111 thoughts on “Study the Studies- What the data really tells us about same-sex parenting”

1. Hi Katy, Have you read the book Jephtah’s Daughter? I highly recommend it. Keep up the good and truthful work.

2. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1505810787/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o01_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

   • Are you paying for this advertising?

     • Haha. Seriously. Too long no see, friend. Hope the pooches are being kind to your custom van upholstery.

   • Susan, yes. I am about half-way through the book right now. And I was honored to contribute a small chapter within the section on ‘women’.

3. Amen Sister! As a CASA worker I see the difference in the children. And, the Lesbian couples are growing all the time. This is an abomination to God and ‘Sorry to tell them but’: They will pay dearly for their sins. The old saw about being born with homosexuality in your genes is pure BS!
   Keep up the good work!

   • Hi Straight. Thanks for the comment. I am against intentional motherlessness and fatherlessness. And I want our laws to prevent adults from separating children from their natural parents to suit their own desires. Much of that trend has been informed by the wrongful message that all children need is two stable loving adults, which is statistically not the case. But I also know two sets of lesbians who are raising grandchildren because of death or general ineptness on behalf of the parents. Those women deserve our support and are doing everything they can do bring some sense of stability to the lives of their grandchildren. And doing so at great personal cost to themselves. I also know of a couple who adopted a child with a serious medical condition, because there was no heterosexual couple willing to take her on. Laws and policy must always reflect the ideal. But personally, we must always extend help and mercy to those who find themselves in less-than-ideal circumstances.

     • Katy – A life-affirming response. Thank you for being an authentic human being, and for having the integrity to see beyond stereotypes on both sides of the argument. Your voice is so needed in this conversation.
       Thanks for speaking the truth in love!

     • Great response indeed.

       • I just wanted to elaborate here- ‘ideal’ circumstances are hard to come by. And even what ideal is can be argued. For some children a gay couple who have a lot of free time might be better than a heterosexual couple who both work very long hours… In some cases a childless family will be more suited than one that already has children of their own and vice versa.
         Adoption is a monumental step, I hugely respect people willing to take on that sort of responsibility- and think everyone else should too.

4. Understanding the truth about living in households that are not bio mom-bio dad-bio child within a marital structure is uber important IMO because it helps us to uphold and honor the scenario that gives the most advantages to our most precious resources as humans….our children. But it shouldn’t strip us of hope and the knowledge that averages, while having their place, don’t make or break an individual. It also doesn’t mean that children of broken families, of which I am one, can’t seek out support, help and healing. It should never mean that we don’t extend love and support to those who need it from us; regardless of sexual orientation, marital status or legitimacy.

   Rock on, my friend! 🙂

5. On target as usual, both with accurate information and the Christian command to love our neighbor. I was pleasantly surprised to learn something new as I was only aware of the three of the eight studies you mentioned.

   Also, I read a counter article some time ago, which claimed that convenience sampling was just as effective as random sampling for the purpose of research. I investigated and found this:

   http://www.conveniencesampling.net/Convenience-Sampling-vs-Random-Sampling.html

   While the site itself defends convenience sampling, it points out it has various drawbacks including the inability to match the accuracy of a random sample study. Hence no matter how many convenient sampling studies one has, a single random sample study has much more intellectual weight in its conclusions.

   • Sam. How grateful I am for your faithful, persistent, and informed voice on the many threads of this blog? So so grateful. Thank you for the link on convenience vs random sampling. Its not that the convenience samples tell us nothing about gay and lesbian parenting, it’s simply that they cannot overthrow the mountain of social science findings which tell us that children fare best with a mother and father.

     • Ma’am,

       Thank you for the kind words, it makes a big difference to me. It’s a struggle to remain respectful and level-headed, what with the universal temptation to simply demonize opponents. And there’s an element of exposure since Sam is part of my name, though it pales to what you have gone through. So, again thank you.

       Besides, I’m a History graduate. If nothing else, I’ll honor my degree by putting those critical thinking and research skills to work.

6. Very well written, researched, insightful on a fundamentally important topic … again! So thank you once again!

7. The American College of Pediatricians is a political group of between 60 to 200 members. They are not a professional peer group that is recognized by the American Board of Medical Specialties. They broke away from the American Academy of Pediatrics, an ABMS recognized professional peer group of 60,000 members, over disagreements regarding gay parenting.

   The ACP does not conduct their own research in the studies mentioned above. They are seeking to “peer review” past studies conducted by others when they are by definition not professional peers. They seek to discredit the studies that have findings they do not agree with, and turn a blind eye to the studies that support their political views. This is not scientific process.

   As for Regnerus, this:

   https://familyinequality.wordpress.com/2015/04/17/regnerus-responds/

   • The above should read “turn a blind eye to the flaws of studies that support their political views.”

8. Regnerus included any respondent who said that their parent ever had a same sex relationship in the group called “with same sex parents.” The majority of the people in this group spent little or no time living in the home of their gay or lesbian parent. This is not a representative group that would say much at all about how children actually raised in homes with same sex parents actually fare.

   So irrespective of whether the child is actually raised in the home of the parent that identifies as gay or lesbian, these young adults appear to have more negative outcomes. The confounding variable that may explain the correlation is brokenness. Children born from heterosexual unions where one of the parents ends up identifying as gay or lesbian are more likely to experience parental divorce for obvious reasons. Maybe if gay and lesbian people are allowed to follow their heart and marry the ones they love from the get go, they wouldn’t end up entering into loveless marriages with people of the opposite sex that are more likely to end in divorce.

   • Hi, docrocki,

     “The confounding variable that may explain the correlation is brokenness.”

     That may be so, but any family where a same-sex couple is raising children is by definition broken. If a same-sex couple gets together with the intention of starting a family, then they are doing so with the intention of creating a broken family, of depriving the child of one of its natural parents.

     The key finding of the Regnerus Family Structures study was what social scientists have been saying for decades, before it became politically incorrect to do so, that the intact nuclear family was superior to any other arrangements as a way to raise children.

     You are right that there is a shortage of good data on, for example, male-male couples who purchase a baby from a surrogate, or female-female couples who pay the father (“the “donor”) to sign away his paternal rights and responsibilities. However, experience shows that a medicine that has been tested and proved effective will be better than an untested, experimental remedy.

     • Doctors reaching for tested effective medications first because that is evidence based medical practice. That in no way proves that the medicine he/she is more familiar with is always superior to untested experimental medicine. That lack of evidence about experimental medicine should not be cited as reason to halt research and outlaw the experimental compound

       • Since the whole thing is going Federal it would seem that the country needs a federal FDA type of agency to protect children. They will need to do some extensive long term unbiased research. I think Scalia made it clear that the social science submitted to date has been sufficiently refuted. Childrens’ rights to a mother and a father will take precedent over what adults want. Nobody can claim a “right” to other people. This conversation is just starting. And people will see what exactly is meant by “love makes a family”. On what basis will people argue to purposefully deny children basic human rights? I highly doubt that adults can claim that their sexual preference somehow trumps the basic rights and needs of a child. The “no difference” argument is dead in the water because it isn’t true.

         • There are already Child Protective Services agencies in every state of the union. I thought most conservatives were opposed to bulky Federal government. Who will fund this long term unbiased research you speak of? The Witherspoon Institute? Scalia is judge, not a social scientist.

     • It remains to be scientifically proven whether a statistically significant difference in developmental outcomes exists between the children raised from birth by same sex parents and the children raised from birth by opposite sex parents.

     • Even using your broad definition of brokenness, divorce is still the most common disruption to the intact nuclear family. As I said above perhaps if gay and lesbian people were permitted to marry the ones they love from the get go there would be fewer loveless marriages ending in divorce.

   • Don’t leave 100 comments here in a row. It makes you seem somewhat unhinged to the average observer.

9. Randomly sampled studies are certainly stronger, but other forms of research are not worthless or they would never be conducted and published in peer reviewed journals.

   The Regnerus study, while randomly sampled, has serious face validity issues that the ACP has chosen to ignore.

   • Sir,

     As mentioned, the link I posted did support convenience sampling, saying it had its place, but that random sampling is stronger always. In other words, that was a strange way of saying we agree.

     I can agree that there are objections to the Regnerus study. I’m more curious if you can find similar objections to the other three studies.

     That said, as Askme and others point out, same-sex parenting will always begin with a handicap since it is impossible for homosexual parents to produce naturally.

10. I cannot speak to the ACP objections to the other studies because the document is written in the form of a legal brief, not a scientific study. They do not specify what “errors in file coding and analysis” they found in these opposing studies that leads them to draw opposite conclusions. Nor can I find any other reference online that discusses these supposed methodological flaws of Rosenfeld and Wainwright research.

11. For both sides of this issue, there is a dearth of randomly sampled, prospective, case controlled studies because a child raised in a home from birth by same sex parents is a rare and relatively new phenomenon.

12. It remains to be scientifically demonstrated that a statistically significant handicap exists vs the null hypothesis, i.e. “no difference”

    • Sir,

      Yet we have decades of research that affirm both fathers and mothers play in an important role in child development. Furthermore, we have a large body of evidence that concludes biological connection between child and parents is an important factor. The lack of such a connection increases the chances of poor child development and abuse toward the child. By no means are all children of step-parents guaranteed to suffer, but the handicap is there.

      Since same-sex parenting guarantees at least one step-parent, it will share the same handicaps of heterosexual step-parenting at the very least. At worst, same-sex parenting deprives a child of the necessary gender development that normally comes from having both a mother and a father.

      More honest research would be helpful. To me, that is the most powerful counter argument against the negatives of same-sex parenting. Yet, that is what also vexes me the most. Within a large portion of the media and the medical community have already adopted the null hypothesis and claim it unvarnished truth, some going even so far to announce same-sex parenting superior despite the step-parent issue. If there really hasn’t been enough research on the issue, then no one can proclaim either hypothesis true or false.

      By that scenario, while the ACP should be suspected for being overwhelmed by their bias, the American Academy of Pediatrics should also be under heavy suspicion for embracing same-sex parenting a decade ago when there was even less evidence on the topic.

      Finally, I have a superfluous question. Why do you make a cascade of small responses instead of one big one? Just curious.

13. The dynamic of a heterosexual step parent trying to bond with a step child mid stream after divorce is completely different from two same sex parents bonded with a child from birth. It is not safe to assume the same handicaps.

    I make small responses because I am in a very busy house. I need to take frequent breaks to tend to things. If I waited until I have everything written out, I wouldn’t be able to get anything posted.

14. More research is called for. This is not a completely decided issue. But I’m also not on the side that is building the totality of their SCOTUS same sex marriage legal argument on this one supposition.

    • Sir,

      I agree that the handicaps would be different in the two scenarios you listed. The step-parent coming in post-divorce would have a much harder challenge ahead of them then the same-sex couple. However, that still doesn’t prevent the handicaps the same-sex couple has to deal with.

      Ah, fair enough.

      I’m afraid you’ve lost me. Which side are you referring to?

