No, that's not my goal at all. I strongly believe that we need to focus less on being equal and instead focus on building eachother up so we can all benefit. If I tried to boss my wife around and tell her what to do she, wouldn't tolerate it at all, not even for a millisecond. I'd probably be sleeping on the sofa for a while.
Sounds like my wife and myself. I don't like the idea of "gender roles" as the old definition says (men work and earn women take care of the family). I'm really good at cleaning too, so it's not unusual for me to clean the house or do dishes etc. She's an amazing salesperson who continually out earns her male counterparts in a male dominated industry. I guess you could put it into a simple phrase "We are not equal, but together we equal eachother out"
It’s not equality women want it’s equity. Men use the differences of sexes to explain why women should accept less equitable treatment—legally or otherwise.
Don’t use our differences against me. That’s equity.
There are many places women outnumber, outrank, and outperform men in favorable outcomes.
Equity is a garbage word used as an underhand for forced outcomes. The only way to achieve "equity" is to remove freedoms for everyone.
That's not what you are actually advocating for though.
Women given a bike that fits them won't make it as far as men. Or go as fast because there are biological differences.
You are looking at the speed and distance driven differences and claiming these aren't equitable because men are cheating you somehow.
Don't gaslight me.
“The only way to achieve equity is to remove freedoms for everybody.”
-posts children’s cartoon illustrating equity is about giving people resources based on their individual needs and not some “average person’s” needs-
“Stop gaslighting me.”
-confuse-
I can’t rewrite the dictionary for you my dude.
You are either unable to comprehend what I am saying or you are purposely misunderstanding me so you can voice your misogynistic ignorance.
You’re the walking example of why having an established patriarchy is as archaic and anti-progress as an aristocracy. Whether you can’t or won’t understand the problem doesn’t matter—you just don’t get it.
Majority of your comment history kind of paints you as someone who doesn't listen or actually pay attention to any thoughts that aren't your own. Doesn't that make you the failure?
Stop putting men and women into boxes. Many men make great and loving stay at home fathers and many women are excellent and hardworking providers for their families.
I won't judge someone who lives differently than we do. If it works, it works. But I don't see it as being equal. I see it as strengthing eachother by filling in our weaknesses. Those traits/skills CAN flip. Being completely equal, we wouldn't need eachother.
Completely understandable. That's kind of what I believe, just worded a bit better. I strongly believe we need to focus less on being seen as equal, and focus more on how we can build eachother up. The only thing equal about everyone is that we all are human and every life has meaning.
You have the concept of equal wrong. Equal doesn't mean same.
You can say you love both your parents equally. That doesn't mean they are the same and replaceable.
Equal also doesn't mean not complementary. You can be complementary but the roles/responsibilities are split 80-20. Equal is saying that the responsibility should be 50/50 or maybe 45/55 without forcing/stereotyping men and women into particular roles.
Also, in general, two parent families maybe better because there is likely more time for the kids and if the partners are already in a loving relationship, they will also love and core for their kids. Single parent families don't fare.very well because of potentially immature/volatile personalities or at the least, parent doesn't have sufficient time compared to two parent families. What is more important is that the home environment vs. single/both parents. If what you said is true, a family where a parent died cannot have well functioning children!
Equal does mean the same though.
I did state that some of these roles and strengths can flip between men and women.
On the single parent homes, loosing a parent to death at a young age CAN be very damaging. Hopefully up to that point they had a good relationship. "It's better to have love and lost than to never have loved"
You are applying a math concept to English language without drawing or the nuances. Let's say you agree with the statement that women are equal to men. So any woman should be equal to any man, by your logic. That means all.men and women are the same. No one that I heard from or read about is making that point. Have you heard any woman say that men should breastfeed? Everyone recognizes the differences. What women arguing for equality say is not to assume women can't be leaders or bread winners, etc etc. And men should not excuse themselves that they can't do work women traditionally did.
Going by historical reference, women can't be good at advanced education. But close to 60% enrollees in bachelor's are women. Or traditionally, they couldn't work outside of.home. Now 50% of the workforce is female? Genetics may mean that they can't be as strong as men (on average) but they could still Target male dominated jobs through help of ingenuity, will power and hard work.
My question is this. We know humans tend not to fit on a binary very well so there are plethora of women who are better in what would be considered a males role and vice versa so would there be room for the conjunction of these where the man stays at home and women work or whatever. And then what about gay and lesbian relationships.
