Welcome to Thunderdome

Posted: **Thu Jul 10, 2014 9:08 pm**

Maybe not as good as we've been told.

I remember the study, and I'm sure we posted it here somewhere...

Anyway, I tend to believe that the results were bullshit. Nobody is a better parent because of who they fuck. Nor are they better based on income, cleanliness, level of education, etc.

The study seemed flawed, and apparently it was...

Posted: **Fri Jul 11, 2014 10:10 am**

I can imagine them being better on average but only in the sense that adoptive parents are better on the average. Because 100% of adoptive parents made a conscious choice to have kids and studies show that they dedicate more time and effort to their children than biological parents. But only because of the low-end "oops, and I hate this kid" tail of the biological parent quality curve, which doesn't really happen with adoption. I don't see why the same would not be true of adoptive gay parents as well.

Edited By TPRJones on 1405087925

Posted: **Fri Jul 11, 2014 10:33 am**

Well, that is certainly the argument that's been making the rounds. Almost makes me feel like a bad parent because he is being raised by his biological parents.

Posted: **Fri Jul 11, 2014 10:48 am**

If you feel that way because of gay parents, you must also feel that way because of all adoptive parents. Because the studies are about adoptive parents versus biological parents, not gay versus straight. Or is it only the gay adoptive parents that threaten you so?

Look, unless you fall into the segment of parents that had an oops baby they didn't want and then hate the kid because they feel like the kid has ruined their life, then clearly this has nothing to say about you. If you feel that way you either are 1) that sort of parent and should feel bad, 2) unable to understand plain English, or 3) just saying that because you want to be snarky.

Edited By TPRJones on 1405090164

Posted: **Fri Jul 11, 2014 10:51 am**

I've seen that study as well. I never really bought into it either. For better or worse, we model the relationship between men and women that our kids learn. And the dynamics in a heterosexual marriage are very different than a gay relationship. Men and women ARE different. So I've always thought that the kids were missing half the picture being raised by a gay couple.

Posted: **Fri Jul 11, 2014 11:06 am**

And the dynamics in a heterosexual marriage are very different than a gay relationship.

This is an assumption with which I disagree. All the gay couples I've known - of both sexes - have had one person that was much more feminine than the other and one that leaned more masculine. I have little doubt that they are modeling both rolls just fine, regardless of what is dangling between their legs or not.

Posted: **Fri Jul 11, 2014 11:50 am**

The linked article clearly has one primary and one secondary intention. The primary is to serve as PR for same sex couples, to try and remove the stigma of their being parents which, in my opinions, is exaggerated. The subtle message, intended or not, is to suggest that hetero couples are the inferior choice as parents. There is no way to misinterpret that, it straight up states that gay couples generally raise better kids.

I think that's horseshit, but my response above, to them, is exactly the response they want. I said it ironically because it seemed to be easier than being angry about it.

Posted: **Fri Jul 11, 2014 11:55 am**

That study was done by people that wanted grant money.

Posted: **Fri Jul 11, 2014 12:01 pm**

Oh, yeah, the study that gay couples are better is crap, no doubt about that. I am in no way defending it.

That doesn't change the fact that studies have shown that on average adoptive parents are better but only because they aren't accidental parents. And that majority of gay parents are adoptive parents with almost none of them being accidental parents. Which two facts taken together do imply that gay parents are probably better on average. Well, as long as you posit that gay parents are even capable of being good parents at all and aren't somehow inherently incapable because they have the same genitalia.

Please note the stress on the words "on average", because that is a key essential point. The only reason there might be any truth to this at all is because the worst of the worst are chopped off the bottom of the quality curve. There is absolutely no indication of any sort that your typical good adoptive parent is in any way better or worse than your typical good biological parent. That hasn't even been hinted at in any of the articles I've read on the matter, and if you read one that did it was written by an idiot or an ass. It's only the reduction in numbers of bad ones on the adoptive side that makes the average different.