15. A number of issues with this post

    One, I would like to start off by saying that I find it disingenuous to use as an argument what is “the best” atmosphere for raising children. We do not legislate based on what the best atmosphere is, we legislate based on what has been proven to work. The best outcome statistically for any child in the United States is to be in an upper-middle class second-generation Asian family. Those students have the best grades, the best chances at college acceptance, the best chances overall for success in life. But we do not restrict other families from raising children, nor do we treat upper-middle class Asian families as special or protected classes. So just because you can show studies that say opposite-sex parents have better outcomes on their children generally, that cannot be used as an argument for why gay parents shouldn’t be able to adopt or marry. (and trust me I can show equal studies that show the exact opposite)

    Secondly, you Conservatives can cling to that Regnerus study all you want, but it just makes you look silly now. It’s such a discredited, toxic study that any one who willingly utilizes it in argument is doing so for their own prejudice. You can talk about it being “the most expansive” sociological study of same sex marriage ever undertaken or whatever lie is being made about it by Conservatives nowadays, but it’s clearly a biased study. It was commissioned for the express purpose of being used in the DOMA case by the Witherspoon Institute, a strongly anti-gay rights Conservative lobbying group. It was paid for by the Bradley Foundation, yet another anit-gay Conservative political action group, these people paid for an anti-gay study and they received what they paid for. Too bad the study was a joke sociologically, with no attempt whatsoever by Regnerus to provide an accurate depiction of modern homosexual couples, he could only refer to any person who had slept with a member of the same sex, regardless of family structure or background, as gay or lesbian. This introduced tremendous statistical bias and what it concluded was (unsurprisingly) that when a divorce occurs the child suffers. Whether the divorced parents are gay or straight is meaningless.

    Now you may say, as Regnerus did, that this was an accurate portrayal of the homosexual community. You would be incorrect though, as this would be an accurate portrayal of the homosexual community from 1970-1994, when these parents were actually being parents. During that time period, homosexuality was still largely marginalized and underground, with open gay relationships being nothing like they are today. The homosexual population was also only 3.4% until about the year 2000, whereas in 2015 over 6.8% of people under 30 identify as gay. This means that twice as many gays exist in the US today and instead of fighting for HIV research like they did in the 1980s or acceptance in the media, they are fighting for the ability to raise a family. Gay rights has changed from being counter-culture to traditional culture so you have far more gay families raising children today than in the Regnerus study, the majority of the “gay families” in actuality being failed straight ones.

    • As a gay man- let me ask you this question: Why don’t people put a bit more effort into adoption than ivf? If we want to genuinely shut up the selfishness discussion, then we have to not be selfish. Just a thought.

    • Own up – you are really that nincompoop, Scot Rosewhinger, aren’t you? Or maybe that partner of his, S8granny? Perhaps not … Nevertheless, it looks certain, though, that you homosexualists remain sore at the Regnerus because his study is still standing. This, despite the amount of garbage and lies (replicated above, in your post) leveled at Regenerus, personally. Do you even understand what sociology is or does, or are you simply reciting the homosexualist dogma like a good little homosexualist? And what’s with the odd figures – comparing overall homosexual population in 2000 with some assumed population of under 30 who ‘identify as’ homosexuals? Let us consider one actual statistic,instead – just so we can balance reality for you. Did you know that more young men died of HIV/AIDS in the US than in all the wars that it has been involved in since WWII? (some 700,000!). Lastly, who is the sociology professor, you or Dr Regnerus?

      • lol the hateful little Asian is now attacking me. I have no clue who Scot Rosewhinger is honey. Are you that masseuse who tugged me off in Scottsdale? I assume all Asian women are either masseuses or laundry shop workers.

        Dr. Regnerus was paid by an anti-gay organization to produce an anti-gay study and that’s what he did. There are very good reasons why sociologists have long since repudiated his study, both at his university and from around the country.

        My point about the percentages is that Regnerus studied gays and lesbians (not even really gays and lesbians but those involved at any point in their life with a same sex partner) between the years 1970-1994 when gay men and women were still largely underground. Nowadays they not only are in the open and fighting for traditional rights such as marriage and adoption, they also make up a higher percentage of young people than ever recognized before. The percentage of gays under 30 is twice that of gays overall.

        I won’t even touch your AIDS comments. AIDS is a disease, homosexuality is a form of love.

16. As soon as an author says something like, “these data also show negative outcomes for children with same-sex parents similar to those reported by Regnerus and Sullins,” they’ve immediately lost all credibility, since Regnerus did not report specific outcomes for children of same-sex parents.

    Let me say that again: Regnerus did not report specific outcomes for children of same-sex parents.

    If someone says otherwise, they do not understand the Regnerus study and they have not followed the issue closely.

17. Katy, well-written article. I didn’t see if you addressed in any of your comments one of the primary objections I hear to social science research like this that finds that children of adults in same-sex relationships suffer negative consequences; specifically, that these children are suffering negative consequences because of the social stigma still attached to their situation. The argument goes: it hurts children’s self esteem to only read children’s books (or watch movies, etc) that depict heterosexual parents when that arrangement does not jive with their own, and this is why they do not fare as well as children in mother-father households. The (faulty, I believe) conclusion is that once society becomes more accepting of gay marriage, these children will start to fare better. Maybe you could address this in a future post? Or have I missed it somewhere on your blog?

    • Hi Claire, good question. The studies do not tell us “why” kids are suffering, they just tell us that they are. I know that social stigma is the popular explanation for just about everything these days, but at some point we need to just be honest- it hurts when a parent is not in your life. And that often causes distress.

      I wrote about this in a bit more detail in this Public Discourse piece, excerpt below: http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2015/04/14813/

      The FEC Brief states: “The major challenge most same-sex-parented families must surmount is nothing inherent in their family structure, but rather the societal and governmental disapproval that the challenged state laws represent and perpetuate.” It speaks of how children of same-sex parents are “psychologically burden[ed]” because “their parents aren’t able to get married.”

      While I recognize that these children really are feeling burdened, I have a hard time believing that a lack of “marriage equality” is the primary struggle that most of these children face. If a parent conceives a child with a member of the opposite sex—or enters into a contract to purchase sperm or eggs from the child’s biological parent—and then chooses to raise that child with an unrelated adult of the same sex, that child’s life is going to be complicated in ways we are just beginning to realize.

      FEC quoted children in situations similar to that of twelve-year-old Annalise, my daughter’s friend, whose father abandoned their family for his lover when she was four. A few years later, Annalise was photographed in the wedding of her “two dads,” who were effusively congratulated on the “family that they had made together.” Though Annalise is careful to say that she loves her father and his partner, she recently wrote an essay on the pain and confusion that has filled her life since her father left the family and married her other dad.

      I understand and deeply identify with the desire to defend one’s parents. Nonetheless, it is not the state’s fault these children are suffering a “psychological burden,” nor can the state ever relieve such a burden. Many children find themselves in same-sex-headed households because their parents have made decisions to separate them from one of their natural parents. Some may feel burdened because they long for a parent who they are told is unnecessary. Some may have adults in their lives who may not acknowledge their loss at all, which imposes a burden of confusion, anger, and pain.

18. Where is frau? Why are people leaving successive comments? Why is frau not controlling all this? I hate to be controlling- HA, okay maybe I don’t, but commentary needs to be structured and organized. Structured and Organized. Or deleted.
    P.S. why am I getting emails- nevermind, I’ll email you.

    • I’ll go out on a limb here and bet that your china cupboard is very very neat.

      • He irons his napkins, IMHO. I basically want him to order my material world.

    • I am lurking and have Z E R O control over the comments section. If it were up to me she wouldn’t field comments at all. F it. But she is a better Christian than I.

      • Comments can be good, but there has to be structure. Otherwise a discussion can be ruined/become pointless.

19. pinkagendist,

    Sorry for the excessive posting. As I mentioned to Sam I am in a busy home and rarely get more than a couple minutes uninterrupted to collect my thoughts. I have also had similar discussions on Twitter for the last few weeks. Compared to the 140 character limit on that site, this feels like writing whole essays. If I had the ability to consolidate the previous posts now I would, but I am obviously not an admin.

    In response to your adoption comment above, I would ask how you know that gay men haven’t pursued adoption before IVF? Adoption is not available to gay men in many places for de facto and de jure reasons. Until recently, adoption by gays was specifically forbidden by law in Florida. I also know of many gay men that have waited for long periods on lists for adoption agencies to place children with them.

    I think some of the people on this site think any gay couple raising children by adoption or IVF are selfish but I will leave that for others who hold that belief to explain.

    • D&R,

      This response will be very long as it is a response to all of your comments on this page.

      All of the children (with an exception of Katy) who have spoken out against same-sex parenting have been been in a situation where they have been raised by their birth parent and the parent’s partner for as long as they can remember. Many people try to critique Heather’s experience because she was not a product of artificial insemination, however, she had absolutely no memory of her father, never met him in person, and has only known her mother’s partner as her other parent all her childhood life, which is a experience that parallels all children of LGTB parents conceived with anonymous AI. Yet, she ‘longed for a father everyday’ and struggled with anger, anxiety, and shame. Shame because her lesbian mothers were enforcing an idea that men are useless, and they could raise them by themselves.

      Millie Fontana Foxx, a lesser known YouTube speaker from Melbourne Australia, was product of artificial reproduction. According to her experience, she had only known her birth mother, and her non-biological mother all of her life, and had a half-brother and a full brother by these two women, while all kids shared the same donor. Growing up, she felt like a political statement for lesbian parents and not knowing her father made her suffer with depression, anxiety, low academic performances and suicide. She think her mothers and her donor were ‘the most selfish people she has ever met’ and she thinks that they were ‘good people as individuals, but not equip parents’. She also said most liberals do not understand how complicated the situation is at home, and that their support of LGTB households is “great but completely misguided”.

      Brandi W, quite controversially, had been raised by her mother and the mother’s lesbian partner from the time she was four into adulthood. Sure, this isn’t the gold star “raised from birth” scenario, but doesn’t that situation parallels children being raised in adoptions, who aren’t taken in as infants? And even at age four, do most people clearly remember their childhood as well at age 4 as they do at age 6 or 7 or 8 or 9? Or even in those critical teen years?

      Speaking of adoption, have you followed the video channel Depfox? They’ve been making YouTube series of their adopted family in a protest against prop8. They’re a gay male married couple, and had two children through the adoption process. Their youngest daughter, Selena, has never known her birthparents and had been raised by her two fathers since infancy. According to one of the husbands, Bryan, Selena has “never known anything else but two dads”. Do you know what she was asking for Mother’s Day? A mom. Do you know she was asking for Mother’s Day the next year? A picture of her mom. No, NOT her birthdad, not her other birth-siblings, not her birth-grandparents, just MOM. The husbands said this has been a theme with her, and she was ecstatic to finally get a picture of her birth mother that wasn’t a mugshot. She has even drawn a picture of her mother during class, and gave it to both her fathers saying “This is a picture I’m going to give to my mommy when I meet her”. Currently, she is the only female in the house, and the only mother-figures she has is school-workers and Jay’s occasionally visiting mother, similar or sometimes even better than most kids reared in all same-sex households.

      The great thing about Jay and Bryan is that they never made this situation with their children’s first parents intentionally. Openly they admit the perfect circumstances would be for the kids to be raised by their biological parents. Their disabled son Daniel was not accepted by adoptive straight couples, because his medical complications were too expensive. Daniel’s baby sister Selena came to live with the two men too simply because the agency didn’t want to split the siblings. However, while this gay couple may be heroic, and even considerate for acknowledging their daughter’s ack for her mother, what can be said about the gay parents who intentionally separate their children from one or both of their birth parents through anonymous ‘assisted’ reproduction, for their own gain? And furthermore, how do they address their children’s suffering (if they have it, like Millie) when they were the direct cause of it?

      From what we know about adoptees, growing up never knowing one or both of your birth parents, even if you were ‘raised with love’ by your non-biological family, doesn’t always insure that the children will be adjusted and happy. According to the few studies recorded on adopted children, they are at least 4x as likely to struggle with suicide, and depression (just like Millie’s sperm donor situation).

