4 ms·

A lot of the things that "everyone knows" are wrong. The point of science is to have a systematic way to tell the difference between things that seem intuitivel

A lot of the things that "everyone knows" are wrong. The point of science is to have a systematic way to tell the difference between things that seem intuitively true and things that are actually true. I did a quick search and found a study about percentages of couples raising children [1]. They have a table by couple type and marital status. The difference isn't as stark as you might think. Looking at the smallest difference in the table, married female/female partnerships have a 30.2% chance of currently raising children, while married male/female partnerships have a 38.7% chance. Is it obvious to you that this would be so close? Would you be surprised if there were countries where the numbers are reversed? [1] https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/publications/same-sex-parents-us/ https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/publications/same-sex...

handmodel 6y ago
I also doubt that the point of the study was to find out which type of couple had "more" children - even if that is what the news picked up. It is obviously important for population and demographic research to know just how age, type of couple, divorce, income, etc. effects family size with actual estimates.
RandoHolmes 6y ago
As I said in my original post, everyone obviously understands that the percentage isn't 0, and understands why. But the idea that homosexual couples have less children than heterosexual couples isn't something that really needed study. Also, this was in the late 90's, you're probably not going to find anything on google about what I specifically saw because that's just how the internet works nowadays.
heavenlyblue 6y ago
The issue is that you don't really need a study to open up a table of statistics in demographics department. Your post just did a study on that topic. Should you get funded for that?
- daveFNbuck 6y ago
  I spent a minute looking up the results of existing studies. If a professor at a public university spent a minute to look up an answer for a reporter, I'm ok with that professor having a salary.

handmodel 6y ago

I also doubt that the point of the study was to find out which type of couple had "more" children - even if that is what the news picked up. It is obviously important for population and demographic research to know just how age, type of couple, divorce, income, etc. effects family size with actual estimates.

RandoHolmes 6y ago

As I said in my original post, everyone obviously understands that the percentage isn't 0, and understands why. But the idea that homosexual couples have less children than heterosexual couples isn't something that really needed study. Also, this was in the late 90's, you're probably not going to find anything on google about what I specifically saw because that's just how the internet works nowadays.

heavenlyblue 6y ago

The issue is that you don't really need a study to open up a table of statistics in demographics department. Your post just did a study on that topic. Should you get funded for that?

daveFNbuck 6y ago
I spent a minute looking up the results of existing studies. If a professor at a public university spent a minute to look up an answer for a reporter, I'm ok with that professor having a salary.