If that makes you feel bad, I don't know what to tell you. To me it seems stupid to feel bad about it. Unless you think you are one of the bad parents, of course. Then it's okay to feel bad.

Posted: **Fri Jul 11, 2014 1:02 pm**

TPRJones wrote:
And the dynamics in a heterosexual marriage are very different than a gay relationship.
This is an assumption with which I disagree. All the gay couples I've known - of both sexes - have had one person that was much more feminine than the other and one that leaned more masculine. I have little doubt that they are modeling both rolls just fine, regardless of what is dangling between their legs or not.

I know there's usually a more male dominant of the pair in a gay relationship, but that doesn't make him a woman (in the case of gay men). Two gay men can't model that you open a door for a lady within their relationship. In a gay relationship there are no gender norms.

The first relationship every man has with a woman is with his mother. That will forever influence every future relationship he has. And the opposite with women.

Don't get me wrong. I don't think gay couples shouldn't be allowed to adopt. I think being in the home of a loving gay couple is worlds better than the foster system. But I think we're going to find it isn't optimal.

Posted: **Fri Jul 11, 2014 1:03 pm**

The first relationship every man has with a woman is with his mother.

I can tell you from personal experience that this is not universally good.

This is in no way salient to this conversation, however.

More on point there isn't really any evidence yet to support either view. Not until we get more adult children of gay couples to look at. But I suspect that there will be little difference overall. Kids don't grew up in a vacuum, and there will usually be plenty of people in their lives apart from their parents as they grow up for them to study if there are any bits missing. Things like the religion and politics and philosophy and quality of the parents will likely have a far overshadowing impact on the children than their gender. All IMO, of course.

Edited By TPRJones on 1405098399

Posted: **Fri Jul 11, 2014 1:05 pm**

But I think we're going to find it isn't optimal.

Given most people I've seen raised by heteros, I'm not calling that shit optimal, either.

The first relationship every man has with a woman is with his mother.

Also a relationship that should never, ever be repeated with another woman.

Two gay men can't model that you open a door for a lady within their relationship.

Yeah, there's no way to let you know that opening doors for someone else is polite unless you're doing it for someone with a vagina.

Edited By Malcolm on 1405098394

Posted: **Fri Jul 11, 2014 2:17 pm**

TPRJones wrote:If that makes you feel bad, I don't know what to tell you. To me it seems stupid to feel bad about it. Unless you think you are one of the bad parents, of course. Then it's okay to feel bad.

There is a difference between being offended by something, and recognizing that offense was intended. I know the my kid is going to be better than anyone elses, they are wasting their breath trying to offend me. But I reserve the right to tell them to go fuck themselves, too.

Posted: **Fri Jul 11, 2014 3:19 pm**

I seriously doubt that when they were publishing that they were cackling and rubbing their hands together, gleeful about how they were sticking one to GORDON.

No, I'm kidding, I know what you mean. And I still don't think that it was their purpose to try to insult heterosexual couples in general, either. As I've said elsewhere, there's a cultural war going on around homosexual civil rights, and sometimes people who aren't the brightest and subtlest of writers are going to go too far in trying to make a point. Add that to the fact that they are reporting on idiots that can't run a decent study, and you get something like that.

Don't attribute to malice what can most easily explained by incompetence, because the latter is far more common.

Edited By TPRJones on 1405106402

Posted: **Fri Jul 11, 2014 3:29 pm**

You can't say one produces superior results without also saying the other produces inferior results.

Posted: **Fri Jul 11, 2014 4:14 pm**

GORDON wrote:You can't say one produces superior results without also saying the other produces inferior results.

Sure. But if the data is bullshit, then that claim is bullshit. I'm not chalking it up to being manipulative. Fraud in "scientific" studies has been around in every discipline forever. People want name recognition, they want fame, they want more grants. You don't get that publishing the same results everyone else does.

I will happily go out on a limb about two theories related to this:

1) Heteros tend to take for granted their ability to have children because there's usually the biological, reproductive option.

