Would you bang?
![[Image: 120607_DX_SAME_SEX_COUPLE_CHILD.jpg.CROP...-large.jpg]](http://www.slate.com/content/dam/slate/articles/double_x/doublex/2012/06/120607_DX_SAME_SEX_COUPLE_CHILD.jpg.CROP.rectangle3-large.jpg)
As you may recall, Mark Regernus released a study about so-called “New Family Structures” over the summer. He published the study through the University of Texas, and penned an article for the DoubleX blog over at Slate – any surprise that gay male parenting falls under women’s interests? He claims to be neutral about gay parenting in general – which is good for complex statistical analyses. Of course, who is going to dedicate a life to sociological study with no preconceived notions about your research?
Mark Regnerus
![[Image: Mark-Regnerus.jpg]](http://vhost1.cns.utexas.edu/he.utexas.edu/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Mark-Regnerus.jpg)
As per usual, he has gained serious support from the anti-gay marriage lobby. Predictably, pro-gay parenting blogs, supporters and researchers have piled on. His fellow “neutral” researchers – you know, just driven by the facts – can have their collective response summed up in the words of David Sherkat – “bullshit.”
However, the contentious approach made by Regnerus, which has been vociferously attacked, is that he surveyed the children of the same-sex parents – most importantly, he used the child’s perception of their parent’s sexuality as the yardstick of defining gay, bisexual and heterosexual orientation on the part of the parent. While this seems to be unusual approach to defining what gay relationships are, the reaction to it is revealing. I get the strong sense pro-gay researchers want to frame the success of gay parenting through the opinions of the gay parents themselves and applying objective success criteria – i.e. did well in college, get married, etc. – to the lives of the gay parented.
The research is incredibly political, and as such, it is tough to get a real view on what that hard data is. Obviously, anybody on the Left, who wants to have a reputation, must cosign gay marriage. Right-wing responses are uniform on one issue – that gay parenting is not good for a child. Let’s review a couple points I noticed in pro-gay parenting studies I read (I would link to some here, but they explicitly state that the studies cannot but quoted or cited without approval of the author – not bringing that sort of attention to the forum).
![[Image: images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSb7dTgGV1v7v7t6skrc7j...-5DF9PeN6z]](https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSb7dTgGV1v7v7t6skrc7jpQzXvdjABCRbH_k3mr6-5DF9PeN6z)
First, which is tiresomely predictable, is the repetitive homage to “gender” and a lack of acknowledgment of sex differences. Researchers tend to treat sex differences as cursory and marginal. Studies sometimes explicitly said that they assumed outcomes for same-sex and different-sex couples to be the similar, or the same. They framed it through the idea that similarly situated heterosexuals and homosexuals will have predictably similar union histories and union stability. For example, the idea the gay male was born into a liberal, rich family will have similar experiences with a straight male born into a liberal, rich family. I have no doubt that, odds are, a person born into a stable family – which are more likely to have wealth, would produce people more likely to have stable relationships. However, did you catch that? The gay male having similar relationship histories to straight males?
Simply put, that’s rich you are talking about relationship histories. I know many men that have an uphill battle just fucking fatties, yet, some have had relationships with decent looking girls. We all know what is happening here. It would not surprise me that gay male relationships track straight male relationships on some level. Neither are naturally serially monogamous (although some are), however, gay males are far more likely to cheat, as close to 2% of gay male relationships are strictly monogamous. One study reported that 28% of gay males report over 1,000 different sexual partners in a lifetime. Simply put, even when gay men are “dating,” they are still fucking other men. Why do think disclosure of AIDS or STD’s is critically important to a gay relationship – there is a huge risk of getting diseased from your own boyfriend. Straight men don’t have this option – there is option is boyfriending a woman because he couldn’t pull her at the bar. While most men would prefer a harem – most never get that mastery of game. Even if they get that, they usually don’t pretend that on the women is her girlfriend – more like main bitch.
