We've been through this argument, recently, and I'm a little disappointed that you're framing this observation as if that discussion hadn't occurred already.
The implication of your comment is that the alternative to "the nuclear family" is "single-parent families". But the other alternative to nuclear families is "extended families", which you yourself have written about on HN numerous times.
There is an important racial justice issue involving nuclear vs. extended families; to wit: high-status municipalities (and their school systems) discriminate against them, both by mandating single-family housing and by working to exclude students who reside with extended family care networks. That's a thing we're grappling with in Oak Park, where I live just outside of Chicago, right now. It's not random; it's in fact a lot more legitimate than other BLM grievances (against, for instance, capitalism writ large).
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23766155
The implication of your comment is that the alternative to "the nuclear family" is "single-parent families". But the other alternative to nuclear families is "extended families", which you yourself have written about on HN numerous times.
There is an important racial justice issue involving nuclear vs. extended families; to wit: high-status municipalities (and their school systems) discriminate against them, both by mandating single-family housing and by working to exclude students who reside with extended family care networks. That's a thing we're grappling with in Oak Park, where I live just outside of Chicago, right now. It's not random; it's in fact a lot more legitimate than other BLM grievances (against, for instance, capitalism writ large).