Pristinegirl
Well-known member
- MBTI
- ANFP
Hahah goood one! It's needed.
IT'S A GOOD DAY TO BE ALIVE PEOPLE
SPREAD LOVE <3<3<3<3
IT'S A GOOD DAY TO BE ALIVE PEOPLE
SPREAD LOVE <3<3<3<3
Lol, it's times like these where I wonder how many people would be willing to argue with a large group of gay people protesting on the streets or how many people would be willing to argue with God or something both excaiming that they are right. I should right a short story about this...there is too much negative enery in this forum. It won't go anywhere in my opinion because everyone thinks their right exept me, I know I am right *smiles confidently* *uses feng shui to change forums energy* *puts dancing monkey there* There
I cited the most objective census type info I could find on anything close to the subject, and offered ideas about looking up how adopted kids do in general. There really is no need to say that I or others are making errors here.
That is sort of why I ducked out of this debate... I won't be able to get my point across, and I don't want to make anyone annoyed with me. I am very passionate about this because, well, it directly effects me. Another reason I don't like to debate, it seldom goes anywhere.
I can understand where you're coming from, but I don't think it was the wisest choice to reference that data. We all know that there can be negative effects of single parenting. I don't think the data supports at all, not even in the slightest, the cons of a homosexual couple (or single gender) raising a child. I realize it was all you could find, but it is irrelevant to the topic. ...
from my experience, anything dealing with gay rights has personal investments from all homosexuals. We feel the injustice of having our rights taken away, even if we don't plan on using those right. I will fight tooth and nail to get gay marriage rights, even though (as for right now), I don't think I'll ever actually seek to get a marriage in the legal sense. It the idea that we don't deserve the right that hurts us.Exactly how does it directly affect you? Are you considering adopting a child?
from my experience, anything dealing with gay rights has personal investments from all homosexuals. We feel the injustice of having our rights taken away, even if we don't plan on using those right. I will fight tooth and nail to get gay marriage rights, even though (as for right now), I don't think I'll ever actually seek to get a marriage in the legal sense. It the idea that we don't deserve the right that hurts us.
don't feel guilty. I know your not being hateful, you're just making some assertions I disagree with.Awww I'm sorry, this makes me feel really guilty :/ I do think you should be able to marry, you have the right to love and have a ceremony for it just as much as anyone else!
The data perhaps shows that people who do not know how to be balanced in their own lives and with each other are not likely to have children that are. I never said it is a con about homosexual couples as I found (as I said) no objective data either way.
So does these point make me ignorant and quick to draw conclusions?
I don't think so and if so, please clarify for I am 'too stubbern' to see it for myself. I think that I am merely reasoning around information that is provided by everyone here and there like a puzzle sort of, on what seems likely and not.
100% for it.
Marriage for me is about two individuals making an emotional, spiritual and physical commitment to one another, sexuality makes no difference in this commitment. I believe a gay marriages should have the same legal rights as I would.
The most important factor with adoption is the parents abilities to raise a responsible child, their sexuality doesn't make them incapable of this so why should they be excluded. Often these children grow up more open minded and accepting of others.
You used the statistics about single parent homes, to make the argument that a home lacking a male figure causes detriment to children. Then you used that information to insinuate that a lesbian couple's home, which lacks a male figure, would have all the same detriment as a single parent's home to the children. Is that wrong?
That was a misuse of statistics, because...
1. You ignored every other variable in single parent homes, such as living with a single income. In fact, most of the people who are living in poverty in this country are single mothers. Poverty might have a little more to do with maladjustment in children raised in single parent homes than not having a male figure around.
2. You drew the comparison between single parent homes and homosexual couples raising children. That means you chose to ignore the variable of the number of parents. Two people can generally do a far better job of looking after a child than one can.
Do you honestly believe that not having a male figure around outweighs the income and number of the parents? Because that is precisely what you were stating when you used those statistics.
No when I was using those statistics all I ever implied was the fact that the children had no father! Of course the other variables will affect, like only one income, one parent etc. HENCE, the fact that a father is not around is another variable that will be affected. A human cannot handle to many variables, calm down. We are essentially talking fractals so we have to draw disctintions. I never said that the income and number of parents dont mean a thing because they do. All I did was NOTICE the non-father variabe in both contexts. Hope I described myself clearer than before.
Perfectly clear. Now I can address the "father not being around" issue directly since it is something you "noticed".
