|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Captain Corea
Joined: 28 Feb 2005
Location: Seoul
|
 Posted: Thu Jan 19, 2012 2:22 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Ineverlie&I'malwaysri wrote: |
^ I highly doubt the article's author is on Dave's to answer, nor would she likely stoop to answering a question with a blatantly obvious answer, i.e. why an article about research on homosexual parents would "steer towards homosexuality" (whatever that means).  |
It means, that if the factor was about "children knowing they are chosen/wanted", then why the need to only emphasize one segment of adoptive families? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
NYC_Gal 2.0
Joined: 10 Dec 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 19, 2012 4:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Another point that may or may not have been brought up is that these children might know that they are chosen and wanted, but they were discarded and unwanted (in many cases, at least) by someone else.
My little brother was about 7 when he asked me where his REAL mom was, even though he has 2 now. I didn't want to explain that she was a teen when she had him, and his father had been an unsavory character. All this, in a poor country. That was up to my mom and her partner to disclose when my brother was older. Instead, I told him that his real mom didn't have a Nintendo Wii, Playstation, a new bike, and 2 puppies. He thought about it for about 5 seconds, smiled, picked up the place of sliced apples and peanut butter that I'd just prepared for our snack, and said "Let's go play Mario." Whew! He's since been told the truth, and that instead of growing in his mom's uterus, he grew in her heart.
My mom and his mom have been together for over 8 years. I doubt he'll have that many issues caused by being the child of a gay couple. He lives in Park Slope, which has one of the highest concentrations of lesbians in the USA, so there are many other children there in the same situation. If so, it's still better than the issues of being an orphan in a poor country. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 19, 2012 4:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| duke of new york wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| duke of new york wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
Not to mention that the author is the chairwoman for a gay-rights advocacy group.
Of course her findings are going to be nothing but positive. |
Thank you for demonstrating the concept of "ad hominem" for the rest of the forum. Of course, we know that just because the author has an opinion about the matter doesn't make her claims incorrect.
. |
Actually I demonstrated the concept of "bias" for the rest of the forum. It seems it is only you who thinks that pointing out bias equates to an ad hominem.
Someone who has a vested interest in an issue and then writes an article/paper in support of said issue...well such an article should be looked at more carefully then if written by someone with no bias.
This is elementary logic. |
You said "Of course her findings are going to be nothing but positive," implying that her bias makes her results invalid. This is the definition of a circumstantial ad hominem attack, a recognized logical fallacy. If you just pointed out that she has a bias and that should be considered, it would be fine, but it doesn't automatically make her wrong. Plenty of researchers have had opinions related to their work, it doesn't mean it is impossible for them to conduct a valid study.
Who are you talking about anyway, the author of the article or someone who did one of the studies? Because the writer is just reporting on research done by other, academic sources. |
Well she says there is research and cites some people but I didn't see any links to the actual studies (which would be nice.
But yes I shouldn't have said "findings" I should have said "write-up" And no that is not an "ad hominem". It is simply pointing out a fact. Does anyone really think that gay-right advocates are going to publish something that hurts their cause? Or for that matter are anti-gay rights advocates going to do this?
But by all means if you have any examples that prove my assertion incorrect then by all means do so. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pkang0202
Joined: 09 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 19, 2012 4:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| There needs to be more gay dudes as to reduce the competition for women. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rollo
Joined: 10 May 2006
Location: China
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 19, 2012 6:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| l think the Captain is right that this is about adoption. The article cited title seems to point to a bias by the author. I can think of no good reason that gay parents would not be good parents. There are so many unwanted and abandoned children in the world that I think that gays adopting is a good thing. . But the article really does nothing to prove that gays make better parents. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NYC_Gal 2.0
Joined: 10 Dec 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 19, 2012 7:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Most kids are going to get bullied for something or other. Having gay parents is at least something that can be (possibly) expected and planned for. Acne or weight or wearing the wrong color shirt on Wednesday or any of the plethora of other reasons can spring up unexpectedly.