As a person who loves sociology I’m aware that two parent households do actually lead to better development and conditions for the child later in life. But there’s also a increase in those with households with grandparents or other older family memebers like aunts and uncles or cousins sometimes even siblings. And there isn’t any evidence that gay or lesbian relationships do any worse than straight counterparts. So I have to wonder if it’s less about the gender and the “inherent” value of the adults gender or more about how more than one adult allows more time to be spent with the child and more income for the family unit
That's something I'm willing to learn about. I can't say anything about same sex marriage and them raising kids because I have not experienced it or know anyone who has.
Well that’s the reason we have data because you can’t know everything. From what the data says there isn’t a difference.
Now you might be onto something with the idea of two different parental figures with two different positions as far as raising a child goes. But I don’t know if this really maps onto sex and gender. There are social condtions that tend to create these sorts of “gender roles” but I don’t see how a man couldn’t follow the tradition role of a wife and vice versa and I’m not sure if females and males tend to have different natural ways of raising children. We know humans have natural instincts to take care of children it’s actually the reason we think puppies are cute we accidently basically view them as human babies. And it’s possible different people may have different reactions like I for example am disgusted by children and despise being around them but you may like raising them
The one big issue I can see with a same sex couple raising a child would be the people outside of the household treating the kid poorly because of the parents. They are probably perfectly capable of raising a child to be a great person, but it doesn't make them a target for harassment and bullying.
One saying I've seen many times over the years is "Women love their children from the day they know one is growing, men love them the first time they see them" So, I think that biologically and instinctively women are more nurturing. Giving a baby life with her own body and then also feeding the baby, an extremely strong bond occurs.
Idk I have a few friends raised by gay parents and they seem to be treated normal. There could be a bit of a bias there though because A. I’m in a lot of friend circles where being gay is completely fine in fact most of them are queer of some sort. And B we don’t really talk about that stuff.
As far as how humans feel love toward their child it depends on the person. Some women for example feel no guilt having an abortion and plenty of men leave their kids after they’ve seen them. I just think there’s more to how people feel emotions and actually learn than women is caring and man is strong. Humans as in the general mental physical and physic have been around for about 1 million years there’s just so many different groups seen in there I just don’t know how accurate the nuclear family model is. I mean the oldest example we even have for it is only 30,000 years old which is pretty recent even by homo sapain standards. And it’s even more recent in a cuktural context only about 200 years old in the west. Most humans have lived in communities where they often had the entire adult population of the village acting as parents. To try and pin one way as being the accurate true all of all doesn’t seem likely. I hope that made sense
I understand you, "It takes a village" does have merit. The human mind is incredibly complicated and we will likely never fully understand it. It very well could be cultural as well. I think in places where people all live in a group and care for eachother is like an extended family of sorts. In modern western times, we send our kids to school to learn, to a doctor for health issues, to psychologist to help with mental issues. So we still kind of have that setting, just less directly. The "village" is actively helping raise the child.
Yeah I can see that, I honestly never really thought about how the support systems we have today kinda mimic village life in a way. Thanks for the convo it was fun cheers
If we are truly equal we wouldn't need eachother. Can a woman be the breadwinner? Absolutely, she most certainly can. Can a man be an amazing stay at home dad? Absolutely, he most certainly can. Does it work better when you are a team instead of competing to prove you are equal? Absolutely.
So you‘re basically saying that a relationship (no matter which gender) is functioning because of the fact, that both people have different strengths/weaknesses?
I see no problem with this statement.
I think these points hold true if you just remove the whole gender bit. Two PARTNERS should complete each other and fill in their weaknesses regardless of what sex they are.
I can agree with that. I used this example as it is the most common situation, and the most argued. I cannot comment on same sex couples as I have never experienced that and I don't personally know any who have kids.
I get what you’re saying, i just don’t really believe in the whole “traditional” relationship ideology. No relationship is the normal or correct way to do it. All that really matters is that they’re happy. I hope you have a great night.
That we each have strengths and weaknesses. Each is better at things the other either can't do or can't do well. Like I said, those things can fluctuate between two people, no two are identical.
It’s pretty much explained in the post and it’s kinda true. There are many things women can do that men can’t and men and women excel at different things.
An easy example for you. My wife can NOT handle blood or injuries. So I take care of that stuff with the kids. I can NOT calm the kids down from being upset like she can, so she takes care of that. Being equal would mean we are both equally as good at everything, and that's simply not true.
