- Can a Feminist Have a Gender Reveal Party? - Motherly
- We’ve Got to be Honest
- Coming Out of the Coffin: Vampires Among Us
But there are some REALLY basic "no-brainer" things that could be done to make a start to redressing the vast amount of damage currently being done. It's really NOT a rare occurrence. BTW, my mother is a lesbian and finding my way back to her and her community was the only reason I'm still alive. I am sure you can appreciate that I for one have no sympathy for the notion that a child should have a father. Why should they? Ginger, This is a very sad story all round and I sympathise with your situation.
The internet makes bile too easy to pour on others. When the terrible story of the two animals broke I couldn't read much of it as it revolted me so much. I know gay parents who are every bit as fine parents as any others. A current court case in Sydney where a poor little girl was bashed and basically left to die demonstrates that there are those who are sub-human, and it has nothing to do with their sexual preferences.
Yes the current case you refer to is also terrible to read. There are bad parents everywhere and still we go with the myth that children are better off with their natural parents. This is a very difficult article to respond to in an adequate, all-encompassing way. For what it's worth - which really isn't much, I'm not convinced that writing what amounts to a part personal apology, part self-justification which, in my opinion, isn't warranted - Ms Gorman did nothing 'wrong' and doesn't need to beat herself up to the extent she is and publishing it on this forum is something that doesn't sit overly comfortably with me.
I accept that Ms Gorman means well - and clearly has a story worth telling, but I am left wondering whether the content here would perhaps not be better shared between one's own private thoughts, trusted friends and personal advisors, and the child himself when he is of an age to understand. I don't, in any way, question Ms Gorman's motivations or sincerity - but I do query whether I needed to know about them in the format that they are presented.
I freely acknowledge that amounts to nothing more than one person's unsolicited opinion. Others would, I'm sure, see it differently. Just a further exploitation of Boy 1, but now for an ideological stance as the article sums it all up with: "And that's what the anger with me seems to come down to. I suspect maintaining a dignified silence would only give licence to the haters good honest folk of rural America? I would have thought some kind of background might calm them down a bit.
Perhaps a brief follow up from Ginger at some stage will show whether it worked out that way or not. I do see it differently. This journalist has become the target of an international hate campaign. That's a terrifying thing to contemplate. It seems clear enough to me that she's trying to stem the tide of evil communications she's been receiving. I see no other apparent motive in her article.
Thank you; this shows exactly how the ABC gets it wrong. Using labels it finds PC subjects to explain all sorts of activity, blaming the PC label for the cause. The world is far more complex and because someone has suffered or has caused suffering has little if anything to do with a PC correct label. We all fall into this trap but I a m not government supported. Therein lies the ABC problem plus the lack of sophistication. I don't even understand what your point is.
Gaylene Perhaps your criticism is best aimed at all media? When it comes to incorrectly allocating causes and effects, surely there are many mainstream agencies to which this comment applies? Personally, I find the ABC more trustworthy than other mainstream media outlets. I disagree with same sex couples having children. To me it is wrong. No thought it seems is given to the child and what they will suffer. I wouldn't want to have two dads and go through school. No way. It's selfish of these people to only think of themselves, and to put themselves first, and what they want first.
It could very well be devastating for a child to have two dads. But we will see it portrayed as the norm on our televisions and in the media. We lose the plot. Until we stop giving people what they want because they want it, with no regard for anyone else, particularly children, we are in all sorts of trouble. At one stage, three of my females friends were all on IVF, and all were single. That is wrong to me. It should take a loving couple to have a child, not a tube that maybe can eventually be bought at Coles in the future the way we head.
Check the fatherless statistics. All are shocking. I'm sure that most children adopted by same-sex couples this example notwithstanding will suffer a lot less with two loving parents, regardless of their gender, than those left to languish and age out of the foster care system. I get really sick and tired of people who complain long and loud that a child needs a mother and a father, yet when asked whether they would be willing to adopt a child, rather than have one of their own, refuse because they want a child that's "theirs". Disgusting hypocrisy. That comment is not supported by the facts, Jade.
There is an enormous imbalance between childless couples who wish to adopt and children and babies availabvle for adoption. The waiting time is many, many years. On one side, there's an over-simplified argument that children apparently need a mother and a father to be "normal", and on the other side, there's always an intimation which you appear to be perpetuating that same sex couples would make far superior parents compared to hetero couples. I think both arguments are heavily biased in their own way. You seem to think that adopting a child is a pure and selfless act of goodwill, when, in reality, it may not be the case.
