Difference and Diversity for Lesbianism Gayism Bisexuality

Question: Discuss about theTheories of Difference and Diversityfor Lesbianism Gayism Bisexuality. Answer: Introduction It is important to highlight that this paper delves in the discussion of marriage quality in children rearing. There has been a lot of stereotype view on the rearing of children. On the roles of parenting, there is the notion that children get the best parental care from the biological parents as opposed to a same-sex couple. Queer theory envisages that the identities either males or female do not really determine who we are (Battle, Scott, 2000). The theory, therefore, puts a lot of emphasis on the diverse mismatches that are indicated between gender, desire, and sex. The theory is deeply rooted on the sex orientation and sexuality of individuals. According to the theory, the gender of an individual has a key role on the caring, molding and nurturing. In the traditional social set, gender and sexuality were categorized. Queer theory is thus an approach which rejects this categorization on the gender roles (Battle, Scott, 2000). In regards to the raising of children, it can be clea rly noted that the queer theory rejects the notion of child rearing left to the biological parents alone. In the 1970s, the feminists believed that every gender has its own features. The theory is built on the perception that feminist challenges to the notion that sexual orientation is an instrumental element in human nature and identity (Battle, Scott, 2000). It is linked with the Lesbianism Gayism Bisexuality (LGBT). The theory comes from the post-structuralist theory and deconstruction with the aim of withstanding sexual identities by making the heterosexuality idea normal (Battle, Scott, 2000). The theory is a tool used in deconstructing the monolithic ideals of the traditional and cultural norms and taxonomies of the society which are in existence (Battle, Scott, 2000). In addition, queer theory helps in giving an inclusive description of a certain group within the society who feel to be the minority or marginalized based on the prevailing practices within the society and their identity (Battle, Scott, 2000). In regards to this, children who are parented by biological parents are less likely to be abused by the parents (Bos et al., 2003). In the cases of same-sex parenting, the child is likely to be sexually abused because the parents can find the child to offer sexual satisfaction tat would have been offered by the opposite sex. This is quite detrimental to the social well-being of the children because they risk getting pregnancies at younger ages and even contracting certain diseases. Sexual abuse on children raised by the biological parents is very rare because the parents satisfy each others sexual desires and they focus on making their children better in the society (Bos et al., 2004). According to Bos et al. (2004), parenting children by the biological parents is that the children receive all the gender support which they need to make them fully complete in the society. In regards to this, mothers in many cases nurture their children. This kind of role is socially defined while the fathers are also socially seen to be carrying out discipline roles in the families. In the event the children are being parented by the same-sex couple, there is the possibility of a gap on who to carry the discipline role and who nurtures the children. This can be very adverse to the children because in many cases children raised by same couples lack certain qualities which the society expects of them. In addition, children brought up by their biological parents with both father and mothers are very comfortable discussing various issues with the parents of their gender. This implies that girls will discuss issues affecting them comfortably with their mothers and not the fathers. Childr en need all the parents as a way of balancing their lives (Bos et al., 2006). The girl-child needs the other a lot just as the boy-child needs the father to enable them to have all the facts in life about their sexes and social values as it relates to each gender. This can only be provided and seen in children brought up by their biological parents. The boys similarly discuss their matters with the fathers openly without fear as opposed to how they would have discussed with the mother in the same-sex couple. This goes on until their time they are married off. In the case where there is same-sex couple parenting, the children who do not see a parent of their gender will resort to getting pieces of advice from outside. Others can assume and finally find themselves getting early pregnancies or infections. Same couple parenting similarly has the effect of children getting involved in drug and substance abuse especially for the case of boys (Bos et al., 2007). When there are no fathers, the children will be a very comfortable having company with fellow teenagers and can be lured into drug abuse. Girls similarly can resort to getting married early in the case where there is no mother in a family and all the parents are all men as highlighted in the queer theory. They opt to marry off at early ages for fear of sexual and physical abuse . Having the biological parents in rearing children is therefore very fundamental in improving the normal development of a child. Children raised by their biological parents are likely to get a lot of parental love, attention, and care from the parents compared to the children reared under the same couple. In regards to this, biological parents have a stronger affection and love through the blood relationship thereby feeling more connected to the children. This makes them love the children wholeheartedly and