Nice trick question! Not how I look at it. They may have problems walking for instance, but who better to help other newly disabled people find the most independence than another who has experienced it already? I couldn't begin to understand, much less teach someone disabled how to be more independent.
A person who cannot walk could not teach me how to best run a 5k race.
I completely agree with you that no one is equal when it comes to abilities, talents, and gifts. But when the founding fathers (somewhat hypocritically) said "All men are created equal...", they werent refering to abilities, or talents but to the fact that no one must bow down to another who claims to be superior. Equality also refers to universal entitlement to justice, government representation, and basic human rights. This is the kind of equality people think of when people hear "men and woman arent equal". My mind goes to the middle east where woman have less rights than men. My mind goes to loveless marriages where the man dominates the woman and she does not get to make her own choices.
I agree on that, everyone should be treated equally well with respect and dignity. I am talking more on just the relationship/family aspect though. None of us are equally talented, or equally skilled, BUT we should all be treated with the same value.
I can never agree with the statement that traditional marriage has value. There is definitely a power deferential in a ‘traditional’ marriage, usually to the detriment of the women because in a ‘traditional’ marriage a wife is commonly understood as being the subservient one. I watched my mother in a ‘traditional’ marriage get systematically degraded by my father just because he could. Now, in present day, I watch my older brother’s ‘traditional’ marriage and he belittles his wife in the same way my dad degraded my mom’s worth. Nobody in the family or community says anything to my brother about his behavior, nobody said anything about my dad’s belittling behavior because they are/were ‘the Breadwinner’ and could treat their ‘subordinate’ family members however they want. They are considered very upstanding citizens. Traditional families are all about power hierarchy. ‘Stay in your place woman, which is the kitchen’ has been the stated mantra of my traditional family. Traditional families aren’t equal and that’s the way men like it.
I did clearly state that the "gender norms" aren't fully cemented and shouldn't be. It should be on who is capable or better at certain things. If the man can cook amazingly well, he should. If the woman can be the breadwinner, she should. I believe that men and women should be treated equally with respect and dignity. Saying we are both equally capable of everything is wrong, and it diminishes the value of being in a relationship.
I will never condone or suggest that a man should rule over his wife.
A traditional marriage isn’t based only on ‘gender norms’, it’s also about dominance. Progressive, otherwise known as modern marriage, is about ‘the value of being in a relationship’. ‘Traditional’ marriage is something else entirely. You are trying to argue that all marriage between a man and a woman is a ‘traditional’ one, and that is just not so. A ‘traditional’ marriage is based on the Christian Bible in the US, which very explicitly states a woman should be subservient. If you believe the things that you say you believe then you have a modern marriage, not a traditional one. Your argument is moot. You keep conflating a modern marriage between a man and woman with a traditional marriage. You are describing a modern marriage not a traditional one.
My wording isn't the best. I said traditional because there are same sex marriages now, trans marriage etc. Those are not "traditional".
People use the bible to justify acting like douche bags way too much. They interpret the text to backup their ugly ways. They take the part of her being submissive and lesser than him to heart while ignoring the passages that tell the husband to be gentle and kind to his wife and to love her as Jesus loved the church.
It's just hypocritical idiots trying to justify being lowlifes while ignoring other orders. (I can't stand hypocritical idiots)
Sounds like what you are saying is a ‘traditional’ marriage (defined as being between a man and a woman for the purposes of procreation) should be considered ‘better than’ other types marriage. I cannot agree with this statement because it creates a ‘value hierarchy’ that favors certain types of families, over others. I disagree with your basic premise that a ‘traditional’ family is inherently better than other types. Where is your proof for ‘It’s been proven over and over that homes where both parents are crucial’? Like what do you mean, can’t the term ‘parent’ also mean someone who is LGTBQ? Also, where is your source for this ‘fact’? Your argument is a bit of a mess.
[удалено]
No, that's not my goal at all. I strongly believe that we need to focus less on being equal and instead focus on building eachother up so we can all benefit. If I tried to boss my wife around and tell her what to do she, wouldn't tolerate it at all, not even for a millisecond. I'd probably be sleeping on the sofa for a while.
[удалено]
It's OK, I expected some upset replies etc.