People want children for many reasons, some of them selfish, some not, and people want to be biological parents for many reasons, some of them selfish, and some not. You demand logic and level-headed thinking about a highly emotive topic, and I think you'd be hard-pressed to find it, especially from the loudest talkers on both sides of the argument.
For most same sex couple at least one parent is biological. So as far as possible they want "theirs". Totally normal for the absolute majority of people to want their own children. Did you ever think that homophobic discrimination is what makes it torturous for kids in school who come from same sex households? Children are taught to discriminate, and rather than curtailing the legal rights of citizens to have their own families, perhaps it would be better to protect the rights of ALL children to be safe from bullying and respected when they are in our community and at school.
The problem is not the victim. Great point Bec. The hatred of others who have an irrelevant distinction is a taught behaviour, not one that people develop naturally. I agree that it is learned. But it will never be the norm, and when they are young they are merciless. It would be a great stress for a child, particularly a boy. And not a case where pressure makes diamonds. I think a case of pressure destroying and doing great damage. Racism may never be fully extinguished - should we discourage all mixed-race couples from having children too, in case they get bullied at school?
This is different. This is a boy having two gay fathers. We give this boy a lifetime of pain and stress. That's of course if he can survive school. As a child there is no way I would have befriended a boy with gay fathers. These are children! They do not have the compassion and caring that you and I have! They are relentlessly cruel! To provide a boy with two gay fathers is simply unforgiveable to me. How anyone could even consider doing that to a boy is beyond me! Your argument that something has to be the norm before people will stop being vilified for it is one that i can not accept.
We as a society are capable of accepting difference; We are not all as intolerant as yourself. I didn't say, "that something has to be the norm before people will stop being vilified for it". Read what I said again! And I am not intolerant either. Where did you get that from? I stand up for the poor boy who gets a life of torture handed to him by those who couldn't care less. By those who care for the adults more. To make sure the adults get what they want, at any cost. Disgraceful to me.source site
Can a Feminist Have a Gender Reveal Party? - Motherly
Mike you say "I agree that it is learned" So If you don't teach them that it is abnormal then it will be the 'norm'. Just as we don't teach our children someone should be singled out for having one leg, red hair, or an ugly face. Homosexuality is just another utterly irrelevant distinction. So when you say "legal rights of citizens to have their own families" you mean go to a foreign country and buy a child.
How about the rights of a child not be a simple commodity that can be bought and sold??? The illegal adoption of Boy 1 in this article did not happen in Australia if you read the article. Currently, surrogacy for cash is illegal here. I was discussing adoption and other fertility options which are perfectly legal for homosexuals to access. I have also known many gay and lesbian friends with children from previous hetero relationships. There is nothing illegal about this is there? The point I commented on was about discrimination against children of gay parents in schools, and you have speciously assumed that I approve of a black market trade in children.
Sorry, but you are way off. Hi Penny The problem is that many people want to conflate homosexuality and peadophilia they are not the same thing at all and these two men used false colors to hide their crime, its the same as trying to conflate Islam and terrorism people are actively forgetting Beider Meinhoff, the IRA, the Basque separatist movement, the Tamil Tigers etc.
I agree that the rights of a child to a safe and loving home are paramount and that is why the law once it discovered the abuse stepped in when it found evidence of crime, and we do need to have a discussion of how we make sure all children are safe, but the law as it stands can only punish crime it lacks the foresight to see who is and who is not a decent parent. If you want a society where the law can predict crime I recommend the Sci Fi movie and book Minority Report. If you are religious god itself does not make sure that every child has a mother and a father circumstances in the real world find many children without one or both parents we are animals and the generation of life requires both sets of gametes the raising, nurturing and education of that life does not.
If you want too see a positive example of gay male parents I suggest you watch Gay Family Values on YouTube this family are the grand marshals in the San Francisco Gay pride parade. The children that they have adopted come from a home with a mother and a father but the home was so damaged by drugs, violence, prostitution etc. The rights of children are defended and maintained by adults regardless of gender or sexual orientation who believe that sex is between consenting adult partners.
Loving homes and nurturing environments are built by loving adults who nurture and protect children regardless of whether they are a nixed gendered couple or something else. Remember their are a lot of different cultures in the world in some cultures the male parenting role is undertaken by the brother of the mother not the biological father of the child, some cultures do not have a nuclear family as the norm but an extended family as the norm where all the family members take care of the children.
Some cultures practice polygamy and that was often the norm in ancient societies where families had multiple members of one of the genders. I love the saying it takes a village to raise a child and. The new theory on menopause for example is that it protected the health of older women allowing them to co parent their grand children and great grand children which increased the survival rates.
The nuclear family is a relatively modern concept.
- Conscious Birth - MAMA Maternity.
