4 ms·
My comment didn't feature an interpretation, it was directly quoting the BLM site... but now I will offer an interpretation based on your comment: I'm not in f
by FFRefresh 4y ago
My comment didn't feature an interpretation, it was directly quoting the BLM site... but now I will offer an interpretation based on your comment:
I'm not in favor of requiring hiking or certain family structures either. Serious question, is there a requirement for the nuclear family?
Let us not conflate norms and legal requirements. Where I live, there is most certainly a norm around hiking being a really positive thing that you should do, and it's associated with being higher status (local fashion trends even favor looking like you are a hiker). Not everyone is a hiker, and some people don't like hiking. But I'm okay with the norm existing, but would never support a requirement for it.
- atq2119 4y ago> Serious question, is there a requirement for the nuclear family? The answer depends on where you are. It's nowhere as strict as "if you have a child outside a nuclear family, you go to jail". But there may be all sorts of softer pressures in place. Now, I don't think having such pressures is necessarily bad in all places. It becomes bad when it's a "one solution fits all" approach, and the pressure is applied even in situations where dissolving a traditional nuclear family would be in the participants' (especially the children's) best interests. Putting myself in the shoes of black folks, I can certainly see how certain conservative initiatives cross that line.