From Juba, but low in the thread:
Perhaps this is not for me to say, but evolving definitions of "man" and "father" seem, to my mind, deeply consistent with the goals of feminism. My own relationship with Kenyatta has been an ongoing study in learning to understand the value of "women's work" and why it's a bad idea to, even subconsciously, process it that way. I'm talking about basic things--like picking up your socks. On our kitchen cabinets, right now, there's a sign that says "CLOSE THE DOOR!!!" which I put there because my male-privileged ass (and Samori's male-privileged ass) always leave them open. We take it for granted that someone will close them. Guess who that would be?
trying to get at is some sort of cultural shift in our discussion of
men, and their family duties, which mirrors the shift we're pushing for
in the roles of women. One can hew to the very traditional view that
fathers, and in their absence male role-models, and mothers, and in
their absence female role-models, are essential to the business of
making young men and young women. But at the same time take the more
radical step of interrogating what we mean when we say "father." And
all of that can be done with the understanding the young men and women
are being made in all sorts of circumstances these days. An effort to
reduce absentee fatherhood, isn't the same as an effort to condemn
families which, for whatever reason, lack fathers.
It's likely that people are already doing this. I guess I should read about something else besides Reconstruction and the Civil War.
We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to firstname.lastname@example.org.