- Navigation menu.
- “If You Want to Be a Parent, Don’t Adopt from Foster Care”!?!!
Oh Bec - you're so thoughtful and concerned for the rights of children. Seeing as most children experience bullying at some point during their school lives, I suppose you think we should ban everyone from having children. You know, to protect these children from the evidently far too significant emotional trauma of bullying?
Or, you know, we could simply put better anti-bullying measures in place in schools. Good stuff Mike. I suggested same as you once. And of course - one of the same sex couples types wrote i and said his and his partners children were fine Like the kids could complain to Dad? Right, because children have never complained to dads about anything. The reasonable evidence and there is a lot out there suggests that children of single-sex couples do fine. The one thing that was interesting out of those studies was that those children were more likely to act on homosexual desires not more likely to have them, just more likely to act , which is only a negative if you're of a biased mindset.
On the other hand, the vast majority of the studies or commentators which say there are negative effects from being raised by a homosexual couple are either clearly biased or show large methodological flaws which indicate bias. And yes, I have gone through and read many of them. In the end, it seems that what defines children's outcomes is a loving family, rather than any particular family make up single parent, homosexual, heterosexual etc.
I never said banning same sex marriage. And I never said because I "want" them to go childless. It is unfortunate but that's life. We cannot compromise a child's well being and future by accommodating adults and what they want. It is wrong. We need to think of the child, not the adults. Mike, So you think "it is wrong" for a child to be raised in a loving household then? Why should a child be forced to live in an orphanage just because you personally don't want that child to be raised in a loving household.
Surely you aren't suggesting that people in a same sex relationship, divorced, solo, widowed etc are unable to raise a child in a loving household are you? Why should we accomodate your adult wants when the right of a child to be raised in a loving household should be paramount?
It is clear you couldn't care less about what is best for a child languishing in an orphanage, and that you are only concerned about satisfying your selfish desires to prevent other people from having children if they happen to have some irrelevant distinction. It is you who is suggesting that same sex couples should be childless because they may not be able to naturally conceive. Does your bigotry extend to hetrosexual couples who are not able to naturally conceive?
Mike, with all due respect that is simply your prejudices coming through. I had a mother and father and the family environment was abusive and violent. It is not about the gender of the parent but the love, care and support provided by the parent. No, these are not prejudices. I find that response offensive. I am not homophobic. This has nothing to do with same sex partnerships. It has much to do with priorities, sensibilities, and empathy. Mike, you have hit the nail on the head and congratulations for having the courage to say it.
In this sick society one gets almost overwhelmed by the "straight" haters. It's almost like how dare we have an opinion! Having an opinion does NOT amount to discrimination or homophobia.
We’ve Got to be Honest
The lifestyle is not and never will be a part of normal design. Wake up people It may not be your 'normal' but it is the 'normal' existence for millions of people born with same sex attraction around the world. We are all equal, we are all born the way we are born. Why can't we live and let live? Yes there are some horrible adults out there, straight, gay, black, white, man, woman, don't tar everyone with the same brush. Schoolyard bullies?
Only when all children are raised to respect others regardless of their backgrounds and home life will that kind of suffering be eradicated. It's up to the people in charge of raising children to uphold and maintain that standard. Why is it so difficult for them to do so, thus propagating the suffering of innocents? No thought it seems is given to the suffering that some children will unleash. Mike what happens when a hetrosexual marriage breaks down and the children of that marriage end up with same sex parents?
It isnt uncommon. Horrible stuff to have gone -and still going through- Ginger, for you and even more so for Boy 1. It is OK though to not have faith in much of humanity. Some of it is faith-worthy, some of the time and the rest is totally unworthy all of the time. It's ok to lose faith in some of the 7 odd billion humans and to walk among them with great care.
Don't beat yourself up, Ginger. I was a child protection worker and paedophiles are the most charming, disarming and reassuring people on the planet. Lots of people get taken in by them. Ginger, no-one's got x-ray eyes. From my work in the child protection and probation system I can assure you, and those who ignorantly put you down, that paedophiles would do anything to get access to a child. If they have to maintain a long hetero or homosexual relationship, they'll do it.
Such mania is buried deep and they hide it well. Paedophiles are never safe until they're deceased and they can go on hurting even after that. It hurts me to say this but children get abused because they are small, helpless and dependent on adults for their survival. Paedophiles abuse children and other people because they have cavernous gaps in their makeups and will never, ever be safe to be in society.
You're already doing great work by writing this article, Ginger. It is disgusting that you threw opinionated gay rights propaganda into a very serious story. And then topped it off with a lie. To quote the article 'They are not equal. That's not just my opinion' Why did you lie in your article? How are your gay friends not treated the same as everyone else?
