What is the most dangerous type of household for children?
- A married couple household: fathers are intrinsically dangerous and married fathers are hard to defend against, or get rid of.
- A single mother household: these moms are stressed out. A household with the mother and her unmarried boyfriend: the boyfriend is interested in the mother, not the child.
- A household with stepparent or foster parents present: these people have no biological relationship to the child, and they are stressed out.
Children in households with “unrelated adults” (usually the mothers’ boyfriends)
were nearly 50 times more likely to die of inflicted injuries than households with two biological
Contrary to feminist propaganda, two biological parents married to each other are the safest homes for children.
Single mother households without an “unrelated adult” are no more dangerous to children than married couple households. This suggests that part of the problem with single moms is not the moms themselves, but the fact that they so often take up with new boyfriends.
D. According to a study of childhood deaths by inflicted injuries in the state of Missouri, stepparent and foster parent homes are no more likely to have kids die of inflicted injuries than homes with two biological parents. (I realize that other studies show increased risks for foster kids: this study has too few foster kids in the sample for those risks to show up!)
Schnitzer, Patricia G. and Bernard Ewigman, “Child Deaths Resulting from Inflicted Injuries: Household Risk Factors and Perpetrator Characteristics,” Pediatrics, Vol. 116, no. 5: 687-693. (Nov. 2005)
Same sex couples have had the legal right to form domestic partnerships in several European countries. Denmark was the first to introduce registered partnerships, in 1989. Norway was second, in 1993, then Sweden in 1995. Data from 2 of these landmark countries, Norway and Sweden, as well as California, have been studied enough to answer this question:
What types of unions have the highest rates of divorce?
- Opposite sex married couples: men and women are so different, it is a wonder they ever stay married.
- Male unions: men are naturally less committed, and less monogamous, so their partnerships don’t endure.
- Female unions: women get so emotionally distraught over things. A union of two women, without
any male counter-balancing their roller-coaster, is very unstable.
Hint: the answer is the same in all three countries!
Female unions seem to have the highest divorce rates, followed by male unions, followed by
opposite sex unions.
“For Sweden, the divorce risk for partnerships of men is 50% higher than the risk for heterosexual marriages, and that the divorce risk for female partnerships is nearly double that for men.”
“For Norway, divorce risks are 77% higher in lesbian partnerships than in those of gay men.” (The Norwegian data did not include a comparison with opposite sex couples.)
In California, the data is collected a little differently. The study looks at couples who describe themselves as partners, whether same sex or opposite sex. The study asks the question, how likely is it that these couples live in the same household five years later. Male couples were only 30% as likely, while female couples were less that 25% as likely, as heterosexual married couples, to be residing in the same household for five years.
The only contradictory data I have found to this pattern is from the Netherlands. In the Dutch data, same sex couples have a 3.15 times greater dissolution rate than opposite sex cohabiting couples, and a 3.15 x 3.66 or 11.5 times greater dissolution rate than opposite married couples. But, female couples seem to be more stable than male couples.
Please note one other thing: gender matters. The whole premise of same sex marriage is that
marriage can, and should be, gender neutral. Gender should be irrelevant for marriage, for parenting
and for sex itself. But in these data, male and female couples behave differently. Hence, gender
is still a relevant characteristic, even in situations that offer legal and cultural support
for same sex unions.
Andersson, Gunnar, Turid Noack, Ane Seierstad, and Harald Weedon-Fekjaer, “The Demographics of Same Sex Marriages in Norway and Sweden,” Demography Vol 43, No. 1 (February 2006) 79-98.
Gates, Gary, “Characteristics and Predictors of Coresidential Stability among Couples,” California Center for Population Research, Working Paper, CCPR-069-06, December 2006.
Kalmijn, Matthijs, Anneke Loeve, and Dorien Manting, “Income Dynamics in Couples and the Dissolution of Marriage and Cohabitation.” Demography, Vol. 44, No. 1, Feb 2007: 159-179.
What is the leading cause of death among African Americans?
- Violent Crime
- Heart Disease
- Complications from Diabetes
Answer: By far, the largest single cause of death in the black community is abortion. In 2004, there were 209,603 abortions performed on black women, (compared with 312,233 abortions performed on white women.) There were only 287,315 deaths from all other causes among black Americans in 2004. The largest causes of death to post-birth African Americans were:
- Heart Diseases: 74,225
- Cancers of all sorts: 62,499
- Strokes: 18,118
- Diabetes: 12,834
- Accidents (unintentional injuries): 12,670
- Assault (homicide): 8,135
In addition, look at how numbers of abortions compare with the numbers of live births. In 2004, there were 616,074 live births to black mothers and 3,222,928 live births to white mothers.
