Photo courtesy of Featureflash / Shutterstock.com
In recent “If-you’re-not-exactly-like-me-you’re-bad” news, openly gay actor polarized the LGBT+ community when he made comments to the Daily Telegraph in the UK about two-dad families:
“I can’t think of anything worse than being brought up by two gay dads.
“Some people might not agree with that. Fine! That’s just my opinion.
“The only community I belong to is humanity and we’ve got too many children on the planet, so it’s good not to have more.”
Overpopulation aside, it’s hard not to shake your head in dismay at anyone making a statement like this, let alone a person who identifies as gay… Perhaps Everett never wanted kids and doesn’t feel the innate desire to make a family with someone he loves, but it does seem a bit baffling that he would so publicly speak against something that the vast majority of people in the LGBT+ community are actively campaigning for.
The Telegraph quotes Ben Summerskill of of Stonewall, saying ““There is absolutely no evidence that the kids of gay parents suffer in the way they are being brought up or in how they develop.”
Are you surprised by Rupert Everett’s thoughts on two-dad families?
What do you think motivated him to speak out on this issue?
Also read ‘Modern Family’ Thinks My Family is Creepy by Jerry Mahoney
Photo of Rupert Everett courtesy of Featureflash / Shutterstock.com
About Joanna Schroeder
Who is Ben Summerskill from stonewall & way should his opinion matter then a gay man who’s stating his opinion about a subject that he might have some knowledge of, Joanna! !!.
I have No issues about gay marriage or even having more than one partner, for the simple fact that consenting adults & their personal life’s are no body else’s business period, but when it comes to two males raising a child as a couple! ! The Jury is still out. Even in countries where it legalized on top of various studies that are showing negative impact on the children themselves, which should be the only issue here the act of the adults , marriage or otherwise is not the issue.
I don’t agree with the bitterness in his comment. I grew up in a house with my mom and my grandma. Both were wonderful women. My grandma was a nurse for over 30 years. My mom was an office manager and a nurse during the course of her life. They both helped with homework. Enrolled me in all kinds of activities. I always felt like I lived in a two parent home but I did miss the presence of a father in the home. I don’t think that two dads is the worst thing in the world but I get what he is saying to a certain point. I am now raising my niece and nephew. It is just me and my mom. My nephew longs for a father. I am sure if it were two men raising him he would long for a mother figure. Now I am practical so I understand that every family is different. But the male and female concept of parenting came into existence for a reason. But then again all kids are different. Who knows. All parents gay, straight, single or married do the best that they can.
I surely can’t say what motivated his statement but Elton John said something similar a while back in stating that his boy (I think it’s a boy?) is missing out for not having a mom. A biological mom and dad is the ideal. Anything other than that (bar the exceptions) generally would have kids miss out. Not sure where Summerskill went to look for the evidence though? Most evidence regarding that is either flawed or premature. Work’s being done to get more acurate studies done though. It’s not too difficult not shaking your head at his statment, it’s his opinion and it’s a quite accurate one. Big ups to Everett for not saying stuff just because it’s expected of him, as this article suggests, but actually making an honest, accurate statement. i shake my head when people suggest there’s no difference between a mom and a dad.
If you want to have 2, 3, or 4 parents of one sex, that’s a choice that is available. But, that doesn’t replace a parent of the opposite sex. Each child should have at least one parent of each sex.
As Servaas stated, there is no substitute for a mom or dad. No matter how many dads a child has, they don’t replace a mom, or vice-versa.
Absolutely.
Of course, I also object to the buying and selling of gametes to conceive children for people who do not find said cells at their disposal, and the casual dismissal of the adults to whom that genetic material belongs…But these modern times do bring on some strange dilemmas!
I was largely estranged from one of my parents and it had a huge effect on me, in spite of tremendous support from my other parent, older siblings, and grandparents. No getting ’round it.
I don’t see a need to shake my head in dismay. I don’t see the controversy. I think most people, if they were honest, would say they would prefer to be raised by a mother and father than by two dads. I know everyone tries to be all politically correct, but let’s be real. Who are we trying to kid? I can see 2 main motivating factors, excluding any related to homophobia. One would be, having the benefit of the unique qualities offered by both genders. The other would be that it creates less complications, in many respects, all other things being equal.
