Dump all your anti-gay research
It's a scientific fact that homosexuals do not form pair-bonds that are as strong as heterosexuals.
>http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2906147/
Found that in their study, "[Homosexual] Couples with monogamous and open agreements did not differ significantly in their relationship satisfaction. This is in line with previous findings (Blasband & Peplau, 1985; Kurdek, 1988; LaSala, 2004)…"
>http://www.pdf-archive.com/2016/01/24/waite-joyner/waite-joyner.pdf
Shows that this is a stark contrast to heterosexual couples. Their research found on page 257 that "the more exclusive the sexual relationship, the greater the emotional satisfaction reported".
So clearly something is different. Research allows us to see what.
>http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2387250/
Studied the effect of strengthened pair-bonds in a species of apes that mate for life. . It was observed that “males [who] had…been part of a previous [brain] lesioning experiment…which resulted behaviorally in increased interaction with their pair-mates and apparent ‘strengthening’ of the pair-bond. Specifically, post-lesion the males were more often in physical contact with their mates, were less likely to break contact, and spent more time grooming their mates. They also displayed less behavioral arousal (arching, tail-lashing) towards strange females than they did pre-lesion”.
However, we can see that homosexuals have a weak pair bond as they have extreme interest in other mates which only increases as their relationship goes on, instead of decreasing like a relationship with the pair-bond was strengthening would.
Continued in comments. Post your research too!
>See pic related
According to the book The Male Couple (written by two homosexual psychologists who were themselves a male couple - so as unbiased a source as could possibly exist), in their study, "all [homosexual] couples with a relationship lasting more than five years have incorporated some provision for outside sexual activity in their relationships".
>http://journals.lww.com/aidsonline/Fulltext/2004/06180/Primary_HIV_infection_as_source_of_HIV.10.aspx
Found that even among homosexuals in relationships, their number of outside sexual partners stays very high. In their study "Men with and without a steady partner had [an average of] eight and 22 casual contacts per year, respectively".
>http://www.pdf-archive.com/2016/01/24/comparative-demographic-and-sexual-profile/comparative-demographic-and-sexual-profile.pdf
Found that, among older men who had engaged in homosexual activities it was reported that just "2.7% had had sex with 1 partner only" (which was even lower than the number who said they were straight, at 3.9%)
So on an emotional and behavioral level, we can see that same-sex relations are inferior to heterosexual ones. They do not form proper sexual bonds, if they form them at all.
wish I had some more P:
We need more stuff like this. The problem with the anti-gay movement has been that its been all claims with no hard facts. Way more stuff like this is needed!
>>78056899
Check out these sick digits faggots
Remember to dislike this video too
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtCyepuLt8Q
One thing I know is that lots of fag-enablers bring up online polls with heavily skewed samples to try and prove homos are normal.
Remember: RANDOM, REPRESENTATIVE samples are always a must!
A common counter-argument to my argument are polls where homosexuals say they are monogamous.
The reply to this is that studies where people self-identify as monogamous are fraught with problems. As:
>http://alliance1.metapress.com/content/c88h40t02x9k8764/
explicitly discusses: In 33 (45.2%) of the 73 monogamous agreement couples, 1 or both partners reported outside sex since the beginning of the relationship”. (And keep in mind many of the men filled out these surveys together since only those where both men returned their’s were counted, so this is likely skewed low)
Further, see:
>http://www.stat.ucla.edu/~cochran/PDF/NatSurveyAALesbiansGayMen.pdf
Look on page 29, at table 2.5. Though about half of the same sex male relations were reported to be monogamous, 65% of the respondents admitted to having sex with someone else since their relationship began (and most of those with multiple someone elses). Only 31% could be sure their partner hadn’t had sex with someone else during the relationship, while the others either weren’t sure (36%) or knew they had (33%).
So self-identifying the relation as monogamous does not even come close to meaning that it actually is.
>http://www.academia.edu/download/30527657/A_Critical_Examination_of_Popular_Assumptions_About_the_Benefits_and_Outcomes_of_Monogamous_Relationships_PSPR_epub_ahead_of_print.pdf
Like this paper discusses, “The general public appears to struggle with the definition of monogamy, and indeed, monogamy may be understood and defined idiosyncratically…This latter practice is exemplified by such comments as, ‘I’m monogamous with whomever I’m with’ (Stevens, 1993)”.