The next point is that their relationships tend to be shorter than heterosexual marriages. While there are some usual exhortations about gay oppression, let’s get back to the point. Alphas and women drive the sexual marketplace for heterosexual men and there is a desire for monogamy on the part of women, especially when women hit the wall. I didn’t find a study that talked about the 20’s for women, and then the post-wall period for women; however, as the studies emphasize the “common knowledge” that marrying later is better, then it is no wonder that the marriages last longer – often times 20 years longer. Hmm, a woman with no options seems to wait around 18 years to get divorced – if they do, of course. No serious sexual options, all the while the lifespan of the relationship tracking the age of majority for a child? This isn’t to say straight, post-wall marriages are stable – many do end in divorce (isn’t it 33%?) and that isn’t even scratching the surface of the psychology of these relationships. That’s like half the blogs in the married man’s part of the manosphere.
Let’s bring it full circle to gay males. First, one must consider the biology of male sexuality, bringing in female sexuality to heterosexual males. Then, consider male-on-male sexuality, coupled with the twin issues of socialization into the gay male community and the fact that gay male brains have likely been exposed to more estrogen than the typical heterosexual male. Until then, one cannot get a full picture of the sexual landscape. However, let’s quickly move through one more point before bringing in lesbians – as the parent of a male.
![[Image: male%2Bprivilge.jpg]](https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-UNINLa2qVdM/T2OMezzpCYI/AAAAAAAABF4/TkESyxtT2oc/s1600/male%2Bprivilge.jpg)
Secondly, what also stuck out in the pro-gay studies is their reliance on feminism. It wasn’t even questioned that men had more options than women in life. A common theme was that poor lesbians were forced into relationships because of poverty, and the need to pool resources. I thought poor lesbians dated poor lesbians; rich ones dated other rich ones. Anytime time I see a lesbian lawyer, doctor or whatever in the public sphere, I google her counterpart (there is almost always one – serial monogamy, ya’ll!). Usually a fellow equal – a psychologist, a banker or just family wealth (gotta love dykes born into wealth – maybe evolutionary psychology as an answer?). Regardless, it was more the same male privilege BS – although rarely called as such. I won’t go more into this point, because there is one far more important.
![[Image: Robert-Oscar-Lopez--thumb-250x245-27152.jpg]](http://www.bilerico.com/assets_c/2012/08/Robert-Oscar-Lopez--thumb-250x245-27152.jpg)
Robert Oscar Lopez dropped a bomb in early August 2012, on the heels of the Regnerus study, that relayed his experiences with lesbian moms – here is the link: http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2012/08/6065/
First off, let me that his article is one you should read at least twice. He makes some very good points, and many salient ones. He lost me a bit towards the end when he talked of discrimination against bisexuals and discriminations against women in the workplace, but he got me back a bit towards the end. Let’s step through a few things that jumped out at me.
One thing overlooked by gays raised by straights – the vast majority of gays – is their ability to play gender politics. They can pretend men and the women are the same, all the while gaining the benefit of having both male and female role models – or not, if raised by a single parent. However, at least with the specter of the other sex at home, they have to admit the existence of the opposite sex. Imagine being born to two lesbians or surrogacy by two gay dudes. What if your mom divorced your dad, and you find yourself at the tender age of six, with a new mom?
Simply put, gays get to see and emulate both men and women; a gay man may try to emulate his mother for a time - he may try to pretend to be masculine. Either way, they don't understand the options they have. Imagine if some gay male baby was raised by two gay dudes – any bets on what that child ends up being like? Hell, imagine if some lesbian baby is raised by two dykes – bets are off on that one. Biology is important, but so is socialization. Most gay people take for granted their socialization by straight people – without it, it would tough to relate to the opposite sex or differing sexualities.
Had to put that in for the lulz. However, I have one final, very important point.
Any masculine options for Lopez here? This is the serious implication of gay parenting – most specifically lesbian parenting of a man. While the author identifies as bisexual, and I will respect his identification, I strongly suspect the concurrent influences his two mother’s inability to develop him as a man and his influence in college from gay men brought him to that point as a bisexual.
Regardless, this shows to me the severe deficiency of the lesbian model of raising boys to men. I don’t trust lesbians to raise girls, either gay or straight girls. I don’t either trust them to raise boys. While there was an example of that dude in Iowa, Zach Wahls, who talked glowingly about his two moms – he wrote a book with them – he was a poster-boy for the movement because he was tall and decent looking – and by all accounts, he was happy.