      To address your critiques of the gay parenting studies, you are way too focused on the sources of these critiques and not the critiques themselves. Lesbians grading their own parenting is a self-report response bias and never will be credible science. Lesbian parenting being compared to no heterosexual control group whatsoever, is bad science. How are you going to have a comparison study without a comparison? The fact that this much bad science has been invested in the LGTB movement to cover up the reality of your children only makes you look more suspicious and begs the question why are you afraid to compare your parenting to a heterosexual couple’s? Or actually evaluate your children’s social, gender and relationship outcomes?

      The fact that the APA can ignore these methodological fallacies to appease the mainstream public is not a sign of progress but political corruption. And when these critiques are recognized by the mainstream it will destroy their credibility as an organization.

      Do we need more studies to validate that same-sex couples raise kids just as well as mixed gendered couples? Yes. But if there are so few studies confirming your parenting, why are you and other gay couples choosing to raise children this way anyway? Has there been records of past civilizations of gay couples successfully raising children without women or men? Has there been aboriginal tribes completely made up of gay men or women, anonymous gamete donors, and occasional visiting grandmothers, uncles and nannies? If not so, and there has been admittedly flimsy evidence supporting your parenting, and absolutely no evidence of your parenting throughout human history whatsoever, then doesn’t that make your parenting truly a social experiment? And if so, isn’t it wrong to experiment with another human being’s life?

      How does your daughter model the type of mother she’s going to be when she grows up, in a household where her primary caregivers are both male?How does she become comfortable with her female identity in a house where neither of her fathers are attracted to women, and she is the only one in the home who has menstrual cycles and wears bras? According to social science, sporadically occasionally visiting aunts and uncles are nothing in comparison to a stable household mother and father. Children model primarily from whoever is in the house, which is why children from smokers are more likely to smoke, children from Christians are more likely to be Christian. Children of teenage parents are more likely to be teenage parents themselves. Children of dropouts are likely to do the same. It’s documented, but ignored in the same-sex parenting debate. How are your sons going to model how to treat their wives in homes where they are not exposed to that everyday? Statically men partner with women who act like their mothers, and learn about females through their daily interaction with their mothers everyday. Where are they getting that influence? Of course your daughter is getting a fatherly influence but it’s one of a gay man, which by observation, is universes different from a interaction with a straight man. Brandi who was raised by her same-sex parents from the time she was four, complained of this very issue. She says her lack of a normal household father-figure has led her into two abusive relationships and that she’s lucky to now have a supportive husband who can understand her handicapped situation with understanding men.

      I won’t even get started how the whole surrogacy practice completely insults the science of what we knows about infant-mother psychology and how research has shown that babies prefer their mothers’ voices and scents at birth, and even stress when they are away.

      This isn’t natural, not the gay part but this parenting style itself. Sure there have been monogamous gay animals, but have they ever raised children this way? Past human civilizations, evolution, and the simply nature of how you obtained your children tells us this isn’t normal or natural. Raising your children in a experimental environment that has only been trendy for the less than half a century (30 years out of the 1,000,000s of years that children have been raised in mixed-gendered homes) is not considerate or fair for the children. And as they grow up, expect to see more Katys, Brandis, and Millies.

      • Wow. Candygirl. You hit that out of the park. Thanks for you comment.

        • Well, I do my best.

      • Wow, excellent comment. Hat tip and polite clapping. I would tweak your comments about nature and suggest that the one “natural” thing about it is the male arrogance and entitlement. In less than 10 years the chickens will be coming home to roost. We are all seeing that already. The storm clouds are gathering.

        • Responding to your comment about the ‘storm clouds’, realistically speaking it heavily depends if the mainstream media is ready to talk about Katy, Brandi, Heather and Millie. They are not getting heavily publicized off the web and I don’t think that was an accident. No CNN interviews, no Fox and Friends, no talk-show guest-staring, just online verbal attacks. Brandi and Millie got the shortest end of the stick being no one has reblogged or made any responses to their experiences. In fact they are invisible with only a couple thousand YouTube watchers who know they exist. Once word gets out that there are kids of same sex parents salty about their upbringing we may get a entire invisible generation finally coming into the light.

          • Candi,
            Mainstream media I do not think is ready this week and the gay lobby attacks people and destroys careers and threatens peoples children–they are bad really really bad. You have major organizations such as GLAAD and the HRC who seem to employ people to attack. Of course it is supposed to either scare people into silence or punish. If people back down it will be longer. LGBT does mainstream media very well. It is not a level playing field and right now. I do think that will change and rather soon because people are seeing the national attacks and for every one of them there are many many more that did not make into the news.

            1st People need to question what has been said over and over. Then recognize in what ways the narrative has been fabricated and controlled. When all the platitudes and cliches start to ring a bit untrue there will be shift. I think the kids maybe need legal help for all the attacks against them and their families. Right now this is a whole bunch of happy slogans and false narratives. If the mainstream media and some real research would come together then that would the watershed moment. All the positive research has been done for the befit of the LGBT movement–When I read you I am heartened even to hear anyone question and ask about the kids. I also think writing our stories and getting them out there will help.

            It is a social experiment and it will go wrong. It already has. I mean they attack us one by one, attack our families, our jobs, our co-workers–over and over. I am of the mind to make it all as public as possible. I am 100% sure the experiment has already failed of because I see it already with my entire cohort raised in LGBT homes. Reseachers are cowed and also under fire from the gay lobby–it is a monster and against children rights. So many have not even thought of the more nuanced questions to ask and the problems created. Much of the research is “outcome” based and money can cover up a lot of “outcome”.

            The hard stuff the real stuff is living day in and day out with the delusions, manipulations, deflections and the abusive responses that occur when there isn’t 100% compliance. I think the closest experience to growing up in a same sex family is having a spouse that is a “narsicissitic abuser. They also claim to “love” their victim. But that is not a perfect analogy and growing up in same sex home is worse because as a kid you do not know what is going on–the adults dictate reality. I feel like I see it all again even in what is said here in their comments–they “love” like somehow because they feel some magic takes place. And what love means very often is want. I learned that when I became a mother and that has only reinforce in me my real concern for children having to be raised in these homes.

            It will be a national tragedy in short order. Then there is the conponet of their personality that sexuality in your face every second–it is very traumatic and they think it is normal. I never had a single friend who had parents that forced their sexuality on the kid and yes heterosexual have a sexuality gays did not corner the market. But truly it is something so horrible to have their sex in your happy meal. The community is also really not good for kids–it like invasion of the body snatchers, split personalities.

            Even as an adult I struggle to articulate it. It is a deeply selfish and superficial group of people and they may indeed have no idea damaging they are. But what can anyone do? I think kids today have it even worse than we did because the adults have all the support and nobody is paying any attention. People are scared of them and rightly so. So when I see you write something so thoughtful and considered I do have some hope. It has meet daylight a critical mass of them are coming of age and they are not happy.

        • Well, I’m glad I give you hope. To be honest nothing I expressed on this page was ‘new’ emotion, I was just able to internalize these concerns I have because I wanted to fit in with mainstream politics and I wanted to be on the ‘good side’. All of my friends are gay, a lot of my relatives are gay too. In many public circumstances I have been the ‘hero’ to defend them from intolerances and homophobic people, but just because I love them, doesn’t mean I have to support a lie. Anything or any system founded on lies is going to corrupt.

          About the new generation, you don’t understand. You don’t know the extent of how gay marriage and gay parenting has been pushed in the youth’s faces. It’s almost excessive. But in all honesty for many ethnic groups, it’s not enough to make them accept gay people. But for those of us that it does hit, it’s like some kind of trophy to say “Look how progressive and tolerant we are! It’s so trendy! We’re basically the new civil rights movement!” Of course, from my observation most of the youth support stems from trusting whatever they read off the internet and being reinforced their beliefs from propaganda such as “The kids are alright” or shows like “The Fosters”, hardly real world experiences. They do what media tells them to, they hate religious people, adhere to libertarianism like a religion, and (ironically) insult and call anyone who doesn’t agree with their opinion a bigot, unaware that bigot means “someone who is hostile towards opposing opinion”.

          The extent of youth liberal bigotry goes towards openly attacking kids of LGTB homes who’ve come out with unpopular outcomes about their circumstances. There are people on Brandi’s channel wall who are calling her a cunt. There are people on Katy’s twitter wall calling her essays
          ‘the rantings of a pathetic idiot’.
          There are people on Millie’s commenting section years younger than her, condescendingly calling her a ‘sweetheart’ and telling her she is uneducated, needs therapy and her experience is not a reflection of gay parenting but her own stupidity. Many were confused and had not fully comprehended the video diary she made, or were even able to make a grammatically correct YouTube comment, but they talk to her like a child? And tell her she doesn’t know what she’s talking about, when she lived through this experience from birth?

          I’m quite ashamed that I was once associated with such a obnoxious and pretentious generation of parentless bastards, but unfortunately I was. Whats startling is that this brainwashed and entitled group of idiots are going to be our future voters, senators, presidents and members of society someday. Some in my past high school classroom environment had already expressed confusion with ‘rights’ vs ‘entitlement’, leading for some open lesbians to declare that “they should get the right to marry a cow if they want, and it’s no one’s business.” <—– these are your future voters, ma'am.

          That aside, it's going to take more than just the six or seven so people to come out about the full reality of gay parenting. As I've talked to R&L abt this if every struggling child of a same-sex household follows the mentality of "I'm the only one with my problems, and according to TV I'm not suppose to have these feelings at all" they will NOT come forward about their honest opinion. They will automatically assume their opinion is the minority, and not only that, but it is 'anti-gay'. They don't want to risk other COGs attacking them, their parents disowning them and society at large publicly shaming them.

          It's basic conformity science. As said, people are willing to die before straying from a group.
          https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vjP22DpYYh8

          with that said, if you are truly a woman reared by gay parents please please please come forward about your opinion, even if it's just a pseudonym on the "It Happen To Me" column on the xoJane magazine.

          Anything would be great at this point. thanks.

        • I know this is a very emotional time, and Mr. Rocks probably ticked you off a little, but I was wondering if you can respond to the comment I made about perhaps getting yourself out there a little, so it can be encouragement for other kids of LGTB parents. Thanks. Hope you hear from you soon.

          Also, if you don’t mind can you explain your side of the story? Were you born to two moms, or were you the product of a divorce?

20. YouTube testimonials are subject to the same kind of self report bias you cite to dismiss the studies you disagree with. These online anecdotes are all over the map and I can similarly cite anecdotes by many grown children of gay parents that did not have the same experience as the ones above.

    You agree that there is a need for more research. In the absence of scientific proof that having gay parents is indeed harmful, why shouldn’t gay couples try to raise children this way? How are the studies going to be done if there are no subjects? You place a moral value on “normal” and “natural” by tapping on your keyboard made of plastic to send messages to a stranger possibly thousands of miles away.

    I have left my own family structure out of this conversation for a reason and I would caution you against trying to psychoanalyze my sons and my daughter. Maybe if Ms. Faust took a break from congratulating her supporters in the comments section she would remember her own ground rules at the top of this page forbidding personal attacks.

    • First, I don’t know if Candygirl is one of my supporters. What say you, Candy? Second, what did you say to me on Twitter the other day? “Disagreeing with you in a public forum” is not a personal attack, is it?

      You are right about the testimonials- you can’t draw conclusions from them alone. They simply put flesh on what they representative studies say about motherless and fatherless kids.

21. :

    She agrees with you writing and you endorse her comments. She can disagree with my comments all she wants. Speculating on the psychological problems my sons and daughter will have being raised by two men is personal. I have never said anything about anybody’s parents or children on this site because you set the boundary at the outset for your own family.