So you need to actually ask about sexual behaviors and numbers of partners and such to see if monogamy is actually present. Just asking if someone identifies as monogamous is insufficient
>>78056899
>>78057206
>>78061321
I'm struggling to see what about this is anti-gay
Yeah of course they don't form strong pair bonds, pair bonds are a product of evolution that helps ensure a mating partner's investment in their offspring so the offspring has a more likely chance of survival. Gay couples aren't reproductive so that instinct isn't there, and any gay person who knows shit about evolutionary biology would agree with that.
>>78056899
WHOOPSIE
>>78056899
http://www.baylorisr.org/wp-content/uploads/Marks.pdf
Science Direct.com July 2012
Loren Marks, Louisiana State University
In 2005, the American Psychological Association (APA) issued an official brief on lesbian and gay parenting. This brief included the assertion: “Not a single study has found children of lesbian or gay parents to be disadvantaged in any significant respect relative to children of heterosexual parents” (p. 15). The present article closely examines this assertion and the 59 published studies cited by the APA to support it. Seven central questions address: (1) homogeneous sampling, (2) absence of comparison groups, (3) comparison group characteristics, (4) contradictory data, (5) the limited scope of children’s outcomes studied, (6) paucity of long-term outcome data, and (7) lack of APA-urged statistical power. The conclusion is that strong assertions, including those made by the APA, were not empirically warranted. Recommendations for future research are offered.
Highlights
► A 26 of 59 APA studies on same-sex parenting had no heterosexual comparison groups. ► In comparison studies, single mothers were often used as the hetero comparison group. ► No comparison study had the statistical power required to detect a small effect size. ► Definitive claims were not substantiated by the 59 published studies. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0049089X12000580
OP is a virgin
please dump, need a starting point
I'm doing personal research on this now.
>>78056899
>>78056899
>homo propaganda doesn't exist
>>78056899
>>78066219
This should be an image to this post, that above is a mark regnerus study. PLEASE SAVE THIS ONE. This is literally a proof that all those pro-LGBT adopting "studies" are a one big hoax.
http://www.baylorisr.org/wp-content/uploads/Marks.pdf
Also interestingly, we see these same sorts of behaviors in lesbians. There's been less research done on them for this, but what we have is quite telling.
>http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1446471/pdf/11392937.pdf
Found that only 13.6% of lesbians reported having one sexual partner in the past 5 years compared to 70.0% of straight women.
>http://sti.bmj.com/content/76/5/345.long
Found that women who have sex with women tended to be more promiscuous even with men than straight women. They reported that “Interestingly, the median number of lifetime male sexual partners was significantly greater for WSW [Women who have Sex with Women] than controls (12 partners versus 6, p<0.001). WSW were significantly more likely to report more than 50 lifetime male sexual partners (9% versus 2%, OR 4.1, p<0.001)”. And that’s even despite the fact that in their sample, “Twenty five per cent reported no previous sexual contact with men ever”.
>http://www.stat.ucla.edu/~cochran/PDF/NatSurveyAALesbiansGayMen.pdf
45.8% of lesbians said that they had had sex with someone else since the relationship began, as can be seen on page 29. This is despite the fact that the median length of the relationship for lesbians in the study was only a little over two years.
And only a little over half – 56.5% - said their relationship was closed to sex with others.
>http://www.uni-koeln.de/wiso-fak/fisoz/conference/papers/p_andersson.pdf
A study of the divorce rates among straight, gay, and lesbian marriages in Norway and Sweden found that lesbians were by far the most likely group to divorce. Once other factors were controlled for, “the divorce risk in partnerships of men is 50 percent higher than the corresponding risk in heterosexual marriages, and that the divorce risk in female partnerships is about double that of men".
>>78066219
>>78066673
>the regnerus study
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/05/10/new-criticism-of-regnerus-study-on-parenting-study/
http://www.regnerusfallout.org/the-story
>>78067467
Dang dude these all really are good studies!!! Will be super useful!
>>78067745
You know the studies you idiots are quoting are from Christcucks who claim authority using false references and false authority. Along with false statistics etc.
No university would publish that kind of crap, not because it is politically incorrect but because the research is highly flawed. A lot of research contradicts your beliefs. But you would probably think ''Jewish conspiracy'' because you can't handle being completely wrong. Therefore hopping on the false assumption that the party who made the research fully knows that being gay is degenerate but that they're intentionally changing everything to spread wrong information.
Ohh boy these comments are prime trolling. Common Filth was not wrong, a demon will recoil when you call it what it is.
guys, focus on separating LGB from the T. We've gone too far, no one will support anti-gay agenda, but there's hope in fighting the tranny's. Check that dislike bar. Now check the dislike bar on the Jew's next step:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9uAAP3PbkRI
We still have a shot at fighting degeneracy. Don't let them get to necrophilia acceptance before we're done. Fight trannies first. Gay marriage is legal already, it's like interracial marriage. Too late.
