Terry Frank Strays Off the Path

Well, folks, you will be happy to learn that there are “fidelity rates of 75-90 percent in heterosexual couples,” according to Terry Frank.

Seventy-five to ninety percent?  Man, if that’s true, I guess that means DNA testing all fathers before they go on birth certificates is a huge waste of time and money.  Whew.  I’m glad to know that’s off the Republican agenda.

On a more depressing note, Pith goes over what is on the Republican agenda.  Basically a whole litany that can be summed up as “If we’re not oppressing you, we don’t feel free.”

9 thoughts on “Terry Frank Strays Off the Path

  1. Golly whiz, where to start? Other than the number pulled out of her ass, I mean.

    First, we might question whether doing a superiority dance because 1 out 4 heterosexuals cheat is wise. If I understand the data she’s (not) referring to — several groups did surveys in the mid-1990s. The finding was that 1 of four heterosexual men reported having sex with a secondary partner. Likewise, 15% of heterosexual females (see also note below about sex bias and underreporting of sexual deviance among females) report cheating on their male partner. To me, those numbers mean that about 1 in 3 heterosexual partnerships in the 1990s had an extra person involved, and sometimes two.

    Second, has she considered that heterosexuals habitually underreport their infidelities for any number of reasons (selective memory, guilt, shame, embarrassment, sex bias where women habitually don’t admit to sexual deviance in face-to-face interviews)? Most studies admit that the numbers they report are low, maybe off by as much as ten to fifteen percent. I know it’s not convenient for spin-meisters to acknowledge that, but it’s a widely acknowledged and fairly well-studied social phenomenon.

    Third, the data on which she’s (not) basing her screed was collected between 10-15 years ago. Lots of things have changed in our national sexual habits and I’d be surprised if these numbers still hold. Anybody have more recent data to examine?

    Anyhow, rather than her “triumphalist” story, if you wanted to try to spin it that way, what you’re left with really is some outdated data that demonstrates that roughly a third of the heterosexual partnerships in the US a decade or so ago were trying to figure out how to cope with the extra person in their lives.

  2. “DNA testing all fathers before they go on birth certificates is a huge waste of time and money”

    Sorry, TCP, that bill was drafted by a good, ole’ Memphis Democrat. Each time he presents it, the female lawmakers beat him to death in committee. He(and some of his constituents?) have dropped spawn all across the state. This is just another self serving piece of legislation. If you have time, you should read all of his bills. Far funnier stuff than Camp.

  3. Oh, JL, I know that was drafted by a Democrat. I should have been more specific about hoping this meant that the Republicans were going to oppose it, even though, if they did, it would seem to go against their anti-anybody doing anything agenda.

    I didn’t realize that Hardaway (isn’t that the guy?) liked to sew his wild oats.

    God, I love those Memphis politicians.

  4. True enough that GA Hardaway also introduced a version of the bill in 2008 (HB 2964), but the bill that actually advanced and then was killed (HB 1523)was Stacey’s.

  5. Sadly, ALL of the following bills are the results of Hardaway’s continuing parental “issues.”

    HB0025, HB0020, HB0005, HB0002, HB0027

    Then again, maybe his experiences have made him listen to the voters on these issues. But I doubt it.

    That being said, I have found that most of the “little number” bills are the funniest. In addition to Hardaway and Campfiield, I also recommend reading anything by Ulysses.

  6. Back to the topic at hand, Terry Frank doesn’t actually give any numbers for gay and lesbian couples. I’m not suggesting that her numbers for heterosexual couples are accurate, but even giving her a total benefit of the doubt, without a numbers for the GLB side to compare it to, her argument is pretty much without any merit from the start.

    Only once we have a comparison can we begin to decide if the numbers are accurate (and why or why not), if they are accurate and there is a significant disparity, are there any confounding variables that maybe leading to the disparity that could otherwise be addressed without depriving children of loving homes, etc.

  7. Eh, I don’t think it matters. To me, there’s something slightly perverse about suggesting that what a person does in his or her sexual life impacts what kind of parent he or she will be. I mean, you could just as easily say that dog owners make better parents than cat owners and find bullshit statistics to back it up, but so what? I don’t think it’s worth our time to even worry about whether the terms of her debate are fair (they aren’t) and whether gay people would fair better if she more correctly took them into account.

    It’s the conservative hang-up that says that what you do in the bedroom has some direct correlation with what kind of parent you will be. Even if we have to address it, I don’t think we should take it seriously.

  8. I don’t disagree, I was just pointing out that she hasn’t even presented enough information to make the argument she’s trying to make in the first place, not even considering whether or not her argument is valid.

  9. Seventy-five to ninety percent? Man, if that’s true, I guess that means DNA testing all fathers before they go on birth certificates is a huge waste of time and money. Whew. I’m glad to know that’s off the Republican agenda.


    Aunt B I could hug you right now.

Comments are closed.