    • *This comment has been slightly edited because I felt the original statements were insensitive and offensive. If I had offended you with my previous foot-in-mouth statement, my apologies*

      This may or may not be long too. I’m not sure I’m writing this all on my phone.

      First I would like go on to say that nothing I said was a personal attack. Attack would be baseless insults. For instance “you’re stupid” or “you are just a f—t.” I’ve never called you any homophobic slurs or insinuated that you were less than for being gay, I bought up thoughtful concerns about your child rearing that has not be brought to the discussion table in the debate about gay parenting. I would hope that you and your husband have discussed these very critical pitfalls in your attempt to raise children, and found a decent solution for them. Hopefully you didn’t go into this thinking that if you fed it and watered it they’d be ok.

      I don’t agree with the author of this blog’s full opinion. I’m not Christian or even a theist. My issues with the same-sex parenting movement is that it’s poorly supported by science, evolution and anthropology. Also that it contradicts all preexisting information and research we know of the mother-child and father-child dynamic. To singlehandedly dismiss everything we know about the implications of fathers and mothers have had for all cultures and all regions of the world for millions of years, with a parenting trend that has been around for few decades is rather ridiculous. No, it’s not science it’s political correctness since everyone feels bad for gay people now. We’ve encountered similar circumstances with Nazi Germany, and the Eugenics movement, just now it’s with gay people and it’s for a misguided but well-intended cause.

      Marriage equality has nothing to do with children as there are gay couples and straight couples who do not reproduce, and singles-by-choice, infertile couples and unmarried couples who do reproduce. The author seems to push ‘domestic partnerships’ as an alternative for gay couples however, if they are going to provide the same martial and parental benefits as a marriage contract does, then this her argument is basically about semantics and a contract title, which is silly. Marriage certificates provide effective ways to split property and ensure couples hospital visitation rights and healthcare benefits. If the only thing a DP or a CU is going to offer a same-sex couple is a different legal title, then this is a rather silly argument that strays from the real point.

      The solution to the parent debate is to simply remove a married couple’s ‘right’ to a child in the first place, and regulate child rearing by licensing parenthood. Straight married couples are just as capable of fucking up a child as anyone else. Marriages are not going to save the kids as there are plenty of incest-survivors of married heterosexual fathers, that can tell you this for themselves. If people are serious about the children’s rights movement parenting licenses would be a better method to allowing us to regulate who gets to be parents based on the best social science of child psychology and child development and also the maturity, and economic competence of the parents themselves.

      As I stand, the debate about parenting is completely separate from the debate about same-sex marriage, as child-rearing encompasses the lives of future citizens. What a man chooses to legally call his partner and do to him in a consenting relationship is his and that partner’s business but a child is no one’s ‘business’.

      A ‘self-response bias’ is critique only used in studies and research projects, not testimonies. Testimonies are simply used to draw out detailed personal analysis of why someone may support a particular idea or disapprove a certain idea. They are neither bias or unbiased, they are simply windows to people’s lives. There is no such thing as a methodologically flawed personal account. Hopefully you know that.

      The anecdotes you cite would probably be incredible flawed being most public kids of gay parents are under intense political pressure to please their parents and make everyone happy. Like Zach Whals for instance, talks about his moms like they cured his cancer but is silent about how he had spent many years writing to his donor begging for this man to come live with him and his moms, but that’s not internalizing loss is it? I mean, the man said it himself “the love from his moms had overpowered any loss he may have felt growing up without his dad” one would wonder hmmm, why should a child feel any loss at all? Isn’t it unfair to intentionally put a child through emotional stress and expect them to overcome it just to make their selfish parents happy? But not in this world where we think with our emotions and not what makes sense.

      As Abigail Garner, from ‘Families Like Mine’ eloquently puts it.

      ………“No matter how nicely a journalist or a researcher asks if a child would want a dad (in case of lesbian mothers) or a mother (in case of gay fathers), children still know what’s really being asked. The question is: ‘Should your parents be your parents?’ Answering the “right” answer means children have to defend their parents by proving how “normal” they are.” (‘Families Like Mine’)

      ……… “When I was young, I was very aware of the assumption: two women plus one son, equals fucked-up guy. You get these very concerned liberal reporters asking ‘Didn’t you miss your dad? Wasn’t that hard’ This is a issue that cannot be boiled down to a sound bite. There is a real story about the question of my father, but then there was a public persona that I felt I had to present. [My lesbian parents] weren’t coming to me saying ‘Don’t talk about your feelings about not knowing your dad. You have to present yourself just fine.’ It was a internal pressure. I felt protective of my family. You are aware of the political issue. You are aware that people are judging you” (‘Families Like Mine’)

      ………. ”‘I’m not comfortable with the poster-child mentality’ says Jesse [raised by gay parents], ‘If speaking on the topic of gay parenting, is reduced down to a cheer-leading role, where you have to give them the strength to carry on, there really isn’t a conversation’…. Jesse says when LGTB parenting groups invite him to speak, they usually expect his perspective to be completely positive. He remembers in particular when his candid comments made parents very uncomfortable ‘I was under the impression that they wanted me to speak because they honestly wanted the honesty’ says Jesse, when parents became annoyed when he shared the difficult aspects of his childhood. “If you don’t like what I’m saying right now, just wait until your kids grow up. You got a baby boom right now and they’re pretty cute, but wait until they are in their twenties.” (‘Families Like Mine’)

      https://books.google.com/books?id=CxHty2DIr-MC&printsec=frontcover&dq=families+like+mine&hl=en&sa=X&ei=M6rSVPW9CIygNr-ZgeAM&ved=0CCMQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=families%20like%20mine&f=false

      Notice that point she made about those studies. But be careful not to lash at her as you probably do towards Katy and Heather, this lady is one of your supporters.

      Also, the kids who’ve came out have mentioned repeatedly that they didn’t come out sooner because they “thought they were the only ones who’ve felt this way”. With this mindset among most socially isolated kids of LGTB parents, who are risking not only harsh criticism from your lovely supporters along but a bunch of family rejection from their disgruntled parents, you’re going to get the Asch paradigm, and never a true consensus of how everyone feels about their circumstances. People will die before becoming a social outcast.

      Petroleum is natural and has been used by humans since Babylonian times, it’s just toxic. Besides that we’re finding plant-based alternatives, which are very natural. Artificial reproduction is artificial, hence the name. And since most people cannot afford it, it’s not normal by any means. Apart from that, humans have been using innovative tools and technology for thousands of years, varying from culture to culture. However, the family structure for the genesis and pre-genius of the Homo sapiens species has always always consisted of at least one mother and one father, rather this society was monogamous, polygamous, polyandrious, or practiced partible paternity. It makes sense since it compliments the main goal in sexuality: to find a mate based on his/her physical assets and create offspring. In all traditional societies, children and adults can trace their linage for several generations back. Moms, dads, ancestry, community, spirituality, and good dieting practices have been proven time and time again to make people more successful and fulfilled, same-sex couples cannot provide this. And yes, never in recorded human or pre-human history have children been raised by a openly gay same-sex couple. In fact most cultures saw homosexuality as a sickness or something very demonic and wicked (which I myself find quite strange since most cultures seem to be accepting towards a ‘third gender’ or transsexualism, along with childhood bisexualism).

      How are we going to test children if we don’t test children? Here’s a f*cking thought, why don’t we NOT experiment on the lives of human beings because human testing is incredible unethical? Right?

      Do you understand what this could mean to the lives of millions of children if this selfish social experiment goes wrong, (like it’s already hinting it’s going to go)? From the testimonies we have: gender-confusion, sexuality confusion, self loath, suicide, depression, and academic failure. And with some kids (since there are documented cases of sperm donors generating hundreds of unknown children) accidental incest, which means putting an entirely new generation in genetic jeopardy so gay people can be happy. WHY would you risk that with the lives of other people so you can get what you want? Do you have any idea how selfish and self-centered that sounds, after you claim that you love your kids so much?

      I don’t mean this harshly but love is more than just buying food, and fulfilling your children’s financial needs. You have to be able to think about what’s absolutely best for them, even if it’s going to be to your inconvenience. If you understand that your same-sex parenting dynamic isn’t scientifically validated, wouldn’t it be more considerate and sacrificial on your part as the adult father to perhaps provide a family dynamic that complies with decades of social science research, anthropology, and gender studies?

      We wouldn’t prescribe a child a treatment that had not been fully tested, so why would we do the same for a child’s family dynamic at home? After all, a person’s upbringing defines the type of person they are going to be when they grow into adults more than any other feature in their life.

      And with that in mind, wouldn’t it be more considerate and sacrificial on your part as the adult father to perhaps, provide your beautiful babies a family dynamic that doesn’t infringe on their human rights, through commodifying their own genes and features? I don’t think anyone wants to be told that their life was based on money payments and a business contract with a company, so why put that emotional burden on a human being at all? We certainly don’t advocate men to shop for their wives’ features and genes from catalogers so they can have the ‘perfect spouse’ that would be sexist. However, if that’s bad, why do we think its ok to do that with a little person, just for being little?

      Your response about your family was a little bit more than stamping your feet, wrinkling your nose, folding your arms and turning the other direction. It answered none of the hard questions that so many gay people try to avoid when they flaunt about how they’re magically able to make better kids than straight people from a artificial family structure that has been poorly studied and never attempted in human history. You can’t answer about your daughter or your sons, because you know why? You more than likely didn’t think it through.

      I honestly expected a well thought out response of the concerns and points I made but it appears you decided to get emotional and throw a fit.

      Oh well. Have a lovely day.

      • A very thoughtful and informed posting. However, there is one thing that continues to irk (if not perplex) me as I read such powerful arguments, and I keep asking myself: Why do brilliant writers like perpetuate homosexualist myths through the very arguments you so eloquently formulate?

        Please understand that the term ‘gay’ is inappropriate when referring to homosexuals. Homosexuals are sodomites, and there is nothing ‘gay’ about it. I know that the term is frowned upon by the owner of this blog – I was already castigated for using it elsewhere here, but isn’t there a very important point that we are forced to ignore? Why should we be loath to use the term which accurately describes what a homosexual is, actually? How is this self-censuring not a manifestation of their exercise of power over us? Why is it that we are mandated to use a misnomer rather than an accurate term?

        Please, please continue to advocate for the most powerless members of our society. However, in doing so could you please be more reflexive, and use normal language – not what they have created so that we, as good little ‘breeders’, can do their work and misinform ourselves. It is in this way that you’ll do better at preventing children from being harmed in the future. Please resist their semiotic ‘reality’.

        • ‘Sodomite’ is not a biological term based in nature. It is a biblical term. A sodomite can be heterosexual at any given point in time. Sodomy is an act, it does not define a person or their sexuality/sexual preference.

          Stop with the nonsense. It is clear that you are not stupid. Don’t attempt to rationalize your use of a slur. Don’t disrespect us. Don’t disrespect yourself.