>>78068384
>No university would publish that kind of crap, not because it is politically incorrect but because the research is highly flawed.
Right. Pro-LGBT studies are always methodologically good. See >>78067467
>>78069079
I know it's very hard to get something published. If it has a minor flaw it can mean your entire research has been worthless and that you're screwed.
I've never experienced anything negative around homosexual people so I don't care about gay rights. I think a lot of people feel the same way and don't see stuff like gay marriage as a huge issue.
>>78069064
With that losing attitude we already lost. Also Bosnia they are all the part of the same problem. That accepting only LGB is "controlled opposition" trick. In the next 10 years you will say "LGBT are fine" zoophiles are the problem.
And what does any of this refute? How does their infidelity/aids/promiscuity affect your life? Why do you care about who they fuck? Because of muh degeneracy and muh feels?
Pork is much less healthy than chicken. Should we ban pork? Do you really want the state to control what you can do, even if it doesn't affect anybody else? If so, kill yourself, statist cucks.
Im not anti-gay, I dont care what they do.
But(t), I am anti-genderfluid and that shit, Its a mental illness/brain damage that i dont want my kids to see when they grow up. If kids are friends with the wrong people, its no stopping them with this shit, it wont take long for this socialism-dictator country to get aboard the bandwagon..
>>78068384
>Along with false statistics etc.
At the very least the statistics about gay promiscuity are true without a shadow of doubt. Otherwise the numbers of HIV infections in America don't make sense.
>>78070047
libcuck pls go
>>78070058
>Im not anti-gay, I dont care what they do.
And why do you care what genderfluids do? I really don't understand this distinction beetwen gays and others degenerates. Like I said in previous post in the next 10 years genderfluids also won't bother you, but some new form of degeneration will.
>>78070047
>As long as they don't harm me they can do whatever :^) who cares if they want to have anal sex with their dogs :^)
Why do you care what polyamorous people do? Why do you care what transracial people do? Why do you care what dragonkin people do?
Harm based morality is retarded and put us into this situation to begin with.
>>78070699
>anybody who wants freedom instead of the state controlling their life is a libcuck
I'm pretty sure the one who wants to be controlled is the cuck. Kill yourself, faggot, even gays are less faggy than you.
>>78068384
I've cited nothing but scholarly studies.
>>78071149
Why don't you start fighting with penalization of incest or zoophilia in Poland if you love liberty so much?
>>78071019
>harm me
I never said "me". Anyone can do whatever they want, as long as they don't harm anybody else (unless they have the consent). Assuming that we recognize any animal rights, anal sex with dogs is illegal, because the dog can't consent. I don't give a fuck about mentally ill people if they don't harm anybody else, why do you?
>>78056899
>>78070699
Because it is not normal going apeshit when the doctor asks (if he really have to) what your gender is. Ignoring the gender-assigned health risks. And also acting like a special snowflake that is constantly opressed, needs attention and protection. These people usually show themselves from the worst possible way. Demanding people should obviously know they identify as a demisexual-hen-progressive-omnipositive.. fuck me...
Many other gay people I know are well mannered, dress like a normal person, has a job, has a social antenna and doesnt demand anything. There is a big difference. They dont care if you talk with them about dick/pussy, they seem more friendly alltogether
>>78071628
Zoophilia is wrong, because the pet can't consent.
There is nothing wrong with incest, as long as it's done with consent of both sides (and without any position of authority, so no mother/son, father/daughter), and doesn't produce offspring. And actually, if it's not done for multiple generation, chances of deformities etc. are not higher than when an old woman gets pregnant.
>>78071698
>I don't give a fuck about mentally ill people if they don't harm anybody else, why do you?
Why do you assume their behavior doesn't harm anything in the long run? Do you seriously believe normalizing and greenlighting mental illness will have no negative consequences in the long run? Shit, forget the long run part, you can plainly see what a clownworld western society has become.
>>78071698
And why the fuck animals should consent? They din not consent to be a dinner on table or to be a pet? Some animals don't even feel pain. There is nothing wrong with zoophilia according to liberal logic.
Take a moment to consider the fact that you are looking for "research" against gay people with strangers on the Internet
>>78072063
>doesnt demand anything
Becouse they have already achieved everything. Don't worry you won't see a problem with genderfluids in future. They will also seem normal to you then.