care so much about the children. The same-sex couple in many cases adopts children thereby lacking the blood relationship with the children hence making such children to lack the parental love and care they would have received if brought up by their biological parents (MacCallum Golombok, 2004). In addition, the children brought up by biological parents faceless physical assault and violence compared to the children raised by the same couple. The Same couple usually is either gays or lesbians. In the event the child is the opposite sex to the couple, some same couple do develop sexual hatred towards such c hildren and become violent to the children which oblige the children to elope from the homes at a young age and become street children or involve themselves in immorality as a result of frustration and violence they receive from the same couple parents. Children raised by biological parents do not experience such violence because both the father and the mother are in the family thereby making the gender balance the center in the growth (Patterson et al. 2004). Besides, children raised by the biological parents are likely to get an education and other services from the best facilities compared to the children reared by the same sex couple. The love and affection that biological parents have towards their children propel them into wanting the best or their children hence the need to give the children the best education and health services. Same couple parents can have children only as a way of having the title of being a parent without having any parent love for the children. Such can make the same couple to fail to give the children the best education or simply send them to any school provided they get an education without showing any concern towards the success of the children (Patterson et al. 2004). Same sex at times argues and fa il to come to a consensus on who should be responsible for the provision of various essential services like education and health to the children (Patterson et al. 2004). This can lead to poor parental care received by the children compared to the children raised by the biological parents where all the parents feel they are all responsible for the provision of the best services to the children. The biological upbringing of children is also instrumental to the social well-being of the children along with their peers (Pruett, 2000). This is because children who are raised by biological parents are not subjected to bullying in schools and in the society compared to the children raised by the same couple. Bullying makes such children be depressed and can even fail to associate well with their peers thereby lowering their self-esteem. Raising children by both parents limits chances of bullying and therefore their self-esteem of the children is not affected by depression (Patterson et al. 2004). This can make such children to have good performance in their education and even associate well with the peers because they will not be discriminated in any way. Similarly, biological parenting to children limits the possibilities of children committing suicide or engaging in immoralities. As reiterated earlier, children brought up by same-sex face bullying and discrimination at home and school from the peers as well as violence from the parents. Biological parenting thus helps in giving the children direction on solving problems and issues (Patterson et al. 2004). Children in many cases resort to escaping from their homes and engaging in immoral activities just to find their peace but in the end, live a wasted life. Gender equality in the society is a very important element they should be instilled in the mind of children from a young age (Kindle Erich, 2005). Children raised by the biological parents are very inclusive and appreciate the need for gender equality in achieving various roles. This is lacking mostly in children raised by the same couple because they view their parents to be of the same sex and therefore they have the notion of independence in carrying out roles in the society. Children in the society need to understand the need to enhance gender equality in their lives and this is instilled from how they see both the mother and the father working harmoniously in supporting the family. Children need to properly know the gender roles in the society and therefore children brought up by the biological parents are well trained by the parents on the roles that male and female carry out. Through this, the children develop a sense of gender inclusivity by seeing every gender to be very im portant in the society. Same couple families, on the contrary, have same-sex parents who end up doing similar jobs in as much as one tries to act as the opposite sex to the other (Hilton et al. 2001). This gives such children limited roles that they can emulate as per the social values. In addition, the children grow by having in mind the need to strengthen the social and family values. Marriage is a great institution in the society which is expected to be for female and male (Eitle, 2006). Children raised by the biological parents portray marriage to have a lot of sanctity compared to the children raised by the same sex. When children are reared by the same couple, they will definitely follow such traits of the parents and this will be against certain cultural norms and social values. The children will get their partners who are similar sex just as they are making because marriage to them is having a partner who is the same sex as them. Raising children by biological parents streamlines the children naturally with the marital norms and values of the society (Eitle, 2006). This thereby makes them have a strong perception about marriage as a fundamental