2) As TPR has pointed out, homos don't become parents without a great deal of warning or a sudden event that causes them to be a surrogate. The ones that have children probably want them. I'm unconvinced sexuality plays as significant a role in child-rearing compared to how much you want to be a parent.

Posted: **Fri Jul 11, 2014 4:44 pm**

TPRJones wrote:
The first relationship every man has with a woman is with his mother.
I can tell you from personal experience that this is not universally good.

This is in no way salient to this conversation, however.

More on point there isn't really any evidence yet to support either view. Not until we get more adult children of gay couples to look at. But I suspect that there will be little difference overall. Kids don't grew up in a vacuum, and there will usually be plenty of people in their lives apart from their parents as they grow up for them to study if there are any bits missing. Things like the religion and politics and philosophy and quality of the parents will likely have a far overshadowing impact on the children than their gender. All IMO, of course.

The first five years of a child's life is when they are impressed with things that will have a heavy influence on their entire lives. Having parental role models of both sexes I think is important. I know a lady with a daughter that's in her early 20's now. She grew up with her mom along with her mother's parents. I think having a father figure in her grandfather ended up messing her up where she was attracted to men that were very inappropriately aged. Like my age. Like me in particular.

Not sure how these things will end up impacting a child growing up with a gay couple. We likely will never know. Too politically incorrect to mention if studies show it's negative for the child in any way.

My gut tells me that it's best for a child to grow up with a mom and a dad. Not for any moral or religious reasons, but because that's the way nature has been doing things with humans from the get-go. It may be that there is no problem, or it may be there are obstacles that these kids have that others might not. My biggest concern is that you might not be allowed to have that conversation without being called names and having people screaming for your firing. And if people put a political agenda ahead of a child's wellbeing... well, they're monsters. Plain and simple.

Posted: **Fri Jul 11, 2014 4:50 pm**

The first five years of a child's life is when they are impressed with things that will have a heavy influence on their entire lives.

I'd argue that to an extent. Early childhood is a thing, and a big thing, but it's not all things.

I think having a father figure in her grandfather ended up messing her up where she was attracted to men that were very inappropriately aged.

There are a million psychological reasons why that may have occurred.

...but because that's the way nature has been doing things with humans from the get-go.

Nature's also been having us sleep and shit outdoors or in caves for the better part of humanity's existence. Nature's way is not necessarily "the best" anymore than evolution produces "the best" creatures. It's a way things have gone in the past.

It may be that there is no problem, or it may be there are obstacles that these kids have that others might not. My biggest concern is that you might not be allowed to have that conversation without being called names and having people screaming for your firing.

That's like me arguing that it's best for people not to have religious convictions because that just leads to obstacles they might not have otherwise. I don't see nature telling the bees to make offerings to the honey badger so he doesn't visit his wrath on them.

Edited By Malcolm on 1405111940

Posted: **Fri Jul 11, 2014 5:08 pm**

Malcolm wrote:
I think having a father figure in her grandfather ended up messing her up where she was attracted to men that were very inappropriately aged.

There are a million psychological reasons why that may have occurred.

That's not the only woman I've know known that this has happened with. This isn't at all uncommon. Hell, you met Davina. Same thing there. Her dad committed suicide when se was 5 or so and she consistently dated older men.

It may be that there is no problem, or it may be there are obstacles that these kids have that others might not. My biggest concern is that you might not be allowed to have that conversation without being called names and having people screaming for your firing.

That's like me arguing that it's best for people not to have religious convictions because that just leads to obstacles they might not have otherwise. I don't see nature telling the bees to make offerings to the honey badger so he doesn't visit his wrath on them.

I have no idea what you're talking about there.[/quote]

Edited By Vince on 1405113041

Posted: **Fri Jul 11, 2014 5:09 pm**

Her dad committed suicide when se was 5 or so and she consistently dated older men.

I know a girl who's got a living father (not the greatest) and another living stepfather (far better). She pulls the same shit. Women going after older men is not 100% related to not having a father figure growing up.

Edited By Malcolm on 1405113039

Welcome to Thunderdome

Gay Parents