In the book 'Sex and Culture' by J D Unwin, and Oxford-based anthropologist in the 1930s did considerable research on a number of civilisations and basically discovered that only the traditional Christian type model leads to prosperity, and that faggotry and other such progressivism bring about societal decline
I've been trying to find a physical copy of it for a while now, but to no avail thus far
>>78072281
Banning arbitrary things based on muh feefees is much more harmful. And if society could fall because of 2% of people being more promiscuous, it was worthless to begin with.
>>78069468
>What is a reductio ad absurdum.jpg
If two-sex marriage is questioned, why couldn't other issues also being questioned too?
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/supreme-court-clarifies-canadas-bestiality-law-with-ruling/article30371581/
The vanguardists of today will be seen as the reactionaries tomorrow. I prefer to be an assumed reactionary right now.
>>78072211
>and doesn't produce offspring
You bigot
>>78072552
You said everything that needs to be said tbqh
Many links:
http://pastebin.com/aiTLKLJc
>Results: Emotional problems were over twice as prevalent (minimum risk ratio (RR) 2.4, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.7-3.0) for children with same-sex parents than for children with opposite-sex parents. Risk was elevated in the presence of parent psychological distress (RR 2.7, CI 1.8-4.3, p (t) < .001), moderated by family instability (RR 1.3, CI 1.2-1.4) and unaffected by stigmatization (RR 2.4, CI 1.4-4.2), though these all had significant direct effects on emotional problems. However, biological parentage nullified risk alone and in combination with any iteration of factors. Joint biological parents are associated with the lowest rate of child emotional problems by a factor of 4 relative to same-sex parents, accounting for the bulk of the overall same-sex/opposite-sex difference.
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2500537
>>78073403
Well, as I stated later, even this part is largely unneeded, since risks are about as high as when an old woman gets pregnant. However, raising the risk of genetic diseases by a big factor is harming the child. If anything, old women should be banned from having children.
>>78073777
How about you compare it to the child not getting adopted at all, and living in a shitty orphanage? I'm pretty sure fag parents are still better than any orphanage.
>>78072552
>>78073456
Meaning what, you can only share research with people you know personally? What an asinine statement.
>>78073083
The problem, as you can see, is not what the mentally ill people do, but that it is being pushed by the media as something that is not mental illness. As something "normal".
That's the problem, these people should be treated instead of being given "pride" on a illness. It also doesn't stop. As you saw, the big amount of "freedom" that is given to people started escalating to polygamy (Germany), necrophilia (Sweden) and bestiality (Canada).
This is my first and likely last post in /pol/. I probably have next to nothing in common with most /pol/tards ideologically, but I'm sure you'd also be against sweeping white males under the rug in the name of diversity.
>>78070047
I don't give a fuck what degenerate shit people want to do in their private lives, what I care about is them pushing it on children. These sick fucks are barraging children with the idea that it's cool to pick your own gender than start injecting yourself with hormones and chop your genitals off. That IS NOT ok.
>>78072974
https://archive.org/details/b20442580
>>78074888
Well, I can accept this answer. Teaching it as the only truth is bad. But banning people from doing things is bad too.
>>78072211
Smoking is more likely to cause genetic issues than first gen incest.
THESE PIECES OF HUMAN SHAPED TRASH DO NOT DESERVE TO LIVE. THEY HAVE PROVEN THIS TIME AND TIME AGAIN.
WE HAVE TO BRING THE FIGHT TO THEM. WE CAN'T LET THESE CREATURES HARM US ANY FURTHER.
USE THEIR TACTICS AGAINST THEM.
SUBVERT THEIR SUBVERSION.
IF THEY SHOW UP ON YOUR DOORSTEP, TEACH THEM ABOUT THE SECOND AMENDMENT.
DO NOT LET THEM CONTINUE THIS FILTH.
THIS SHIT IS NOTHING MORE THAN A THINLY VEILED ATTACK ON REGULAR PEOPLE. THIS VIDEO AND THIS DAY ARE ONLY A SIGN THAT THEY ARE STEPPING UP THEIR GAME. IF WE DO NOT FIGHT THEM OFF THIS TIME, THERE MIGHT NOT BE ANOTHER TIME TO DO SO.
INVOKE WHATEVER MAGIC OR BULLSHIT YOU BELIEVE IN, BUT DO IT NOW. WE HAVE TO DO THIS FOR OUR CHILDREN'S SAKE.
>>78075376
Just becouse something it's bad (old woman pregnancy it does not mean we should accept something which is bad too. As you said earlier multiple generation incest is very bad for offsprings.
>>78075376
>they are doing it in privacy meme
see >>78066712
I don't want to ban gay sex. But there need to be censorship of homosexuality in public (in public in TV etc.)