institution in the society. The children similarly will understand how reproduction occurs as opposed to when they are raised by the same sex. Usually, same-sex parents find themselves walking together or spending much time together and not with the children (Drexler and Gross, 2005). This makes the children lose the attachment they should have with the parents and assume independence from a very young age. It also gives the children an impression that they are neither loved nor valued by the parents. Children raised by the biological parents, on the contrary, have their parents either together or one remains with the children at home or they go out as a family. This is important in training the children on better parenting for the children and even just how to love each other. Such children are very close to their parents and feel loved which motivates them a lot. They get motivated to be good parents to their children just as their parents are good to them. Besides, biological parenting also helps the parents in keeping the child in check by monitoring the behavior of the child thereby making their children be very respon sible every day. Conclusion In conclusion, it can be noted that biological upbringing of children has a lot of significance to the general wellbeing and development of the children. Children are very fragile and require sufficient support, guidance, love and care to become better people (Brinamen, 2000). Biological parenting is an instrumental form of parenting that helps in making the children to get the right guidance, molding and get streamlined to be familiar with all that pertains to their wellbeing. This helps in making the child to effectively balance their life and be conversant with the social and cultural values which are of great importance. Children need their fathers to discipline the well while the mother nurtures them thereby making them be better and whole to the society. Upbringing by biological parents is the only way that children learn the roles that each gender is expected to do and also making the children be on par with the social values of every gender (Demuth Brown, 2004). A same-sex c ouple has many limitations to the general wellbeing of children and is a key factor behind the high number of children in the streets and immorality (Battle Coates, 2004). The children see this as a way to be away from the parents that frustrate, harass and assault children. References Battle, J., Coates, D. L. (2004). Father-only, mother-only, single-parent family status of Black girls and achievement in grade twelve and at two years post high school. Journal of Negro Education, 73, 392407. Battle, J., Scott, B. M. (2000). Mother-only versus father-only households: Educational outcomes for African American males. Journal of African American Men, 5, 93116. Bos, H. M. W., van Balen, F., van den Boom, D. C. (2003). Planned lesbian families: Their desire and motivation to have children. Human Reproduction, 18, 22162224. Bos, H. M. W., van Balen, F., van den Boom, D. C. (2004). The experience of parenthood, couple relationship, social support, and child-rearing goals in planned lesbian mother families. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45, 755764. Bos, H. M. W., van Balen, F., van den Boom, D. C. (2007). Child adjustment and parenting in planned lesbian-parent families. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 77, 3848. Bos, H. M. W., van Balen, F., Sandfort, T. G. M., van den Boom, D. C. (2006). Childrens psychosocial adjustment and gender development in planned lesbian families. Working paper, Social andBehavioralSciencesDepartmentofEducation, University of Amsterdam. Brinamen, C. F. (2000). On becoming fathers: Issues facing gay men choosing to parent. Dissertation Abstracts International, 61(5-B), 2794. Brines, J., Joyner, K. (1999). The ties that bind: Principles of cohesion in cohabitation and marriage. American Sociological Review, 64, 333355. Demuth, S., Brown, S. L. (2004). Family structure, family processes, and adolescent delinquency: The signi?cance of parental absence versus parental gender. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 41, 5881. Drexler, P. F., Gross, L. (2005). Raising boys without men: How maverick moms are creating the next generation of exceptional men. Emmaus, PA: Rodale Press. Eitle, D. (2006). Parental gender, single parent families, and delinquency: Exploring the moderating in?uence of race/ethnicity. Social Science Research, 35, 727748. Hilton, J. M., Desrochers, S.,Devall, E. L.(2001). Comparison of role demands, relationships, and child functioning in single-mother, single-father, and intact families. Journal of Divorce and Remarriage, 35, 2956. Kindle, P. A., Erich, S. (2005). Perceptions of social support among homosexual and heterosexual- dual adopters. Families in Society, 86, 541546. MacCallum, F., Golombok, S. (2004). Children raised in fatherless families from infancy: A follow-up of children of lesbian and single heterosexual mothers at early adolescence. Journal of Psychology and Psychiatry, 45, 14071419. Patterson, C. J., Sut?n, E. L., Fulcher, M. (2004). Division of labor among lesbian and heterosexual parenting couples: Correlates of specialized versus shared patterns. Journal of Adult Development, 11, 179189. Pruett, K. D. (2000). Father need: Why father care is as essential as mother care for your child. New York: Free Press. P., Noret, N. (2008). Victimization, social support, and psychosocial functioning among children of same-sex and opposite-sex couples in the United Kingdom. Developmental Psychology 44, 127134. Sandberg, J. F., Hofferth, S. L. (2001). Changes in childrens time with parents: The United States, 19811997. Demography, 38, 423436.