Friday, July 11, 2014

Another Media Lie about Homosexuality

If you spend much time on the net, or listening to the media, you'll hear a lot of lies. Sometimes the lies are direct, and sometimes they're just lies repeated by sloppy journalists perfectly willing to quote charlatans to advance the liberal agenda, or sometimes just because they're too lazy to do any research themselves. One common trick is to quote the SPLC, a hard-core leftist con artist group you can read about HERE, and which is always referred to as though it were some kind of peer-reviewed scientific research group.

But I've recently encountered some nonsense lately about a "study" that "proves" that children of homosexual couples are healthier, saner, etc., than kids raised by boring old normal parents. This is in keeping with the paradigm described by Alexander Pope, as homosexuality has progressed from being reviled to being tolerated to being embraces... And now, being touted as morally superior to the practices of the rest of us. Well, I've been waiting for the "study" to be discredited, and it certainly has. It's kind of like a study proving that Hillary Clinton is honest based on interviews with Hillary Clinton and other members of the Clinton family. This is from

That Study Showing Kids With Same-Sex Parents Fare Better? Yeah, the Media Left a Few Details Out.

There’s been no shortage of media coverage of a new study that purportedly shows that children raised by same-sex partners fare better than other children.
“Children of same-sex couples are happier and healthier than peers, research shows,” was the headline of a Washington Post story. “Largest-ever study of same-sex couples’ kids finds they’re better off than other children,” proclaimed Vox, while announced, “Children of Same-Sex Parents Are Healthier: Study.”
But the actual study is a little more, well, complicated.
In an article published on Public Discourse, University of Texas at Austin professor Mark Regnerus takes issue with the study’s method.
The study, conducted by researchers at the University of Melbourne in Australia, found that “children in same-sex families scored better on a number of key measures of physical health and social well-being than kids from the general population,” according to an article written by one of the researchers on The Conversation.
But the sample surveyed in the study chose to participate. The Melbourne researchers didn’t randomly select the first 500 same-sex couples they found, after checking for sufficient regional/income/educational diversity. Instead, they advertised the study – and couples found the researchers, not vice versa. Furthermore, the couples then reported on how their children were – and no outside party fact-checked those results, or evaluated the children independently.
Talking about the couples who participated in the study, Regnerus sounds this note of caution:
[P]articipants—parents reporting about their children’s lives—are all well aware of the political import of the study topic, and an unknown number of them certainly signed up for that very reason. As a result, it seems unwise to trust their self-reports, given the high risk of “social desirability bias,” or the tendency to portray oneself (or here, one’s children) as better than they actually are.
Ultimately, Regnerus argues, this study’s methodology is so problematic the results aren’t worth taking seriously. He concludes:
Until social scientists decide to do the difficult, expensive work of locating same-sex attracted parents (however defined) through random, population-based sampling strategies—preferably ones that do not “give away” the primary research question(s) up front, as [this study] did—we simply cannot know whether claims like “no differences” or “happier and healthier than” are true, valid, and on target.
It should come as no surprise the news media trumpeted a study with these findings. Unfortunately for readers, flawed reporting on a flawed study does a disservice to everyone.
Quibcag: This unsavory embrace (take my word for it) is from  Ranma ½ (らんま½). 


  1. Well, those kids are sure a lot more likely to have been raped by their "two Daddies." Sexual deviants LOVE little boys. Love them, love them, love them. "Eight is too late!" "Ten percent is not enough! Recruit, recruit, recruit!" This is why they push so hard to change the marriage laws, so they can adopt cute little boys more easily and train them to be proper catamites.

    And this is why the liberals, with their long history of advocating for disgusting, destructive people and disgusting, destructive behavior, are so gung-ho to pimp little boys to these loathsome, AIDS-dripping old queers: the idea of not having sex with other men, or with infants, or animals, is part of "cultural hegemony," and it is the duty of the Party Vanguard to smash "cultural hegemony" wherever they find it, using any and all means at their disposal. "Cultural hegemony" is their term for the shared central ideas that are vital to our culture. It's Gramsci's term. Marx called these ideas "false consciousness" and declared that those who hold such ideas must be "re-educated."

  2. In Canada it was found that 33% of men and 28% of women with the surname Kerr were left-handed. It was a self selected survey so it was of no value.