idiocracy and marriage

As far as the examples you gave, I'm not sure if those are necessarily true. In my family, feminine hygiene was always a "read the instructions" type deal. My mother was not one to teach about private things. She was also the one who put the breaks on things like waxing, ear piercing, etc. when she thought we were too young. I know of a gay male couple who has a daughter, and they let her do things like that all the time even though she's only 6 or 7. It's not the sex of the parents so much as it's just different for every person.

I read a study that said they gay couples often have more successful marriages because they can't fall back on gender norms. While straight couples often fall back on the men earning the money and the women cleaning the house and raising the kids, gay couples can't do that. They have to divide things more equally and talk things out and make conscious decisions about who does what. This would include a more equal division of labor when it comes to raising children, which would suggest that children of gay parents are at least more likely to have both parents more involved in their lives. I know in my family and in most of my friends' families our fathers were at work all day, so they didn't get involved in making decisions about what we could or could not do because they hadn't been there during the day while arguments with our mothers unfolded. So it wasn't like having a father around was necessarily stopping our mothers from letting us do things that we maybe shouldn't have been. Either our mothers were sensible enough to make those decisions or they weren't. It had nothing to do with our fathers.

Since it is so difficult for gay parents to have children under this system and since you can't really compare gay parents to straight parents when their legal status as a couple often is not even the same, you can't really study this very effectively. You would have to legalize marriage equality first so that the legal status of the couple couldn't be a factor, which is still a long way coming.

The thing that I think of is that we let single parents raise kids, we let poor parents raise kids, we let couples where both parents work raise kids, so how can we say that gay people can't raise kids because they won't have a stable home environment? There are plenty of families that don't have stable home environments but still raise kids. So why do we somehow decide that gay people are such second class citizens that a loving gay couple is the worst thing a child can be brought into?

It's possible to have children when not married. I have one and I'm not married. My aunt is a lesbian with three kids and she's not married. the only real issue regarding children and homosexuals is adoption by non-biological parents.

The thing that I think of is that we let single parents raise kids, we let poor parents raise kids, we let couples where both parents work raise kids, so how can we say that gay people can't raise kids because they won't have a stable home environment? There are plenty of families that don't have stable home environments but still raise kids. So why do we somehow decide that gay people are such second class citizens that a loving gay couple is the worst thing a child can be brought into?

Don't ask me

ren wrote: The fact is, men and women, although we really shouldn't act any differently, remain quite different in the way we approach life. We claim to be equals but we segregate. Women tell other women things they wouldnt tell men, same goes the other way... Even in employment women have the upper hand on the service sector, men, on the secondary/primary. As such a heterosexual couple brings the best of both worlds. that's just something single parents an homosexual couples can't put on the table.

I don't agree with this opinion. Parents tell there kids things that the kids need to know, whether they are male or female, same or opposite.

ren wrote: I meant better off in the sense of "something extra", not as a protection against abnormality. Then again I do think the little differences end up becoming major differences/issues.

Here are my observations (based on what it as like for me as a kid, an what I see nowadays). the father has become disposable. We see increased divorce rates, hatred between parents, and often, the father is nothing more than a cash cow who better not "clash" with whatever the mother decides or there'll be consequences. this is a generalization and only based on my own observations, but when I see mothers sending their little girls to the salon for a leg wax, I can't help but think that a father present and in charge would never allow such a thing to happen.

A man in charge would never allow what you think shouldn't happen, happen, is what I'm reading here. Just because -you- don't agree with it, doesn't mean that whichever father is allowing it doesn't agree with it.

ren wrote: I've also noticed that the children of separated people seem to take sides... because one parent cheated on the other, or one parent doesnt pay child support, etc. In my own situation (married parents), there simply are no sides to take. Sure back when I was a kid one would say "no" and I could try my luck with the other for a "yes", but there simply was no competition over who was making money, paying for holidays, cleaning my clothes, etc.

this is completely true, but has absolutely nothing to do with homosexuals any more than it does for heterosexuals.

ren wrote: To go back to my previous example, do you think in a lesbian couple one of the parents would take on the role of "waxing my 10 year old daughter = over my dead body"? Can a lesbian couple understand boy problems? They can't provide any help from experience. they could involve someone else, but that someone else is a stranger, not a parent. The same issue exists with gay couple and girls. How do you (a man) tell your daughter how to put a tampon on? Read the instructions? look on the internet? find a female friend to do it for you? rely on the school nurse?

