I know it's been a long time since I rapped at ya' (as Jim Anchower would say), but there hasn't been a whole lot percolating in the Rebel Dad world. (Plus, there's been a lot percolating in the real world, and I'm still digesting the State of the Union.)

Instead, I've been catching up on my reading. I finished The Price of Motherhood by Ann Crittenden, a damn fine analysis of how it is that caregivers get shafted at every turn in the United States, first by being forced out of the workforce by policies designed in utter disregard for family life and then being economically marginalized because of the decision to serve as a full-time caregiver.

Crittenden makes to interesting points early in the book. In a footnote to the very first page, she notes that "mother," as used in the book, should be considered a gender-neutral term that applies to "anyone who is the primary caregiver to another person." That was a nice touch, I thought, even as the rest of the book is resolutely non-gender-neutral.

Seven pages later, though, she mentions off-hand that the long-time feminist argument that the best way to ensure equality is to make sure that men share in childcare has largely come up empty, and she spends the rest of the book looking at ways to better treat and compensate mothers. This is a laudable goal -- and her arguments are compelling -- but I'd like to think that the idea of men playing a bigger role in that traditionally mother-centered sphere isn't a loser. Rebel Dads are a minority, but not such a small group that our impact can safely be ignored when trying to figure out how to value caregiving.

Caregivers need more support, regardless of the sex. But caregiving needs more diversity, too. Men are part of the answer, and many of Crittenden's suggestions (making part-time work more common and more financially viable, making full-time caregiving less of an economic black hole) would have the happy effect of making caregiving easier for everyone, dad and mom.

And that's an cause I can rally behind.