04-17-2010, 03:17 PM | #541 | |
Best Ex-Administrator ever
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Ireland
Posts: 60,547
|
Quote:
|
|
06-14-2010, 07:45 AM | #542 | |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: In me taters
Posts: 3,288
|
Apparently, lesbians may raise better kids than the rest of us:
Quote:
Go lezzas! Mind you, I have my concerns about the sperm donor: clearly some sort of Jacksonian elf-ancestry is involved. |
|
06-14-2010, 10:23 AM | #543 | |
Dread Mothy Lord and Halfwitted Apprentice Loremaster
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Thomas Aquinas College, Santa Paula, CA
Posts: 10,820
|
Which would seem to suggest that gay men would raise worse children . . . Oops.
EDIT: Some critiques that have been made here: Quote:
__________________
Crux fidelis, inter omnes arbor una nobilis. Nulla talem silva profert, fronde, flore, germine. Dulce lignum, dulce clavo, dulce pondus sustinens. 'With a melon?' - Eric Idle Last edited by Gwaimir Windgem : 06-14-2010 at 10:38 AM. |
|
06-14-2010, 11:50 AM | #544 |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: In me taters
Posts: 3,288
|
Valid criticisms here.
1) Sample size. Yes, a problem, although less so if you are looking for very large effects. This limitation is somewhat offset by the longitudinal nature of the study: a 17-year follow-up is pretty good, and the drop-out rate was low. 2) Self-selecting sample: also a problem, although this is pretty standard practice for this sort of research. 3) Maternal reports as data: also a potential source of bias, but also standard practice for this this sort of research, unfortunately. Objective outcomes can be difficult to establish. Note also that this is not an entirely honest critique: although the mothers filled in the questionnaires, they used a questionnaire that has been extensively validated in other studies. So there is some evidence to say that the data might be resistant to reporting or recall bias than is otherwise the case. They didn't just sit them down and ask them if their kids were good little boys and girls. 4 & 5) If indeed lesbians are better parents, then one might expect there to be a difference in these patterns as well. Maybe they provide better parenting for boys? Maybe they handle their separations better than the rest of the population (on average)? Also, if the critique 1) is made, re: sample size, then it would invalidate these criticisms. If the study isn't big enough to show a benefit for lesbian parents, then why would you expect it to be big enough to show a difference between boys and girls. 6) I suspect that this is the most likely cause of bias. Socioeconomic status is very strongly associated with childhood outcomes. 7) is bollocks. The study group is compared with a set of baseline data that has previously and repeatedly been validated for use as a baseline for this type of comparative study. If your blogger had bothered her arse to read the paper, she would have realised that. She would also have found Table 1, which contains lots of useful data about the study population and the comparison group. It would have actually her if she had, because this table makes clear that there are important demographic differences between the groups. 8) This was one of the primary objectives of the analysis: to look for the effects of stigmatisation. Given that, I find it logical that there would be detailed discussion of it. Still, makes you think, eh? Last edited by The Gaffer : 06-14-2010 at 12:13 PM. |
06-14-2010, 06:28 PM | #545 |
Cardboard Harp of Gondor Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: IM IN UR POSTZ, EDITIN' UR WURDZ
Posts: 6,433
|
Actually I would think that #4/5 are more like supporting factors/points for #1 than anything that would invalidate the first statement. If you want to criticize those statements, I'd think it would be more for redundancy than anything else .
|
06-14-2010, 09:06 PM | #546 | |
Dread Mothy Lord and Halfwitted Apprentice Loremaster
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Thomas Aquinas College, Santa Paula, CA
Posts: 10,820
|
I tend to think 1 and 2 are unfortunate, but necessary given the nature of the survey. It is a fairly narrow pool to draw from, after all.
I'm surprised to hear that 3 is par for course, as well, though. Don't they usually look at evaluations from schools, and other third parties? Of course, those can't be completely unbiased, either, but still anything's gotta be better than getting your information from the kid's mom. Re: 4 and 5, do you mean to say that, because lesbians provide good role models for boys, and prepare their children for separation, we should NOT Of course, you're right about 6, and about 7, as well. (And just for the record, not my blogger! Someone sent this to me, and I just thought I'd toss it out there; I have no idea who this person is). Regarding 8: I'll be honest, I'm not entirely due to the clumsy wording, but I thought the point was not that they talked too much about it, but that they drew causal links too quickly. Quote:
__________________
Crux fidelis, inter omnes arbor una nobilis. Nulla talem silva profert, fronde, flore, germine. Dulce lignum, dulce clavo, dulce pondus sustinens. 'With a melon?' - Eric Idle |
|
06-14-2010, 09:23 PM | #547 |
Advocatus Diaboli
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Reality
Posts: 3,767
|
I'm not surprised. In my experience with a lot of parents as my four boys go through school and life, I've found fathers to generally be the more negative role models.
