It was inevitable that it would be claimed children raised by adults who have or who act on same-sex attraction would be better than children raised by normal adults, or by parents.
And so it has come to pass in the peer-reviewed paper “Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity: No Differences? Meta-Analytic Comparisons of Psychological Adjustment in Children of Gay Fathers and Heterosexual Parents” by Benjamin Graham Miller, Stephanie Kors, and Jenny Macfie in the journal Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity.
From the Abstract:
…The current study applied…meta-analysis to 10 studies…to evaluate child psychological adjustment by parent sexual orientation…[R]esults indicated that children of gay fathers had significantly better outcomes than did children of heterosexual parents in all 3 models of meta-analysis.
The emphasis on “better” was in the original—a word that was noticed in the popular press.
If the results are true, it is clear that if we want what is best for the nation’s children, they should be placed in the households of men who enjoy non-procreative sex-like activities. (Actual sexual intercourse can only take place between males and females.) Leaving kids to fester with their own parents dooms them to lesser outcomes.
That prescription might to your ears sound absurd, but it does follow if Miller and his co-authors are right. Are they?
The trio used a statistical technique called “meta-analysis”, which I jokingly define as a method to prove a hypothesis “statistically” true which could not be proved by actually true. Actually, it is a way to glue together results from disparate studies, so that one needn’t be troubled by the hard work of investigating the disparate studies. In other words, it is a controversial technique, often badly applied and in the service of confirmation bias. I suspect that is true here…