Also, I don’t think Rupert Everett sounds bitter at all. From what I have seen and heard of him, he comes across as an intelligent and well balanced person. He’s also confident and brave enough not to be brow beaten by the prevailing orthodoxies of his demographic. I’m not a fan of groupthink and I suspect Rupert is the same. I also think more is being made of his comments than is warranted, but that will happen with people looking to sell copy or those who feel their fight for acceptance is being undermined. Advocates of same sex parenting will feel compelled to respond, but these comments by Rupert are a blip.
Simple fact is that Rupert, like a lot of us, likes to express himself freely. He simply communicated his opinion on a topic that might be at odds with other people in the LGBT community. It was probably a very small part of a much larger interview about a whole host of things and said with a chuckle, but as I said, papers have to sell copy. Also, saying he cannot think of anything worse is simply a figure of speech, so people shouldn’t get their undergarments in a twist over that either.
Studies actually show that the children of gay parents are doing just fine. They’re not bullied or abused more than other kids. Rupert Everett shouldn’t have kids because he doesn’t think he’s good enough to parent. I hope he manages to fix that self-confidence problem, but I’m not in a hurry for him to spawn.
No one is saying that gay people or lesbian people don’t make great parents. Heck my lesbian aunt and her partner of 31 years are first in line to raise my kids if something should happen to me. But I am speaking as someone who had a great two parent home (raised by two strong, caring and intelligent women) and still missed my father. Don’t hate on Rupert because this is his opinion. The ideal is to have a mother and father in the home. Anything other than that is less than ideal. If a single woman has a baby by herself and is totally able to afford that kid that is less than ideal. If a lesbian or gay couple have kid it may be great for the couple but it is less that ideal for the kid. It may be a great situation but less than ideal.
My ideal is to have more than two adults in the home. How about four parents? Or fourteen? Throw in some extended family while you’re at it. It appears this two-parent nuclear family thing is a fairly recent invention and I’m not so certain it’s working out all that well.
Okay.
I agree. It takes a village, especially these days.
Along those lines, a reasonable and more responsible compromise that puts the children first, not the parents’ egos, is for same sex couples to also have an opposite sex parent.
That would give the child(ren) access to an opposite sex parental relationship, which is important for all children to have. Have as many same sex parents as you want, as long as there is at least one opposite sex legal parent.
Sure, kids can grow up just fine with no parents at all but having at least one of each sex is important.
Excellent point. I was stymied by Nick, mostly. As I stated before I ended up with two kids, my niece and nephew. I love them to death but I know that even though I am doing my best they are missing out. I sometimes contemplate dating just to find a husband so that they can have a male in the household. Then I come to my senses. But in an ideal world I wish that I could find that perfect partner for their well-being. We have a full house. My aunt and her partner of 31 years live with us as well as my mom but it is not the same and it is not ideal. And we are a pretty boring leave-it-to beaver type clique.
Just any man? Just any woman? I’d say a household with a male female parent who are neglectful isn’t ideal at all when compared to a two man or two woman household that is attentive. Or as Nick mentioned three or more. You mentioned in a comment (I think) that you missed your dad. Was it your dad specifically? Or just “a man” in the house. I can easily understand missing your dad. My dad died when I was 9 and my mom never dated but lived close to her sister so I was raised more or less by two women. I wished she could have found love, but not because I needed a man in the house specifically. I missed my own father. Any old man wouldn’t have been him and might have been far worse than none at all.
If she’d found love (even with a woman) she would have been happier and more stable and less depressed.
I realize my opinion won’t convince you, but your’s probably won’t convince me either.
I’d need to know what you mean by “ideal” anyway. That’s a word chock full o “values” statements.
Ideal, meaning best case scenario. It’s not necessarily a matter of values, rather basic human interaction practicality. Being parented by a mother is not the same as being parented by a father. They each offer overlapping but also unique advantages.
That is why same sex partners who wish to become parents are wise to also have an opposite sex parent, preferably the biol parent, to ensure that the child(ren) benefit from having at least one parent of each sex.
Parenting isn’t a right limited to those people who are somehow “ideal” parents. This is just the way the world is. We have babies all over the damn place, and sperm and ova just don’t wait around for the ideal circumstances. People with disabilities, people in poverty, people with drug addictions, people with all kinds of challenges that make it hard or impossible for them to be ideal parents. While it would no doubt give a child an expanded view of the world to have adults close to hir of both/all sexes, why stop there? Shouldn’t children also have exposure to adults who believe in science, and ones who believe in a religion, and adults who have different orientations, and people with all kinds of differences? It begins to sound like the ideal situation for raising a child is within a Benetton ad.