This is most definitely biased. It's about adoption. Better to adopt and deal with bullying than leave the kid in an orphanage to have to fend for their own self once they come of age. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
duke of new york
Joined: 23 Jan 2011
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 19, 2012 8:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| duke of new york wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| duke of new york wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
Not to mention that the author is the chairwoman for a gay-rights advocacy group.
Of course her findings are going to be nothing but positive. |
Thank you for demonstrating the concept of "ad hominem" for the rest of the forum. Of course, we know that just because the author has an opinion about the matter doesn't make her claims incorrect.
. |
Actually I demonstrated the concept of "bias" for the rest of the forum. It seems it is only you who thinks that pointing out bias equates to an ad hominem.
Someone who has a vested interest in an issue and then writes an article/paper in support of said issue...well such an article should be looked at more carefully then if written by someone with no bias.
This is elementary logic. |
You said "Of course her findings are going to be nothing but positive," implying that her bias makes her results invalid. This is the definition of a circumstantial ad hominem attack, a recognized logical fallacy. If you just pointed out that she has a bias and that should be considered, it would be fine, but it doesn't automatically make her wrong. Plenty of researchers have had opinions related to their work, it doesn't mean it is impossible for them to conduct a valid study.
Who are you talking about anyway, the author of the article or someone who did one of the studies? Because the writer is just reporting on research done by other, academic sources. |
Well she says there is research and cites some people but I didn't see any links to the actual studies (which would be nice.
But yes I shouldn't have said "findings" I should have said "write-up" And no that is not an "ad hominem". It is simply pointing out a fact. Does anyone really think that gay-right advocates are going to publish something that hurts their cause? Or for that matter are anti-gay rights advocates going to do this?
But by all means if you have any examples that prove my assertion incorrect then by all means do so. |
This is exactly what a circumstantial ad hominem is. From a book cited on Wikipedia,
| http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem#Circumstantial wrote: |
| Ad hominem circumstantial points out that someone is in circumstances such that he is disposed to take a particular position. Ad hominem circumstantial constitutes an attack on the bias of a source. This is fallacious because a disposition to make a certain argument does not make the argument false; this overlaps with the genetic fallacy (an argument that a claim is incorrect due to its source). |
It goes on to say that bias can obviously reduce the trustworthiness of a source if it speaks without evidence, but the point is that someone who has a personal bias is perfectly capable of being right about their facts. You not only pointed out her bias, which was reasonable to do, but said that it means her findings/write-ups "are going to be nothing but positive." Just because she wrote something that agrees with her bias doesn't necessarily make it flawed. That is what ad hominem is. You say, "Does anyone really think that gay-right [sic] advocates are going to publish something that hurts their cause," but just because they are arguing for their own cause doesn't make their evidence invalid. It deserves skepticism and close scrutiny, but to just assume it is flawed or wrong is a fallacy.
| Quote: |
| Well she says there is research and cites some people but I didn't see any links to the actual studies (which would be nice. |
I agree there should be sources provided, but this seems to be the norm in the media today. Whenever I see an article referring to "research" or "studies," the actual source information is rarely linked. Most people are just lazy and trusting, so the writers don't bother to include sources. I mean that it is not unusual for writers of these kinds of stories to not link their sources.
