Kids of lesbians have fewer behavioral problems, study suggests
POSTED BY: Niki2
UPDATED: Wednesday, June 9, 2010 02:03
VIEWED: 4422
PAGE 3 of 4
Historical human grouping and behaviour really is difficult to determine, since any clues we might try to get from modern males are influenced by their culture.
The best evidence would be whether male skeletons are found with female skeletons. If they're not, we have wandering males.
I think generally the fossil record indicates something tribal, with males and females living together at least within a tribe, with no indication how permanent those arrangements are.
This is also consistent with bonobo groupings, our closest relatives. Chimps have male/female tribes with male hunter groups and a dominant male. Gorillas may allow other males around, but tend to have a harem system. Baboons segregate strictly into male and female groups.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by PhoenixRose:Quote:
Originally posted by MOOSE1942:
there is a reason the family unit was designed the way it is.
Yeah, it's called 'biological necessity.' Getting outdated now.
How is 'biological necessity' as you put it becoming outdated? A very TINY slice of the worlds population can become pregnant without doing it the old fashioned way. Why? $$$.
There's a reason we have males and females and its MORE than just biological. I argue that it goes into so much more.
There are people out there that somehow think all humans are the same regardless of their gender. Sorry but that is a complete fallacy. There are so many differences between the genders and not just physical but mental, and emotional as well.
God, Darwin, or the spaghetti monster put all of the higher life forms into male and female forms for a reason. Why would life evolve into separate genders if there wasn't an advantage and important reason for it?
Quote:
Originally posted by PhoenixRose:
I actually think it very likely that there was a time, back in the history of humanity, when fathers did not really stick around with one 'family unit.' (Do all of them do that even now? Think about it.) At best, they might have stuck with a tribe. At worst, they wandered far and wide to scatter their seeds, leaving all the women they impregnated to raise the kids together. It could've happened. Easily.
Do all men stick around... no. That's IMHO one of the biggest problems facing our society today. Too many children, are growing up without a father. People who say a father isn't needed have an agenda. I wouldn't be the man I am today without my father. The boys I work with who don't have a dad would be better if they had a good father figure. Taking mom or dad out of kids life will cause them life long problems. Can many of them get past it? Yes. But I bet if you ask kids who didn't have a father growing up if they would have rather have a good one I'd bet 99% of them would have wanted a dad.
Quote:
I've also read so many studies on the likely importance of a nurturing mother figure to the development of the immune system, the nervous system, et al, that I can believe that being surrounded by such nurturing would be beneficial.
I agree with you 100% here. Kids NEED their mother so much. It's sad when I hear about mothers going back to work when their baby is only a few months old. Daycare workers, and nannies can be great but they can not replace the mother.
Anyway this is an interesting discussion, but you can't tell me this study doesn't have some serious flaws.
Oh and sorry I've probably said too much about the boys I work with.
It's not my place to share their personal problems.Come read my stories, http://alonekingofone.wordpress.com/
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I didn't notice who funded the study; that said, I too would have to entertain a certain amount of skepticism. You can make a study "prove" anything you want to, if you start out with a bias.
Hippie Operative Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
signing off
To our President: “Mr. President, you're a god damn, mother fucking liar. Fuck you, you cock sucking community activist piece of shit.... oh, go fuck yourself, Mr. President” ...Raptor
To Anthony, unquestionably the most civil person on this forum: “Go fuck yourself. On this matter, make no mistake. I want you to go fuck yourself long and hard, as well as anyone who agrees with you. I got no use for you. ...Raptor
To Frem: “You miserable piece of shit.” ...Raptor
To Niki: “My guess is it won't just be your ugly face you dislike.....Well, it's true......if you had a soul.” ...Raptor
...Remember, remember, the ugliest member...
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
I didn't notice who funded the study; that said, I too would have to entertain a certain amount of skepticism. You can make a study "prove" anything you want to, if you start out with a bias.
You have won the internet!
Objectivity is dead. Too many studies have been done by people with too much to gain from the outcome of the number crunching. I am not a statistician, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night...
I took a couple of statistics classes in college. There are so many places where you can tweak the numbers to make them support your theory.Come read my stories, http://alonekingofone.wordpress.com/
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Oh and sorry I've probably said too much about the boys I work with. It's not my place to share their personal problems.
That's okay, understood.
Quote:
There's a reason we have males and females and its MORE than just biological. I argue that it goes into so much more.
There are people out there that somehow think all humans are the same regardless of their gender. Sorry but that is a complete fallacy. There are so many differences between the genders and not just physical but mental, and emotional as well.
Ehm... Not really a fallacy, unless you can explain what logical rule it violates. It might be incorrect or correct, or not match up to observation, which we might debate, but it's not logically invalid to say. A statement can be logically valid and untrue, at the same time.
<_< And I'm actually one who would say this. I do think a lot of the purported "differences" between genders are culturally influenced and part of upbringing. There are a few exceptions. Of course there's the obvious sexual dimorphism such as size and the respective gender features. These are genetically coded for. Chemical differences due to hormones also play a role in how certain emotional and psychological disorders manifest in the genders.
