|
Back to Index
Lesbians of mass destruction
William
Saletan, Slate Magazine
December 23, 2006
http://www.slate.com/id/2156033/
Poor Dick Cheney.
He was sure we'd find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. We searched
and searched, but he refused to give up.
Now he's discovering
what it's like to be on the other end of such obtuse certainty.
The conservative jihad has turned from Saddam to Sodom. Moralists
are denouncing Cheney's pregnant daughter, Mary, for disclosing
that she and her lesbian partner will raise the baby together. The
moralists are confident that having two mommies is bad for kids.
And no evidence to the contrary can dissuade them.
The 30-year
search for proof that gay parents are destructive looks a lot like
the hunt for WMD. The American Psychological Association has compiled
abstracts of 67 studies. Some are plainly biased, and only the latest
two or three have avoided the methodological flaws of earlier investigations.
But after 67 tries, you'd expect the harm of gay parenting to show
up somewhere. Yet in study after study, on measure after measure,
kids turn out the same.
One study found
that straight parents "made a greater effort to provide an opposite-sex
role model for their children," but it doesn't say whether this
affected the kids. Another says children raised by lesbian couples
"were more likely to explore same-sex relationships," but it doesn't
say they turned out gay. Other studies say they seldom do.
That's it. That's
the evidence against gay parenthood. On the other hand, three studies
say lesbians share child care more equally than straight couples
do. Others conclude that lesbians are more satisfied with their
relationships, that they show more "parenting awareness skills,"
that nonbiological lesbian moms "played a more active role in daily
caretaking than did most fathers," and that their kids are less
domineering and experience "greater warmth and interaction with
their mother."
Such unwelcome
findings haven't chastened the antigay lobby any more than they've
chastened the Bush administration. If the direct evidence doesn't
bear you out, look for indirect evidence. So conservatives have
developed a subtler argument: On average, children do best when
raised by their two married, biological parents.
Let's take this
argument a piece at a time. It's true that two parents are better
than one. It's also true that married parents are better than unmarried
ones. But those aren't arguments against gay parenthood. They're
arguments for gay marriage.
The biological
part of the argument is more serious. On average, kids do better
with parents than with stepparents. Focus on the Family, a leading
moralist group, concludes that gay parenthood is unhealthy because
"it is biologically impossible for a child living in a same-sex
home to be living with both natural parents." Actually, that may
change. Scientists recently produced a fertile adult mouse by combining,
in one embryo, DNA from two females. But a lesbian who wants a genetic
bond to her partner's baby doesn't have to wait for such technology.
She can simply ask her brother to donate the sperm.
If you believe,
as Focus on the Family does, that we should stop creating families
in which one parent is biologically unrelated to the child, then
gays are the least of your worries. By professional estimates, 40,000
babies are born each year from donated eggs or sperm. You want to
stop nonbiological parenthood? Go chain yourself to a sperm bank.
For that matter,
if you want every child to have the benefit of two parents, you're
picking on the wrong Cheney. Mary's sister, Liz, just had her fifth
kid. All things being equal, Liz's baby will get one-fifth as much
parental attention as Mary's will get. But nobody complains about
that.
And let's not
forget that the case against nonbiological parenthood is based on
averages. Averages make bad law. The best critique of gay parenting
studies is that because many homosexuals are closeted, those who
are found by researchers and who agree to participate are disproportionately
white, well-educated, and female. But that's exactly what Mary Cheney
is. She's a vice president of AOL. Her partner's current occupation
is renovating their home. Should they abstain from motherhood because
they're above average?
The same goes
for gender averages. James Dobson, chairman of Focus on the Family,
says Cheney's pregnancy is a bad idea because a father "makes unique
contributions to the task of parenting that a mother cannot emulate,"
such as "a sense of right and wrong and its consequences." You must
be kidding. Cheney's partner is a former park ranger. They met while
playing collegiate hockey. If they want a night out to catch an
NHL game, Grandpa Dick can drop by to read bedtime stories about
detainee interrogation.
If you're going
to base family policy on averages, the chief problem isn't stepparents;
it's men. That's what "pro-family" groups keep covering up. According
to Focus on the Family, "Increased risks of physical and sexual
child abuse at the hands of non-biological parents are another serious
concern for same-sex families." Nope, not for lesbians. The latest
study cited by the group actually concludes that the "key risk factors
are living with a stepfather or the mother's boyfriend." Of 55 child
deaths reviewed in the study, zero were caused by a stepmother or
by a biological mother in a stepfamily or live-in relationship.
Other studies show the same pattern in child abuse generally.
The Family Research
Institute says Cheney's child "will disproportionately associate
with homosexuals—who are as a class considerably more apt to have
STDs and a criminal history [and] be interested in sex with children."
That's hilarious. Women commit 3.5 percent of single-perpetrator
sexual assaults and make up 7 percent of the prison population.
The Family Research
Council says lesbians are dangerous parents because of their "high
prevalence of life events and behaviors related to mental health
problems," particularly rapes and sexual attacks. But if you look
up the study cited by the council, guess who committed virtually
all of the rapes and sexual attacks? Men.
You want to
protect kids? Here's my proposed constitutional amendment: "Marriage
in the United States shall consist of a union involving at least
one woman."
Or you could
just let Mary Cheney raise her child in peace.
A version
of this article also appears in the Outlook section of the Sunday
Washington Post.
Please credit www.kubatana.net if you make use of material from this website.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License unless stated otherwise.
TOP
|