Some new research that certain folks are going to find inconvenient. Though merely inconvenient. The gears in their heads are remarkably well oiled. To the point where cogent social science slips right through. Do Children Need Both a Mother and a Father?
Extending their prior work on gender and family, Biblarz and Judith Stacey of NYU analyzed relevant studies about parenting, including available research on single-mother and single-father households, gay male parents and lesbian parents. “That a child needs a male parent and a female parent is so taken for granted that people are uncritical,” Stacey said.
In their analysis, the researchers found no evidence of gender-based parenting abilities, with the “partial exception of lactation,” noting that very little about the gender of the parent has significance for children’s psychological adjustment and social success.
As the researchers write: “The social science research that is routinely cited does not actually speak to the questions of whether or not children need both a mother and a father at home. Instead proponents generally cite research that compares [heterosexual two-parent] families with single parents, thus conflating the number with the gender of parents.”
Indeed, there are far more similarities than differences among children of lesbian and heterosexual parents, according to the study. On average, two mothers tended to play with their children more, were less likely to use physical discipline, and were less likely to raise children with chauvinistic attitudes. Studies of gay male families are still limited.
However, like two heterosexual parents, new parenthood among lesbians increased stress and conflict, exacerbated by general lack of legal recognition of commitment. Also, lesbian biological mothers typically assumed greater caregiving responsibility than their partners, reflecting inequities among heterosexual couples.
“The bottom line is that the science shows that children raised by two same-gender parents do as well on average as children raised by two different-gender parents. This is obviously inconsistent with the widespread claim that children must be raised by a mother and a father to do well,” Biblarz said.
Genuine commitment to be a good parent – an individual trait that one has or does not – regardless of gender of sexual orientation plays a larger role then whether there was one male and one female. Even single parents have been found to have children that do as well and in some cases better than households with two parents because that person has figured out a way to provide financially and a nurturing environment.
The issue of parenting and good outcomes – well-adjusted adults who are good citizens. Add up some casual experience and some basic statistics. America is not the wild west, but we are one of the most violent nations. We hold the traditional male-female household as the perfection factory for child rearing. The number of people identifying themselves with organized religion is on the decline, but the majority of U.S. citizens perceive, for whatever inexplicable reason, that we’re a Christian nation. As far back as they’ve been keeping statistics on child abuse, there is a child abused in the U.S. about every twenty minutes. So much for tradition. We have a tradition of struggling for our ideals, not living them. If single or gay parents just live up to the already established low standards of the traditional family, judging fairly, they should not be considered any worse parents than what we’ve had.
If human beings could generate their own energy – a condition that makes us utterly dependent directly or indirectly(meat) on plants – we would miss those dinners together. Considering our large brains and using a little imagination we could probably think of other reasons to get together. So despite their enviable advantage in the self generation of energy I doubt snails go to movies or frat parties, Green sea slugs use plant genes to live on sunlight
Part animal, part plant! This may sound like a tabloid headline, but scientists say that a green sea slug has managed to incorporate enough algae parts to easily live off of sunlight, just as a plant does.
Scientists already knew that a few slugs could eat algae but save the algae’s chloroplasts from digestion and feed off of their energy. Chloroplasts are where the photosynthesis process of turning light into energy occurs.
But this was not a self-sustaining system, since most slugs cannot make their own chlorophyll, a green pigment that fuels the chloroplasts. To get more chlorophyll, the slugs would have to eat more algae.
The green sea slug, however, can make its own chlorophyll.
Scientists at the University of South Florida have identified several algae genes within the slug’s body that are crucial to photosynthesis.
“This is the ultimate in horizontal gene transfer,” said Terry Gaasterland, a UC San Diego professor and director of the Scripps Genome Center, who was not involved in the study.
Once it incorporates algae genes into its system, the green sea slug, which lives in salt marshes in New England and Canada, passes the genes on to its offspring. The babies need chloroplasts to make the system work (the slugs don’t have the genetic instructions to produce them on their own). But all a young slug has to do to acquire such instructions is have a big meal of algae. Once the chloroplasts are in its system, the slug can make food out of light. It might never have to forage for algae again, said Sidney K. Pierce, a University of South Florida biology professor.
Yea, but would Jenny Slater date a slug.