More often than not though, I think it is simply that women are generally taught to care more about other people than men are, and this carries over to adulthood. Men tend to be more self-centered.
__________________
Your reality, sir, is lies and balderdash and I'm delighted to say that I have no grasp of it whatsoever. |
06-14-2010, 09:28 PM | #548 |
Dread Mothy Lord and Halfwitted Apprentice Loremaster
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Thomas Aquinas College, Santa Paula, CA
Posts: 10,820
|
It's a carry-over of patriarchy; the man is still expected to be more self-determining, and the woman more nurturing.
__________________
Crux fidelis, inter omnes arbor una nobilis. Nulla talem silva profert, fronde, flore, germine. Dulce lignum, dulce clavo, dulce pondus sustinens. 'With a melon?' - Eric Idle |
06-14-2010, 11:22 PM | #549 | |
Cardboard Harp of Gondor Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: IM IN UR POSTZ, EDITIN' UR WURDZ
Posts: 6,433
|
Quote:
I know some guys who definitely fit the description you're talking about Gwai, but I can also think of many men who I would consider to be very nurturing. |
|
06-15-2010, 01:41 AM | #550 |
Dread Mothy Lord and Halfwitted Apprentice Loremaster
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Thomas Aquinas College, Santa Paula, CA
Posts: 10,820
|
So can I. I was speaking in generalities, and every generality is untrue.
I didn't mean to suggest that there were no counter-examples, or even that there weren't a good number of them. I was just talking about a general cultural tendency to expect certain behaviour models from people. Of course, people don't always fulfill these expectations, and awareness of that fact has risen to the point that it is no longer seen as any sort of transgression. From my experience, though, the general expectation still remains, even if its not as strong as it once was.
__________________
Crux fidelis, inter omnes arbor una nobilis. Nulla talem silva profert, fronde, flore, germine. Dulce lignum, dulce clavo, dulce pondus sustinens. 'With a melon?' - Eric Idle Last edited by Gwaimir Windgem : 06-15-2010 at 01:47 AM. |
06-15-2010, 04:53 AM | #551 | ||
Elf Lord
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: In me taters
Posts: 3,288
|
Quote:
My point was that if the sample size was too small to show a benefit (or otherwise) from lesbian parenting, as this critique suggests, then it is likely also to be too small to show gender differences or "separation" differences, even if these variables are are independent from parental sexuality (an assumption for which we have no evidence anyway). So, it cannot be valid to criticise the study for both. I tend to agree that the majority of problems tend to be down to neglectful fathering. More so than mothering. Quote:
When you are talking about studying people's experiences (as they are in this study) you have to ask them! A thermometer is not going to help you. The usual approach (e.g. in measuring "quality of life") is to spend a lot of time and effort developing a questionnaire that exhibits internal and external validity. These questionnaires could then be used as an outcome measure in a range of studies. This is the type of instrument they used in this study. That said, I would also like to see correlation with objective outcomes. Food for thought. Interesting to see the focus on the parents' sex rather than their sexuality. I tend to agree with that, although I wouldn't be surprised if gay men also made good parents. Gay parents generally have to be a lot more committed at the outset, and I would have thought that factor is at play here. |
||
06-15-2010, 08:20 PM | #552 |
Hobbit
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sheffield UK
Posts: 40
|
Personally, I don't see the point in marriage period! If two people love each other (regardless of gender) then why do they need the state to approve it! I've been with a guy for over a year and plan to spend the rest of my life with him, but I'd never dream of getting married to him!
With regards to raising a child, if a couple can provide a loving family environment and nurture the kids, then who cares what gender they are! I've known many a straight couple whio should be sterilised to prevent them from procreating! I think that there's too much focus on sexuality, it should be humanity thats the focal point! I'm gay by the way!
__________________
Ash Nazg Durbatuluk, Ash Nazg Gimbatul, Ash Nazg Thrakatuluk, Ag Burzum-ishi Krimpatul. |
06-15-2010, 10:01 PM | #553 | |
Advocatus Diaboli
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Reality
Posts: 3,767
|
Quote:
Historically, government almost always left marriage alone. Then organized religion co-opted it for mostly taxation purposes, which was later taken over by government institutions as religious control declined. The whole moral/societal arguments over the control marriage are very recent in nature.
__________________
Your reality, sir, is lies and balderdash and I'm delighted to say that I have no grasp of it whatsoever. |
|
06-15-2010, 10:04 PM | #554 | |
Dread Mothy Lord and Halfwitted Apprentice Loremaster
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Thomas Aquinas College, Santa Paula, CA
Posts: 10,820
|
Quote:
I will say, however, that I am kind of dubious about trying to separate sexuality from humanity; it seems to me that the two are inextricably connected.