Do they announce they are gay at the beginning of every conversation to be different and then complain that they are different? Are they wearing the wrong genders attire in public? How do people know they are gay to even begin to treat them differently? Do your gay friends know what it's like to be and be treated as a straight person?
If being gay is not a choice - they have no experiences to compare their treatment to. So it seems that IT IS your opinion that your gay friends are treated differently. No one can look at another person and magically know what they do in their bedroom. Not only is it only your opinion - it is also a lie. As Ginger mentioned, the statistics show that homosexual people are more likely to be subjected to violence, be homeless, and experience mental and physical health problems.
If that isn't discrimination, I don't know what is! You might want to look at some other statistics of things that are more prevalent amongst the gay community too. Also considering the stats you present are true, exactly which of them are promoting it as a positive environment to raise a child. Sure it can be done, and no doubt done better than many hetero couples but statistics don't have a bias, even if it were an original bias which lead to the circumstances of creating those statistics.
Until you invent a time machine and make history all fluffy and cuddly forever, reality is what it is, not what you want it to be, and we have to deal with what is. I can affirm, as a straight person, that my gay friends are treated differently. By the law, as well as by many in society. The uncomfortable silence that occurs after Joan mentions her partner Jane, and the intrusive and uncomfortable questions that ensue in most circumstances, but never when I mention my opposite-sex partner by name is just one example.
Agree Jade. This is a conversation that needs to be had though. Ginger has a right of reply to the homophobic conservatives. They are hopefully the noisy minority. We need to have an open forum without abuse. Unfortunately though the abusers just can't help themselves and don't understand what a public debate is. People make assumtions and then act on those assumtions and that is discrimination.
If they hold hands in public people may assume they are gay and if they are treated differently because of that then that is discrimination. You don't need to have first hand experiance of being treated in some way to be able to know that you are being treated differently. There could be a social gathering where no one knows or thinks they are gay, then the next social gathering they hold hands or cuddle each other like couples do and they find they are treated differently.
That's discrimination. I find it repugnant that you attack her from the first word in your response and don't even give an oppertunity for a response.
Coming Out of the Coffin: Vampires Among Us
To start with this attack "It is disgusting that you threw opinionated gay rights propaganda Can you please explain how clothing has a "wrong" gender? If I, as a woman, went out and bought a well-fitting mens suit, I'd probably look chic, but there'd be no comment that I'm doing something "Wrong". Also, you're wrong. Completely wrong. It's not a lie that gay people are treated differently. There are homophobic acts committed everywhere. Couples in a same sex relationship find adoption harder than a couple in a heterosexual relationship.
Same sex couples are not allowed to get married. Another difference in treatment. Lastly, if there were no difference in treatment this entire issue wouldn't be discussed, would it? Good work. Steve, I read your email and I shake my head. I am not gay by the way but I see what you call a lie in the workplace, in my own family as haters not victims and in the broader community with monotonous regularity.
Just because you either cannot see it or because you refuse to see it doesn't make it a lie. What happened to this child is truly dispicable but is in no way a part of the gay community. I should know. Wow, such anger. Openly gay people ARE treated differently. That is why many spent years 'in the closet' acting like everyone else around them so they didn't get 'found out' and get harassed or worse. Society always offers plenty of examples of stereotyped 'straight' behaviour to copy so you do that and hope to pass under the radar. That is living a lie. It is stressful and it hurts.
Openly gay does NOT mean using it as an intro line, or discussing what you do 'in the bedroom' it is about being with your partner in public and doing the things 'straight' couples often do not all, just most like holding hands, looking at each other with affection, shopping together, referring to your partner, being out with friends.. And cross dressing is not an indicator of being gay. Neither ia a short haircut on a women or a man with a graceful walk.
Everyone makes mistakes. Only fools make the same mistake twice. Journalists are fooled by our politicians every day. You have a long way to go yet Ginger. Is that all you got out of this very sad story? What she is saying it that once people know you are gay, you get treated differently. To say this isn't the case is ridiculous.
Have some sympathy for what she is going through. I agree Ginger that it is so sad that this case has tarnished the many good gay parents out there, struggling to adopt or surrogate a child. You must be very disturbed by your accidental involvement in such a heinous situation. Thank you for sharing what must have been difficult to re-live. I have some sympathy for what you are going through, you misjudged 2 fairly slippery characters.
But you do seem to reveal you went to the story with a preconceived idea of what was right and wrong with the situation. You appeared to have suspended your critical judgement, understandable if you had immersed yourself in the discrimination felt by LGBT people. But it was still an error. You are a convenient target for attack precisely because you made a huge error, indefensible in hindsight.