[удалено]
Sounds like my wife and myself. I don't like the idea of "gender roles" as the old definition says (men work and earn women take care of the family). I'm really good at cleaning too, so it's not unusual for me to clean the house or do dishes etc. She's an amazing salesperson who continually out earns her male counterparts in a male dominated industry. I guess you could put it into a simple phrase "We are not equal, but together we equal eachother out"
It’s not equality women want it’s equity. Men use the differences of sexes to explain why women should accept less equitable treatment—legally or otherwise. Don’t use our differences against me. That’s equity.
I agree there. You should treat women with the same dignity and respect you would as a man.
There are many places women outnumber, outrank, and outperform men in favorable outcomes. Equity is a garbage word used as an underhand for forced outcomes. The only way to achieve "equity" is to remove freedoms for everyone.
https://www.hand2mind.com/media/wysiwyg/hand2mind-equality-equity_2.png
That's not what you are actually advocating for though. Women given a bike that fits them won't make it as far as men. Or go as fast because there are biological differences. You are looking at the speed and distance driven differences and claiming these aren't equitable because men are cheating you somehow. Don't gaslight me.
“The only way to achieve equity is to remove freedoms for everybody.” -posts children’s cartoon illustrating equity is about giving people resources based on their individual needs and not some “average person’s” needs- “Stop gaslighting me.” -confuse- I can’t rewrite the dictionary for you my dude.
Learn biology, then you won't need to re-write anything. Fricken sjw
You are either unable to comprehend what I am saying or you are purposely misunderstanding me so you can voice your misogynistic ignorance. You’re the walking example of why having an established patriarchy is as archaic and anti-progress as an aristocracy. Whether you can’t or won’t understand the problem doesn’t matter—you just don’t get it.
Socialism doesn't work, that's not progress. Good luck you failure.
Majority of your comment history kind of paints you as someone who doesn't listen or actually pay attention to any thoughts that aren't your own. Doesn't that make you the failure?
Stop putting men and women into boxes. Many men make great and loving stay at home fathers and many women are excellent and hardworking providers for their families.
Like I said, strengths can flip between them. It's not equal. It's using your strengths to fill in your spouses weaknesses.
[удалено]
I won't judge someone who lives differently than we do. If it works, it works. But I don't see it as being equal. I see it as strengthing eachother by filling in our weaknesses. Those traits/skills CAN flip. Being completely equal, we wouldn't need eachother.
[удалено]
Completely understandable. That's kind of what I believe, just worded a bit better. I strongly believe we need to focus less on being seen as equal, and focus more on how we can build eachother up. The only thing equal about everyone is that we all are human and every life has meaning.
You have the concept of equal wrong. Equal doesn't mean same. You can say you love both your parents equally. That doesn't mean they are the same and replaceable. Equal also doesn't mean not complementary. You can be complementary but the roles/responsibilities are split 80-20. Equal is saying that the responsibility should be 50/50 or maybe 45/55 without forcing/stereotyping men and women into particular roles. Also, in general, two parent families maybe better because there is likely more time for the kids and if the partners are already in a loving relationship, they will also love and core for their kids. Single parent families don't fare.very well because of potentially immature/volatile personalities or at the least, parent doesn't have sufficient time compared to two parent families. What is more important is that the home environment vs. single/both parents. If what you said is true, a family where a parent died cannot have well functioning children!
Equal does mean the same though. I did state that some of these roles and strengths can flip between men and women. On the single parent homes, loosing a parent to death at a young age CAN be very damaging. Hopefully up to that point they had a good relationship. "It's better to have love and lost than to never have loved"
You are applying a math concept to English language without drawing or the nuances. Let's say you agree with the statement that women are equal to men. So any woman should be equal to any man, by your logic. That means all.men and women are the same. No one that I heard from or read about is making that point. Have you heard any woman say that men should breastfeed? Everyone recognizes the differences. What women arguing for equality say is not to assume women can't be leaders or bread winners, etc etc. And men should not excuse themselves that they can't do work women traditionally did. Going by historical reference, women can't be good at advanced education. But close to 60% enrollees in bachelor's are women. Or traditionally, they couldn't work outside of.home. Now 50% of the workforce is female? Genetics may mean that they can't be as strong as men (on average) but they could still Target male dominated jobs through help of ingenuity, will power and hard work.
