iamwhatiseem
Diamond Member
- Aug 19, 2010
- 42,630
- 27,179
It is still a false narrative. These kinds of dumb studies are themselves purely anecdotal, and rely on the honesty of the participants. The only way the study could be valuable is if they installed cameras in pretty much every room in the house for months.. to show the level of involvement over a period of time.Of course there is.There is nothing "anti-male" here. Cultural notions change constantly.
The whole premise of the ludicrous faux study is that they make better fathers because they are less like most men.
What part of that do you not understand?
It alludes and attempts to drive a narrative that masculinity is a predictable cause of why males may not be be attentive to their children. That is the VERY FOUNDATION of the article.
And it is a false argument. It states it, without in any way proving it other than an assumption...which is easy to do when you already subscribe to it.
I read it as saying that gay fathers might have a more creative and expansive approach to fatherhood than some other men, and more active involvement in the care and raising of their children aged 1-6. There is nothing "anti-male" here. All of the people being discussed here are male. BTW: there is plenty of anecdotal evidence that some fathers have little involvement and shove the care of their children off on others. Perhaps the level of involvement of all fathers should be studied.
Regardless. It is just dumb. People are people. And the quality of a parent is related entirely on the individual characteristics of each person. Gay people are in no way "better people".... thus they are not better parents.
Once again it is an example of how liberal studies insult the masses paying homage to some preferred, chosen group.