Best option is apologize, and even better one would be to track down the biological mother and do a story on how common baby-farming is, and is this a pure aberration like you Id like to think this is extremely rare , or is it a horrible risk? It's difficult to understand, Ginger, why anyone would subject you to hate mail. Abusers such as these are notoriously good at putting on a good face and getting away with their crimes for a long time.
It's happened time again in the church, in schools. There is no way to spot a pedophile. If there was, well the world would be a great and glorious place. I am curious about your belief that paedophilia can not be linked to gay people. I don't know if it is or it isn't and would like to know of any research into that proposition. I accept that being gay does not mean you are a paedophile, but then many paedophiles are gay.
The one that abused me in my youth was gay and I also accept that could alter my perception. Is it something to do with their sexual preferences? If your gay and operating outside what is considered socially acceptable by many does that make you more likely to act on other sexual desires, such as paedophilia, which are not socially acceptable by many as well? It is up to those who correlate homosexuality with paedophilia to provide scientifically verifiable and testable research-backed evidence to back up this claim.
They have not been able to do so and I doubt they can. The research I've read suggests that there are actually three basic sexual preferences - heterosexual, homosexual and pedophilia - most gays want sex with same sex adults, just as most straights want sex with opposite sex adults.
Pedophiles aren't attracted to adults at all, only children - and that means the gay vs straight parallels are not especially meaningful. Pedophiles may well focus on boys, but identify as being straight when dealing with adults. So where does the cross dressing family man and scoutmaster that used to touch up my older brother fit into your three classes of sexual preference? There's been attempts to study this scientifically but there are a lot of problems with it.
The best thing I've ever read in an article is that paedophiles cannot be thought of as homosexual, heterosexual or bisexual in the usual sense, because they don't enter adult relationships. Instead it's about age preference. Even a man who thinks of himself as heterosexual could be attracted to young boys, not because of their gender but because of their age. I'm sorry about what you went through, and I understand why you might have this bias which you pointed out yourself , but don't let that influence your perception too much.
Actually there is quite a significant amount of research in this area, and it consistently shows that homosexuals are no more likely to be pedophiles than heterosexuals. There is a very good summary of the research, and debunking of the lies spread by the anti-gay groups in the University of California Davis article "Facts About Homosexuality and Child Molestation" by Dr G.
You know what the conservative would say We have a lesbian couple a couple of doors down with two children their offspring? I think "Gay Men" maybe should just stick to their other social outlets and leave parenting to women and heterosexual couples to stuff kids up it gives Gay Men the high moral ground Well said! The one positive in all this is that the boy is no longer subjected to abuse. Thank you Ginger, however you are letting ideology cloud you thinking. To label the quote as homophobic just demonstrates your inability to think, and not feel, clearly and dispassionately.
By the way, the term homophobic is an inaccurate and made up political statement, which has no place in rational discussion. To connect without any evidence, homosexuality and paedophilia is completely heinous. The quote assumes that homosexuality is a symptom of a moral lack which leads to all kinds of criminal and unethical behaviours.
If that is not homophobic, then what is? Is it proven that only homosexuals are paedophiles? Are the majority of sex offenders gay? These claims are old propoganda against homosexuals, and are still in use by those who want society to actively discriminate and intimidate gay people.
You seem to care more about gay rights than the rights of a child. It takes both a man and women to create a child and to raise a child. The child has a right to a Mum and Dad and not be sold for cash. Well, you got the first bit right - it does currently take both a man and a woman to create a child. The second bit, well, I think I can help here - it does not, in reality, take both a woman and a man to raise a child. For many, many decades there have been parents, and even relatives, who have raised children on their own.
These are known as "single parents". In fact, there have been many successful variants on the child-raising paradigm, including "it takes a village", large extended families under the one roof, being raised by grandparents single or multiple , being raised by adoptive parents, the aforementioned single parents and, yes, both heterosexual and homosexual couples.
- How To Get Your Information Product Online in 24 Hours (The Nitty-Gritty for Non-Geeks Book 1);
- Search form;
- Conscious Birth – Conscious Parenting?
- Smart Guide Italy: Central Italy?
Anyway, glad to help! No person born has a 'right' to anything. If we grow up with a loving family then we are lucky. If we have two loving parents, its a jackpot. I was raised by my mother and my grandmother. I don't feel that any of my human rights were infringed because one of these people did not have a penis. Surrogacy is a completely separate issue from gay parenting, and many straight couples participate in this too.