![[Image: images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQdHIg_mLovovnGJt1xjD3...4dsulbDO8w]](https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQdHIg_mLovovnGJt1xjD3DWoEYiTLYkuOEfpVoaKm04dsulbDO8w)
However, when considering Lopez’ account, I can’t help but believe Lopez is being honest while Zach Wahls isn’t. There is probably much pressure on Wahls, his parents are alive and still together – Lopez’s mom’s corpse has long been cold. Also, if Wahls does say he has issues, he knows his parents will likely reject him, as will the mainstream media; Lopez is already outed as a conservative, he doesn’t have as much to lose if he questions gay parenting. Finally, what makes a person think Wahls even knows what is going on? Lopez went on one hell of a journey in his life – I felt really bad for him – and took him some serious time to come to grips with his experiences.
Let’s just get down to it – most of our parent’s leave us complexes. Some good, mostly bad. However, to pretend you can just come into the lives of two gay parents, at any point in your development, and walk away just the same as if you had heterosexual parents. To pretend that gay women and gay men are same is bullshit. Further, what complicates matters is the fact that not all gay parents (even among gender) are the same. I would strongly assume a boy raised by Camille Paglia will be far different than one raised by Valerie Solanas (author of the SCUM Manifesto) or Perez Hilton.
Which will always damn these sorts of studies. Nobody is going to get real (red-pill) and chop up some game when it comes to straights - certainly not going to happen with gays. Boys born into these sorts of situations - gay men or lesbians will always be a disadvantage, mostly especially lesbians with boys. Let me leave you with an example from my own life that might illustrate my point.
I came home from school one day, completely ashamed. I had been assigned a detention for fighting in high school. When I brought it in, my mother - a housewife - put the fear of God into me, laid into me for fighting "real men don't fight, they compromise." She told me to wait until my Dad got home.
When he got home, my Mom showed him the detention notice. My father was angry, but then turned to me and said, "Why did you get this?" I said, quietly, "Because the local autistic kid was getting beat up, and I tried to intervene." I got beat the fuck up too. The nurse told me my parents don't donate enough to the school to keep you out of this - this will affect your college record (LOL, at me getting into a top law school).
In any event, my Dad looked at my Mom and said, "A real man stands up for he believes in - he believed that autistic kid did not deserve to be beaten up. What more to need you need to know?" As usual, she blamed me, saying I should be more aware of my college future coming up, and events like this don't help.
She was right on some level, I needed to learn to compromise instead of fight. However, that was not my issue. My Dad knew I needed to assert myself myself more if I was going to survive in the world.
This is why fathers matter. Fathers, generally, play more with their children, while also teaching them to be independent. Fathers are far more likely to play games with an infant, and then encourage independent behaviors in an adolescent teen.
Fathers aren't just important, they are everything. Really, they are.
As you may recall, Mark Regernus released a study about so-called “New Family Structures” over the summer. He published the study through the University of Texas, and penned an article for the DoubleX blog over at Slate – any surprise that gay male parenting falls under women’s interests? He claims to be neutral about gay parenting in general – which is good for complex statistical analyses. Of course, who is going to dedicate a life to sociological study with no preconceived notions about your research?
Mark Regnerus
As per usual, he has gained serious support from the anti-gay marriage lobby. Predictably, pro-gay parenting blogs, supporters and researchers have piled on. His fellow “neutral” researchers – you know, just driven by the facts – can have their collective response summed up in the words of David Sherkat – “bullshit.”
However, the contentious approach made by Regnerus, which has been vociferously attacked, is that he surveyed the children of the same-sex parents – most importantly, he used the child’s perception of their parent’s sexuality as the yardstick of defining gay, bisexual and heterosexual orientation on the part of the parent. While this seems to be unusual approach to defining what gay relationships are, the reaction to it is revealing. I get the strong sense pro-gay researchers want to frame the success of gay parenting through the opinions of the gay parents themselves and applying objective success criteria – i.e. did well in college, get married, etc. – to the lives of the gay parented.
The research is incredibly political, and as such, it is tough to get a real view on what that hard data is. Obviously, anybody on the Left, who wants to have a reputation, must cosign gay marriage. Right-wing responses are uniform on one issue – that gay parenting is not good for a child. Let’s review a couple points I noticed in pro-gay parenting studies I read (I would link to some here, but they explicitly state that the studies cannot but quoted or cited without approval of the author – not bringing that sort of attention to the forum).
