NYT’s LGBT Family Blowout

The New York Times is chock full o’ LGBT family goodness this weekend:

Lisa Belkin’s “What’s Good for the Kids” looks at recent research showing that children of lesbian and gay parents tend to be more tolerant and less bound by gender stereotypes and assumptions. She relies heavily on a new book by Abbie Goldberg, Lesbian and Gay Parents and Their Children. (I have a column of my own coming out soon on Goldberg’s book, so I won’t go into details here, but I will point you to my interview of Goldberg from a couple of years ago.)

Belkin makes some good points, and her main one, that non-traditional families can actually be good for kids, is laudable. I have to take issue with one thing she says, however:

It is striking, then, how comparatively rarely children are mentioned as an argument in favor of gay marriage. The issue is framed as a debate over equality and justice, of personal freedom and the relation of church and state, not about what is good for kids.

First, I’ve seen a lot about how letting same-sex couples marry is good for our children, and about how not letting us do so hurts our kids.

Second, the ultra-right is always framing the debate about what is good for kids. (Several, if not all, of the sources I mention in the Maine section of my Weekly Political Roundup note this was a large reason we lost there. Ditto for Prop 8. )

If LGBT advocates have framed the issue instead as one of simple fairness and equality, that may be a matter of tactics, and isn’t necessarily a bad thing. As I’ve said before, I think Protect Maine Equality should be praised for focusing on fairness and equality, and not getting caught up in the back and forth of whether “gay marriage will be taught in schools,” one of the big issues that sank us in California.

Still, Belkin is correct in noting that the research on lesbian and gay parents, deftly compiled by Goldberg and others, shows not only that we are no worse than others, but may in fact be better preparing our children, gay or not, to live in a world where gender stereotypes are fading, straight husbands spend more time with kids, and wives take out the trash.

Will that convince people to support marriage equality, however, as Belkin suggests? My take? It won’t persuade the ultra-right, for whom the idea of blurred gender roles is as scary as that of same-sex couples getting married (and may in fact be the root cause of the latter). On the other side, those who see blurred gender roles as a good thing already tend to support marriage equality. For the undecided middle? Perhaps, although I am continually surprised at how entrenched gender roles are among the families in my neighborhood, even here in relatively liberal Massachusetts.

Still, the ultra-right has long owned the argument of “what is best for children.” If there is anything we can do to reclaim that argument from them in a compelling way for Middle America, then maybe Maine will be the last defeat of its kind.

Also of note in the NYT this weekend:

• “Can a Boy Wear a Skirt to School?” a good exploration of gender expression and identity. (The article even mentions Labels Are for Jars, whom I—and many of you—have long known around the queer-mom blogosphere.)
• “Field Guides to Fairies” is not in fact about identifying gay men, but rather a review of several new young adult books involving fairies, including Malinda Lo’s Ash, a lesbian retelling of Cinderella. (Here’s my interview with her about the book.) Many congratulations to her for making the NYT, which calls Ash “somber and lovely.”

I am a member of the Amazon Associates program, and get a small referral fee from all purchases made at Amazon.com via links on this site. You are under no obligation to purchase through them.