There are children, perfectly happy children, who have been raised by two mums, or two dads, or no mum or no dad. They exist. Do you plan on initiating a crusade against all single mothers, or is it just the gays who deserve your ire for "denying children the right to a mum and dad?
The connection is sexual deviation and so the more heinous act would be to advocate for the adults in having a child live in a condition of known sexual deviation. Asking if a majority of sex offenders comes from a particularly small minority group is a little bit silly. The better question would be, as a ratio, is the occurrence of sexual violence, abuse, illness, drug abuse etc higher in this group? What is your point? It has an air of 'we knew, and you should have known, all along that these men were sexually abusing their child because they're two men in a relationship who have an adoptive child'.
You're good at patting yourself on the back. That may be all that is important to your goodself. But be assured that paedophiles do not and cannot fool lots of people. You fit into the category that they can. Normal for a child is having a mother and father. Whilst Boy 1 has both he wasn't raised by both or even either parent. Journalist who believe homosexual parenting is a story just waiting to be told are a problem. I wouldn't listen to such rubbish on radio. Who would? I love children too much to see them as the subject of debate by people who select a particular lifestyle that excludes them from having their own children.
Journalists shouldn't see themselves as change promoters or activists supporting deviate behaviour. Ginger, you could have dropped any notion of airing your story before it was even recorded. But you chose to run with it. You claim to love children, yet you discriminate against their families? And what about people who biologically cannot have their own children due to medical conditions etc? I guess they have no right to adopt either because kids should be raised by their biological parents?
The only indicator of a child growing up well is if they have the love and support from their parents, whether it be their biological or adopted, straight or gay, single or in a relationship Hate like yours is doing more damage to this world than any gay relationship ever could. What do you mean, "do not and cannot fool" everybody? You think all paedophiles are greasy little men with comb-overs driving ice-cream vans?
If you do, you're quite deluded. These people are often charming, outwardly-likeable people who work subtly to gain the trust of others. If you reckon you can easily pick them out of a crowd then join the police force and get cracking. Ginger shouldn't be attacked for airing the story. If Bolt aired a story about a respectable Conservative heterosexual family with strong Christian values, and years later found out the family was busted for raping their children or worse, I'm sure you wouldn't be attacking Bolt for running the story.
Non-biological fathers are 37 times more likely to sexually abuse children in their care. The maintenance of the traditional family unit is the single most important factor protecting a child from sexual abuse. Except for you know the fact that the most likely person to sexually assault a child is a family member It will sound like I'm backing the wrong horse but this is a poor rebuttal. A non-biological father is a "family member" after all. Yours and Roger's comments can co-exist peacefully! A family member perhaps but a biological parents mother or father are the least likely to sexually assault a child.
Your comment is ambiguous. Is that because hetero dads outnumber gay dads or are you talking in percentage terms? If you're going to throw inflammatory comments like that into the conversation it would be good to see you cite a source. You do realise that group of abusive fathers is far more likely to be in a heterosexual couple with the child's mother? So the biggest part of your solution would be to ban divorce and re-partenering of heterosexuals? Interesting point.
Remove unilateral divorce, force parents to sort out their trash and get on with taking care of their kids instead of selfishly deciding 'we just don't get along anymore' and we may solve many of societies problems? Might just be crazy enough to work. Plus, that's a fairly week argument relying on the overwhelmingly larger sample group inherent in heterosexuality. I'm a conservative and I don't hate you, Ginger, if that's any consolation!
So, you didn't pick up on the problem at the time. They successfully hid their "issues" from you as they did, apparently, from just about everybody else. Why is that your fault? And, in your time, you've quite probably interviewed people who, in their private lives, are violent, drug dealers or even Collingwood supporters. Are you responsible for them as well? And you're right. The issue here is paedophilia, which is a serious crime, not homosexuality. I don't understand why my fellow conservatives are so hung up about homosexuality.
Indeed, it doesn't seem that long ago that, in order to rise in the ranks of the British Conservative Party, one had to Don't let the nutters cause you a minute of lost sleep, Ginger. As you say, most people are wonderful. The nutters are out there only to remind us how throughly decent the rest of the human race is! That's probably what is lurking in the minds of many. The answer to that question "are homosexuals statistically more likely to be pedophiles?
I don't hate Ginger either. Although I don't neccessarily suggest that we all declare a position on this aspect. But it sure is a shame that Ginger thinks it worthy to support parenting by denying a mum to a child. As a mother herself can she now see how dreadful it is to deliberately deny the child a mum? Two dads is a silly idea. So, too, is two mums. It's not old fashioned to have parenting undertaken, where possible, by both a mum and a dad.