22. I am the product of a lesbian couple. My father decided he didn’t want to be a part of my life and my mother decided to finally acknowledge who she really is and come out as lesbian. I am very prooud of her being able to be free enough to do so. While I may have had to look other places to get that “stereotypical male” role model.. I do not feel any worse off for having two female parents. In fact I feel I am more compassionate, more in tune with the women in my life, more respectful to them. I can’t say I wouldn’t be this way if my dad had stuck around and they worked it out, but I think everything happens for a reason. Gay couples deserve to get married.. they are making the same sacrifices and commitment to raising a child it does not matter that they can’t get each other pregnant and is probably a nice change of pace not to see them making a family of 6-10 children when they can’t afford it. They deserve the same tax benefits and everything else a marriage brings, there is no reason not to. Just like a black person deserves to sit where they want on the bus.. it’s the same argument literally. Because your God says it’s not normal does not mean you should determine they deserve less benefits. He alone then should judge and not you. You are supposed to be accepting, understanding, and compassionate, not a proponent of blocking equal benefits. My mother and her partner acted as my mom and dad and raised me as such and in doing so I had no shortage of great male role models in my life that they surrounded me with. You don’t have to have a male parent and you don’t have to have a female parent to be a wonderful productive human. I have a bachelors in finance, and am currently in classes to get my MBA. I have many friends, a great network, and my ability to connect with and understand people on a deeper level has gotten me very far in life. I urge you to rethink your limited and traditional view of a Gay couples impact on a child. Every two parents will have different trials in raising children despite gender. Parenting is a gender neutral word. I am better off than many heterosexual couples’ children and probably also worse off than many. That is life. There are literally a million other more important issues than the issue of MARRIAGE of ALL things that we could focus on to make society more productive and a better place. Let’s start focusing on THOSE.

    • I am a the adult woman product of a lesbian relationship as well. My mother and her partner raised me from birth. I have no idea who my father is, and it’s something I don’t like to think about. I decided to train myself not to care. I have many friends raised by single moms and have never known their dads either so at this point I think it’s normal.

      Both my mothers were bully dykes. They acted like men, dressed like men, never wore makeup, and kissed in front of me and my brother. As a child growing up in the late 1990s in Frankfort Kentucky, it was incredible embarrassing and confusing. People hated us because my moms had to prove to the world that they were “here and queer” with absolutely no regard that this would cause their children to be socially rejected. My half-brother thought our mothers were men. He would constantly call them his daddies and would ask them for our ‘real mother’. Our moms thought this behavior was cute, and often encouraged his confusion. Several years of physical violence and bickering every night, our moms broke up. One them dropped out of our lives completely, and my brother’s biological mother moved us in with a femme. My then four-year-old brother thought she was his real mother.

      Right now he’s now a high school dropout. He works as a clerk at a gas station, and lives in a trailer where he spends his extra time getting high with his girlfriend and feeling bad for himself. I can’t convince him to get a GED, I can’t convince him to do something productive with his life. He blames everyone for his problems and he’s constantly begging our grandparents for money he doesn’t need. At some points he steals it and denies it when he’s caught. He is a loser and a self-centered crybaby, but my mothers favor him.

      I can’t say that being raised in a straight family would have stopped him from being the mess that he is, but it might have solved the daddy-problems, gender issues and abandonment issues he is going through.

      Right now he thinks he’s a transvestite and is taking hormones to make the transformation. Does anyone know if this is common or not for sons of lesbians??? Of course he can’t afford the hormones so his wonderful mommies are funding it and have even asked ME to pitch in. They have called me bigoted for disproving this crap and have called me a homophobic bitch for criticizing their judgments and their lousy parenting skills. I don’t care anymore, I have had enough. I am DISGUSTED at my mom and step-mom for funding this nonsense instead of giving the boy the therapy help they deprived him from, but what the hell can I do? They hate my guts and they won’t listen to a
      ‘bigoted anti-gayer’.

      I was the luckier one of us two. I got into a brutal fight with my step-mom and got the hot shot out that house when I was fourteen. My mom kicked me out. It was between me or her new partner and as it goes the partner came first.

      I lived with my grandmother and grandfather until I was twenty-two. BEST time of my life. No more stares when we went into public, no more down-talking the male sex, or how inferior heterosexuals were for not being gender nonconformists. I finally had a MOM in the house to teach me how to flirt with boys, or how to be proud about wearing dresses and act like a LADY. I finally had friends! I finally got to see a man and woman love each other like a normal couple. I finally knew the type of man I was going to marry when I grew up. I finally was allowed a NORMAL life. I never called them grandma or granddad. To my eyes they were the mom and dad that I was deprived of for fourteen years of my life.

      I struggled with school, I overcame it thanks to my grandparents financial sacrifices to get me tutors and extra help. Now I’m enrolled in a community college and I’m on my way to becoming a nurse as soon as I transfer next year. I am my grandparents’ shinny glory and the center of their universe. I love it.

      Your background does not have to define you, and I’m total proof of that. I have a wonderful relationship with a long-term boyfriend, I don’t think I am a man, and I wear dresses and makeup, yes. I’m completely normal.

      I’m grateful that my lesbian mom and my sperm donor dad gave me life, but they were not my parents. Parents love their kids more than than themselves, neither of my gay parents gave me such love. They were selfish selfish selfish people. I was lucky to experience this love from my grandparents. But it sucks now because these wonderful people won’t be around much longer to love on my children as grandparents like a mother and father WOULD have.

      I wrote all this to tell you, you experience is not universal. There are many of us kids out here who have had very crappy experiences with our “proud” gay or lesbian parents. And for many of us, like me, YES it would have been better if we had been born in a normal family!!!!

      I follow Katy’s blog silently and I don’t comment because I don’t want the trouble from her haters telling me how I should feel when THEY don’t know what it’s like to grow up in this insanity!! BUT is so so sooo nice to finally see kids of these homes brave enough to talk about what it’s REALLY like, and it is SUPER nice to know I am not alone in my opinion about my mothers.

      It’s not in your place and it’s not anyone’s place to tell me how I should feel about my lesbian parents, and it’s not your place to tell me or Katy or anyone how we should feel about gay marriages.
      I have mixed feelings, but I can understand why some kids of queer people may not like it at all!

      You have your opinion, Great!!!! Don’t shove it down our throats and tell us how to feel, please!!!

      [A message to anyone who’s read this:

      I don’t want any trouble or any responses from the people of this blog. This was just MY truth from MY experience. I don’t think every child out there has had the same experience with their gay parents but there are a bunch of us out there who haven’t been getting our opinions heard and respected. I don’t want any emails, no conversations or anything. I am DONE here]

      • Hi VJ. Thank you for sharing your story. Welcome to asktheBigot, though is sounds as though you’ve been here for a while.

      • Sorry to go against your wish not to enter in further conversation here. However, I feel compelled to thank you from the bottom of my heart for sharing your story.

    • Sir,

      I’m glad you’re doing well, however what evidence do you have that you represent the rule and not the exception? I do not deny it is possible for a same-sex couple to properly raise a child. I deny it is probable, as the growing evidence suggests.

      • Whoops, timed that response poorly. I was replying to CK.

    • Hi CK. Welcome to asktheBigot. Thank you for sharing your story and your thoughts with us!

    • CK,
      Realize there has a bit a shift of late. First, you do not get to control the conversation, content, direction or tone. You get to talk about your experience and your feelings–that’s all. Along a similar line, you do not get tell anyone how they should feel, or what issues are important to them. You are not them. You can focus on whatever you like for however long you like, but do not dare come and give orders to others.

      Catch a clue. Many of us, also raised in same sex homes, are against same sex parenting. We feel it is unfair to children, damages them and it denies them certain basic human rights. We get to say this. You do not tell other people what to focus on, or what’s important. So save all your cliches, “back of the bus” and tired crap about your moms’ taxes and your MBA and my fav, your deep thinking (which is not evidenced here but I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt). In general in this life you will not get to tell other people what they need or want. That crap only flies on the LGBT reservation. And as that goes, now I only speak for myself when I say this: “free at last, thank god almighty I’m free at last’. And I am not even a Christian. What a relief being free of all the LGBT talking points and the “because I say so” logic . So tell your moms you wrote this, and you used all the fake analogies, hit all the talking points, and they can sot off now, nothing new, not much true. For many of us it is not that we do not understand them it is that we do no believe them.

23. CK’s story is just as valid as anyone else’s. Ms. Faust put up this site ostensibly inviting people to engage in critical thinking and civil debate without personal attacks. CK is just taking Ms. Faust up on that invitation and expressing his differing opinion. How is CK controlling conversation, content, direction or tone for anyone other than himself?

    I will repeat my assertion that it is rather hypocritical that Ms. Faust congratulates commenters that personally attack other commenters by speculating on the mental health of their family members and questioning their love for them. Devoid of vulgarity or nonsense insults, comments directed at my sons and daughter are absolutely personal attacks. If Ms. Faust would like to revise her own rules to allow discussion of the psychology of people’s parents or children, please let me know and so I can go ahead and add some thoughts I have refrained from sharing out of (possibly undeserved) respect for the admin.

    • No one said that CK’s story was valid or invalid. IMHO’s and VJ’s response was that she or he shouldn’t tell others how to feel, being they grew up in gay homes and had polar experiences. ms. Faust has actually said nothing in particular. She merely thanked CK’s and VJ’s for expressing their views and their stories, and welcomed them to her blog. As far as I’ve assessed none of the 9 or 10 kids of LGTB parents who are currently speaking out about their family has said that their perspective was universal, just that their views are not getting any attention, and that the LGTB community has made the political landscape uncomfortable or even threatening for their children’s opposition. Chill, man.

    • Doc,

      First Ms. Faust does not control what I say. And she has nothing to do with it. She said something like, hi and nice to see you to CK, nothing more.

      You ask how? Did you read it? The tedious rote talking points, are (my mom is just like Rosa Parks and all other false analogies) lost on you. He states: “Let’s start focusing on THOSE” My response, Uhm? Let’s Not, or you go right ahead and focus on what you want but I am focusing on what I consider important.

      I feel that in my experience, the lies and the distortions that LGBT live and breathe are destructive to kids. He can focus on what he wants. He can’t tell me to focus on. Why would he imagine that anyone would think his focus is better or more important than others–Begs the question in what arrogance does he imagine that he can tell other people what to focus on?

      Here’s my focus: to make sure that people are aware that all children have the right to a mother and a father and that no adult has the right to a child that is not theirs or rights to women’s wombs. I am also committed to exposing the fact that children suffer in LGBT homes. And LGBT silences them.

      You do see we are a growing number. And we do get attacked our families, our jobs threatened. Our co-workers harassed by people that I suspect GLAAD and the HRC pay to silence us and intimidate us. I do not need him to tell me that I should give a rats ass about his mothers’ taxes. No doubt Ms Faust gets ticked at me because I am not very “nice” But I am so over you people and the endless lies and self-serving posturing. My bullish*t meter is like some weird Gaydar. It goes off at the first manipulative syllable.

      Sorry the kid sounded like a parrot, a trained parrot–polly want cracker “love makes a family” “I love my gay moms” yada yada yada. Ms Faust has not congratulated me. To be honest I do not know if your are manipulative or a poor reader.

24. IMHO “So tell your moms you wrote this, and you used all the fake analogies, hit all the talking points, and they can sot off now, nothing new, not much true. “

    • The analogies that the person gave was incorrect not the actual experience that he or she gave. Jesus Christ, this is like the second time you’ve done this.

    • Yeah so? Here’s the deal. If people teach kids to spew rote falsehood sooner or later the kids may bump into people that know the truth–and add to that the usual doesn’t work, he can’t howl bigot and scare us. So now what? He did what he was told–good for him. I loath the way LGBT uses kids. Some day we all wake up. Good Morning, smell the coffee and all that.

25. I know exactly who Candy and IMHO are. Ms. Faust does as well and the fact that she ignores these personal attacks by Candy and IMHO because they are a twitter follower and a writing colleague, while calling people out on the other side for similar offenses exposes the hypocrisy of this site. This isn’t a civil debate forum. This is a conservative echo chamber. Ms. Faust should revise her headers and forewarn gay and marriage equality supporters that they should stay away unless they want their character defamed and their families ridiculed. That way she can continue to misinform the naïve masses unchallenged, and all her like minded followers can be left alone to commiserate and agree with each other in the comments section ’til the end of time.