>>78056899
I don't mind gays/bisexuals, even though I see heterosexual nuclear families as ideal, they serve some purpose in humanity as they have survived natural selection. Post-modern gender theory is total shit though, there's no such thing as a genderfluid person, and transgenders are mentally ill.
>>78075048
Yeah I know the eBook is easy to find, but I was talking about a physical copy
>>78076617
I'm in favor of gay tolerance, as in, tolerating something that is definitively not ideal. The left thinks that they need to exalt and idealize things like this, and completely deny that heterosexual, married, nuclear families are superior. I don't want to kill gays, or even censor them, but this glorification of aberrant/unfavorable behavior needs to stop.
>>78071019
>bestiality is like homosexuality
false equivalence. Animals can't consent.
>>78078343
Like as in theyre both unhealthy mental issues
>>78074247
>How about you compare it to the child not getting adopted at all, and living in a shitty orphanage? I'm pretty sure fag parents are still better than any orphanage.
But gays are such a tiny fraction (2-3%) of the general population.
If finding homes for orphans is a priority, a more effective approach would be to promote adoption among heterosexual couples.
I doubt same-sex adoption advocates even care about the children. If they did, they would push for a campaign to make adoption popular, period. It's more about muh gay rights.
>>78078808
how sure are you that your are mentally healthy?
>>78078343
>Animals can't consent.
What if it humps you?
>>78078808
I think that gays have a place in society, so long as they remain a fringe group. They drive memetic evolution since they can afford to make mistakes and take risks, sometimes they yield great results (like Allan Turing) and sometimes they make mistakes and fade away. There's a reason why they survived natural selection despite being incapable of reproducing.
>>78079850
homosexuality is not a gene
>>78079302
Trying to fuck a dog or suck another man's cock is a good sign
>>78079850
I agree they as people have a place in society, as they are people and being a faggot in itself isn't really harmful to anyone else.
Move ur sorry asses and report this shit for terrorism or smthin
>>78058810
I made it to the third second. Then I had to quit.
>>78079850
>There's a reason why zoophiles, pedophiles, necrophiles, survived natural selection despite being incapable of reproducing.
>>78078343
see>>78072287
>>78078250
>but this glorification of aberrant/unfavorable behavior needs to stop.
That won't happen becouse natural family is a fallacy for them.
>>78056899
Bigot. Bi-got. Are you having fun here in your little self-affirming bubble? You're all so cute in your little echo chamber. The world finds you all socially retarded. It's time to come into the real world and accept people for who they damn well are. Children. You're all children.
All gays should be put in special recovery camps for extremely meantlly ill people.
>>78056899
>Proud to be mentally ill
This is the world we live in.
>>78081518
You people are the ones who are mentally ill. The people who project their inadequacies on minority groups are people with serious mental and social problems. I suggest leaving your basement/house and meeting some gay people, and not just the ones you see on your TV/in the light of the cultural narrative.
[common filth intensifies]
https://soundcloud.com/xtrilliam/grown-up-prod-another-excuse
>>78081739
Yeah, they're mentally ill with depression, because there are assholes like you in the world being hateful for literally no reason besides
>muh beliefs
>muh supremacy narrative - that is, I have a small penis but FUCK IT I'm straight and therefore BETTER than SOME men!
Grow. Up.
>>78056899
Lesbian couples regularly come out in studies as being the most monogamous though.
The problem isn't so much homosexuality as that a lot of men will fuck anything that moves and in a gay relationship you're doubling that likelihood.
ITT virgins bitch about seeing two men holding hands and how it made them feel lonely.
>>78081337
>Bigot. Bi-got.
>>78082054
Cry about it maple nigger.
>>78081337
>bigot
oh my :^)
>>78081337
>a fucking leaf
tl;dr
Why would you care this much? Internalized homophobia? That was the case with the Pulse shooter.
Just bee yourself, faggots.
>b-b-but current year
>>78056899
really makes u think
MODS ARE DELETING THREADS
main thread just got deleted.
Mods killed the main threads on /pol/ and /b/
fuck knows what they're doing to /po/ and r/the_donald
>>78068447
>undertale
Fucking faggots
>>78089390
>>78089517
>>78089562
It's technically a "no raids" rule, but honestly, it's not so much a raid considering we legitimately disagree with JewTube producing this absolute garbage.
>>78056899
FAGGOTRY ABOUNDS.