__________________
Crux fidelis, inter omnes arbor una nobilis. Nulla talem silva profert, fronde, flore, germine. Dulce lignum, dulce clavo, dulce pondus sustinens. 'With a melon?' - Eric Idle |
|
06-15-2010, 10:39 PM | #555 | |
Faithful Gardener
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: I walk here and there, they say...
Posts: 3,603
|
Quote:
As to the purpose of government in marriage, I tend to lean toward the side of the less government in our lives, the better. It has a God-given purpose (like everything), but that purpose is NOT to regulate every jot and tittle of our lives. For those of you who do not adhere to the Bible and its statutes, I do not see why gay marriage would be a problem. However, I am not among you, so don't tear me to pieces for being abhorred by the idea of the practice of homosexuality. Such a practice should not taint the beauty of marriage the way God created it.
__________________
In God I trust, I will not be afraid. What can man do to me? Psalm 56:11 "Starbuck, what do you hear?" "Nothin' but the rain, sir!" "Then grab your gun and bring in the cat." Make sure to check out the C.S. Lewis forum. Game threads, movie and book discussions and more! |
|
06-15-2010, 10:52 PM | #556 | |
Cardboard Harp of Gondor Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: IM IN UR POSTZ, EDITIN' UR WURDZ
Posts: 6,433
|
Quote:
I am not meaning to imply that you should not express your opinion, but if you give a strong comment don't preface it by basically saying, "go easy on me." |
|
06-15-2010, 11:11 PM | #557 |
Hobbit
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sheffield UK
Posts: 40
|
if it's in their faith then people can express their views and thats fair enough, (although a better choice of words would be prefered! ) but I think you've hit the problem head on hun. You say God created marriage, not so, people created it as a means of showing to god that they are committed to their spouse as well as to him (and don't say that the bible says god created it, cos we all know the bible was written hundreds of years after the events had taken place and is mainly a way of keeping people in check [do NOT missunderstand me, I'm not bitching at christians or the bible, if it brings you peace, then good, believe in it with all your being and more!]) I just have trouble in trusting a god that gives you free will, then punishes you for using it! Besides, pagans had handfastings long before christian marriages came along and I still don't think their a good idea. If you think it's easier to leave someone just because your not wed to them, your wrong, sorry! A piece of paper is a powerfull item, it can bind and trap a person in a relationship which they may not want to be in, if you don't have that bit of paper, you're more likely to stick at it if only to prove it to yourself!
I really don't want to sound as tho I'm slating you, I believe that you have the right to worship who you will and act as you will. And if that makes you happy, then great! I just don't get how happiness, however it's achieved, can be abhorrent! May your god's be with you, whoever they are.
__________________
Ash Nazg Durbatuluk, Ash Nazg Gimbatul, Ash Nazg Thrakatuluk, Ag Burzum-ishi Krimpatul. |
06-15-2010, 11:28 PM | #558 | |
Cardboard Harp of Gondor Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: IM IN UR POSTZ, EDITIN' UR WURDZ
Posts: 6,433
|
Quote:
Hmmm, I feel that this is a rather dubious claim. I have typically found that my friends who are against marriage tend to be so because they do not want to be tied down to one person, not because they have a desire to prove to themselves that they can stick it out without a marriage license. But I have nothing other than my personal observations to base that statement off of. |
|
06-16-2010, 04:36 AM | #559 |
the Shrike
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: San Francisco, CA <3
Posts: 10,647
|
I am against marriage & have been with the BF since '94.
__________________
"Binary solo! 0000001! 00000011! 0000001! 00000011!" ~ The Humans are Dead, Flight of the Conchords |
06-16-2010, 03:06 PM | #560 |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: In me taters
Posts: 3,288
|
It's hard to imagine a more diverse range of opinions.
I am married, and I am also divorced. I think both are great! This is my question to Midge, and/or anyone who thinks that "commitment" is an end in itself: why do you want me to be miserable for the rest of my life? |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
marriage | katya | General Messages | 384 | 01-21-2012 12:13 AM |
Homosexual marriage | Rían | General Messages | 999 | 12-06-2006 04:46 PM |
Gays, lesbians, bisexuals | Nurvingiel | General Messages | 988 | 02-06-2006 01:33 PM |
Ave Papa - we have a new Pope | MrBishop | General Messages | 133 | 09-26-2005 10:19 AM |
Women, last names and marriage... | afro-elf | General Messages | 55 | 01-09-2003 01:37 AM |