Ethical Dilemmas in Contemporary Igbo Christian Marriages: Navigating Modernity and Cultural Identities

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

So this article overall is interesting. But what the authors need to do to improve it to be more technical and scholarly is:

1) erase the first paragraph entirely and lead with the second paragraph;

2) erase the word "modernity" almost everywhere it currently exists and replace it with words that are more meaningful and precise-- for instance: "late 20th century" (as in "late 20th century coupling practices") or "individualized, commercialized marital customs" or "current" or "early 21st-century" or "post-independence" or "contemporary." The word "modernity" is an empty signifier and the reader does not know what the authors are referring to when the word "modernity" is used. If Igbo marriage customs are changing because of what the author argues is an effect of "modernity"- that idea has to be defined early on in the article. If "modernity" is really a variety of things, i.e. commercialization, individualization, atomization of the couple distinct from the lineage, professionalization of the woman, contemporary family-rearing practices, etc." then those things have to be identified and clarified in each paragraph. The whole article needs to be revised to clearly define what the author means by "modernity" and then run that specific idea through the paragraph or section. Otherwise, the article is too vague and the reader does not understand precisely what the author means. The reader is *highly* interested in this article overall and wants to know how Igbo marriage is evolving/changing in response to a variety of stimuli and stressors. But what are those? Are they coming from within the society? Outside of the society? (i.e. international influences). Are they economic pressures? Cultural pressures in response to western influences? Please identify and then revise- there are clearly multiple things *within* modernity that the author is referring to. So please differentiate and define and then run it through each paragraph and section.

Author Response

please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This is an extremely schematic and oversimplified account. The author discusses Christianity in the abstract, as if differences between different denominations are irrelevant, or without once pointing out the predominant influence of Roman Catholicism among Igbo. (He cites a novel where a woman expresses dismay that her brother wants to become a priest and never have children, something that only makes sense in a Roman Catholic context, but still leaves this unspecified.) "Modernity" is never explicated, and taken to be a monolithic category. "Tradition" and "modernity" (it is unclear where Christianity would fit here!) are simplistically contrasted in terms of communalism and individualism, a view without nuance that has been challenged for decades.

The author's understanding of gender roles in Igbo culture is equally without nuance. He must read Ifi Amadiume's book, Male Daughters, Gemale Husbands, for a much more complex understanding of Igbo gender ideology. His account of gender roles is in any case contradictory. He deplores the "modern" absence of wives from roles as cooks and child caretakers, working outside the home and relying on nannies and servants. This, at the very least, is quite class specific, but "class" is never mentioned in the context of modernity, nor does he consider the roles of women who cannot afford household help. In traditional Igbo society, he notes the importance of women in trade and crafts, suggesting that their roles were never restricted in the ways he implies.

He states (l. 77) that the study uses "qualitative case studies and descriptive analytical methods." However, he includes absolutely no concrete examples of real behavior, and only writes in abstract terms. Nor does he specify exactly where his case studies come from, as if Igbo culture and society were monolithic. 

All in all, I do not consider this paper publishable.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

please see the attached review

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Author Response

please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The author has attempted to address issues raised by the review by amending a number of passages. This is certainly an improvement, but nowhere near enough. There are still no concrete examples to illustrate major points. To specify that the research was conducted in Enugu State is not sufficient. Differences between Christian denominations are treated as incidental, whereas for marriage they may have important implications. To take one example alone, Roman Catholicism, but not all Protestant denominations, outlaws both divorce and contraception, both of which have important implications for marriage. There have been volumes written about modernity; a few short sentences is better than nothing, but far from enough, if modernity is to remain a key concept. (It can, I would suggest, be fruitfully sidestepped if particular aspects that the author considers "modern" are highlighted.) This needs reworking from top to bottom; a few changes will simply not suffice.

Author Response

please see attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 3

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This is the second revision, and each time the author has in good faith made real efforts to revise the paper in line with the critique. While I am still personally convinced that it overgeneralizes, I am willing to advise the journal to accept the article.