>>78089795
im still waiting for the islamic horde to be released upon these faggots Tbh.
i really really want to be the jews
>>78089795
yeah i assume it was under no raiding.
but this has been on the front page of /pol/ for five hours.
direct links between the chans, probably didn't help
>>78056899
Dat thread
saving to read later.
>>78090004
There is generally a specific time/shift change where stuff like this is suddenly enforced.
Probably referencing /b/ was what killed it, really.
>>78090004
This being Youtubes main page thing, i would have thought that we wouldnt have needed to tell /b/ and wheelschan about this shit, and that they'd come upon this shit themselves
the fucking like bar went up 200 likes in 20 seconds
fucking mods are deleting every thread on >>>/b/
fucking faggots
Thread OST: https://youtu.be/-txARIembzg
TO KEEP OUR NATION PURE AND CLEAN
EVERY HOMOSEXUAL MUST BE QUARANTINED
PUT THEM TO DEATH WITH NO MERCY
GAS THEM ALL WITH ZYKLON-B
Based Raunchous Brothers.
Daily reminder that this is a Hillary/Democrat false flag operation designed to mitigate damage done by the Orlando terror attacks. It's all designed to remind the LGBT population that their "real" enemy isn't ISIS/terrorists/muslims, but republicans/"homophobes"/"racists"//pol/, and they'd better not think about voting Trump, or else.
If you absolutely have to post comments, have them focus on how PC culture is being shoved down our throats, that's something that most of the population can understand. But if you have to say "I hate gay people" or some dumb shit like that, then keep it on /pol/. Anyone who posts that dumb shit on youtube or facebook is actively working to get Hillary elected.
the CDC has a lot of information about homosexuals having higher rates of STDs, domestic abuse and smoking.
Maybe removed now though.
>>78091572
R A R E
A
R
E
G
B
T
Q
+
+
>>78092456
this is fucking retarded. did you write this dogshit? im sick of gays too but your arguments sound like you have an IQ of 75
>>78093746
only thing semi related I got - I am not sure if empty bumps work anon
>>78091572
>Thin Man
>>78067745
>>78068112
>/pol/ gets BTFO
>react by posting the same thing again
You guys really have no arguments, huh? I think you know that you're wrong, but don't care. The only thing that matters to you went presenting these arguments is that you're going against the status quo; not that you're right. Pathetic.
You're welcome, anons
https://vimeo.com/171664966
>>78096034
It's now on YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmecvvRzfZM
I'll post the references I cited for my research paper. Those indicated with "Web." are easily found using a simple google search. Some of the "Print." citations you can find online as well.
1. Comanor, William S., and Llad Phillips. "The Impact of Income and Family Structure on Delinquency." Journal of Applied Economics 5.2 (2002): 209-32. Web.
2. McLanahan, Sara, and Gary D. Sandefur. Growing up with a Single Parent: What Hurts, What Helps. N.p., (1997): 38. Print.
3. Lerman, Robert L., and W. Bradford Willcox. "For Richer, for Poorer: How Family Structures Economic Success in America." Institute for Family Studies (2014): 1-65. Web.
4. Population Reference Bureau. U.S. Census Bureau Census, 2000 Supplementary Survey, 2001 Supplementary Survey, 2002 through 2014 American Community Survey. Web. <http://datacenter.kidscount.org/data/>
>>78096500
my paper was on marriage, gay marriage, and the effects on children. Not explicitly anti-gay, but definitely anti-gay-couples-raising-children and anti-gay-"marriage"
5. Downey, Douglas B. "The School Performance of Children from Single-Mother and Single-Father Families: Economic or Interpersonal Deprivation?" Journal of Family Issues (1994): 1-19. Sage Publications, Inc. Web.
6. Amato, Paul R. "The Impact of Family Formation Change on the Cognitive, Social, and Emotional Well-Being of the Next Generation." The Future of Children 15.2 (2005): 75-96. Web.
7. Cabrera, Natasha J. "Fatherhood in the Twenty-First Century." Child Development 71.1 (2000): 127-36. Web.
8. McLanahan, Sara, Irwin Garfinkel, and Dorothy Watson. “Family Structure, Poverty and the Underclass.” Committee on National Urban Policy, Working Paper No. 86.13 (1986)
9. Carlson, Marcia J., and Mary E. Corcoran. “Family Structure and Children’s Behavioral and Cognitive Outcomes.” Journal of Marriage and Family 63 (2001): 779-792. Web.
10. Painter, Gary, and David I. Levine. “Family Structure and Youths' Outcomes: Which Correlations are Causal?” Institute for Research on Labor and Employment UC Berkeley (1999): 1-32. Print.
