Family Obligation

The Rambam (1:1) rules that a free eved is obligated in Megillah.  The inference is that an eved who is enslaved is not obligated.  The question posed by the Lechme Mishna is why is an eved not obligated is he is obligated in everything a woman is obligated in and a woman is obligated in Megillah?  

The Megillah (9:28) says וְהַיָּמִ֣ים הָ֠אֵ֠לֶּה נִזְכָּרִ֨ים וְנַעֲשִׂ֜ים בְּכׇל־דּ֣וֹר וָד֗וֹר מִשְׁפָּחָה֙ וּמִשְׁפָּחָ֔ה מְדִינָ֥ה וּמְדִינָ֖ה וְעִ֣יר וָעִ֑יר.  The obligation is formulated as an obligation on groups of families, communities and cities.  The minimal group is that of a family.  In other words, the obligation of Megillah is structured not as an obligation on the individual but as an obligation on the family.  With this idea Rav Genack (Beis Yitzchak #33) explains the Rambam holds since an eved is not part of a Jewish family, he is not obligated in the Megillah.  

The Magen Avraham (698:5) cites a Midrash that a woman should not read the Megillah for herself.  Why not?  Rav Genack cites Rav Solevetchik explained the Midrash is of the opinion that woman are not obligated to read on their own but that it is an obligation on the husband to read for their wife.  In other words, it is like the chiuv of simcha of Yom Tov which is an obligation on the husband to make his wife happy.  Therefore, the Midrash holds that a woman can't read for herself.  This is מדיוק in the words of the Yerushlami cited in Haghos Memoni (beginning of Laws of Megillah) which says the amoraim read the megillah for their families.  It says they read for them, it does not say that their is an independent obligation upon them.  It is a family obligation, not an independent obligation of the woman and children. 

The Yerushlami also evokes the din of אף הן היו באותו הנס so it is not clear to me how this would jive with saying the peshat in the Yerushalmi is because of a chiuv mishpacha?  

On the above possuk in the Megillah Rashi comments מִשְׁפָּחָה וּמִשְׁפָּחָה. מִתְאַסְּפִין יַחַד וְאוֹכְלִים וְשׁוֹתִים יָחַד. וְכַךְ קִבְּלוּ עֲלֵיהֶם שֶׁיְּמֵי הַפּוּרִים לֹא יַעַבְרוּ.  Rav Zevin in Moadim L'halacha points out that this Rashi says that past of the din of seudat Purim is to eat it together with the family, to eat together.  The Divrei Yatziv also cites additional sources for din to eat the seudah together with others.  Why the emphasis of family for the holiday of Purim?  

What is the connection between the points in Rashi that מִתְאַסְּפִין יַחַד וְאוֹכְלִים וְשׁוֹתִים יָחַד and כַךְ קִבְּלוּ עֲלֵיהֶם שֶׁיְּמֵי הַפּוּרִים לֹא יַעַבְרו?  The Rebbe explains Rashi is bothered that the end of the possuk says וִימֵ֞י הַפּוּרִ֣ים הָאֵ֗לֶּה לֹ֤א יַֽעַבְרוּ֙ מִתּ֣וֹךְ הַיְּהוּדִ֔ים וְזִכְרָ֖ם לֹא־יָס֥וּף מִזַּרְעָֽם.  What guarantees that Purim will last?  Rashi answers by gathering together ,by enjoying a feast together with the family that will ensure that Purim will last.  The Rebbe points out that when Klal Yisrael is counted in Bamidbar, it is first to be counted as part of a family and then as part of a shevet.  The continuity of Klal Yisrael is assured by being part of a family, part of a band together to stand up to opposing forces.  The holidays of pisumay nisa, Chanukah and Purim are defined by נא איש וביתו and משפחה משפחה because that is what guarantees the perpetuity of Klal Yisrael and hence of the nissim of Klal Yisrael.