An article today in the Daily Mail, Betrayal of a Generation, outlines the difficulties experienced by children in the United Kingdom. The UK performed as follows:
Rates of teenage births were the worst in the developed world. British children were most likely to be drunk from the age of 11 onwards, most likely to have had sex by 15 and highly likely to smoke cannabis. Their diet was also poor.
The Netherlands ranked highest according to the UN study. The difficulties cited by the article suggest that pro-child social programs in the UK have not been effective at improving the plight of these children.
It leads me to the question which has long troubled me in the same-sex marriage debate: how can heterosexuals who have so neglected their obligations as parents dictate to gays and lesbians the limits of marriage and parenting rights?
It has been my opinion that if we indulge the selfishness and self-gratification of heterosexuals (sex without love, love without commitment, children as an afterthought) then we have no right to refuse gays and lesbians in their assertion that there should be exemptions from moral absolutes as well.
Kinsey, in his landmark studies on sexuality, from a population of participants sought to “describe” what America’s sexuality really was. To dispel myths and “get down to the facts.” We now know how agenda-driven his research was, and how flawed his population selection was. Kinsey is the left’s, Paul Cameron. Nevertheless, his work was championed and set the foundation for a sexual “revolution” which has had enormous negative consequences for multiple generations of children.
I may not agree with gay marriage based upon my religious beliefs and my interpretation of some social science data, but my larger concern, and the larger concern of our society’s future should be how heterosexuals are treating sex, love, commitment and parenting.
This study from authors, For-Wey Lung and Bih-Ching Shu in Comprehensive Psychiatry (opens a pdf file in this window) assess adult ratings of parent-child relationships as correlated with sexual orientation. The authors find significant differences between the gay and straight groups in parental overprotection and parental concern. There appear to be significant issues with this study but I thought I would note it since it is quite appropos to discussions we have here. I have written the authors with questions regarding sampling, definitions and assessments of sexual orientation and the lack of non-clinical homosexual group. Readers: post any other questions or observations you have.
UPDATE – 2/15/07: In further review of the study, it appears that the flaws in design outweigh any conclusions that could be drawn from it. Not only was the homosexual group a clinical group (they were diagnosed with an adjustment disorder), they had much higher neuroticism scores than the other two groups which stacked the deck against them. In essence, the authors varied two independent variables (sexual orientation, & neuroticism) simultaneously and attributed all the effects to the homosexual variable. You can’t tell what predicts what and certainly not causes what. Without adequate controls, you cannot say how much of the variance in perceived parenting was related to being gay and how much was due to higher neuroticism.
About all you can say is that a small non-representative group of homosexual soldiers in Taiwan who have an adjustment disorder and are high in neuroticism perceive their parenting as worse than a larger group of heterosexual soldiers in Taiwan who have an adjustment disorder but are significantly lower in neuroticism. All of those who have an adjustment disorder perceive their parenting as worse than those soldiers who do not currently have an adjustment disorder. I am careful to say perceived parenting because neuroticism as a trait may impact recalled parenting. In other words, if you manifest the temperamental trait of neuroticism (negative, prone to depression and worry, generally unhappy), this is likely to color your recall of upbringing. Some research suggests that the relationship between perceptions of parenting and adult pathology are related in a bidirectional manner (children impact the parent’s relationship and vice versa – this essentially means that some kids are harder to parent than others and the quality of the parental relationship and hence the recollection of that relationship will be colored by the temperamental traits of the children).
They meet!. I believe that my original theory should be revisited. If you are still interested in this bizarre story, you should go check out the link quickly because it was on YouTube once for a few hours and then pulled. If you aren’t that interested, then you might be annoyed, disappointed, upset or worse. Donnie Davies’ C.H.O.P.S. program is starting to take shape though.
UPDATE: 2/14/07 – We interrupt your V-Day celebrations to bring you news that Donnie Davies has now posted the footage MTV did not want you to see on his website. He has actually hired Joey Oglesby part-time. What a guy!
Good song for a blog, eh?
Michael Luo has a story in the New York Times this morning titled, “Some Tormented by Homosexuality Look to a Controversial Therapy.” Intended to provide coverage of reorientation efforts in the greater New York City area, the article reviews some familiar ground.
The article focuses on Corey Larson, a young man who is seeking change through People Can Change and David Matheson, a student of Joe Nicolosi’s. At first read, it looks to me like a surface review of some issues that breaks little new ground.
Bob Spitzer is quoted sounding like he has changed his views on the prevalence of change. However, he has been saying that change is rare ever since the study came out.
In the audio accompanying the article (Part one, Part two), Mr. Larson described how he has reframed his attractions as being expressions of emotional neediness rather than sexual attractions. Specifically, he says he has emotional needs to connect with men at an emotional level but that these needs are not met through sexual contact. He also describes how change to become completely heterosexual is not now his objective but rather to live consistent with his beliefs is more it.
Mr. Larson speaks highly of the People Can Change group and the Journey Into Manhood weekend. A glance through the website reveals the heavy reliance on reparative drive theory to explain homosexual attractions. I am not sure the creators of this site would say all homosexuals are subject to a deficit in masculine identification but they are saying that their homosexuality was based on that dynamic.