Here is the question: does an empirical basis exist for claiming that children who are raised by two women or two men are equally likely to thrive as those raised in a conventional home? A “conventional home”, of course, nowadays includes divorce in a great many cases, among both gays and heterosexuals.
It has long been my belief that a great many homosexuals, perhaps the majority of them, are “gay” because of some traumatic sexual event in their childhood or youth. They are 12, their parents are fighting all the time, they don’t have any friends, and a 19 year old seduces them, and the homosexual pattern–which was previously not there, becomes imprinted. The gayness and premature sexual experience–which is almost definitionally traumatic, even if it is never consciously processed as such–go together.
We know that gays, bisexuals and transgendered people abuse drugs and alcohol at higher rates than the population as a whole: http://www.cdc.gov/msmhealth/substance-abuse.htm They don’t provide a number, but anecdotally I suspect it is significantly higher.
It appears they suffer disproportionately from emotional problems:
Several large population-based public health studies are discussed in the November American Psychologist (Vol. 56, No. 11) by Susan Cochran, PhD, an epidemiologist in the University of California, Los Angeles School of Public Health, who authored or co-authored many of the studies. Specifically, the studies find:Higher rates of major depression, generalized anxiety disorder and substance use or dependence in lesbian and gay youth.
Higher rates of recurrent major depression among gay men.
Higher rates of anxiety, mood and substance use disorders, and suicidal thoughts among people ages 15 to 54 with same-sex partners.
Higher use of mental health services in men and women reporting same-sex partners.
She does on to say that she doesn’t want this data to be used to claim homosexuals are inherently unhealthy. I don’t believe this either. Correlation and causation are two different things.
What DOES make sense to me is that if gayness is the result of trauma, then OBVIOUSLY it is connected with being traumatized. The trauma comes first, then the gayness. My personal opinion is this holds for many. It is impossible to say how many. Some kids are clearly, obviously, beyond any reasonable doubt born that way, and those are obviously going to be much, much happier openly expressing their sexual preference. These people do not concern me either.
But it is so hard to know what the truth is: everyone wants to cover for them. You can’t do a study asking about traumatic sexual experience and the emergence of sexual identity because the Gay Police will come after you. You can’t publicize negative facts too well or too loudly, because even if true, that would be “discriminatory.”
This is how differential rates of nearly everything negative about blacks has been kept hidden. They have higher rates of damn near everything: poverty, jail time, violent crime, drug and alcohol abuse, single parenthood, teen pregnancy, dropping out of school, etc.
But when you correct for the kids who grow up in two parent homes, POOF, the difference disappears. Crime rate is the same as two parent white families, and crime rate is the same as ONE parent white families. The large difference comes from there just being a lot more two parent white families.
Turns out is has NOTHING to do with race and everything to do with proper acculturation. Logically, if race has nothing to do with it, then neither does racism. And logically, with such a strong finding, public policy that was intelligent would focus on creating more two parent homes. This is cheap for the state, and better for the kids in literally every way.
It is easy to abuse the weak and helpless, and you cannot be more weak and helpless than an unborn child. And I’m not talking here about abortion, but about children who have not been born yet who will or might be adopted by gay couples.
Out of the gate, we can assume that any prospective gay couple is more likely to be suffering mental health issues and substance abuse issues. Obviously, there are extremely well adjusted couples out there, who would make superb parents, particularly in comparison with a dysfunctional heterosexual home, which is most of them.
But in working across large populations, we will have put children at increased risk of unhappiness before we even factor in the importance of gender roles in developing a healthy ego.
Read this: http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2012/08/6065/
Keep in mind that the socialist project is about eradicating ALL differences, which would include our ancestral, instinctive distinctions between male and feminine. They have, in my understanding, stopped using gendered words in Sweden. This is the direction this goes.
What is won, deleting all our cultural knowledge, everything which has come before? I ask you. What takes its place? What happens when everyone is transgendered and genetically engineered to be identical? Does the world become more interesting? I don’t think so. I think it becomes awful.
As I say in my Sade piece, the Sadeist curses God for making every tree just a bit different, and the only solution is to burn them all and place their ashes in neat little, identical piles. It is lunacy. It is eradicing all reasons for living, all interest and savor and DIFFERENCE, which is valued rhetorically, but not in reality. When a leftist calls for diversity, what they really mean is “Hate whitey”. That sounds awful, but I view it as the truth. Somebody needs to speak the truth. I could find dozens of quotes supporting this with a five minute search.
The alternative is GENUINELY embracing difference. You don’t do this when you take a cudgel to everyone who doesn’t even go so far as to disagree with you, but not agree with you immediately.
I won’t be buying an Apple product again, and it won’t be hard for me to shop less at Wal-Mart, or watch less sports. Fuck them. People are selling their souls for Wonder-Bread.
Nobody thinks deeply any more. Nobody looks deeply at the root principles that are ACTUALLY in play–they assume the ones stipulated are sincere, which they are not.
Everything in this universe is in motion, including our culture. It is both right and prudent to ask what direction we are going, and if that is in fact the best direction. One must have a principle by which to make these evaluations, a stated goal, and that is what everything I write is oriented around. This is the essence of my word Telearchy.
I’m not trying to rain on anyone’s parade, but am trying to ask important questions that affect ALL of our happiness. If we destroy every vestige of meaning and purpose, EVERYONE suffers. Gays suffer. Blacks suffer. Mexicans suffer. The poor suffer (and are suffering).
You don’t get graded on the extent of your self delusion. You get graded on your competence–at least in a sane world, one which many are doing their best to usher out, unceremoniously.