Now that an internal audit at Social Science Research has confirmed that Mark Regnerus' "gay parenting" study was indeed so badly flawed that it never should have survived peer review, it's safe to say that we can move past examining the specifics of how it went wrong and start looking at the deeper question of why so many in the media and the right wing readily accepted its conclusions with little critical scrutiny while dismissing the valid concerns raised by others. Given that their hailing of the study as a revelation about the supposed inferiority of same-sex parents was actually based on a paper that should have been immediately disqualified from publication, are they prepared to correct the record? What many of them described as a paper about "gay parenting" covered barely a handful of respondents who had lived with same-sex couples as parents for an appreciable fraction of their childhood, far too few to be representative of the true proficiency of same-sex parents. This is not merely a matter of partisan political opinion; Regnerus himself acknowledged these shortcomings. Are these reporters and activists willing to admit that they were wrong?
– Zinnia Jones
"After the Regnerus Debacle, Where Are the Apologies?"
HuffPost Gay Voices
August 1, 2012
"After the Regnerus Debacle, Where Are the Apologies?"
HuffPost Gay Voices
August 1, 2012
See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
Competent Parenting Doesn't Require "Traditional Marriage"
Quote of the Day – October 18, 2010
No comments:
Post a Comment