In a 14-year study comparing 25 children of 18 lesbian mothers against 21 children of 16 single mothers, when asked what they thought their mother wanted them to become, 40% of the lesbians’ children but none of the children of divorced heterosexuals said that they believed their mother wanted them to be homosexual. Not surprisingly, 67% of the daughters and 57% of the sons of the lesbian mothers vs. 13% of the heterosexual mothers’ daughters and 20% of their sons said that they would consider homosexual relations. Also, 29% of the daughters of lesbians and 13% of their sons (but none of the children of single mothers) reported a homosexual relationship. In fact, two of the lesbians’ daughters said that when it came to sex, they primarily enjoyed homosexuality.

– Golombok S, Tasker F Do parents influence the sexual orientation of their children? Developmental Psychol 1996; 32:3-11.

Adding together the various studies of children of homosexuals published through 1999, at least 19% of 115 daughters and 16% of 120 sons said that they themselves engaged in homosexuality; that is, 17% of 235 offspring. In the comparison groups that were employed in these studies, only 2% of 66 children of heterosexuals said they practiced homosexuality.

– Cameron P Homosexual parents: testing common sense. Psychol Rpts 1999; 85:282-322.

I know what it is like to your work taken out of context and I applaud your stand. Keep up the good work.

Yours,
Drew Payne.

Psychologist Paul Cameron has used his own studies to claim that homosexuals threaten public health, social order, and the well-being of children. His conclusions are generally at odds with other published research, and objective indices show that his work has had no apparent impact on scientific research on sexual orientation.

Although Cameron has been criticized in the popular press, extensive scientific critiques of his group’s research have not been widely available. Those that have been published have been brief or appeared in obscure journals. This inattention by the scientific community is perhaps not surprising, given the poor quality of the Cameron group’s data and the low prestige of the journals in which they have published. Most scientists have simply ignored the Cameron studies.

Lacking training in research methods and statistics, however, nonscientists may not be equipped to subject the Cameron group’s results to the rigorous scrutiny that they warrant. Consequently, they may mistakenly assume that the Cameron group’s papers are basically sound because they included lengthy bibliographies, reported many statistics, and were published in academic journals. Some members of the lay public may not understand that the mere presence of bibliographic references does not guarantee an assertion’s accuracy or validity, that statistics can easily be generated from faulty data, and that academic journals vary widely in their quality and their criteria for accepting papers for publication.

Herek goes on to dissect Cameron’s claims…go here to read more

Jim Burroway over at Box Turtle Bulletin has also done some analyzing of Cameron’s “work” — and Paul’s always a popular topic of conversation at exgaywatch.com as well.

Thanks for the work you do…it’s so important that people continue to speak out against him and his statistics!