Dividing the number of abortions by the number of live births, we find an abortion ratio of 97 abortions per 1,000 live births for white women and 340 abortions per live birth for black women.
Can you see why so many African-American leaders are becoming alarmed about the impact of abortion on their community?
“Abortion Surveillance, United States, 2004,” Center for Disease Control, MMWR (Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report): Surveillance Summaries, November 23, 2007/ 56(SS09); 1-33. Table 9. “Deaths: Final Data for 2005,” National Vital Statistics Reports, Vol. 56, No. 1, Center for Disease Control, April 24, 2008, Table 1, and “Deaths: Final Data for 2004,” National Vital Statistics Reports, Vol. 55, No. 19, CDC, August 21, 2007, Table 12. “Deaths: Final Data for 2004,” National Vital Statistics Reports, Vol. 55, No. 19, CDC, August 21, 2007, Table 12. “Births: Final Data for 2004,”National Vital Statistics Reports, Vol. 55, no. 1, Center for Disease Control, September 29, 2006. Table 1.
What percentage of the population is gay??
- Less than 1%
- None of the above
Answer: This is a trick question! The correct answer is: it all depends on what you mean by “gay.” Is it exclusive sexual activity, recent sexual activity, sexual desire, self-identification, or some combination of these? The percent gay also depends on whether you are talking about men or women, as well as a bunch of other factors. You can make a case for several different numbers.
A. There is virtually no case for Answer A, 10%. The “10% of the population is gay” figure that is so commonly thrown around comes from Alfred Kinsey’s study. Kinsey’s study was flawed because he used a non-representative sample. He also used an open-ended interview, which means he did not have a fixed set of questions he asked each person. It has never been remotely replicated as a figure for the general population. His work is criticized extensively in the Lauman et. al study cited below.
B. The case for 3%, answer B, comes from a very recent study by The Williams Institute, at UCLA Law School. The Williams Institute is a pro-gay think tank, devoted to studying gay and lesbian issues. They estimate that in 2005, there were about 8.8 million gay, lesbian and bisexual people in the US. (Census Snapshot, The Williams Institute, December 2007). That same year, according to the US Census Bureau Population Estimates Program, the total population of the US was 295,560,549, or approximately 295.6 million. Therefore, according to those figures, the total percentage of the population that was gay, lesbian or bisexual was right around 3%. (8.8 million/295.6 million = 2.977%.)
C. You can get an answer of less than 1%, by asking the following question: what percent of the population has had exclusively same sex partners since puberty? According to data from the 1990’s, (admittedly a bit dated) .2% of women and .6% of men had exclusively same sex partners since puberty. This would be the most rigorous definition. It rules out the person who experiments, dabbles or is confused. This data is worth taking seriously, since it is the exhaustive, University of Chicago study, "The Social organization of Sexuality: Sexual Practices in the United States" (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1994) by Edward O. Laumann, John H. Gagnon, Robert T. Michael, and Stuart Michaels.
Another compilation of data from roughly the same time frame found that 1.4% of women and 2.5% of men had exclusively same sex partners over the last five years. This result makes sense in conjunction with the previous result. A little bit higher percentage of people had exclusively same sex partners over the shorter period of time. [Dan Black, Gary Gates, Seth Sanders and Lowell Taylor, “Demographics of the Gay and Lesbian Population in the United States: Evidence from Available Systematic Data Sources,” Demography, vol 37, No. 2 (May, 2000) 139-154.]
D. The case for None of the Above now totally makes sense, doesn’t it? It depends on what population you are looking at. Did you notice that every number I quoted above was different between men and women? Pretty much everyone who studies this topic, looks at men and women separately. That’s because gender keeps showing up in the data as important. For instance, in the Gates et al study, only .6% of the female population self-identifies as lesbian, while three times as many men, 1.8%, describe themselves as gay.
Other variables matter as well. Just to give another, completely different example, the percentage of men who self-identified as gay varies with the size of the city you currently live in, and the size of the city you lived in at age 16! Of men currently living in the 12 largest cities, 14.3% had some same sex partners in the last 5 years. And of men who lived in urban areas between the ages of 14 and 16, 7% have had same sex partners in the last 5 years.
This is probably way more than you wanted to know! But the point is that this question is not as simple as we sometimes suppose.
What percentage of Artificial Reproductive Technology
patients are married couples, and what percentage are unmarried women?
- The vast majority of ART patients, about 75%, are married couples.
- It is split about evenly between married and unmarried women.