11. Flouri, Eirini, and Ann Buchanan. “The Role of Father Involvement and Mother Involvement in Adolescents’ Psychological Well-being.” British Journal of Social Work 33 (2003): 399-406. Web.
12. Biblarz, Timothy J., and Adrian E. Raftery. “Family Structure, Educational Attainment, and Socioeconomic Success: Rethinking the ‘Pathology of Matriarchy.’” American Journal of Sociology 105 No. 2 (1999): 321-65. Web.
>>78096680
13. Mistry, Rashmita S., Elizabeth A. Vandewater, and Aletha C. Huston. “Economic Well-Being and Children’s Social Adjustment: The Role of Family Process in an Ethnically Diverse Low-Income Sample.” Journal of the Society for Research in Child Development 73 No. 3 (2002): 935-951. Web.
14. Lundberg, Shelly, and Robert A. Pollak. “The American Family and Family Economics.” Institute for the Study of Labor No. 2715 (2007): 1-33. Web.
15. Becker, Gary S. “A Treatise on the Family.” Harvard University Press. (1981): ix-449. Print.
16. Flouri, Eirini, and Ann Buchanan. “The Role of Father Involvement in Children’s Later Mental Health.” Journal of Adolescence 26 (2003): 63-78. Web.
17. Amato, Paul R., and Bruce Keith. “Parental Divorce and the Well-Being of Children: A Meta-Analysis.” Psychological Bulletin of the American Psychological Association 110 No. 1 (1991): 26-46. Web.
18. McLanahan, Sara, and Larry Bumpass. “Intergenerational Consequences of Family Disruption.” National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Working Paper No. 86.10 (1986): 1-27. Web.
19. Sigle-Rushton, Wendy, and Sara McLanahan. “Father Absence and Child Well-Being: A Critical Review.” Center for Research on Child Wellbeing, Working Paper No. 2.20 (2002): 1-53. Print.
20. Sarkadi, Anna., Robert Kristiansson, Frank Oberklaid, and Sven Bremberg. “Fathers’ Involvement and Children’s Developmental Outcomes: A Systematic Review of Longitudinal Studies.” Acta Pædiatrica Foundation, Review Article 97 (2008): 153–158.
>>78096726
21. Corak, Miles. “Income Inequality, Equality of Opportunity, and Intergenerational Mobility.” Institute for the Study of Labor, Discussion Paper No. 7520 (2013): 1-28. Web.
22. “The Decline of Marriage And Rise of New Families.” Pew Research Center, Social & Demographic Trends Project (2010): 1-114. Web.
23. Reardon, Sean F. "The Widening Academic Achievement Gap Between the Rich and the Poor: New Evidence and Possible Explanations." Whither Opportunity? Rising Inequality, Schools, and Children's Life Chances. Ed. Greg J. Duncan and Richard J. Murnane. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. 92-111. Print.
24. Mather, Mark, and Diana Lavery. “In U.S., Proportion Married at Lowest Recorded Levels.” Population Reference Bureau Report. (2010) Web.
25. Wood, Robert G., Brian Goesling, and Sarah Avellar. “The Effects of Marriage on Health.” U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Human Services Policy. (2007): 1-10. (Web).
26. “How Are the Children of Single Mothers Faring? Evidence From the Fragile Families Study.” Population Reference Bureau, Discussion Online (2010). Web.
27. Wilcox, W. Bradford. “The State of Our Unions: Marriage in America.” The National Marriage Project. (2009): iii-114. Web.
28. Cohn, D’Vera, Jeffrey S. Passel, Wendy Wang, and Gretchen Livingston. “Barely Half of U.S. Adults are Married—A Record Low.” Pew Research Center, Social & Demographic Trends. (2011) Web.
>>78096804
29. Ironmonger, Duncan, and Faye Soupourmas. “Output-Based Estimates of the Gross Household Product of the United States 2003-2010.” The International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, 32nd General Conference (2012): 1-32. Web.
30. McLanahan, Sara. “Diverging Destinies: How Children are Faring under the Second Demographic Transition.” Population Association of America, Demography 41 No. 4 (2004): 607-627. Web.
31. Osborne, C., and Sara McLanahan. “Partnership Instability and Child Well-Being.” Journal of Marriage and Family 69 (2007): 1065-1083. Web.
32. Bronte-Tinkew, J., A. Horowitz, and M. E. Scott. “Fathering with Multiple Partners: Links to Children’s Well-Being in Early Childhood.” Journal of Marriage and Family 71 (2009): 608–631. Web.