    • No one attacked your family. Again, you’re making claims up to find an excuse to dismiss my opinion. No one called your a ‘f@ggot’ or a ‘fairy’. I am not even Christian, so I don’t think your sexuality is wrong. I think same-sex parenting is wrong, but I have stated that my issue is clearly on the grounds of science, and not religious prejudices. Religion is an entirely different issue for me. Yes, I asked questions about your family that you have blatantly advertised in the short description of your profile picture. If you didn’t want anyone to question your parenting, why in Yewah’s holy name did you open the discussion of the gay parenting studies on this page, as a gay parent? Does that even make sense, sir?

      I don’t mean to ask this, but are you suffering some insecurities as a gay parent? I just don’t understand. Is your daughter really asking questions about her mother and you feel threatened? Are your kids doing poorly in school? What gives? If I was a proud gay man, who was absolutely positive that my parenting was so superior I didn’t need a mother to help me raise my kid, I wouldn’t give a rat’s backside about Ms. Faust’s opinion. I would think she’s full of crap and move on with my life. Clearly my kids and the ‘science’ supporting my choices prove that mothers are dispensable uteri and buyable DNA, no more or less, right? And since the media pities me so much, I wouldn’t be the least bit worried that a dozen kids (according to Dawn and Denise’s brief at least 50 more also), are speaking out against gay parenting. There are so so many politically correct kids who will reinforce what a fantastic Papa I am, right? But yet, here you are… It makes me curious.

      Ms. Faust has over a hundred followers so it’s very likely that some people on her blog also follower her on Facebook, twitter, Instagram or however the hell this woman keeps up. For Christ sakes, her twitter updates are visible on the bottom of her page, and updates daily. Get real, Mr. Rocks.

    • There are no naive masses here, people can actually think for themselves. I do agree with you on one point, though. The owner of this blog should, indeed, discourage homosexualist propaganda – let me list some of the usual propaganda items you took the opportunity to post just in that short space above:
      – “hypocrisy of this site”
      – “This isn’t a civil debate forum” [JMG site is, mayhap, much better?]
      – “conservative echo chamber”
      – “[wronged] gay and marriage ‘equality’ supporters”
      – “misinform the naïve [sic] masses unchallenged”
      – “like minded followers”

      Yes, yes – please, Ms Faust, withdraw from these HRC-vetted cadre the opportunity to use your blog as a propaganda platform.

26. Candy, you are confusing your personalities and referencing arguments and pictures you have seen while harassing me from your multiple “KB” Twitter accounts and while stalking my blog. You get real and start taking responsibility for your statements.

    I started interacting on this page because Ms. Faust and Ms. Barwick wrote disingenuous pieces online inviting “honest, difficult” dialogue with gay parents about how we are hurting our children.

    Now that I see Ms. Faust has no real interest in engaging in difficult dialogue because she can’t answer for her deliberate misinformation, you are correct in that I see no need to further this discussion on this page.

    • It seems your debate style is to instigating debates but then intentionally misconstrue and misinterpret what others have said towards you to make it appear that they had used ad hominem attacks towards you. It’s quite the headache, and it certainly doesn’t get anything accomplished.

      Your debating style has not been successful at all for you, sir. So far you’ve failed twice trying to prove that others have attacked your family, and failed once again when trying to prove that others had attacked another user’s experience as a child of two mothers.

      These childish debate tactics are no way to have an open discussion about gay parenting, like adults. As a matter of fact, this seems more like a way of you escaping those questions you don’t want to answer. You’d be doing your community and yourself a favor if you stood your ground, answer our concerns, instead of running away like a *coward, making wild-eyed claims, and licking your imaginary wounds.

      “KB” is this your ex-girlfriend you’re stalking? Or is this another unfortunate person who’ve you’ve dragged into a debate with and lost? Or is it just a pseudonym you’ve used to escape the conversation? I’ve seen this type of behavior before but usually it’s the works of young internet trolls, not someone who is supposedly old enough to be a father.

      You say you know who IMHO and who I am, and knowing others experience with unsolicited exposure, that makes me nervous. Are you a hacker? If you are, I will send Ms. Faust my concerns to have you removed from this page for everyone’s safety. Be careful with that trollish language.

      Everyone is having an open discussion with you. But instead of taking in these concerns, and making educated responses to it, you seem to be having an emotional-based response. Emotions are not rational. Emotions have killed untold millions of people, Mr. Rocks.

      Come back when you aren’t dodging the discussion and when you are facing adult matters like an adult. Until then, I really do not want to hear another complaint about the imaginary ‘attacks’ others have been making towards you when asking basic questions about the pitfalls in your artificial family structure, sir.

      Asking “how your daughter is going to model a mother, in a house where she isn’t exposed to one?” is attacking your family? Are you sure? Or you’re simply trying not to answer the question at the best of your abilities, and are trying to find any petty and superficial reason to dodge the inquire.

      As I’ve said in a very casual nonchalant way ‘Chill, man’. This entire diversion is just an expression of your immaturity, and quite frankly your bigotry. Holding the blog-owner accountable for the comments you had intentionally misconstrued from other users is child’s play. And when others visit this blog, all they will do is conclude how childish and emotional gay parents are, from your example. Think wisely.

      • Candy,

        “It seems your debate style is to instigating debates but then intentionally misconstrue and misinterpret what others have said towards you to make it appear that they had used ad hominem attacks towards you.

        It is a narcissistic operation, an abusive psychological maneuver. Not a debate “style” . If I could stress one thing is that this is the MO. imagine these tactics being used on a child, day in and day out. I have no idea why or how so many LGBT do this. I am not even sure all of the are aware–but many are.

        I just know it is standard and devastating to kids to have to deal with adults that swap and distort all words and NEVER take any emotional responsibility. You will never hear: “I am sorry” from them ever. They want everyone to beg forgiveness from them for their fabricated hurt feeling.

        • From my anecdotal account I think that is just men in general. Feel free to chuckle

          • Yep. It is a male rights movement that uses lesbians as front women (and they think het women live under a patriarchy) it is deeply misogynistic.

        • My experience with my now Lesbian wife and anecdotal evidence from the hundreds of spouses that I communicate with, all unknowingly married to homosexuals, matches yours. Total narcissism, no empathy for others, “gas lighting”, etc.

          It brings back many years of abuse when I read the “arguments” of same sex marriage proponents. They are always the victims in any story they tell. Logic need not apply. Reality is optional. There will be a lot of damage done before the majority of people catch on and reverse the insanity they are proposing.

          • An entire movement of people with destructive and abusive collective personality disorder. Yep.

          • If you haven’t already done so, have a read of Kirk and Madsen’s ‘After the ball’ (1989) (if you can obtain a copy): http://books.google.com.au/books/about/After_the_ball.html?id=1deGAAAAIAAJ&redir_esc=y. The book explains many of the strategies you encounter from homosexualists, including the special victimhood discourse they like to construct and promote.

            An earlier, condensed, version is a pamphlet written for a large meeting of the sodomite ‘liberation’ movement. It can be read it in its entirety here: http://library.gayhomeland.org/0018/EN/EN_Overhauling_Straight.htm

    • Katy and Ms Barwick wrote “disengeous” peices–oh that’s rich from some man that was raised by heterosexuals. What personal attack? In la la land me tell you I do not believe you is a personal attack? Grip—-meet reality, please. I’ll take this slow. Have I called you fat ugly or stupid? I have not even mentioned “your family” ever. Sorry I don’t have twitter.

      Here’s the problem, non compliance. My truth is not squaring with what gets fed to the public. Now I grew up in a same sex home and I get to speak about my life and my lived experience. That is not yours and you do not get to dictate it to me. So stand down. All you have are the talking points, and what you want to tell may have nothing to do with reality. You don’t like it that. Now your confounded, Since I went off script that’s a threat and too many of the adoring fans question the truth of the real lived experience As I see it non compliance is an attack in your mind? Correct? And what exactly is hysterical exaggeration? All of that kinda proves my points about distortion. Even a slightly astute reader can see you falling apart and lashing out with veiled threats and unfounded–not there on the page accusations.

      Here’s what maybe sticking in your craw, aside from my blunt style. First, I am immune to the manipulations and maneuvers, the deflection, the swaps, all the dramatic rhetorical games have no power. Why? I don’t care. Second, you don’t like that I know all the maneuvers, and all the little games better than most and I know they are in fact manipulations.

      I am immune to the manipulations. Because on a very profound level I do not care about you. I do think same sex parenting is bad for children and I do happen to care about children. If I did not feel 100% sure that same sex parenting is unfair to children and many are damaged by it and denied what they need and what they have a right to I would not have gotten involved in this. But I am 100% sure.

      You played for pity, tried to make me feel guilt with some crap ass accusation that I made a personal attack. But I don’t care so you get no pity for fake injured feelings. Now, here’s the rub. Not getting pity throws all the other manipulations that follow from it out the window. You do not know how to proceed. So true to form you start with a thinly veiled threat: You know exactly who I am. Got my address? Gonna threaten my job or family?

      You sir are the epitome of disingenuous. Here’s your difficult dialogue. The manipulation and gas-light don’t work. I can’t speak to anyone else’s interest but I am decidedly not interested in YOU telling me WHAT I KNOW. You who grew up in nice little heterosexual land and have the nerve to tell me what I know and what I saw and what I experienced.

      I dunno, maybe you are just getting very nervous because so many of us coming forward. And our voices will be a game changer. And no sir we are not going to be quite. And if you want to cry that what we say insults “your family” then I suggest you move them to the moon because we get to speak and I certainly don’t care how that makes you feel. You are getting this right? You do not get to dicate what it was like to grow up in a same sex home or in the LGBT community because you never experienced and in fact you do not know what it is like. The best I can tell you are suffering from a control issue. Everyone must conform to your will and how you dictate what reality is because the distortions created for the public must be maintained at all cost. No dissension ever or as evidenced by your comments .

      Look what happens when all the standard manipulations fail. You’re reduced to near incoherence. Its so familiar so predictable but if other people did not see it with their own eyes they would not believe it. People may have other insights but as I see it the high drama of your feigned indignation and made up accusations is like dealing with a complex motif of personality disorders.

27. This post is to sum up my observations of the preceding conversation and a response I directed toward Mr. (Dr?) Rocki in a different part of the internet. I write this to aid mutual understanding and to add depth to the concluded conversation. Replies aren’t necessary, but will be acknowledged.

    This is a relevant fraction of my original post directed to Rocki:

    “When I first read through the newest messages, I was confused. You felt personally attacked, but I couldn’t see why or why the conversation was going downhill. It was only when I read through the thread a third time that I caught the source.

    Candygurl could’ve made a better post if she hadn’t used your daughter as an example what difficulties children will face with same-sex parents. It was certainly unwelcomed, and her post could’ve easily used a hypothetical child in the same situation.

    That’s fair.

    What wasn’t fair was your accusation that it was a personal attack. She didn’t insult you or your family, but brought up concerns about the rearing process. Polite disagreement isn’t mud-slinging. When you started throwing accusations at Askme, that really wasn’t fair, especially since she politely welcomed both VJ and CK, even thanking CK for his input.”

    There was another post that responded to that one, but I don’t have permission to re-print it. It clarified a few details, but didn’t largely change the crux of the matter. For those wondering, I didn’t mention IMHO because her post wasn’t one of the two original posts that unintentionally caused the conversation to head south. So, I will end this post here.

28. Okay, I get it. Candygurl could have done this, IMHO could have done that. AskMe could have done a third thing. Or not. It’s pretty much a matter of subjectivity.