- It is evenly split three ways: about a third married women, about a third partnered lesbians and about a third single women.
- None of the above
Answer: the correct answer is D, none of the above, because NO ONE KNOWS! The infertility industry is so resistant to regulation or accountability, that no one collects the numbers that would allow us to answer this question. This is something to keep in mind if you are trying to evaluate the “success rates” of infertility clinics. The women without male partners may or may not have any physical impairment of their fertility. So successfully assisting them in achieving a pregnancy probably doesn’t tell you much about how successful they’ll be at helping a women with an actual medical problem with their fertility. Of course, the way the clinics report their success rates isn’t uniform either…. Those of you involved in family activism, might want to consider this as a legislative project. Ask your state legislature to require uniform reporting procedures and data collection for infertility clinics in your state.
What percentage of women who had abortions in the year 2004
were currently married?
- A. Less than 20%
- B. Between 20% and 45%
- C. Between 45% and 66%
- D. Greater than 67%
The answer to this question illustrates one reason why we at the Ruth Institute believe that the abortion and marriage issues are so closely linked. When only 14% of women getting abortions are currently married, that tells you that marriage is the single biggest protective factor against abortion. In other words, if more women were in stable happy marriages at the time they conceived, they wouldn’t be thinking about abortion.
Put another way, when people marry, they are making themselves ready for parenthood. The ten dollar term way of saying that is that by marrying, they “capacitate themselves for parenthood.” That is, the act of marriage itself creates or enhances the capacity for responsible parenthood.
“Trends in the Characteristics of Women Obtaining Abortions, 1974 to 2004,” Stanley K. Henshaw and Kathryn Kost. Guttmacher Institute, 2008, p. 11, Table 2.
What percentage of women who had abortions in the year 2004
had already had one or more abortions?
- A. 64% The kind of woman who would have the first abortion is the kind of woman who doesn’t mind using abortion as a contraceptive method. There aren’t really that many women having abortions for the first time. Most abortions are being done by the same relatively small group of women.
- B. 47% Nearly half of women who have abortions have already had at least one. The reasons are many and complex, and have little to do with proper contraceptive use.
- C. 30% Once a woman has been through an abortion, she does not want to go through it again. But her contraceptive use is not greatly improved.
- D. 7%. Once a woman has an abortion, she gets properly trained and educated by her abortion provider, so that she understands proper contraceptive use.
Correct Answer: B
47% of women who got abortions in 2004 had already had at least one prior abortion. And, the reasons are many and complex. According to Theresa Burke, pioneering researcher in the psychology of the post-abortive women, some get pregnant quickly after their abortions, in order to replace the child they killed. They have an idea that “this time will be different,” and they will have the moral and material resources to take care of their babies.” “Trends in the Characteristics of Women Obtaining Abortions, 1974 to 2004,” Stanley K. Henshaw and Kathryn Kost. Guttmacher Institute, 2008, p. 12, Table 3.
How common is “sexting” among teens?
A young man at Rutgers University committed suicide. His roommate had filmed him having sex with another man, and posted that film on the internet. In the wake of this tragic incident, the question of electronic sexual harassment has become more urgent. This week’s quiz is about the phenomenon known as “sexting.” The term “sexting” can include sending suggestive photos, videos or messages of yourself, receiving messages with images of someone you know, and receiving sexually suggestive messages that were originally intended for someone else. Such images can become the basis for harassment, teasing and bullying. At least two high-profile suicides of teen girls have been attributed to the fall-out from sexting.
- A. Less than 5%
- B. 15%
- C. 20%
- D. 38%
Correct Answer: The purpose of this quiz is to raise awareness among adults of just how common “sexting” is among teens. All of the answers are correct, depending on how you define sexting. A. According to the Pew Internet and American Life Project, 4% of cell-phone owning teens between the ages of 12 and 17, say they have sent sexually suggestive nude or nearly nude images or videos of themselves to someone else via text messaging. B. According to the Pew Internet and American Life Project, about 15% of cell-phone owning teens between the ages of 12 and 17 have received nude or nearly nude photos of someone they know on their cell phones. C. According to the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy, 20% of teens aged 13-19 have sent nude or nearly nude pictures or videos of themselves. D. According to the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy, 38% of teen girls and 39% of teen boys say they have had sexually suggestive text messages or emails—originally meant for someone else—shared with them. The real kicker is this: according to the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy’s survey, fully 75% of teens believe that sending sexually suggestive content “can have serious negative consequences.” In spite of this belief, teens continue to send such messages. I imagine this is because teens put the emphasis on “can have serious negative consequences.” Young people believe bad things happen to someone else, not to themselves.