| Quote: |
| But by all means if you have any examples that prove my assertion incorrect then by all means do so. |
I'm not sure what assertion you mean...do you mean examples to prove biased sources can publish legitimate analysis of studies? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 19, 2012 8:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| duke of new york wrote: |
It goes on to say that bias can obviously reduce the trustworthiness of a source if it speaks without evidence, but the point is that someone who has a personal bias is perfectly capable of being right about their facts. |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Certainly but (a) it does not mean that they exercise said capability and (b) that tends to be the exception and not the norm. Look at global warming, abortion or any other divisive issue. You'll find that most people are either ill-informed or cling to pre-conceived notions when a personal stake or bias comes into play. Human nature. |
| duke of new york wrote: |
| I'm not sure what assertion you mean...do you mean examples to prove biased sources can publish legitimate analysis of studies? |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
Do you agree or not that biased sources are significantly less likely to publish research that disagrees with their position? I do and thus I give unbiased sources (or seemingly unbiased sources) backed up with research the benefit of the doubt. I see no reason however to extend biased sources the same courtesy. As we are all well aware that "research" can be cherry picked to support an agenda. I'm not even going to get into the question of who posted it...that's another whole can of worms. Nor the fact that actual research was not linked (though your remark about it IS plausible). Finally see Mr. Captain Corea's remark at the top of this page.
Suffice it to say that all that together combine to make me doubt the veracity of this source unless further proof or research is forthcoming. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ineverlie&I'malwaysri
Joined: 09 Aug 2011
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 19, 2012 9:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Actually I demonstrated the concept of "bias" for the rest of the forum. It seems it is only you who thinks that pointing out bias equates to an ad hominem. |
Nope. Dismissing someone's arguments on a personal basis without considering them on their merits does constitute an ad hominem.
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Well she says there is research and cites some people but I didn't see any links to the actual studies (which would be nice. |
Don't be so lazy. She gave at least three sources. You can look them up for a defintitive answer instead of criticizing her on a maybe.
| pkang wrote: |
| There needs to be more gay dudes as to reduce the competition for women. |
Yeah, but then there'd be more competition for the really hot guys. 
| rollo wrote: |
| l think the Captain is right that this is about adoption. The article cited title seems to point to a bias by the author. |
Yeah, it's about adoption - BY GAY PARENTS! Not sure what is so hard to understand about that.
| Quote: |
| I can think of no good reason that gay parents would not be good parents. |
Really, none? How about that the son of a lesbian couple does not have a father figure? Vice versa for the daughter of a gay couple. What if the kid is not pre-gay? From where does he get his heterosexual role model? I am not necessarily saying these have negative outcomes; indeed, from this article it would appear that they do not. Nevertheless, they are questions which bear scrutiny which you should have been able to think of.
| Quote: |
| But the article really does nothing to prove that gays make better parents. |
Hence the word may. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 19, 2012 10:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ineverlie&I'malwaysri wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Actually I demonstrated the concept of "bias" for the rest of the forum. It seems it is only you who thinks that pointing out bias equates to an ad hominem. |
Nope. Dismissing someone's arguments on a personal basis without considering them on their merits does constitute an ad hominem.
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Well she says there is research and cites some people but I didn't see any links to the actual studies (which would be nice. |
Don't be so lazy. She gave at least three sources. You can look them up for a defintitive answer instead of criticizing her on a maybe.
[ |
Then it's a good thing I considered the arguments on their merits and found them wanting.
As to the sources? You must be kidding. They ALL with the exception of Brodzinsky display the same bias.
| Quote: |
| Gay parents "tend to be more motivated, more committed than heterosexual parents on average, because they chose to be parents," said Abbie Goldberg, a psychologist at Clark University in Massachusetts who researches gay and lesbian parenting |
| Quote: |
| When you think about the 114,000 children who are freed for adoption who continue to live in foster care and who are not being readily adopted, the goal is to increase the pool of available, interested and well-trained individuals to parent these children," Brodzinsky said. |
| Quote: |
| There is very little research on the children of gay men, so Stacey and Biblarz couldn't draw conclusions on those families. But Stacey suspects that gay men "will be the best parents on average," she said. |
Goldberg's claim is without merit. Many heterosexuals choose to be parents too. And many who didn't yet have kids love them just as much as if they were planned. Sure some may not...but the point is how does she know this for a FACT? It's an assumption, nothing more
Brodzinsky does appear more balanced and his argument does have merit however he seems to be making a sweeping judgement in the quote above. But I agree with him on balance.
