Children of Lesbian Parents Reported to do Better

uberrogo said:
its cause im right
Click to expand...

Well no. If all the parents in the world were lesbian then pretty soon there'd be no children to look after. While I think this would be a marvellous idea I'm not sure the rest of the human race disagrees with me, apparently breeding is a good thing...

Although I've noticed that single mothers tend to group together, so much that my mum has given them the collective term of "benefit" (a benefit of single mothers). Perhaps this is a natural instinct for the mother to find others of her kind as it's beneficial for the child.

This was the post I had lined up but it's not nearly humorous. So here's a video of a guy skipping a tollbooth at DFW airport:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XFgULN1BkZ4"]YouTube- Car Jumps Tollbooth At DFW Airport[/ame]
 
I'll bet that I could come up with survey parameters and standards of emotional development that could easily ensure that homeless children that have been physically and emotionally abused are proven, according to my study parameters, to be far more developed and balanced than the rest of the population.

The point is, a study doesn't actually change anything, it reports simple measureable facts. Both the selection of which facts will be measured and their evaluation is always a highly subjective activity.

I guess I am cynical about the value of statistics, especially in a quasi-scienc such as sociology, because something as simple as a slightly different nuance in a poll question can completely throw a result in a new direction.

**These comments are not about the subject of this study - lesbian couples and their children - but about the value of such studies at all, without clear reporting of the evaluation criteria**
 
Last edited:
Flavus Aquila said:
I'll bet that I could come up with survey parameters and standards of emotional development that could easily ensure that homeless children that have been physically and emotionally abused are proven, according to my study parameters, to be far more developed and balanced than the rest of the population.
Click to expand...

Probably, I remember my statistics professor was for ever bragging that he could come up with some stats. to support just about any premise.
 
Unfortunately, I am with FA. Such studies contain self selective samples and that in itself significantly mars the results. What this study tells us has nothing to do with whether or not gays make better parents than straights. However, there are some things these kind of studies tell us that are quite significant and that you don't even really need statistics to realize.

1. The sexes of the parents is nowhere near as important as the number of the parents. When comparing single parents, opposite sex couples, and same sex couples by the same standards, it is readily apparant that couples do far better than single parents at raising children regardless of whether they are opposite sex or same sex.

2. The amount of abuse, neglect, and abandonement a child faces is significnatly more important to their outcome than the sex of the parents.

3. The income and wealth of the parents is significantly more important to the outcome of a child than the sex of the parents.

4. The amount of time the parents can spend with a child is significantly more important to the outcome of a child than the sex of the parents.

5. Whether or not the child was a choice or an unplanned pregnancy has greater influence on the outcome of the child than the sex of the parents.

6. The presence of extended family has a greater influence on the outcome of a child than the sex of the parents.

7. The education and parenting ability of the parents has a greater influence on the ouctome of a child than the sex of the parents.

Given that all these factors take precedence over the sex of the parents, you have to wonder how flipping nuts someone is when they argue that the "ideal home for a child is with a man and a woman". As if an abusive and neglectful, uneducated, impoverished, and isolated heterosexual couple is more ideal for children than a loving and providing, educated, wealthy, and involved homosexual couple. Only really ignorant people can think so simplistically.
 
88chaz88 said:
So here's a video of a guy skipping a tollbooth at DFW airport:

YouTube- Car Jumps Tollbooth At DFW Airport
Click to expand...

And this was in my city. :m080: Yee-haw, and she (it was a she) claimed she was sober at the time (tho' the arrest warrant says differently): http://www.myfoxdc.com/dpp/news/off...allas-fort-worth-international-airport-060310

Anyway, I believe in two loving parents. Two equally capable parents who make sure their son or daughter is exposed to a variety of positive influences (both male and female) make for some very healthy individuals. :)
 
I definitely agree with Satya, that many other things are more important than gender of the parents. Sadly, most people are really ignorant (or is it just that I live in Arizona and am surrounded by them....?).

However I do not think that we can ignore all psychological and sociological studies, as there are many parameters to in ensure their correctness. We should thoroughly explore the study and if we cannot, then take the info with a grain of salt.

I actually read a study (a real peer-reviewed scientific article of a study with all the parameters and statistics laid out, not just an article pulling from the findings) and it said that children of lesbian couples (they, sadly, did not include gay couples, only lesbian and straight, of different places and classes) tend to have far less anxiety than children of heterosexual couples. They explained that children of straight couples feel more pressure to fit into their gender roles, and children of lesbian couples felt they had more freedom and choice. Interestingly, children of lesbian couples still fit into their gender role as they grew up: little girls loved pink, little boys loved blue, etc (because it is natural for us to match our peers to fit in, survival of the fittest and all) but as they got older they felt that they had more freedom in their life choices.

I'd have to say I think that's a great thing.

I think it is not so much that the children had two female parents, but rather (as this study states and other studies have shown) that lesbian couples tend to be very egalitarian. They share labor, whereas most straight couples tend to divide it based on gender (man works, woman cooks and does the dishes). I think it may also be a factor that lesbian couples would probably be more accepting of their children if they did stray from 'the norm', which puts less pressure on the kids.
So I guess straight couples need to learn how to share, and pull the sticks out of their asses.
 
One other thing.

People who discount pyschological and sociological studies without reviewing them are intellectually dishonest.

I've read dozens upon dozens of articles written about homosexuality, gay marriage, gay parenting, etc. as written by NARTH, the Family Research Concil, and Catholic Research organizations. I simply read the parameters by how they define things and then interpret their results based on those parameters. I don't dismiss their research simply because I don't like what they say. In fact, some of my strongest arguments have come from understanding the research of the other side and how they define things differently and it has allowed me to compose arguments that refelct the goals that we have in common. I wouldn't support same sex marriage if I didn't think it was the best thing for the family and the tradition of marriage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top