First, which is tiresomely predictable, is the repetitive homage to “gender” and a lack of acknowledgment of sex differences. Researchers tend to treat sex differences as cursory and marginal. Studies sometimes explicitly said that they assumed outcomes for same-sex and different-sex couples to be the similar, or the same. They framed it through the idea that similarly situated heterosexuals and homosexuals will have predictably similar union histories and union stability. For example, the idea the gay male was born into a liberal, rich family will have similar experiences with a straight male born into a liberal, rich family. I have no doubt that, odds are, a person born into a stable family – which are more likely to have wealth, would produce people more likely to have stable relationships. However, did you catch that? The gay male having similar relationship histories to straight males?
Simply put, that’s rich you are talking about relationship histories. I know many men that have an uphill battle just fucking fatties, yet, some have had relationships with decent looking girls. We all know what is happening here. It would not surprise me that gay male relationships track straight male relationships on some level. Neither are naturally serially monogamous (although some are), however, gay males are far more likely to cheat, as close to 2% of gay male relationships are strictly monogamous. One study reported that 28% of gay males report over 1,000 different sexual partners in a lifetime. Simply put, even when gay men are “dating,” they are still fucking other men. Why do think disclosure of AIDS or STD’s is critically important to a gay relationship – there is a huge risk of getting diseased from your own boyfriend. Straight men don’t have this option – there is option is boyfriending a woman because he couldn’t pull her at the bar. While most men would prefer a harem – most never get that mastery of game. Even if they get that, they usually don’t pretend that on the women is her girlfriend – more like main bitch.
The next point is that their relationships tend to be shorter than heterosexual marriages. While there are some usual exhortations about gay oppression, let’s get back to the point. Alphas and women drive the sexual marketplace for heterosexual men and there is a desire for monogamy on the part of women, especially when women hit the wall. I didn’t find a study that talked about the 20’s for women, and then the post-wall period for women; however, as the studies emphasize the “common knowledge” that marrying later is better, then it is no wonder that the marriages last longer – often times 20 years longer. Hmm, a woman with no options seems to wait around 18 years to get divorced – if they do, of course. No serious sexual options, all the while the lifespan of the relationship tracking the age of majority for a child? This isn’t to say straight, post-wall marriages are stable – many do end in divorce (isn’t it 33%?) and that isn’t even scratching the surface of the psychology of these relationships. That’s like half the blogs in the married man’s part of the manosphere.
Let’s bring it full circle to gay males. First, one must consider the biology of male sexuality, bringing in female sexuality to heterosexual males. Then, consider male-on-male sexuality, coupled with the twin issues of socialization into the gay male community and the fact that gay male brains have likely been exposed to more estrogen than the typical heterosexual male. Until then, one cannot get a full picture of the sexual landscape. However, let’s quickly move through one more point before bringing in lesbians – as the parent of a male.
Secondly, what also stuck out in the pro-gay studies is their reliance on feminism. It wasn’t even questioned that men had more options than women in life. A common theme was that poor lesbians were forced into relationships because of poverty, and the need to pool resources. I thought poor lesbians dated poor lesbians; rich ones dated other rich ones. Anytime time I see a lesbian lawyer, doctor or whatever in the public sphere, I google her counterpart (there is almost always one – serial monogamy, ya’ll!). Usually a fellow equal – a psychologist, a banker or just family wealth (gotta love dykes born into wealth – maybe evolutionary psychology as an answer?). Regardless, it was more the same male privilege BS – although rarely called as such. I won’t go more into this point, because there is one far more important.
Robert Oscar Lopez dropped a bomb in early August 2012, on the heels of the Regnerus study, that relayed his experiences with lesbian moms – here is the link: http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2012/08/6065/
First off, let me that his article is one you should read at least twice. He makes some very good points, and many salient ones. He lost me a bit towards the end when he talked of discrimination against bisexuals and discriminations against women in the workplace, but he got me back a bit towards the end. Let’s step through a few things that jumped out at me.
Quote:Quote:
I would later seem strange even in the eyes of gay and bisexual adults who had little patience for someone like me. I was just as odd to them as I was to straight people.
One thing overlooked by gays raised by straights – the vast majority of gays – is their ability to play gender politics. They can pretend men and the women are the same, all the while gaining the benefit of having both male and female role models – or not, if raised by a single parent. However, at least with the specter of the other sex at home, they have to admit the existence of the opposite sex. Imagine being born to two lesbians or surrogacy by two gay dudes. What if your mom divorced your dad, and you find yourself at the tender age of six, with a new mom?