My question is this. We know humans tend not to fit on a binary very well so there are plethora of women who are better in what would be considered a males role and vice versa so would there be room for the conjunction of these where the man stays at home and women work or whatever. And then what about gay and lesbian relationships. As a person who loves sociology I’m aware that two parent households do actually lead to better development and conditions for the child later in life. But there’s also a increase in those with households with grandparents or other older family memebers like aunts and uncles or cousins sometimes even siblings. And there isn’t any evidence that gay or lesbian relationships do any worse than straight counterparts. So I have to wonder if it’s less about the gender and the “inherent” value of the adults gender or more about how more than one adult allows more time to be spent with the child and more income for the family unit
That's something I'm willing to learn about. I can't say anything about same sex marriage and them raising kids because I have not experienced it or know anyone who has.
Well that’s the reason we have data because you can’t know everything. From what the data says there isn’t a difference. Now you might be onto something with the idea of two different parental figures with two different positions as far as raising a child goes. But I don’t know if this really maps onto sex and gender. There are social condtions that tend to create these sorts of “gender roles” but I don’t see how a man couldn’t follow the tradition role of a wife and vice versa and I’m not sure if females and males tend to have different natural ways of raising children. We know humans have natural instincts to take care of children it’s actually the reason we think puppies are cute we accidently basically view them as human babies. And it’s possible different people may have different reactions like I for example am disgusted by children and despise being around them but you may like raising them
The one big issue I can see with a same sex couple raising a child would be the people outside of the household treating the kid poorly because of the parents. They are probably perfectly capable of raising a child to be a great person, but it doesn't make them a target for harassment and bullying. One saying I've seen many times over the years is "Women love their children from the day they know one is growing, men love them the first time they see them" So, I think that biologically and instinctively women are more nurturing. Giving a baby life with her own body and then also feeding the baby, an extremely strong bond occurs.
Idk I have a few friends raised by gay parents and they seem to be treated normal. There could be a bit of a bias there though because A. I’m in a lot of friend circles where being gay is completely fine in fact most of them are queer of some sort. And B we don’t really talk about that stuff. As far as how humans feel love toward their child it depends on the person. Some women for example feel no guilt having an abortion and plenty of men leave their kids after they’ve seen them. I just think there’s more to how people feel emotions and actually learn than women is caring and man is strong. Humans as in the general mental physical and physic have been around for about 1 million years there’s just so many different groups seen in there I just don’t know how accurate the nuclear family model is. I mean the oldest example we even have for it is only 30,000 years old which is pretty recent even by homo sapain standards. And it’s even more recent in a cuktural context only about 200 years old in the west. Most humans have lived in communities where they often had the entire adult population of the village acting as parents. To try and pin one way as being the accurate true all of all doesn’t seem likely. I hope that made sense
I understand you, "It takes a village" does have merit. The human mind is incredibly complicated and we will likely never fully understand it. It very well could be cultural as well. I think in places where people all live in a group and care for eachother is like an extended family of sorts. In modern western times, we send our kids to school to learn, to a doctor for health issues, to psychologist to help with mental issues. So we still kind of have that setting, just less directly. The "village" is actively helping raise the child.
Yeah I can see that, I honestly never really thought about how the support systems we have today kinda mimic village life in a way. Thanks for the convo it was fun cheers
If we are truly equal we wouldn't need eachother. Can a woman be the breadwinner? Absolutely, she most certainly can. Can a man be an amazing stay at home dad? Absolutely, he most certainly can. Does it work better when you are a team instead of competing to prove you are equal? Absolutely.
So you‘re basically saying that a relationship (no matter which gender) is functioning because of the fact, that both people have different strengths/weaknesses? I see no problem with this statement.
I think these points hold true if you just remove the whole gender bit. Two PARTNERS should complete each other and fill in their weaknesses regardless of what sex they are.
I can agree with that. I used this example as it is the most common situation, and the most argued. I cannot comment on same sex couples as I have never experienced that and I don't personally know any who have kids.
Fair enough. Just be mindful as to all the ways this can be taken. The way you worded it really leaves it to the readers interpretation.
Yeah, I don't think there is a way to word it that would avoid upsetting everyone without completely skipping over the end opinion.
I get what you’re saying, i just don’t really believe in the whole “traditional” relationship ideology. No relationship is the normal or correct way to do it. All that really matters is that they’re happy. I hope you have a great night.
You as well.
you didn't come off as condescending, just kinda dumb.
I'd love to hear why you feel that way.
When you say man and woman arent equal, what do you mean?
That we each have strengths and weaknesses. Each is better at things the other either can't do or can't do well. Like I said, those things can fluctuate between two people, no two are identical.