I was raised by a man and a woman, but it wasn’t an ideal situation. Plenty of others who can tell you about their non-ideal upbringings by a man and a woman. It doesn’t mean that one man and one woman can’t do a good enough job raising children, just that it’s not the only model that works. Julie and Tiff have different kinds of families that work. You get to make the kind of family you think works. The Duggars get to have theirs. It’s one of the rights of humanity, and of all living things. We get to express our natural behaviors and live, and that includes having children and raising them. Any way that it happens, is natural, even if it involves frozen sperm and hormone treatments, and a group marriage arranged by a priest of a church you don’t recognize.
This discussion is not about who has the “right” to be a parent, rather what is best for each child, to give them the experience offered by both a mother and a father. Mothers and fathers aren’t interchangeable. They each offer something the other can’t give. Otherwise, these articles about the importance of fathers is all hogwash.
I always wonder why we try to have this conversation with Eric…
I wonder why you run articles extolling the unique benefits of fathers and then claim that there are none. . .
Of course, show. A parent’s example (showing) is the most powerful teacher. However, it must be “show AND tell”, not just show OR tell. One of the most important aspects of parenting is communication, explaining why and how, for example, and then demonstrating, to the greatest possible extent.
And, having the ability to “show” is precisely why it’s best to have at least one parent of each sex, as I illustrsted above.
I’m not sure I understand how your desire for unique advantages leads to having parents with different genital configurations. Isn’t the goal to provide a full range of experiences for the child? That’s why I made my comment about four or more. Ultimately it’s not the genitals that matter, but that the child is exposed to a wide range of modeled behaviors (positive ones we hope).
Fathers and mothers aren’t the same, as men and women aren’t interchangeable. Thus, having a parent-child relationship with at least one of each offers unique benefits. For instance, having a good relationship with her father benefits girls in ways that having only a mother or 3 mothers can’t. The same is true of boys and their mothers, boys and their fathers, and girls and their mothers.
I’m not suggesting the fungibility of parents, but rather trying to understand why the particular genitals a parent has is of primary concern. What is different between a “father” and a “mother” that makes each of them necessary?
To whit, I have heterosexual friends where the “father” is stay-at-home and provides nurturing support while the “mother” is the corporate breadwinner and disciplinarian. I have lesbian friends where one mother performs traditionally “masculine” tasks while the other is more conventionally “feminine.” I have a third set of friends, another heterosexual couple, where neither models traditional masculinity. What makes the first or third set of parents qualitatively better than the second?
If it’s not performing masculinity and femininity, then what is it you see as missing from households where both parents are of the same gender?
How can a mother teach her son by example, by how she lives each day of her life (which is the most powerful and effective way of teaching) how to be a man, such as how to be a good father, how men ought to treat women, how a husband ought to treat his wife, how a father ought to treat his daughters and sons, how men to treat and interact with women in general, how to treat and interact with other men?
How can a mother give her daughter the experience of having her father’s unconditional love?
How can a father tell his daughter about how he deals with his period, when it’s heavy, when it’s light, what to expect based on her experience and her aunts’ experiences, when he got his first period, how he felt, how he handled it in school, how he dealt with the other girls, etc.?
These are just examples. There are many things that mothers and fathers are simply going to be more effective at than the other.
Can a child grow up with neither a mother nor a father? Absolutely, many do. But the children will miss out on having “the full range of experiences” that are possible by having at least one parent of each sex – and having bio parents provides an even fuller range than non-bio parents can.
Teach your children to be decent human beings. Show, not tell. That is all.
I think this this ideal comes from our modern notion of the nuclear family. As we become increasingly isolated from our neighbors and extended families, our children spend more time with, and increasingly rely on their parents as the adult role models in their lives.
I’m not that old, but I remember growing up that pretty much any of my neighbors were a sort of in loco parentis. Can you imagine today what would happen if a neighbor disciplined a child (and I don’t mean corporal punishment)? As we’ve turned inward, we create these tight-knit families and it’s us against the world. Rather than building collaborative societies, we keep a wary eye on our neighbors, ever vigilant for bad influences or stranger danger.
