Real??

A statue called "A Real Birmingham Family" has been unveiled outside the city's new library.  It portrays two young women - one of them heavily pregnant - each holding a child by the hand.  It is based on a pair of real sisters, who are single mothers, and their respective sons.  The sculptor, a Turner prize-winner, says that her intention was to show that "a nuclear family is one reality but it is one of many and this work celebrates the idea that what constitutes a family should not be fixed."  I am in two minds about it - first of all let me say that it's a good piece of work - it's a good likeness of the sisters and their children, and she (the sculptor) has resisted the temptation to do something pretentious or clever-clever which so often seems to be the norm for works of art these days.  But - but, but, but...  is this in fact just a feminist statement?  Is it saying that dads don't count, don't matter? If it had been called A Birmingham Family I would have no issue with it, but A Real Birmingham Family?  I suppose the argument would be that such families do exist and therefore it is simply reflecting reality, but the word Real in the title seems to me to be implying that a family without a father is somehow more worthwhile, more commendable and that I find disturbing.