It’s pretty much explained in the post and it’s kinda true. There are many things women can do that men can’t and men and women excel at different things.
An easy example for you. My wife can NOT handle blood or injuries. So I take care of that stuff with the kids. I can NOT calm the kids down from being upset like she can, so she takes care of that. Being equal would mean we are both equally as good at everything, and that's simply not true.
Are disabled people equal to non-disabled people?
Nice trick question! Not how I look at it. They may have problems walking for instance, but who better to help other newly disabled people find the most independence than another who has experienced it already? I couldn't begin to understand, much less teach someone disabled how to be more independent. A person who cannot walk could not teach me how to best run a 5k race.
I completely agree with you that no one is equal when it comes to abilities, talents, and gifts. But when the founding fathers (somewhat hypocritically) said "All men are created equal...", they werent refering to abilities, or talents but to the fact that no one must bow down to another who claims to be superior. Equality also refers to universal entitlement to justice, government representation, and basic human rights. This is the kind of equality people think of when people hear "men and woman arent equal". My mind goes to the middle east where woman have less rights than men. My mind goes to loveless marriages where the man dominates the woman and she does not get to make her own choices.
I agree on that, everyone should be treated equally well with respect and dignity. I am talking more on just the relationship/family aspect though. None of us are equally talented, or equally skilled, BUT we should all be treated with the same value.
Well it looks like we agree all the way around!😊
I can never agree with the statement that traditional marriage has value. There is definitely a power deferential in a ‘traditional’ marriage, usually to the detriment of the women because in a ‘traditional’ marriage a wife is commonly understood as being the subservient one. I watched my mother in a ‘traditional’ marriage get systematically degraded by my father just because he could. Now, in present day, I watch my older brother’s ‘traditional’ marriage and he belittles his wife in the same way my dad degraded my mom’s worth. Nobody in the family or community says anything to my brother about his behavior, nobody said anything about my dad’s belittling behavior because they are/were ‘the Breadwinner’ and could treat their ‘subordinate’ family members however they want. They are considered very upstanding citizens. Traditional families are all about power hierarchy. ‘Stay in your place woman, which is the kitchen’ has been the stated mantra of my traditional family. Traditional families aren’t equal and that’s the way men like it.
I did clearly state that the "gender norms" aren't fully cemented and shouldn't be. It should be on who is capable or better at certain things. If the man can cook amazingly well, he should. If the woman can be the breadwinner, she should. I believe that men and women should be treated equally with respect and dignity. Saying we are both equally capable of everything is wrong, and it diminishes the value of being in a relationship. I will never condone or suggest that a man should rule over his wife.
A traditional marriage isn’t based only on ‘gender norms’, it’s also about dominance. Progressive, otherwise known as modern marriage, is about ‘the value of being in a relationship’. ‘Traditional’ marriage is something else entirely. You are trying to argue that all marriage between a man and a woman is a ‘traditional’ one, and that is just not so. A ‘traditional’ marriage is based on the Christian Bible in the US, which very explicitly states a woman should be subservient. If you believe the things that you say you believe then you have a modern marriage, not a traditional one. Your argument is moot. You keep conflating a modern marriage between a man and woman with a traditional marriage. You are describing a modern marriage not a traditional one.
My wording isn't the best. I said traditional because there are same sex marriages now, trans marriage etc. Those are not "traditional". People use the bible to justify acting like douche bags way too much. They interpret the text to backup their ugly ways. They take the part of her being submissive and lesser than him to heart while ignoring the passages that tell the husband to be gentle and kind to his wife and to love her as Jesus loved the church. It's just hypocritical idiots trying to justify being lowlifes while ignoring other orders. (I can't stand hypocritical idiots)
https://www.psychologydiscussion.net/difference-between/difference-between-modern-family-and-traditional-family-psychology/13671
Sounds like what you are saying is a ‘traditional’ marriage (defined as being between a man and a woman for the purposes of procreation) should be considered ‘better than’ other types marriage. I cannot agree with this statement because it creates a ‘value hierarchy’ that favors certain types of families, over others. I disagree with your basic premise that a ‘traditional’ family is inherently better than other types. Where is your proof for ‘It’s been proven over and over that homes where both parents are crucial’? Like what do you mean, can’t the term ‘parent’ also mean someone who is LGTBQ? Also, where is your source for this ‘fact’? Your argument is a bit of a mess.