I believe mums are wonderful. Can we please stop denying children a mum in the case of adoptions. Likewise dads. It is a sickening and shocking story and your personal insight makes it even more sad. Thank you for your humility in sharing this. Perhaps your story actually helped uncover them in a way? I do hope that this little boy is nutured in a healthy and loving environment from here on in. I do hope that he can recover from the abuse he's suffered. I think it's normal to feel a sense of anger - something very, very wrong happened here. But it's equally wrong to label all homosexual couples as potential perpetrators.
Sexual abuse against children is an insiduous crime, usually those that appear the most 'respectable' homosexual or otherwise turn out to be abusers. You are not in anyway culpable, but I can understand how this story and encounter would haunt you. The story haunts me too and I never met them. There is chain of evil here, from whatever happened with the true parents, through the Russian "seller", to this pair, and it stops there. Evil people will con non-evil ones. Many other were conned as well. Personal so-called BS detectors are notoriously faulty, in both ways, as we discovered in the Chamberlain case.
Some few people for what ever reason, are wired up wrong, and will cause mayhem if not detected and prevented. This pair were caught by good anti-pedophile police procedures not by one person being a better judge of character than someone else. I'm glad someone, somewhere, was on the ball, and I hope this poor child has wound up safe, and I care more about that than any attempt to generalise this into pro- or anti- gay arguments.
This boy was brought into this country on the basis that one of the men was the child's biological father. A case could be made that such claims should be subject to mandatory DNA paternity testing. That would defeat the practice of people buying children overseas and then bringing them here outside the established foreign adoption protocols. This is clearly why the border control questioned them for so long.
Heinous indeed. There was a case in US afraid to google and find it though where a single male legally adopted a child from Russia and abused her into her teens. Pretending a gay or straight relationship is merely the next level of paedophilic sophistication I suppose. It's got nothing to do with the paedophilia itself. Homophobia is a misguided word. It is too easy to deflect valid criticism of something that many find abborent and have every right to feel in an open society.
Journalists like Ginger are too naive. Paedophiles and gay predators should be lumped in together with rapists. They are the ones with sick and evil minds not those who are revulsed by their dark ways. People should be able to crticise homosexuality per se without being unkindly and unfairly typecast as homophobes.
Ginger owes the world an apology not only for being gullible but recklessly judgemental and unprofessional. Can't agree Steve. I guess I would call myself a "rapistophobe or a paedophilobe" but not a homophobe, because I do not agree with, and hate what rapists and paedophiles do but I do not hate what homosexuals do. If you are "revulsed by their homosexual's dark ways" then you have a phobia of homosexuals. Stop worrying about things that don't affect you and we would all live a more peaceful life :. Hey Steve. So I'm gay, from conception, which was not my choice and I'm not a pedophile.
Far, far from it. I am horrified and sickened by what people will do to children for sexual gratification. I don't have any want or need to do anything like that. I have a loving relationship with my partner of same age 32 and we don't want to have children of our own. Not because we think we're going to abuse our child , it's because we cannot afford to have a child.
We choose not to have children when we struggle at times to keep ourselves clothed and fed. Are you going to lump us in with rapists and child molesters as well? I just want to emphasize, I didn't choose to be gay, so how can you compare me to a pedophile, rapist or whatever you want to call me. I'm a human being, trying to live my life peacefully within our community and yes, we are discriminated against for something that we didn't choose to be.
As a last comment, my partner was emotionally, physically and physiologically abused by his biological mother as a child whilst his father chose to ignore what was happening. This went on for many years with people in the community aware of what was happening, but they chose to ignore it. I understand the reasoning behind why people say a child should have a mother and a father, but guess what. Heterosexual parents can be just as evil as anyone else. Actually, I think you owe an apology for associating homosexuals with rapists and pedophiles.
Gays are no more likely to be either than are straight people. Homosexuality is not, unlike rape or pedophilia, a criminal offence. Very open reflection, Ginger. I hope you can work through this eventually and remove all sense of blame from yourself. It is a complex and layered situation.
In journalism, one does one's best including using well informed, evolved intuition. If the scar tissue from these deeply distressing situations grows over your better instincts, it will render you less insightful and more suspicious. That, as you imply, is a worse outcome. The aberrant amongst us should not be able, ultimately, to warp the whole fabric of trust and diversity.
Thanks for documenting and sharing this. Journos are always first in suckers queue especially when it comes to reporting alternative life choices, complementary health reporting, Climate change. The depth of their ignorance and gullibility never ceases to amaze me. That is quite a generalisation there Joan.
