I'm heterosexual and I would like to have kids some day, so back of the line for both of you.
You're not willing to "let" it happen, except when you're ready.
And the best part, nathan? You never answered my question.
what is it about his gender -- and gender only -- that would be impossible to be filled by two women?
For most people, the process of getting married revolves around making babies
Irvine, Martha, and the rest -- do you believe that there are differences between genders?
So in a society which still legally defines marriage as one man/one woman, your marriage is still valid.
Or his role in effectively raising sons, per the statistics I cited?
Or his role in modeling opposite-gender relationships for both sons and daughters?
Just off the top of my head.
Besides his role in conception? (Which is kind of the starting point for fatherhood, for most people.)
Or his role in effectively raising sons, per the statistics I cited?
Or his role in modeling opposite-gender relationships for both sons and daughters?
Just off the top of my head.
Irvine, Martha, and the rest -- do you believe that there are differences between genders?
but i see no gender difference that makes successful marriages or parenting impossible for same-sex couples, nor do i believe that gender difference confers a superior status onto a heterosexual couple. many of the practical differences in gender -- the ability to actually support a family, women as actual property -- have been done away with for decades by feminism and straight people themselves.
You keep mentioning psychology and sociology as though you know what you're talking about.
the clear misreading of both Obama (a politician)
I understand the dangers of too easily equating causation and correlation. I'm not necessarily saying that correlation proves causation either. However, one can assemble enough statistical evidence to draw certain conclusions. It's pretty clear from the statistics above, in addition to those quoted in Newsweek, in addition to those cited by President Obama, that the role of fathers cannot be underestimated. Those who do, do so in the face of reality...
So what are we going to do about what clearly presents an enormous menace to our children: STRAIGHT MEN?
I understand the dangers of too easily equating causation and correlation. I'm not necessarily saying that correlation proves causation either. However, one can assemble enough statistical evidence to draw certain conclusions. It's pretty clear from the statistics above, in addition to those quoted in Newsweek, in addition to those cited by President Obama, that the role of fathers is crucial. Those who underestimate that role, do so in the face of reality...
In a longitudinal study of 1,197 fourth-grade students, researchers observed "greater levels of aggression in boys from mother-only households than from boys in mother-father households."
Source: N. Vaden-Kierman, N. Ialongo, J. Pearson, and S. Kellam, "Household Family Structure and Children's Aggressive Behavior: A Longitudinal Study of Urban Elementary School Children," Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology 23, no. 5 (1995).
Nathan, I do not think those stats mean what you think they mean. They are comparing the effects on kids raised in a one-parent household vs those raised in a two-parent household. What we're talking about are the differences between households that both have two parents, none of whom leave their families.
Nathan, I do not think those stats mean what you think they mean.
so in many ways, all this has been quite useful. we've done a very good job in this thread of exposing that fact as a red herring -- sure, kids do better with two parents, which most often is a mother and a father, but that doesn't mean anything to the success of children with gay parents, nor does it mean that there aren't single parents doing a great job, nor does it also mean that one parent might be so destructive that his absence actually makes the family better.
of course children do better with their fathers when their fathers are invested, loving, supportive parents. no one is going to debate that two parents are more effective than one, as the Obama speech pointed out.
but this has nothing at all to do with gender essentialism. that's entirely your own concoction.
again, nathan, let's hear those specific, indispensable qualities that ONLY men have a woman could never have and that children with two mommies are going to be deprived of and become part of the statistics that you've outlined above.
The key thing that sets off alarms for me is in the title, I don't even need to read the whole study: A Longitudinal Study of Urban Elementary School Children. Just that one word tells me that there's a lot more going on for these children than just fatherlessness.
Nor does it really have anything to do with marriage equality.
they're also the most likely people to sexually abuse children, especially girls.