    What I find ironic in the extreme is a supporter of gay marriage huffing off a post because he perceives he has been the victim of a “personal attack’. Personal attacks are the absolute foundation of such a large percentage of communication from the LGBT community. They attack anyone and anything that stands in their way. And not simply verbally, either. As has been mentioned, they attack other people’s property, their jobs, their families. They attack their OWN children when they do not fall in line with the “yay gay” mantra.

    This does not hold true for all communication from the LGBT community or even for all LGBT individuals, obviously. However, to come on the website of a woman who has been viciously attacked for simply saying she doesn’t agree and considering the number of commenters on here and in social media who have even more egregious stories to report, I’m afraid the one who is “disingenous” is docrocki…..

    • Tisha & S, Sam,
      Sam they eat polite disagreement for lunch and belch. You seem like a nice reasoned person who may not see or want to see that there is a pathology of abusing. I know that sounds extreme but it is true for the most part. Yes sure there are exceptions but by and large the glue that binds this movement together is a shared contempt of other people and a shared delusion of superiority.

      Tish, Re subjective, well yes and no. He would have played the standard manipulation the whole “offended pearl clutching, how dare you insult my family” bit, no matter what. He would have found a way because it is like a con game–3 card monty as life. The best I can tell they use regular peoples’ good will as weapon against them. They want one life long apology because that means they have control of the person. No more than 3 or four exchanges can ever take place before the manipulations and abuse starts. Very often it is in the 1st exchange. If someone does not give in then the rage sets in. The only way I think to proceed is to realize what your dealing with. IMHO. Many people have been conned into believing and falling prey to the manipulations. And people who consider themselves nice and decent and caring don’t want to do or say what really ought to be said more often and louder. You saw. He gave what I see as a thinly veiled threat–he “knows who I am” (deflect and missive too) one thing is they make good on their threats. So many of the people pretend to be supportive because they are scared. The cost of speaking out is very steep. The threats are real. I think in time and continued exposure people who do not want to be called a bigot and have not thought too deeply will realize something is not right.

      Also based on my experience. The kids live with gas lighting and abusive narcissism all the time. They do not trust their own feelings and they are not allowed to have feelings unless those feelings serve to confirm the adults narrative. This takes a toll and cuts the kids off from meaningful social exchanges that would help them see sooner what is going on. The kids learn to be superficial and get by. The superficial serves well and many do well in school and seem–so perfect. That is why they push “outcome” based research. Its superficial.

      The last thing they want is for the kids to realize that their others who also feel the same and who have spoken out. They are told constantly, everybody see’s and admires the parents and thinks they are such victims and so heroic– the kids dare not question. A question means that their is something wrong with kid. The psychological abuse in same sex home is like nothing else I have seen anyplace else. There is no terminology for it yet. Either people compile or every exchange with them will head south. There is truth and they do not dictate it and people saying it is not some kind of bigotry–they just make all those word meaningless. IMHO

      • “An entire movement of people with destructive and abusive collective personality disorder. Yep.”

        IMHO, you’re being very rude and very unfair. And to be honest, its your type that makes it so hard to disagree with same-sex parenting without being viewed as a homophobe. Its actually your type that makes it hard for me to come clean about my politics as someone who doesn’t fully side with either party. I feel so stuck sometimes when I read stuff like this. Its as if I can either side with the gay-haters or I could side with the gay-worshipers. Where is the fucking middle ground around here, y’know?

        This may shock you but I don’t hate gay people. I don’t think they are an entire movement of “destructive and abusive narcissists”. I think their movement has been forwarded by the forces of some abusive politicians and money (like many movements), but to say that every gay person is in on this, or that every gay person is even aware of it, is slightly insane, and completely dehumanizes them.

        If you read books like the “Against Equality” trilogy or books like “The Trouble With Normal” it is evident that there are plenty of gays who are aware of the LGTB community’s political corruption and strongly disagree with it. One gay activist who wrote the “Against Equality” books with his team of radical queers was brave enough to talk about the decision of Proposition 8 and how its victory violated minority group’s voting rights. And no he is not a conservative, nor is he a Christian. He is actually an advocate of ‘sexual freedom’ and gender independence. He spent a lot of time helping minority group projects, and he specializes with LGTBQ people living in poverty.

        What about gay men like Dolce and Gabbana, who stuck up for you, and who also disagreed with the LGTB community’s infringements on the rights of children through processes like surrogacy and artificial reproduction? They are so rich, they could possible afford 20 surrogate babies, a team of nannies, and a wet nurse. But they didn’t, because they understood how this wouldn’t be entirely fair for the children. Are these men “abusive narcissists”?

        There are gay couples who adopt handicapped children that straight people had abused and gave away.

        There are gay couples who adopt older kids that infertile adoptive people don’t want.

        There are lesbian couples who partner with gay men to make children because they understand the importance of father-figures and heredity. Then there are gay couples who raise their adopted children with their children’s birthparents, so the kids will never have to grow up feeling abandoned or deprived a mother or father.

        Are all these people “abusive narcissists”?

        To cast all gay people out as being evil corrupted people who are in cahoots with each other to destroy their children is quite obsessive and destructive to your own causes. There are bad practices and selfish behavior everywhere, its simply hard to touch up on in the LGTB community because the media sees them as oppressed victims not normal fallible human beings, like everyone else on the planet.

        Yes, there are gay people who infringe on the rights of their children through 3rd Party Reproduction. But you know what? There are straight single-parents-by-choice, and infertile straight couples who engage in that same self-serving behaviors. Worse, they lie to their children and don’t tell them about their biological origins. Most donor-conceived people of straight couples do not even know they’re donor-conceived. So not only are they separated from their biological parents, bought like furniture, but lied to about it. At least a lesbian couple will have no issue telling their kids that their dads were shopped from a cataloger and their DNA was bought from a bank. Hell, they make children’s books about it.

        A lot of my gay friends don’t agree with third party reproduction or at least have very mixed feelings about it, and plenty are aware of the attention-seeking and sometimes irresponsible behaviors in their own community. They are kind people. Flawed, like everyone else on Planet Earth, but kind. I don’t appreciate you casting them out like that. Its very much like insulting a family member.

        Please, for the love of god, tone down that abusive language. Its very hard to believe you came from a same-sex household when you speak about gay people like how The Westboro Baptist Church does, you don’t show your face, or have even written publicly about your story.

        • Candy

          I just have zero patience for the all the lies. I escaped The Church of Holy Gay, brainwash failed. And that’s a good thing. I have a life–for others it was not such a happy ending. And that becomes clearer everyday. Its some serious stuff and I’m not playing footsie. If I owe anything it is honesty. Its like being the child of sleazy lying politician or minster or a grifter and then watching people vote for him,or see him a spiritual leader or hand over their life savings. I just hold my head in shock that people actually buy it. People may not believe me in particular at first and may be put off but they will remember what I said and what I described and then they will see all the manipulations, they will feel the abusive maneuvers and the dime will drop. I am not looking to sweet talk anyone into a position or convince them. I would hope people see things honestly.

          Dolce and Gabana are great–and so are others, I know a few. And they back me in ways they can. What I am saying as far as the movement goes is the rule and not the exception. And I don’t hold up the exceptions as a cover for the rule. I hold these abusive men in utter contempt because they are misogynistic abusers–period. Zero tolerance for abusers. People need to recognize for themselves not based on my language or my tact or lack of it. Everybody gets to reclaim language. And call me a cockeye optimist I feel most people will sooner rather than later. I seriously could not careless what LGBT thinks of me–they are very lucky that I have a filter. If you knew what the kids really felt and thought in so many of those homes your face would burn with humiliation for the entire long list little things you were kind enough to point out to lil ole ignorant me, as if I did not know–This is not an earthshaking thought but I’ll throw it out Exceptions are not the rule and do not use them to cover the abuse–real kids, real damage.

          • Ok IMHO, I guess it would be better if I had a clear picture of what exactly you experienced with your same-sex family, so I can better understand your rage. Would it be possible for you to share a summary of it? If you don’t want to share that on a comment section, I can definitely do emailing.

          • I have the experience of my own family and the shared experience of hundreds of others that mirror what IMHO says about the narcissism and gas lighting rampant in gay parenting. There are a few exceptions, of course and no group of people act monolithicly.

            My experience on the Internet researching and in dialogue about this topic has largely been met with similar tactics that I and my children experienced from my ex. Thinly veiled rage and narcissistic control.

            Sugar coating my words only makes people conclude that my experience must not have been too bad and makes it easier for them to believe the lies.

            The few times I have seen children of gay share pro parenting stories has been in the media spotlight or regurgitating a set of memes in their personal testimony.

            Having seen the brainwashing up close and personal do you blame me for suspecting that they are still under the control of their parent or unable think critically about it?

            I have to say I feel exactly as others on here feel. It is time to cut out the bullshit and talk frankly about our experience.

            You will never understand the surge of relief and joy I felt from listening to others honestly and openly talking about the brainwashing tactics that kept me in a marriage against my own self interest and survival instincts.

            Now that I am out, I am equipped to see past the misdirections, the manipulation by guilt, the abusive use of people’s instinct to be kind.

            If I come off as homophobic to you or others, I no longer care. Maybe your experience with all of your thousands of gay friends was all sunshine and rainbows. Mine was the opposite.

            if I saw kindness and reason from the other side of the debate I would react to that. For now I can only deal with what I see and that is lies and manipulation

        • Sorry to interrupt, but can I please invite you to visit this site: http://www.gnosticliberationfront.com/homosexualityandnationalsocialism.htm ?

          The ‘gay’ movement you imagine may not be as you imagine it. What IMHO is talking about is a disorder that characterizes these people. They think they are superior to the rest of us. It is a disorder because they actually believe this, which is really quite plain if you care to discern the subtext within their posts and writings. What do you think drives one to declare (see the site I linked to above) that ‘Gays exist because gays helped humans survive in a hostile and highly selective environment [sic]. Gays are more intelligent than heterosexuals because this helped the human gene pool survive. Since homosexuality is found in almost all cultures, in all times, and is also widely practiced in the animal kingdom, the salient question now becomes “How do gay people, with our elevated intelligence, help the gene pool survive?” … Nature chose gay men to fill this unique role of “nature’s elite,” possessing the extraordinary skills required to provide socialization and leadership. This meant balancing the need to survive and reproduce with the need to have a small minority focused almost entirely on bonding males together, creating a cultural expression for unity, and passing this cultural expression to the young.’

          I think IMHO knows exactly what she’s talking about, and is right on the money. She can read these charlatans very well, and they don’t like it! It’s just so sad to see otherwise intelligent people being actually taken in by their discourse!

          • I at first thought that site was satire but its very close to the SA doctrine and they were not joking.

          • Homosexuality is not “widely practiced in the Animalia [or any other] kingdom”. The new ‘HomoNAZIs’ may be able to pull off a lie about their unsupported version of anthropology, but, they have no legs on the natural law front.

            The only time homosexual behavior (which is a far-cry from a permanent ‘lifestyle’) is observed in animals is when it is used as ‘practice’ in the absence of the opposite sex, or as an act of dominance over another individual. The sex act (copulation/coitus) is never consummated. That would be an extreme waste of precious energy/resources.

            There is no obligate homosexuality, anywhere, in the animal kingdom, or any other kingdom-anywhere in the unmitigated natural world.

            Next.

      • IMHO,

        I am aware of the widespread abuse occurring withing the LGBT community, both inward & outward, accidental & intentional. The LGBT lobby/agenda has become something of a monster with the way they treat people. I won’t deny that, and it angers me. However, while I can’t trust the overall lobby, I will still give every LGBT individual the benefit of the doubt and attempt polite discourse. I understand that’s not how you do things and, though I disagree with it, I can’t and won’t try to compel you.