Stacy's is the weakest of the three. Based on very little research not even enough to draw conclusions she suspects that gay men "will be the best parents on average." Basically a hunch in other words?
So we've got one assumption
One statement about needing available, interested and well-trained individuals" Which doesn't support either side.
And something that amounts to a gut feeling or hunch.
So you tell me...what exactly am I supposed to look up? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Captain Corea
Joined: 28 Feb 2005
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 2:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ineverlie&I'malwaysri wrote: |
| rollo wrote: |
| l think the Captain is right that this is about adoption. The article cited title seems to point to a bias by the author. |
Yeah, it's about adoption - BY GAY PARENTS! Not sure what is so hard to understand about that. |
[/quote]
What is "so hard" about this is the word BEST. If you're going to try to compare A to B, why not do it evenly? Adoptive parents vs natural parents? Gay parents vs straight parents?
But as far as I can figure, the title is flawed because it's the "wanted" part that was the focus - NOT the homosexuality.
How hard is that for you to figure out? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pkang0202
Joined: 09 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 3:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| In a gay family (gay parents with adoptive children), at dinner time who gets the big piece of chicken? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NYC_Gal 2.0
Joined: 10 Dec 2010
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 8:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sons of lesbian couples can have male role models. Gay parents tend to go out of their way to find these role models. My parents are still very good friends, and he loves his sort-of-step-son, because he had 2 daughters and wanted to be able to experience a son as well. My little brother visits my dad all the time, and they make fart jokes, my dad taught him how to use the toilet like a man, and even lets him watch hims shave. He also has uncles and male friends of the family. There is no shortage of male influence.
I'm good friends with a gay couple with an adopted daughter. She has plenty of aunts and "aunties" (female close friends) who take her to see Disney on Ice, go shopping for dolls, and all that stuff. It's not like her dads don't do those things with her, though. If anything, she has an amazing wardrobe from very fashion-conscious parents that I wish I'd had at that age!
Gender is somewhat flexible. I'm not talking transgender, but some men are better at being maternal while still being manly, and some women are better at (traditionally) masculine roles, without losing their femininity.
Either way, adoption is almost always better than living in an orphanage.
I'm not gay, but I plan on adopting. If my child is of a different race, I'll be sure to learn as much as I can about how to style their hair, because my mom had no clue as to how to deal with my curls, and there's a wall at my grandpa's house covered with photos of me in elementary school with horrible hair. My mom had straight hair and was at a loss as to how to style it. I forgive her now, but I won't be making the same mistake with my kids. I used to fight and scream and be dragged to the hairdresser, because I was always so angry and looked like a poodle afterwards. In middle school, they finally let me grow and style it the way that I wanted.
If adoptive parents truly take the time to think about some of these issues that might develop, there are workarounds. It's not about sexuality. It's about planning and caring.
End of thread?
EDIT: The person who cooked gets the biggest piece, or chooses who gets it. If it's take out, that depends on the family. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ineverlie&I'malwaysri
Joined: 09 Aug 2011
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 9:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| NYC_Gal 2.0 wrote: |
I'm not gay, but I plan on adopting. |
That's beautiful, NYC_Gal, and you won't regret it. You'll be doing something wonderful for both yourself and the kid. Maybe you'll even be as lucky as the couple who helped us with our first adoption.
They had adopted a baby boy, but had always told him about his origins on a level he could understand since he first began asking. One day when he was in first grade the class was talking about love. When the teacher asked, "What does 'love' mean" he raised his hand and answered "Love means to adopt." Needless to say, mom and dad were ecstatic when they were told. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rollo
Joined: 10 May 2006
Location: China
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 6:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Adopting is wonderful by whoever. The late great Harpo Marx adopted many children who when they got old enough he would set down with them and explain the situation that" unlike other children they were special because they were 'chosen" specially selected". I know this has nothing to do with the topic. I have some doubt that adoptive parents whatever the sexual identity can be as good as natural parents. But for an orphan they are great. I also doubt the lack of bias in the article. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