33. Hofferth, S. L. “Residential Father Family Type and Child Well-Being: Investment Versus Selection.” Population Association of America, Demography 43 (2006): 53-78. Web.
34. Matthews, T.J., Sally C. Curtin, and Marian F. MacDorman. “Infant Mortality Statistics from the 1998 Period Linked Birth/Infant Death Data Set.” National Center for Health Statistics, National Vital Statistics Reports 48 No. 12 (2000). Web.
35. Cuffe, Steven P., Robert E. McKeown, Cheryl L. Addy, and Carol Z. Garrison. “Family Psychosocial Risk Factors in a Longitudinal Epidemiological Study of Adolescents.” Journal of American Academic Child Adolescent Psychiatry 44 (2005): 121-129. Web.
36. Harper, Cynthia C. and Sara S. McLanahan. “Father Absence and Youth Incarceration.” Journal of Research on Adolescence 14 (2004): 369-397. Web.
37. Hughes, Robert Jr. “Are Custody Decisions Biased in Favor of Mothers?” Huffington Post. (2011). Web.
>>78096858
38. “Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study.” Princeton University. Web. <http://fragilefamilies.princeton.edu/sites/fragilefamilies/files/ff_fact_sheet.pdf>
39. Wright, Danaya C. “Untying the Knot: An Analysis of the English Divorce and Matrimonial Causes Court Records, 1858-1866.” University of Florida Levin College of Law, Law Scholarship Repository 38 (2004): 903-1010. Web.
40. Heckman, James J. “The Economics of Inequality: The Value of Early Childhood Education.” American Educator. (2011). Print.
The facts are on our side. Threads, etc. like this are important because the more time goes on, the more censorship and disinfo is going to prevail in the culture at large.
>>78065461
The problem with a lot of this information is that it`s really outdated. The 70`s were so vastly different for homosexuals (read: way fucking worse and a lot more degenerate), it`s not really accurate stats for nowadays (especially the promiscuity stats).
>>78097297
>oppression made me a rampant faggot
>now that we're more accepting, it's much safer
>>78056899
WTF IS THIS BURGERS?
I WUZ THORING AND GOT A... ugh.. california IP
Hate facts are not facts. Just like hate speech is not free speech. I'm reporting this thread to the mods. Enjoy your ban, bigots.
>>78096500
>>78096680
>>78096726
>>78096804
>>78096858
>>78097061
>The facts are on our side
>>78056899
who makes the studies? homophobes
>>78097591
fugg
this is where I'm from
>>78097613
>facts are not facts when they hurt my feelings
Social Science is not real science.
OP you are the faggot. Get over it.
>>78096034
toppest kek
Wait just a sec... I thought all you faggots loved faggots now because a terrorist shot them?
Disturbing to say the least
>>78097663
>implying you read any of the 40 citations
>implying you could properly comprehend the reasoning behind it
>implying you aren't already triggered
gay couples should not be raising children.
Any evidence regarding parasitism?
>>78074888
exactly this. see >>78096500
>>78058810
>1:11
>i am 33 weeks pregnant
AAAAHAHAHAHAHA
OH GOD I'M FUCKING DYING, IM GLAD I DIDNT JUST CLOSE THE VIDEO LIKE I WANTED TO
>>78099499
can someone explain this? The dude got implanted with a uterus and now he's gonna have a baby or wtf is this shit? Is he going to shit the kid out or did he get a vaginal canal installed or what?
>>78100424
i just assumed that he wanted an excuse for his obesity, but the more disturbing the better i guess
>>78065056
I agree with that.
>>78081337
remove Leaf
>>78082054
Why do Canadians use /pol/?
Wouldn't they be happier on reddit or in the center of an interracial gang bang?
Just seems silly to me.
>>78082054
Hey there Trudeau
>>78097809
>this is where I'm from
I'm very sorry for you then, that is some swedish tier shit. I get the sympaty and all but these jews just keep on gassing on fueling the fire. They must be stopped
Know it was your faggots to kill, and not that fucking shitskin and all. Kebab shall all be removed regardless, you should start with a heathen court system against them, held the entire family/clan responsible when they do this.
This wuz our ways, before that white christ piece of shit came with the state and christian-roman court from rome... sneaky kikes.. we burned you 3 times and finnaly took you, but you fucked us in the end with that kikery.. Fuck rome!
We're turning heathen again now, it's happened before.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwAr6ciwoUg
not kidding look for your self, this be on great King's grave mound
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sY4Z-yPq0CE
With that viking guy I just learned I actually know.... that show sucks ass, but he's good
The ravens shall feast on mannaflesh soon
