Buoyed by rave reviews and positive word of mouth, Lisa Cholodenko's film The Kids Are All Right is expanding into more theaters and exposing Americans to something they probably haven't seen before -- a gay married couple raising children. According to Republicans, this is something you should be deathly afraid of, since gay people marrying could bring about the end of civilization, and gay parents are inherently unfit to raise children. So Republicans wouldn't want you to see a movie like The Kids Are All Right, where Nic (Annette Bening) and Jules (Julianne Moore) raise their two teenage children (Mia Wasikowska and Josh Hutcherson) in a way that is shockingly, disturbingly... normal.
Watch my ReThink Review of The Kids Are All Right and discussion with Cenk Uygur of the Young Turks about gay marriage, what the Bible says about divorce, and how Cenk ruined Mark Ruffalo's conversation with Pierce Brosnan below.
If the opponents of gay marriage are really motivated by the desire to protect children from living in less than optimal parenting arrangements, then they are truly (or willfully) ignoring the elephant in the room: divorce. In fact, there are few things that can potentially do more damage to a child's psychological, and even physical well-being, than divorce. Here are just a few of the shocking statistics I found at a website for marriage counseling:
Half of all American children will witness the breakup of a parent's marriage.Studies in the early 1980s showed that children in repeat divorces earned lower grades, and their peers rated them as less pleasant to be around.
Teenagers in single-parent families and in blended families are three times more likely to need psychological help within a given year.
Compared to children from homes disrupted by death, children from divorced homes have more psychological problems.
Following divorce, children are fifty percent more likely to develop health problems than two parent families.
Most victims of child molestation come from single-parent households or are the children of drug-ring members.
A child in a female-headed home is 10 times more likely to be beaten or murdered.
Seventy percent of long-term prison inmates grew up in broken homes.
People who come from broken homes are almost twice as likely to attempt suicide than those who do not come from broken homes.
Considering the increased risks faced by the approximately 35 million children from divorced heterosexual couples, how can gay marriage opponents claim that banning gay marriage is anything close to an effective way to protect children? Instead, why not outlaw divorce? Why not force members of a divorced couple with children to marry someone else immediately? Gay marriage opponents claim that any parenting unit other than a married heterosexual couple should be barred by law, yet when millions of heterosexual couples willfully destroy that supposedly perfect unit, they say nothing.
Why are our worst criminals allowed to marry while in jail? In a practice that is more common than anyone would like to acknowledge, serial killers (especially ones who enjoy some level of fame or notoriety) are often proposed to by multiple women. Why are serial killers allowed to marry and gay people aren't?
Also, if protecting children is the paramount concern, why are there no laws preventing murderers, rapists, child molesters, or people with violent histories from getting married and having children? If a child molester is released from prison, he has to notify his neighbors and keep away from places kids gather, but there's no law stopping him from marrying and having children of his own. Why not? Are gay marriage opponents really serious about protecting children from all threats, real, potential and imagined?
For more ReThink Reviews -- the best (therefore only) political movie reviews on the web -- visit ReThinkReviews.net
To subscribe to ReThink Reviews on YouTube, go here.
Follow Jonathan Kim on Twitter: www.twitter.com/ReThinkReviews
I love Ruffalo, love Benning, love LOVE Juilianne Moore.
I also thought this movie was the worst film I've ever seen.
It was horribly acted - stiff and uncomfortable; but so not in an intentional way. The script was dull and lacked humanity or warmth, not to mention hugely insulting to married lesbian couples. I mean, c'mon -- a woman married for twenty years is FINALLY tempted to have an affair by a MAN? As if that's all she's been missing all these years - a man?
I have no idea why this film got a single positive review. I was excited to see it, but after about 20 minutes I wanted so badly to walk out but I was with friends and trapped in the middle of a row. The film was torture.
For all our free world, open-mindedness - we are ultimately a divided puppet show of fake freedoms and inequality.
I'm pretty sure if I were a child given a choice of parents who are gay and happily single or together or parents who are straight and miserable, I'd want the gay parents. All things being mostly equal, I'd want the parents with the best sense of humor (or a pool).
