Today’s world, with direct reference to the Adams and Eves of our day.

TOO many domestic casualties command our attention—some are fatal, while others are disruptive—with the disruptions directed at the vulnerable: their own children and those young observers witnessing through neighbouring shades.

What experience has taught me is that the case is not closed with only the main players who are featured on the front and inner pages of the media, as the media does its job to highlight our social realities. There are always those unmentioned. Yes, I’m talking about those visitors who come to your home full of opinions and advice, always based on what they would have done or what they think you need, often for their own benefit. As they sit there eating your food, they somehow manage to stir up even more drama.

The fact is that we can’t change the world; however, we can decrease that level of conflict from its critical position. This means that we have to enhance homely discussions on logic: to formulate an interpretation of things that encompass, with a local fact-based assessment of processes that hinder. It may be errors, or it may just be inevitable circumstances that do not necessarily require opening the checkered platform of accusations, which creates the vulnerable labyrinth of the “Blame Game”, with its shades, traps, and weaknesses.

Most of us come to the table of family life moulded by fixed expectations that are difficult to meet within the realms of ready compromises, which may even be necessary to support family income forged by the changing cycles of our times and what is compatible. People come together outside, exploring most of the platforms of conflict, even those with favourable incomes cannot neutralise. For example, do not take for granted that the home is for hosting friends exclusively—or can it, if necessary, also be a centre of livelihood?

The Adams of this age and the Eves, no doubt, require an exploration of living space compatibility, addressing the areas that resonate around comfortable trust zones and considering influences and fears that cannot be easily accommodated within the context of shared perspectives. For example, I have friends who carry the burdens of stories told, rooted in the shadow realms of mistrust, casting their misty own aside.

Perhaps it may be necessary for formal education to serve as a vital stepping stone in shaping discourse on overcoming the challenges of a crucial realm of human gender relationships, as explored in the lesson of “Talking Culture.”