RECENT  POSTS:  » And now NOM is literally pleading with its (theoretical) supporters » Add 'professional advocate for anti-gay scouting' to list of bygone career choices » NOM to lasso the White House with a rosary. Or something. » NOM's new plan? To beat up its org-crushing loss until it becomes a win. » By the time you read this headline, we'll be ten more seconds beyond stagnant anti-gay 'culture wars' » Video: America cannot wait—to purchase American Family Association radio equipment? Huh?! » Huckabee 2016: 'cause church and state aint gonna marry themselves » EEOC does wonky, under-radar thing that could lay groundwork for definitive nondiscrimination protections » Maggie Gallagher, now that you've lost on marriage, might you lose these deceptive ways as well? » Crowdfunding discriminatory business owners: Perfect statement on anti-gay movement's current affairs  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

06/12/2012

Corvino: Flawed, destined-to-be-misused study comes at expense of actual child welfare

by Jeremy Hooper

John Corvino has a great takedown of that flawed gay parents study that's gaining unfortunate steam with slight-hopeful conservatives:

[Mark] Regnerus’s analysis purports to debunk the claim that children from same-sex families display no notable disadvantages when compared to children from other family forms, including intact, biological, two-parent families—what Regnerus calls the “no differences” paradigm. Had the study actually focused on “same-sex families,” it might have shed some light on the issue.
FULL: Are Gay Parents Really Worse For Children? How a New Study Gets Everything Wrong [TNR]

ALSO: Jim Burroway's excellent take: First Look at Mark Regnerus’s Study on Children of Parents In Same-Sex Relationships [BTB]

The far-right is already doing everything it can to turn this misrepresentative/under representative analysis into the gay parenting gospel, invoking shades of that "ex-gay" Spitzer study that the researcher now does everything in his power to repudiate. They want something to cling to—they need something to cling to—and so many, like Maggie Gallagher, are itching to have this be a "protect marriage" movement hole-ace. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if we see it in the ads NOM runs in the upcoming ballot states.

We must do all we can to get in front on it now.

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails