{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01839464882943144, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0033444816053511705, 'mean_word_length': 4.955223880597015, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Reflecting on regendering care at different scales

This commentary on Boyer et al.’s (2017) article reflects on producing knowledge on regendering care at different geographical scales. I begin with my own story about my partner being a stay at home father as a contrast to the authors’ focus on regendering care at the scale of the nation – United Kingdom. Different things are gained and lost by focusing on different scales and yet geographers, traditionally, have tended to pay more attention to broader scales constructing them as more rigorous and scientific than intimate scales. One of the things that can be gained by focusing on the intimate scales of bodies, home and community, however, is a deeper understanding of the emotions and affects that surround caregiving. The commentary also raises two additional points: First, that there is a need for conceptual and empirical work that dislodges the simplistic alignment of women with motherhood and men with fatherhood; and second, that there is a tendency for work from outside the Anglo-American centre to be marginalized, and it would be useful to know more about regendering care from places beyond those mentioned in the article.