Simply put, gays get to see and emulate both men and women; a gay man may try to emulate his mother for a time - he may try to pretend to be masculine. Either way, they don't understand the options they have. Imagine if some gay male baby was raised by two gay dudes – any bets on what that child ends up being like? Hell, imagine if some lesbian baby is raised by two dykes – bets are off on that one. Biology is important, but so is socialization. Most gay people take for granted their socialization by straight people – without it, it would tough to relate to the opposite sex or differing sexualities.
Quote:Quote:
[T]hey are corrupting the purity of a homosexual model of parenting.
Had to put that in for the lulz. However, I have one final, very important point.
Quote:Quote:
When I stepped outside of my mothers’ trailer, I was immediately tagged as an outcast because of my girlish mannerisms, funny clothes, lisp, and outlandishness. Not surprisingly, I left high school as a virgin, never having had a girlfriend, instead having gone to four proms as a wisecracking sidekick to girls who just wanted someone to chip in for a limousine.
Any masculine options for Lopez here? This is the serious implication of gay parenting – most specifically lesbian parenting of a man. While the author identifies as bisexual, and I will respect his identification, I strongly suspect the concurrent influences his two mother’s inability to develop him as a man and his influence in college from gay men brought him to that point as a bisexual.
Regardless, this shows to me the severe deficiency of the lesbian model of raising boys to men. I don’t trust lesbians to raise girls, either gay or straight girls. I don’t either trust them to raise boys. While there was an example of that dude in Iowa, Zach Wahls, who talked glowingly about his two moms – he wrote a book with them – he was a poster-boy for the movement because he was tall and decent looking – and by all accounts, he was happy.
However, when considering Lopez’ account, I can’t help but believe Lopez is being honest while Zach Wahls isn’t. There is probably much pressure on Wahls, his parents are alive and still together – Lopez’s mom’s corpse has long been cold. Also, if Wahls does say he has issues, he knows his parents will likely reject him, as will the mainstream media; Lopez is already outed as a conservative, he doesn’t have as much to lose if he questions gay parenting. Finally, what makes a person think Wahls even knows what is going on? Lopez went on one hell of a journey in his life – I felt really bad for him – and took him some serious time to come to grips with his experiences.
Let’s just get down to it – most of our parent’s leave us complexes. Some good, mostly bad. However, to pretend you can just come into the lives of two gay parents, at any point in your development, and walk away just the same as if you had heterosexual parents. To pretend that gay women and gay men are same is bullshit. Further, what complicates matters is the fact that not all gay parents (even among gender) are the same. I would strongly assume a boy raised by Camille Paglia will be far different than one raised by Valerie Solanas (author of the SCUM Manifesto) or Perez Hilton.
Which will always damn these sorts of studies. Nobody is going to get real (red-pill) and chop up some game when it comes to straights - certainly not going to happen with gays. Boys born into these sorts of situations - gay men or lesbians will always be a disadvantage, mostly especially lesbians with boys. Let me leave you with an example from my own life that might illustrate my point.
I came home from school one day, completely ashamed. I had been assigned a detention for fighting in high school. When I brought it in, my mother - a housewife - put the fear of God into me, laid into me for fighting "real men don't fight, they compromise." She told me to wait until my Dad got home.
When he got home, my Mom showed him the detention notice. My father was angry, but then turned to me and said, "Why did you get this?" I said, quietly, "Because the local autistic kid was getting beat up, and I tried to intervene." I got beat the fuck up too. The nurse told me my parents don't donate enough to the school to keep you out of this - this will affect your college record (LOL, at me getting into a top law school).
In any event, my Dad looked at my Mom and said, "A real man stands up for he believes in - he believed that autistic kid did not deserve to be beaten up. What more to need you need to know?" As usual, she blamed me, saying I should be more aware of my college future coming up, and events like this don't help.
She was right on some level, I needed to learn to compromise instead of fight. However, that was not my issue. My Dad knew I needed to assert myself myself more if I was going to survive in the world.
This is why fathers matter. Fathers, generally, play more with their children, while also teaching them to be independent. Fathers are far more likely to play games with an infant, and then encourage independent behaviors in an adolescent teen.
Fathers aren't just important, they are everything. Really, they are.