It's just not the same thing.

Yes, just as often as the father is going to stop the mother from doing stupid things, one homosexual partner is going to stop the other. Yes, females can understand boy problems, my mom had no problem with me.

The rest.. first off tampons go -in- not -on-.. second off, women, at least in my experience, don't sit in the bathroom with their daughter and put the first one in for them. I asked my mom, my step-grandma, my girlfriends mom, her step mom, and my sisters room-mates, and they all say they learned from the instructions on the box, and taught their daughters by saying "read the instructions." A gay male would have to do the same thing.

Heck, without ever seeing someone put one in, without ever being told how, and without ever reading the instructions -I- could, as a male, teach someone to put one in. (made sure I could actually do such by asking the girlfriend if my instructions would get it in correctly)..


It -is- the same. A parent is a parent, whether they are male/female straight/gay.

ren wrote: the only real issue regarding children and homosexuals is adoption by non-biological parents.

They're either going to be adopted by heterosexual non-biological parents, homosexual non-biological parents, or not at all. I think the first two options are better than the third, and they're the same as either.

Many children are 'accidental'. Perhaps not so much where you live but if we take some of the poorer and less educated parts of the world (1st, 2nd and 3rd) then it is the same throughout. Stupid people don't use protection and have children they are not responsible enough to raise...

Not all children in those situations come out to be bad children of course but it is more commonplace. That makes gay couples having children via adoption (which in itself is brilliant anyway!) probably being more responsible because they have to jump through a bunch of hoops. They can't 'accidentally' one day have a child or be pregnant, at least not as easily as hetero couples...

Abhaya Budhil wrote: The thing that I think of is that we let single parents raise kids, we let poor parents raise kids, we let couples where both parents work raise kids, so how can we say that gay people can't raise kids because they won't have a stable home environment? There are plenty of families that don't have stable home environments but still raise kids. So why do we somehow decide that gay people are such second class citizens that a loving gay couple is the worst thing a child can be brought into?

I actually avoided saying this, because these things are not exclusive to gay couples. It actually supports the view that gay couples would be less suitable for being parents if one takes the view that them being gay is a further limitation... (which I don't see)

I must admit ren that I still don't agree with your point of view regarding this matter

I wouldn't exactly call having a baby by not using a condom accidental seeing as it's common knowledge that these things tend to happen during sex. I don't believe it matters whether it's single parent, male and female, male and male, or female and female as long as there is love and some sort of structure but I could be wrong because I was raised without a father because my father went in search of his home planet Krypton before I was born

By accident I mean 'Without the specific intention of having a child.'

I know someone who's sister is 12 while her father is about 60... I don't think he meant to have a daughter at that age. She was an 'accident' but not all 'accidents' end up being bad...

Hey wait......Im......an......accident

Avner, perhaps you were planned by the Force, else within the hearts of your parents, they wanted a child yet simply had not "planned" for one to come when it did. Regardless of origin, it is what you do with your life that matters, and not necesarily the nature of your birth else the people who raise you. While both can play factors in your life, I believe that you can be the master of your own fate so long as you accept others and other perspectives outside of what each individual holds uniquely in his or her heart

Cheer up, and may the Force be with you.

Ah yes, Master Ren, I'm identifying more with Akkarin on this one yet value your points. Both of you have presented your opinions in a clear, concise and logical manner

Cheers

soya, I think you read me the wrong way. Also, saying that people can't teach that which they do not know themselves isn't an opinion, but a fact.

Akkarin, people know very well how to not have children. While accidents can happen (such as contraception failure), children who are not wanted can be aborted or abandoned very easily.

Also, we had condoms 15000 years ago in France. Just sayin'. Just because it's fairly difficult for homosexuals to have children (lesbians need a 'donation', gays pretty much need to have previously been in a heterosexual relationship) doesn't mean (half of) heterosexuals' kids are accidents.

Often times I find Ren’s statements to be off in left field somewhere. That does not mean I don’t agree with them.
Being a single parent for over a dozen years and having quite a bit of life experience, I agree with Ren on this one. And Ren wrote in his initial statements that these were based on what he had observed.

As a parent myself, there are many things that I don’t “agree” with, but that does NOT mean I have some right to interfere with it either. There is a difference between being a “man” and being a bully.