Other than that, it's hard to argue that genes and the X and Y chromosomes account for differences in behaviour and skill sets. Really, this seems cultural.
Behaviour and skill sets seem to be mostly influenced by experience and training. Certain cultures like to encourage boys to work on certain skills and act a certain way, girls to work on other skills and act another way, and then they think it's some inherent derived trait when the adult versions specialize in those skills. Surprise surprise, it's probably not.
However, I don't contest that having a good role model of the same gender is important. I think the current idea of what a role model should be like is... Lacking.
A male doesn't have to be authoritarian, violent, or emotionally closed off/stoic/emotionally stunted. And in fact, that probably hurts how effective they are at parenting. Not good.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
A male doesn't have to be authoritarian, violent, or emotionally closed off/stoic/emotionally stunted. And in fact, that probably hurts how effective they are at parenting. Not good.
+1
Fathers should be strong, but have empathy with his kids.
One of the problems I see is a lot of kids aren't getting enough structure and discipline. Too many parents are either doing laissez faire or buddy parenting.
Both approaches don't work. Parents should parent not be their kids best friend.
Oh BTW I've got 3 kids. So I think I'm qualified to say the above.
Come read my stories, http://alonekingofone.wordpress.com/
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I don't know about the study, but speaking from personal experience, my daughter and her partner have raised a wonderful daughter together. She just turned 18 and is a happy, well-balanced, wise beyond her years and an extremely compassionate young woman.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I agree wholeheartedly with Byte about the cultural aspect of it. There's certainly a biological component, but it's not the overriding factor in my opinion. In fact, most of what you wrote parallels my own beliefs.
I do agree, Moose, that structure is lacking. That I would also put down to culture...we can go back to the evolution of American culture and easily see where it comes from, but that's beyond the point. The point is that structure has become a problem in our culture when it comes to kids...seems to be either too much or too little, or, as you said, inconsistent.
Nonetheless, I think part of what Western culture (and Mideastern and others, too) has done to the male of the species hasn't necessarily been healthy for their children. That's just my opinion from 61-or-so years of observation. Both sexes have their individual problems, obviously.
I have to respectfully disagree with your statement that having three kids qualifies you to make definitive statements about child rearing. I'm assuming it was half in jest and referred to not being a buddy to your kids, but one would have to judge by your children when they have matured and perhaps had children of their own to tell whether they were healthy psychologically, and it definitely wouldn't be you to do the judging. We can never see our children objectively.
Hippie Operative Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
signing off
To our President: “Mr. President, you're a god damn, mother fucking liar. Fuck you, you cock sucking community activist piece of shit.... oh, go fuck yourself, Mr. President” ...Raptor
To Anthony, unquestionably the most civil person on this forum: “Go fuck yourself. On this matter, make no mistake. I want you to go fuck yourself long and hard, as well as anyone who agrees with you. I got no use for you. ...Raptor
To Frem: “You miserable piece of shit.” ...Raptor
To Niki: “My guess is it won't just be your ugly face you dislike.....Well, it's true......if you had a soul.” ...Raptor
...Remember, remember, the ugliest member...
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
It's a difficult thing to study children's outcomes, because of the mix of factors that may affect their wellbeing, including things like their economic status, the education level of their parents, the psychological health of their parents etc etc.
Any study of outcomes would have to sample in a broad mix of people to get a reasonably accurate outcome, so I don't know if that study has done this or not.
Sometimes even being a part of a study can affect the outcomes. Nevertheless it gives some indications that kids can be raised by same sex couples without adverse affect. Kind of a no brainer in my book.
My only issue is with anonymous sperm donors and the affect of not knowing your biological heritage for the kids later in life, which goes for het couples as well as same sex couples. I think people need to know who they come from if possible.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by PhoenixRose:
I actually think it very likely that there was a time, back in the history of humanity, when fathers did not really stick around with one 'family unit.' (Do all of them do that even now? Think about it.) At best, they might have stuck with a tribe. At worst, they wandered far and wide to scatter their seeds, leaving all the women they impregnated to raise the kids together. It could've happened. Easily.
I think evolutionarily speaking females who were looking after very small infants would have had little chance of survival without the father sticking around in a protective/hunting role, at least for the first few years.
Then there is that kind of gluing that happens if you do stick around, the bond with the child that cements the unit if you like.
Quote:
I've also read so many studies on the likely importance of a nurturing mother figure to the development of the immune system, the nervous system, et al, that I can believe that being surrounded by such nurturing would be beneficial.
I would be interested in seeing more studies on this, wider ranging and on-going.
There are lots and lots of studies on this. Look up 'attachment theory' and you will be able to access them.
The benefit to the child, apart from the psysiological benefits of breast feeding,are from having a secure attachment to a primary carer, who can be mum, dad, or marvin the martian - so long as it is a secure one.
It's sad that dad's roles have become sidelined in recent history as kind of an optional extra because I think having strong male as well as female role models is essential to all children. That's not to say that hets do this well as a rule, or that it is not possible for gay couples to arrange this. I'd assess that it would be difficult for a boy to grow up in a lesbain separist community and vice versa as there would be no way he could learn how to be a man, but I'd say those scenarios are pretty rare.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME