keeps many people from seeking help when they first need it. By the time they do apply for aid, they report being so far in debt that moving out of poverty can seem impossible. This tendency, coupled with the overrepresentation of black people in media representation of people on welfare, has helped to produce the welfare queen trope. Lastly, southern states in the 1940s enforced "suitable home" laws which allowed welfare line workers to refuse to provide aid to those who infringed on sexual norms. This rule simultaneously reinforced and promoted stereotypes about black women and denied this group aid. Because of the Personal Responsibility Act of 1996, work first programs began to take over welfare. Work first programs impact black women in racialized and gendered ways. This can be attributed to conscious or unconscious bias by government employees who fall into the ideology about black women being less domestic and more ready for work programs. This results in black women being seen as less likely to succeed in education reform programs or longer-term training programs. Essentially, racialized ideas about black women being lazy, overly sexually active, or as having a drug or alcohol addiction can influence welfare line workers to force this group into work-first programs. Studies about this overrepresentation in welfare have led to more research into the ways that welfare can be reformed to better benefit black women. ==See also==
tickerdossier.comtickerdossier.substack.com