I presented this study...
http://www.ru.edu/faculty/rboughner/courses/Alternative%20activities/Children%20of%20gays.pdf
Which argues with 20 years of research of same sex couples that the "father not being around" issue does not have a detrimental effect on the adjustment of children, since the children of same sex couples are just as well adjusted as the children of heterosexual couples. All the other variables that I mentioned (income, number of parents, etc.) are likely what caused the detriment to the children of single parents in mayflow's statistics. That is called isolating a variable. We are not talking about "fractals", I'm simply stating that the "father not being around" issue is completely irrelevant as far as the statistical data demonstrates.
Perfectly clear. Now I can address the "father not being around" issue directly since it is something you "noticed".
I presented this study...
http://www.ru.edu/faculty/rboughner/courses/Alternative%20activities/Children%20of%20gays.pdf
Which argues with 20 years of research of same sex couples that the "father not being around" issue does not have a detrimental effect on the adjustment of children, since the children of same sex couples are just as well adjusted as the children of heterosexual couples. All the other variables that I mentioned (income, number of parents, etc.) are likely what caused the detriment to the children of single parents in mayflow's statistics. That is called isolating a variable. We are not talking about "fractals", I'm simply stating that the "father not being around" issue is completely irrelevant as far as the statistical data demonstrates.
explain to me why a heteroparent-raised-child who was raised in a fairly wealthy environment with many stimulating supporters, HAVE psychological problems when a father has not been around?!?!
None of the DSM diagnoses have a connection to "lack of father involvement". Please, provide just one DSM diagnoses where one of the criteria is "lack of father involvement".You see LIKE half of the DSM diagnoses have a connection to lack of father involment, or missbehaviours from father etc.
Where did you get that information? Where are your statistics on heteroparent raised children who are also raised in wealthy environments? Or are you just pulling things out of the air now? There has not been any statistics presented in this entire thread of what you are arguing. In fact, it could be just as possible that heterparent raised children in wealthy environments suffer no psychological problems as a result of not having a male figure around. Please provide the statistics to support your assertion.
None of the DSM diagnoses have a connection to "lack of father involvement". Please, provide just one DSM diagnoses where one of the criteria is "lack of father involvement".
Father involvement at age 7 protected against psychological maladjustment in adolescents from non-intact families, and father involvement at age 16 protected against adult psychological distress in women.
In all theories related to sex-role adjustment, the father is a particularly powerful influence on the son's masculine orientation. A girl's heterosexual relationships are strongly aligned with the kind of fathering that she experiences. The emotional, cognitive and social development of children are reported to be adversely affected by fathers' absence. Clearly, fathers' contributions are not as peripheral and indirect as was formerly believed. Strengthening fathers' preparation for their responsibility is urgent. Both the creative act of human life and the healthy nurturance of children require a mother and a father.
i have no verifiable numerical statistics (thanks for making me feel like a failure I guess that was your aim now wasnt it?)
Perhaps your personal experience has a great influence in your perception that children need to be placed in homes of heterosexual parents even when the studies indicate otherwise. It is your privilege as an NFP to hold subjective value judgments. Also, without seeing the journal I can't determine how valid it is. For all I know, it was written by a Christian organization bent on arguing the gender roles that were dictated by Paul.I have read studies carried out on this where the fatherless subjects did have problems relating to male situations. One example would be 'Sex roles' which is a journal of research on such matter. Also as both me and my best friend are raised by our single parent mothers, I dare propose that it does have an impact. In the case of females they gain their sense of self and beauty and is validated by her fatger. Often it is to see that men will fulfill a dad's role in interpersonal relationships. And in those cases where a father has been present but dissapeared - relationships are chosen to mirror that bond of their father to recapture the bond of a father. Like for example men fulfilling a dad's role.
Qualitative studies have value, just not in drawing generalizations or determining causation. In order to do those things, you have to rely on quantitative data. Intuition has nothing to do with either. When interpreting data, I have to rely on Ti.You are dissknowledging the observational sides of what can be empirical as well, you rely your belief in only numbers. Hence, trust your intuition some more perhaps?
Just take malignant narcissism or histrionic personality dissorder. Excellent example of the outcome when a fathers involvement is to low or malignant.
I could also find a link on the positive sides of a fathers engagement:
http://blogs.psychologytoday.com/bl...father-involvement-means-better-outcomes-kids[