nuclear family¶

They care because of the centrality of the bourgeois family form in the hegemonic culture -- the patriarchal, heterosexual, cisgender, monogamous, "nuclear family" -- which they have, regardless of any stated "progressive values," deeply internalized as natural. https://t.co/pNKTtsYu6f The social cohorts ostracized by that hegemony in general are "coincidentally" the ones least likely to align with that model. Single parents, "situationships," multigenerational homes, intentional childlessness, "found family," polyamory, and more are all treated with disdain. These "organic" family forms appear most commonly among poor, nationally oppressed, and queer populations, by very large margins. Cultural disdain for these groups and their family models are inextricably linked. Social ostracism and economic repression, mutually reinforcing. These are the families of the "dregs," therefore it is improper, beneath the "decent folk." And since it is improper, the people who do it are "rightfully" resigned to the dregs. This line of thinking goes around and around in that way to continue to reify the "nuclear family." None of this is to say that polyamory itself is an oppressed status; just like with every divergence from hegemonic norms (e.g. queerness, abortion, divorce, etc.), it has always been easier to get away with "deviance" if you're already in the upper class. But it's inescapable that the ways the most oppressed populations live their lives are simultaneously less defined by and less tolerated by hegemonic culture. The lowest tiers of the social hierarchy have the most diverse, organic expressions of lifestyle -- and are hated for it.