I think, quite simply, that the more positive adult role models in a child’s life the better. I don’t think they have to be a parent (and certainly not a biological one) as long as they exert a positive influence. When we start to prescribe as “ideal” a particular configuration (man + woman) rather than particular roles I think we risk missing out on what’s truly important – that we have adults to help shepherd kids through childhood and adolescence to become the types of men and women we hope to see in the world.
Don’t worry I have no intention of trying to convince you. I understand that parenting and familial issues are different for everyone. I appreciate positive role models. I think I indicated that I had pretty fabulous ones. Because of the females in my life I was able to believe that I could rise above my circumstances, go to law school and take on the raising of my niece and nephew. No matter how you slice it though I think the idea situation for any child is to be raised by their bio Mom and Dad. When I am speaking of this ideal I am thinking of the best possible people not perfect but decent people. Like I said, I am raising my niece and nephew. I help them with their homework. I take them to golf, ballerina and fencing lessons. I have movie nights with them every Friday. I am on their PTA. I communicate with them all the time. They still bring up their bio mom and bio dad. The mom is doing her own thing and the dad is deceased. I have explained to the oldest that I am so lucky to have them and that some people are born to be parents and some people are not and his mommy made the best decision to let me raise him because she saw how much I loved him. He still has a yearning to know about her and to bring her into our circle. His dad is dead and brings him up once a month. He met his dad once when he was a few months old. The ideal for a kid is to connect to their genetic makers. My dad was not the worst person in the world. He made a choice to do things (criminal things) that would keep him away from me. Now at 32 we have a decent relationship but when I see the progress that he has made I wish that he could have been there for me. Ideally I wish that I could have had both my mom and dad in my home raising me together. I had a stepfather who was great but he was not my father. I don’t think that I miss out on something really important and I don’t think I discount the importance of positive adults in a kids life. I know how important I am to my niece and nephew ( I generally call them my kids but for the purposes of this post I am identifying them correctly). But I also know that if my sister were to get herself together it would ideal if I could make it work for the kids to have her in their life. That is the best I can do since their father is dead. In the context of Rupert’s comments why can’t two facts exist: Fact 1 – Gay people should be able to marry and raise children. Fact 2: It is ideal for a kid to be raised by their mentally stable loving bio makers (generally, their mom and dad.
“My dad died when I was 9”
I’m sorry to hear that. My dad died before I turned 2. When I hear about the love my mom had for him and the stories from my oldest brother and the respect of the people he worked with, I can’t help but miss a man I never knew. Life would have been easier with a dad especially financially. I also suspect that I would be a different person. Not necessarily better. My father was a conservative Republican. I am mostly a liberal Democrat.
Rupert should speak for himself. If he doesn’t want kids that’s fine, but the gay community could do without his “help” in the fight for equality – it has plenty to overcome already. As for some of the comments here: if we’re going by personal experiences, I was raised in an “ideal” male/female home that was no such thing and I’d rather have been raised by same-sex parents that love their kids and respect their partner. As for a child needing a parent of the same sex to relate to their experiences in puberty and other adventures in growing up – I didn’t have that anyway. My parents were very hands off and left us to figure these things out for ourselves, so again, I would have preferred an attentive same-sex couple of the opposite sex that would have helped me find the answers, even if the experience was foreign to them. There’s no such thing as ideal and no foolproof formula for parenting, there’s only love, acceptance, patience and a willingness to deal with whatever comes. I speak as a parent as well as someone’s child.
He might be looking and agreeing with the Regnerus study, which found that children raised in gay households were less well adjusted as adults than children who weren’t. I suspect that it had less to do with the child rearing of the parents than with the reaction of people outside the family.
That study has a considerable flaw in it, principally that it didn’t compare apples to oranges. It compared married heterosexual couples to gay single and two-parent households, and those households were before gays had the right to marry and included the time period of the AIDS epidemic. If the comparison is between stable households and unstable households the stable households will always win (I’m sure I could pit the many stable gay and lesbian households around here with unstable heterosexual households and draw the conclusion that gays and lesbians make better parents).
I think in 20-30 years, once attitudes towards homosexual relationships and gay marriage have been normalized, we’ll be able to better study the effects single-sex households have on raising kids. For now, the data simply isn’t there.
Are you surprised by Rupert Everett’s thoughts on two-dad families?
Nope – our dear Rup has always been a prat, and has a terrible habit of opening his gob, sticking any available foot in it (there seem to be an endless supply) and then shrugging it all off with supposed boyish charm.
It worked when he was 20ish, but it’s far less interesting when it’s 50ish!