/2X/ - (XX)

I've been watching a reality show as of lately, and in that show there's a girl that, because she was very vocal about some other contestant being a misogynist pig (he is) she became a "feminist icon" of some sort in my third world country for a week and a half (the guy had to abandon the show because of how much he verbally aggravated others, including the girl). But actually looking at her actions, besides of what she did to the stupid misogynistic guy, she also acts very aggressive and mean with her fellow female contestants, wants male validation, and there's rumours she might have hit her mother before the reality started. People on social media really tried their best to make her into a local feminist resistance icon but I don't think she is one. She calls other women bitches and always tried to get on with a guy that doesn't even like her the entire season and got jealous of her own friends for being friends with the guy. She even tried to use feminism against another woman just because that woman held hands with the guy ("how dare you touch him against his consent" etc, she thought the woman touched him in his privates but she only held hands). My question is, what are you supposed to do in these cases? Am I supposed to celebrate this? Am I being a bad person for pointing out the way she's absolutely not a feminist to my own understanding?

Can any kind nonna give their thoughts on this article?
>The Mother of All Same-Sex Parenting Studies
>Since 1957 the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Center for Health Statistics has annually interviewed between 35,000 and 40,000 households, collecting data on 75,000 to 100,000 individuals comprising a nationally representative sample of the civilian noninstitutionalized population of the United States. The present study examines combined 1997-2013 NHIS data, consisting of information on 1,598,006 persons, including 207,007 sample children. This sample included 2,751 same sex couples—2,304 cohabiting and 447 spousal—consisting of 1,387 male couples and 1,384 female couples; 582 couples—406 female and 176 male—had children under age 18 in the home. A more extensive battery of health questions, including the measures of emotional health used in this study, was completed for 512 children sampled, one per family, from the same-sex parenting families.
>Dr. Sullins, who analyzed the NHIS data, concludes:
>The higher risk of emotional problems for children in same-sex parent families has little or nothing to do with the quality of parenting, care, or other relational characteristics of those families.
>If the greatest benefits for child well-being are conferred only on the biological offspring of both parents;
>•and since same-sex relationships cannot, at least at present, conceive a child that is the biological offspring of both partners, in the way that every child conceived by opposite-sex partners is such;
>• then same-sex partners, no matter how loving and committed, can never replicate the level of benefit for child well-being that is possible for opposite-sex partners.

>This defect, moreover, is an essential and permanent feature of same-sex relationships; it is part of their definition, an irreducible difference that cannot be amended or abrogated by improving the circumstances, stability, legal status or social acceptance of same-sex couples.

>The primary benefit of marriage for children may not be that it tends to present them with improved parents (more stable, financially affluent, etc., although it does do this), but that it presents them with their own parents. This is the case for 98% of children in nuclear families—which most successfully fulfill the formal civil premise of marriage, that is, lifelong and exclusive partner commitment—compared to less than half of children in any other family category, and no children in same-sex families. Whether or not same-sex families attain the legal right, as opposite-sex couples now have, to solemnize their relationship in civil marriage, the two family forms will continue to have fundamentally different, even contrasting, effects on the biological component of child well-being, to the relative detriment of children in same-sex families. Functionally, opposite-sex marriage is a social practice that, as much as possible, ensures to children the joint care of both biological parents, with the attendant benefits that brings; same-sex marriage ensures the opposite.

https://askthebigot.com/2016/11/29/the-mother-of-all-same-sex-parenting-studies/

I have seen another study where the results showed that straight couples are more likely to be abusive to children than lesbian couples, etc. I do believe that. But I also believe that it's important for a child to have a healthy relationship with both mother and father (specifically when talking about single parents, not same-sex couples), so maybe it's more difficult for same-sex couples to fulfill the "missing role"? Not trying to be homophobic here, obiously. I just want to know how reliable the information in the article I posted is, especially in regard to lesbian couples (I'd believe that children raised by gay male couples might have a higher chance of having emotional problems because it's males).

I don't support having kids anyway but this is kinda depressing to read about.

>>33567
Haven’t read it but Googled “mother of all same sex parenting studies” and found this.
https://whatweknow.inequality.cornell.edu/topics/lgbt-equality/what-does-the-scholarly-research-say-about-the-wellbeing-of-children-with-gay-or-lesbian-parents/

> We identified 79 scholarly studies that met our criteria for adding to knowledge about the well-being of children with gay or lesbian parents. Of those studies, 75 concluded that children of gay or lesbian parents fare no worse than other children. While many of the sample sizes were small, and some studies lacked a control group, researchers regard such studies as providing the best available knowledge about child adjustment, and do not view large, representative samples as essential. We identified four studies concluding that children of gay or lesbian parents face added disadvantages. Since all four took their samples from children who endured family break-ups, a cohort known to face added risks, these studies have been criticized by many scholars as unreliable assessments of the well-being of LGB-headed households.

This is an interesting note: some studies include parents who come out as gay, divorce, and remarry as examples of gay parents, when this is obviously an unusual and highly stressful situation. I don’t know if the study you mentioned accounts for this. Try to look up meta-analyses of same sex parenting outcomes that examine multiple studies, those tend to be more useful than a single study as they reveal statistical trends. This blog post explains the use of them: https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/12/12/beware-the-man-of-one-study/

There’s not a lot of interest in picking apart whether gay people are good parents or not nowadays, so I haven’t read any good science journalism on the matter in either direction. The 79 studies seem to suggest that overall, gay parents have little effect on well being, but the authors point out much of the data is convenience samples, which isn’t the highest quality. See if you can find more recent studies than 2016, too.