Do you think opponents of gay marriage are reaching a bit to make their points? Check out this commentary Why Young Black Men Don’t Graduate in the Washington Times. It’s by Janice Shaw Crouse, executive director of Concerned Women for America’s Beverly LaHaye Institute. She writes:
A new report from the Schott Foundation reveals that just 47 percent of black male students earn a high school diploma on time. Ironically, this report came out shortly after Judge Vaughn R. Walker ruled on Proposition 8 and homosexual marriage in California. If the statements on which Judge Walker based his ruling are “facts,” how do we explain what is happening educationally to boys in the black community, where a large majority are growing up without fathers?
Of course, Judge Walker might well agree that having two parents is better than one for raising children. But the points he made (and which Crouse quotes) were different ones, that “The gender of a child’s parent is not a factor in a child’s adjustment” and that “Having both a male and a female parent does not increase the likelihood that a child will be well-adjusted.”
Crouse twists and spins to make the same old argument that allowing gay people to marry is an assault on the heterosexual family unit, and that the absence of fathers in black homes leads to underachievement by young black men. So, ipso facto, Judge Walker’s ruling that gay people have a constitutional right to marry is so bad it’s keeping young black men from graduating!
8 Comments for “Rather a Reach”
posted by Travis on
The more they talk, the better off we are. As the saying goes, give ’em enough rope…
posted by Jorge on
If it makes you feel any better, I didn’t even understand the point she was trying to make until you spelled it out. I will valiantly refrain from making any inappropriate statements about external factors influencing the quality of the author’s high school education.
Having said that, I do think saying gender has no effect on a child’s adjustment is a radically feminist (and somewhat shaky) conclusion that most reasonable in and around the African American community would reject as nonsensical. The author’s statement that it takes a father to raise a child has a certain mysogynist hint in it: single mothers are incompetent. But most serious commentators on African American issues recognize this statement as true. They will say a father brings something into the home. Question: what is it that an African American father brings into the home (or takes out of it) that a single African American mother does not? See, if African American families knew, their single mothers would be raising kids who graduate from college. That is what I say as a radical feminist. An anti-feminist who believes it’s the gender roles that makes a difference will probably tell you it’s about the discipline, direction, and moral example, and that this comes from the direction of that person.
posted by Jorge on
(Sigh)
“most reasonable in and around the African American community” >> “most reasonable *people*…
posted by JimG on
Jorge,
The point that I was getting was about the importance of the father to the African America Male, and I see nothing misogynistic about realizing that importance. And recognizing the importance of fathers (and it is great) does not diminish the importance of mothers (and it is great).
The absence of a male in the household DOES make a difference but that doesn’t mean that a single parent, male or female, can’t make up the difference of the absence of the other, but it is an added burden.
Of course if this woman is so upset about there being no man around to guide the young male in his development, we can just assure her that two men, happily wedded will do twice the job she is concerned about.
posted by jpeckjr on
I’d ask for help on the logic here — absent fathers in African-American hopes is caused by Judge Walker’s ruling — but I don’t think there is any logic. I’ve read the ruling and no where does Judge Walker order African-American fathers to abandon their children. Besides, knowing how sociological studies are done, the research was probably completed months before the ruling. And, finally, this report is not the first one in American history to note concerns, genuine concerns, about absent fathers in the African-American community. Lastly, consider the source. Has CWA ever before expressed concern over the state of the African-American family?
posted by Regan DuCasse on
Janice Crouse, like so many others who are anti gay, DO exclude all kinds of more complex factors on the break down of the black family.
In many ways, the effects of systemic discrimination are more subtle than of old, but no less damaging and there is a GENERATIONAL effect on these families.
That is to say, if a family was disqualified from merit based job and economic stability in the 50’s and 60’s, this could damage the prospects of that family later down the line. There are less pensions, less savings, less money for higher education, less ability to STAY in school because the family needed a child to go to work before college or even high school graduation was possible.
This occurred in MY family. I’d lost both parents by the age of 15 and struggled in school and lost a great deal of ground achieved by my own parents having attended college.
The most important factor for stable families IS economics first. Blacks have higher health problem statistics, stress related factors that can stem from difficulties in the workplace.
Why should anyone assume it takes overt racism or expressions of it to determine if it exists at all? Especially in the workplace? The most important factor in one’s self reliance?
I , like millions of black people, have personally experienced the kinds of racial insensitivity and determined neglect regarding it, that destroyed much of what I had gained. Not only from some workplaces, but also in my marriage (which is mixed).
Subtle problems can be devastating because it’s harder to do anything about them.
Those that assume it’s not about that, are showing the very insensitivity needful to SOLVE the problem.
And SOLVING it is certainly the goal.
Crouse is leaving out the factor of abandonment on the psyche of children. Children who are loved, know it and are secure with a network of adults that share the responsibility in their upbringing are far better off than their peers raised in a family that is estranged and shows hostility to that estrangement.
Gender really doesn’t always matter, because no same sex parents usually raise their children in households or social situations DEVOID of the opposite gender to influence them.
But the anti gay speak on the subject as if gay parents have no contacts, engage no people of the opposite sex to help them raise their children.
No such profound exclusion ever exists, if at all in same sex households.
Just as parents raising children of a divergent ethnicity don’t exclude themselves or their children from people who share the ethnicity of all the family members.
There weren’t any comparison studies cited by Crouse that put two parent gay couples with two parent hetero ones.
THIS would be the better comparison to make to get accurate results. Those that DID make those comparisons found no differences in parenting that justified discrimination against same sex marriage.
Single parenthood in an environment of economic instability, low education and compromised social networks suffered most from pathology.
The difference between successful and effective parenting, whether single or gay, was the PREPARATION that went into it.
But blacks have suffered more economic and educational exclusion than other groups. And denying the generational effect of that would do the discussion a disservice. Assuming also that racial insensitivity is only in the mind of the black person would too.
If a black person can’t honestly and openly speak about their experience, while fully knowing and understanding the import of it on their lives, without someone who has never had that experience treating it as trivial, paranoid or non existent, is already displaying the very symptoms of why such a problem persists.
This I know too.
Janice Crouse is using this sad factor of American life, to advance anti gay prejudice.
It’s exploiting ignorance. Do we really need MORE ignorance to exacerbate an already pernicious situation?
posted by Regan DuCasse on
Oh and this discussion of same sex parents vs. op sex parenting assumes a narrow definition of the character of individual parents.
There is an assumption about males and females that is so narrow, it defines stereotypes rather than real people.
As Judge Walker ALSO said: marriage is a union of equals.
He’s right about that. No longer, by LAW, is a woman FORCED into a specific role, with limited rights in a marriage.
To assume marriage is to be only between a man and woman based on the goal of parenting, is to assume that ONLY being a man or woman has built in specifics to their duties AS parents.
Let alone spouses.
And we all already know that marriage is for the adults FIRST. Children, while a goal for some. Is not a requirement for everyone, nor for marriage eligibility.
The duties of parenting are determined by the individual characteristics and talents involved. NOT the gender.
So writing those goals into the laws are impossible, and not determined by laws like Prop. 8.
Therefore making Prop. 8 irrelevant to protecting marriage, children or the roles of men and women.
So there really isn’t any need for the law in the first place. It doesn’t do the stated goal.
It only damages the self reliance of gay couples.
Which is the actual goal.
Big difference. And why marriage discrimination against gay couples isn’t necessary, or supportive of the values of self reliance.
posted by Jorge on
Oh and this discussion of same sex parents vs. op sex parenting assumes a narrow definition of the character of individual parents.
There is an assumption about males and females that is so narrow, it defines stereotypes rather than real people.
Thank you.