    • Ma’am,

      I agree with your assertions. While I understand how it came about, I do not defend or condone dockrocki’s behavior once he started interacting with Candygurl. As I pointed out to him, whatever justification he might have had, went out the window when he started attacking others, especially neutral Askme.The purpose of my last post was to lay the groundwork for future fruitful dialogue. Could it be pointless? Absolutely. But our goal is to enlighten and change opinions, which works best when we are respectful to one another. So, I strive toward that goal, imperfectly as usual.

      • And now I know why everyone starts off with a name instead of a generic meeting. Good grief, these posts can end up anywhere. *facepalm*

        That last reply is to Tisha.

29. Hi Katy — I just discovered you and am so glad to find your work. I have been trying to shout to anyone who would listen the results of this amicus brief you have so helpfully outlined above. I read the entire brief with wonder and incredulity, especially when I understood that nearly ALL the “no-harm” studies had deliberately excluded heterosexual controls as “heterosexist.” No one really wanted to hear my case on behalf on children at the blogs where I posted, and this research is always rejected out of hand as biased, even when people like Regenerus, for example, can repeatedly and capably defend his study from detractors.

    If the Supreme Court makes gay marriage the law of the land, I hope to see happen here what happened in France. After gay marriage was passed against the people’s will, massive protests were organized, and at their highest, the people in the streets numbered nearly a million. They were united under a single unified banner: “Every child deserves a mother and a father.”

    Imagine, Katy — hundreds of thousands of people cared enough for the children to rally in the streets to defend their rights! Here it is mostly silence. Children have been almost completely marginalized by the proponents of SSM and used mostly as a marketing tool for their cause.

    I am so heartened by your courage, your blog, this work. God bless you, Katy. I pray that the voices of the children will be heard above the roar of the mob who appears to have factored children entirely out the consequences of redefining marriage.

    PS: Thus far, France has yet to legalize gay adoption — because of those hundreds of thousands of people who cared enough to mobilize and protest for their rights!

30. I know I’m late to the party, but wow this is a lot of comments.

    Not that I am a sociologist and nor do I have the time to familiarize myself with the details of the literature regarding same-sex parenting vs. opposite-sex parenting, but it seems to me that the burden of proof falls on the same-sex marriage advocates. There is tons of research that says mothers and fathers are important before gay parenting was a glimmer in the public’s eye, as well as many studies that show divorce is destructive to children and likewise, adoption, surrogacy and reproductive technology babies seemingly are messy affairs for children. Gay couples can only become parents through these ways. Therefore, it seems to me this discrepancy needs to be addressed by a comprehensive and large consensus of strong studies to reasonably infer there is “no difference” in child-rearing between gay couples and straight couples. We are just starting to compare these two different households together in social science. From what I’ve found, gay couples raising children are demographically small in what already is a tiny minority of 4 to 5 % (charitably) of the adult population. That’s presumably is an explanation as to why the lack of large, randomized studies involving same-sex parenting.

    Moving to the larger policy issue at hand in regard to marriage, I understand that some of the plaintiffs in these high-profile marriage cases are using the fact they are raising children to justify them being “married” with all the hitherto benefits and responsibilities. I’ve heard this generally being argued by same-sex marriage advocates as a reason for “marriage equality” with the subsequent trotting out the pro-gay parenting studies to support this claim. But if all this is so and the jury’s very much still out on the whether there is “no difference,” then the legal successes the same-sex marriage crowd has enjoyed — unelected judges overturning recent democratically-ratified state constitutional amendments — are utterly unjustified on this front. That all this was rushed and has undermined our federalist system’s “laboratories of democracy” and our society’s overall civic health. That this has been done through deception and political, cultural coercion, as there currently doesn’t exist a sound or sizable academic, peer-reviewed basis for such a federal revolutionary overhauling of basic building blocks of human experience like courtship, reproduction and parenting. For it doesn’t take much critical thinking to recognize whatever inequality that same-sex parents face raising children, it is not very comparable to the human rights crises blacks face under Jim Crow, rendering all that civil rights rhetoric about “separate but equal” and “Loving v. Virginia” as both historically and morally obtuse.

31. Great blog on an important topic!

    To pull back the curtain a bit, there are no scientific conclusions to be drawn from any of the studies on homosexuality and child rearing cited. Techno-science is a method, not an oracle. With apologies to those who make their living trying to match the scientific method to broad, cultural human behaviors, it doesn’t fit. The scientific method requires objective observer(s) and, until we teach robots to do science, that is not happening for topics like SSM that revolve around human sexuality, human childhood, motherhood, human politics, and emotionally-invested funding agencies or university departments with financial conflicts-of-interests on all sides. It also requires controlling the non-experimental variables—we don’t even know how to count the variables of a human upbringing, let alone control them. It also requires a valid quantitative model if one wants to extrapolate conclusions. Do we really think a human being, the ultimate social animal on Earth, is a statistical “independent event” in her culture growing up? Can anyone ethically do an experiment to separate twins at birth and raise them with all the important environmental variables controlled for 15-20 years except the parent’s sexual lifestyle? Huh? So the meaningless application of words like “evidence” or “scientific” or Gaussian statistics and p values is window dressing in the SSM discussion. This sort of literature, like the comparable studies claiming to show that SSM “does no harm,” has value for communication and expression but it is neither scientific nor objective.

32. I love how same sex marriage proponents consistently fall back on “Science”, a (nother) man-made and flawed concoction still in its infancy and easily and readily manipulated by ideologues, as their go-to safe place.

    Here’s an idea- lets just go to nature: tried and true for a few billion years. Male + Female = Baby.

    All done now.

33. So, I decided I wanted a St. Bernard puppy, even though I lived in a studio apartment, worked over 12 hours a day, 7 days per week and was, therefore, rendered physically and emotionally incapable of being able to provide the basic necessities of loving reinforcement, exercise and training required of responsible ownership of that puppy, and growing it to a mature, healthy, happy adult dog. But, I WANTED it and by ALL MEANS, regardless of the puppy’s well-being, I was going to have it. After all – all any dog needs is food, water, a good bed, love – the very best that money can buy – right?

    Well, I got it.

    As predicted, it didn’t have most of its puppy to healthy adulthood needs met (but, “it was so well-fed and loved”) – not intentionally, but because the reality of my life (which I denied via a very neat rationalization)made it impossible for me to meet the dogs needs. It grew to be a 150 lb. monster, had to be surrendered to an expert dog trainer/rescue- was almost deemed unadoptable-which was a death sentence, but, thanks to one trainer willing to work with that dog for two years to undo the years of unintended ‘damage’ I had done in my selfishness, the dog finally wound up on a farm- along with other similarly ‘loved’/ruined dogs. He never became stable enough (safe, sane) to live in an appropriate home, with the right family. His life was ruined as a direct result of my selfishness.

    I am sure all you dog lovers and animal behavior “experts” are going to pounce on me with your “you should have known better”, “what were you thinking- everyone knows a dog needs more than a good bed, food and water…”, “yada, yada, yada….”, “this is different, kids are different”- and all your other attacks, and alibis…. or rationalizations.

    Yeah, sure.

    Thanks for making my point.

    • Yeah nobody to retrains kids. It is a one shot thing.

34. What I am thinking is certainly nothing new. Almost everyone has been socialized in communications that are first and foremost considerate of other people. And this is why Gaslight works.

    Gaslights and thought terminating clichés, short list

    You have been gas-lighted if you feel like the person deliberately or willfully misunderstand or misinterpret or misquote you in discussion and mirror this back to you or to others.

    You have been gaslighted if the person tells you that you or others did things you that you didn’t do or said things you didn’t say. Attempts to bully, shame or silence, mock, trivialize or say that “never happens”

    You’ve been gas-lighted when someone says “but nobody agrees with you” or appeal to authority. If they tell you that others do not agree with you or have a negative opinion of you” This attempts to make you feel isolated, cut off and alone—and not trust your own judgment

    You are being gaslight when they say “You are harming me or X and Z by saying. . .” Really? How so? Tries to make you feel guilty. Or a variant every time you say ABC it cause all adorable fluffy kittens to jump to their death–meowing–goodbye cruel world.

    You are being gaslighed when they feign needing the smelling salts “Pearl Clutching, “Shocking simply shocking” You feel you are communicating but you are accused of being aggressive, angry, crazy, stupid and such an ordeal to endure.

    Crude Gaslight. You do not know= ignorant. This opens the door for all manner of rhetorical swaps and false analogies. Everything you think is wrong– based on your religion or your shoes or your limited . . . or whatever. Fake social science used often along with pseudoscience.

    Even Cruder (this is the tactic of the not too bright) Have no right to say anything because it’s all “bigoted” “hater” “phobic”

    Here’s the bottom line. It is not illegal to disagree. It is not a hate crime. It does not cause suicides or acne. The real take away is all of it signals emotional hunchbacks–emotionally healthy people do not engage in these type of exchanges or move through the world with these habitual patterns.

    • That’s an incredibly accurate, and articulate analysis. I have not been brought up by homosexual parents (thank God), but I did see and experienced what some of these people can do in the workplace. The finesse with which they bully, the subversive ways in which they target people (especially Christians), the pathological lying, the manipulative micro-politics they engage in — all these and more have I seen and experienced first hand. Not just from one or two individuals, but enough to convince me that it is due to a trait that is shared by many of these people. Most likely it is due to a mental condition of which narcissistic and grandiose self-imaging is obviously a large part. To see my work colleagues suffer terribly at the hands of these sociopaths, one even attempting suicide, has convinced me that we, as a society, are on the verge of experiencing a very dangerous time in history.

35. We must always go to the source of our being, nature, when responding to manipulation by anybody. However it is you believe you came into being doesn’t matter- nature is tangible, observable and never wrong (unless and until it is manipulated by Man).

    Don’t take the bait of arguing religious conviction, social constructs or even ‘science’- always, but always, look to nature to open eyes, hearts and minds.

    We are our biology, there is no science (‘hard’ or soft) to support otherwise. Form IS function. Facts are observable-not theorized. The correct solution to this latest deviation from nature will not be found in a lab, law office or courtroom- it is to be found in nature.

    Nature is never relative. It is absolute truth.

36. Pingback: Studies on SS Parenting | Christian in Canada

37. I am so thankful to have found this blog! Apparently, Dr. Robert Oscar Lopez blog had been shutdown or something. Anyways, my husband never knew his father. His father died on the battlefields and was never found. This greatly affected my husband growing up and even today. He lacks confidence and doesn’t know how to take on a proper fatherly role with our sons (ex. doesn’t engage in conversations with them, doesn’t take them out to kick a ball around, etc.) – he kind of just avoids them. Yet, he is great with the girls and that’s mostly because he was raised in an all-girl household by his mom. It’s even more frustrating when the boys act out and he doesn’t know what to do so just ends up yelling at them or spanking them. He tells me all the time how he wished his father had been around and how he longed for his father, especially since all his cousins had theirs. He always felt left out. His mom just wasn’t enough even though her own brothers tried to be good male role models. He has trust issues with other men because he feels like they have each other and that he’s the odd man out. Other guys have their father as security while he’s vulnerable. His sisters all feel the same, like they are vulnerable and don’t have a father’s protection.

    If this is the way children from single-parent homes (or broken heterosexual families) feel, I can’t imagine how children of same-sex parents feel. Their feelings are valid, too. I hate how same-sex supporters want to dismiss it. I don’t know of any heterosexual parent who would tell their own child that she/he doesn’t need a mom/dad. We make mistakes (for our own selfish reasons) but I think we pretty much agree that in a perfect world, our children would have both a mom and dad.

Comments are closed.