And unsupportable. ALL journalists? As a class? Even a moment's thought renders that claim absurd really. Not an excuse for homophobia, there's plenty of paedophilia from straight men,. Ginger, please tell me that Boy 1 is receiving some sort of psychological help with what he has been through and is in the care of someone who actually will care for him and love him. I am not sure that the core issue here is homophobia - it's about the child's interests including the right to decent vetting procedures for prospective parents versus the parents' privilege in being able to adopt a child.
The story is unclear whose jurisdiction this fell under - Russia's? If Australia is anything like other countries, the local adoption people will do a home study to determine whether the parents are suitable adoptive parents, and if so, the parents then go abroad and adopt. The child is then legally there, and DOCS would no more follow up with them than with a straight couple who've just had a baby. Ginger, congratulations on the courage to write your story above.
So many of your comments are a true reflection of our society. You were in no way to blame for the predicament this unfortunate youngster was enduring. The two calculating, sick men were and are completely responsible for their evil actions and will hopefully reap the consequences of their actions on a young innocent and helpless child.
As a society, we need to accept that there are those, who through no fault of their own, are attracted to the same sex. We are not in a position to judge. There are, though, those, both hetero and homosexual, who are perverted and capable of the atrocities perpetrated by these two beasts. I am well aware of heterosexuals who are just a devious, evil and cruel. So, let's not wrongfully attribute blame to one group simply because a couple of their members commit what is being done by those of the hetero sexual community as well.
Having worked with paedophiles and other sex offenders, it is remarkable how people who are so tainted with this psychopathology can come across as perfectly "normal" people. It is a hallmark of the pathology that these people, generally, can cover their intentions so convincingly. Lets face it though, it is the unsuccessful sex offenders who cannot do this trick. A presentation of innocence is necessary to obtain the pleasure that they seek and to effect the harm they do.
And they seek to do both. Many wise and insightful people are deceived and rightly so. If we disregard the salient point of justice and fairness that we are innocent until proven guilty our then cynicism would lead to worse. You are right Ginger. As a professional as well as a constructive and creative human it would be inappropriate to judge without having all the facts No-one could have predicted the outcome given the presentation.
Yes I can feel your pain and understand how hard this would be for you but I am a simplistic person, I am not homophobic but I have a simple belief in the way nature works for other species. People who are born homosexual are done so for a reason - it is natures way of natural preselection to keep the population in check - it is my belief these people are not meant to have children. Therefore: No IVF for infertile heteros, either, as they weren't born to breed. I'm not heterophobic, I just believe nature knows best. By the same token, we're also not meant to have antibiotics, antivirals, surgery, flying machines, cities, cars or houses made of things other than wood and leaves.
We're human beings. We abandoned what was natural a very long time ago and, when it comes right down to it, nobody is keen to go back to it. I don't have the exact statistic to hand and it may have changed so don't take this as writ but most abusers of children are heterosexual males in some sort of close proximity to a child father, stepfather, grandfather, uncle, brother, family friend etc.
This statement is wrong rob. I have read that blog and numerous other articles and reviews now and the blog you reference appears to be quite selective in the data it presents. There is also no such blanket statement on there that makes your claim that I can see. Try this review and you will see both sides of the story: Hughes, John R. Families are by their nature private, and with that privacy comes the potential for it to be used as a cloak for abuse. If anyone thinks that children are safe, or even at less risk, living with natural heterosexual parents, I invite them to look at the stories from the ABC today alone, in which one can find reference to two natural heterosexual mothers convicted of killing their children.
Basing child protection strategies on the sexual orientation of the parties involved is only going to put children at risk of greater harm, as it will result in the misallocation of already scarce resources from where they are needed most. Approximately half the women of childbearing age who have epilepsy report an increase in seizures around the time of their monthly menstrual period.
Seizures that occur around the menstrual cycle are called catamenial epilepsy. Studies show that changes in seizures are most often in the middle of the cycle around ovulation and about a week before menstrual bleeding. The hormonal changes during the menstrual cycle are the most likely cause of changes in seizure frequency. The brain contains many nerve cells that are directly affected by estrogen and progesterone, the main sex hormones in women. Studies in animals have shown that high doses of estrogen can cause or worsen seizures. Yet progesterone can protect against seizures.
Other hormones are being looked at as possible triggers of seizures during menses and at times of other hormonal changes in women. The mission of the Epilepsy Foundation is to lead the fight to overcome the challenges of living with epilepsy and to accelerate therapies to stop seizures, find cures, and save lives. Skip to main content.
Sign In Register find us donate. Does the menstrual cycle affect the rate of seizures in women with epilepsy? What causes seizures to be seen during hormonal changes with menses? What strategies can be used to reduce seizures associated with the menstrual cycle? Adjusting the dose of a seizure medication before the time of increased seizures.