I'm blessed to have been blissfully married for 30 years to my high school sweetheart and our marriage just seems to get better and better as our amazing kids start to fly the coop but we waited for 7 years to add kids to the mix because we knew we'd gotten married very young and we wanted to be sure of our relationship. I would hope that if anything ever happened to our marriage, we also would come together in friendship for our kids.
{end sarcasm}
So, given I am a man who has been solely with my husband for 17 years, legally married for 6 (we're Canadian), exactly why don't you believe I have the equal right to make it work as any straight couple?
I think those divorce statistics need to be examined a little more closely. How did the divorcees handle their kids afterwards? What constitutes a single parent household?
I am divorced but my ex and I have a peaceful and harmonious relationship. We also spend time with the kids as a family. I wrote an article about this that you might find interesting. http://www.postcardsfromapeacefuldivorce.com/579/being-a-family-after-divorce/
Ignorant straight people may feel that way but the majority of us want our gay friends and family members to have every right that we enjoy.
If you want a gay play land, then go for it. Whatever floats you boat. I am not gay, but if you build a gay playland that is kid friendly, safe and fun I'll take my kids. It probably be safer than Chuckie-Cheeses....
Although this movie has it's flaws, I'm glad the movie industry is FINALLY showing movies that portray gay couples as normal and boring... because that's what we are. Happily living boring, normal lives like most Americans.
My parents were not perfect, but they did the best with what they had. Through everything, no matter what came along, I had parents that I knew loved and supported me. It didnʻt matter if they were together or separate, or whether or not my mom was working the night shift, or I was seeing one of them every other weekend. There is absolutely no such thing as an ideal family, unless youʻre referring to one in which a child is loved and encouraged and taught to believe they can do anything they want, and then instilled with the willingness to do the hard work it takes to get there. That transcends the number of parents in the house, and most certainly their sexual orientation.
I'm a consistent link in their lives --- they all have abandonment issues related to problems in their biological parents lives, caused by issues such as rejection, being put at risk, or the death of parents. They all deserved better than me, but I was available at a time when they needed someone. Together, we raised each other to adulthood.
My kids run the gamut of the sexual orientation spectrum --- gay and straight and whatever is in between. They made their own decisions about whether to announce it to me or anyone else. I just sat, listened and learned from them. Some were more confident about their sexual orientations and came out long before I did.
When it comes to relationships, my kids are my only success story. I'm a three time loser otherwise. I maybe didn't do right by the two women and one man I partnered with, but I have always tried to do well by my kids.
My point here is that sexual orientation doesn't have much to do with being a good parent, who is someone willing to commit completely to the job like it's the only opportunity they'll have in life to succeed at something. My kids turned out all right, maybe because of my help and maybe despite it. But none of them ever had reason to doubt that they had a dad who
With this change, spouses would be less likely to initiate divorce when children are involved. Initiating a divorce would mean they could lose custody. Spouses would have more pressure to work out their differences. There would be much less power in the hands of the spouse who wants the easy way out. The freedom to divorce would still be there, but there would be less of a reward for doing so. This change wouldn't impact situations where divorces were truly mutually agreed upon and approached collaboratively, but those situations are the minority.
The real issue behind a damaging divorce is the petulance of the two parents. If they don't act like adults and make the split a nightmare, then the kids are likely to suffer.
Check out my article from yesterday on how to maintain your family after divorce. http://www.postcardsfromapeacefuldivorce.com/579/being-a-family-after-divorce/
The notion that "My kids are happy because I'M happy," is particularly self-centered. All things being equal that might be true, but all things are never equal. Kids have certain needs that trump YOUR happiness. I can think of lots of examples where doing something for the sake of my happiness would make my son's life worse. Part of being a good parent is putting the needs of our kids above our own selfish desires.
The issue is takes just one petulant parent w wants to split despite the kids solely because that parent knows they will obtain a very favorable custody settlement. It's not surprising that 2/3 of divorces are initiated by women -- more when children are present -- and 90% of the time when the couple is college educated. Family court is a particularly sexist place.
Having a rebuttable presumption that children remain with respondent can help fix all these problems. It's an idea worth discussing.