life:

Richard and Mildred Loving never asked to be heroes of the Civil Rights Movement. But when the state of Virginia had their interracial marriage in its crosshairs, the unassuming, intensely private couple fought back. And on June 12, 1967, they won.
Here, on the 45th anniversary of the June 12, 1967, Supreme Court decision that, in effect, codified the right of men and women to simply love whom they choose, LIFE.com presents a gallery of recently rediscovered Grey Villet photographs of the Lovings, their family and their friends, along with the text of the original magazine story.
High-res

life:

Richard and Mildred Loving never asked to be heroes of the Civil Rights Movement. But when the state of Virginia had their interracial marriage in its crosshairs, the unassuming, intensely private couple fought back. And on June 12, 1967, they won.

Here, on the 45th anniversary of the June 12, 1967, Supreme Court decision that, in effect, codified the right of men and women to simply love whom they choose, LIFE.com presents a gallery of recently rediscovered Grey Villet photographs of the Lovings, their family and their friends, along with the text of the original magazine story.

  • Reblogged from life

To all those hurt we say sorry… We apologise for the lies, the fear, the silence, the deceptions. We hear you now, we acknowledge your pain and we offer you our unreserved, sincere regret and sorrow for those injustices… We seek to reconcile the South Australian community with these people who have suffered so much.

South Australian Premier Jay Weatherill delivers a public apology to the parents, children and communities affected by the State-sanctioned practice of forcing unwed mothers to give up their babies. It is estimated that 17,000 children in South Australia were adopted before 1980 “and some of these were forced adoptions.” Forced adoptions were a common practice around Australia between the 1950s and the 1970s, affecting around 150,000 unmarried mothers across the country.

Source: SBS Australia.

fuckyeahrupaulsdragrace:

Drag Dad is an independent documentary project about a six year old boy named Jeremiah and his father, the drag queen superstar, Tyra Sanchez.
This documentary will help shed light on gay parenting and break prejudices against LGBT families! But it will not be possible without your help. Please offer you support by sharing this link, reblogging, and donating here
High-res

fuckyeahrupaulsdragrace:

Drag Dad is an independent documentary project about a six year old boy named Jeremiah and his father, the drag queen superstar, Tyra Sanchez.

This documentary will help shed light on gay parenting and break prejudices against LGBT families! But it will not be possible without your help. Please offer you support by sharing this link, reblogging, and donating here

(via tarantolata-deactivated20130908)

It seems to me that, rather than trying to answer questions when you don’t have the necessary data to do it, perhaps you should ask different questions. Certainly, we all do the best with the data we can get, but it is never alright to draw conclusions that your data don’t support—and Regenerus’ data simply cannot answer the question he set out to ask. And when your research questions the legitimacy of people’s families—my family—I demand higher research standards.

In Sociology Lens, an insightful blogger known only as Amanda critiques the new study by sociologist Mark Regenerus. Regenerus has published a paper arguing that children from heterosexual parents are better off than children raised by lesbian and gay parents. I recently posted that academic research actually shows that this is not true. Studies actually show that children of LGBTQI families are slightly better off than kids from heterosexual families with respect to aspiring to more progressive gender roles. In other respects they are similar, when you factor in class differences. 

Amanda notes that Regenerus’ research on gay and lesbian families has produced contradictory findings due to the study’s poorly conceived methodology. Simply put: Regenerus’ methods for data collection do not match his research questions (meaning the methods are invalid). Regenerus defines homosexuality according to anyone who has had a same-sex experience, without taking into account their subjective identities or family experiences. Regenerus has not controlled for the fact that some children from gay and lesbian families are being raised in single parent households. This generally puts any child at an economic disadvantage when compared to dual parent households. Amanda argues Regenerus’ findings are tinged with homophobia, possibly influenced by Regenerus’ ties to the Christian site that hosts his blog.

Sociologists are not above having their politics influence their research interests - including you, me and everyone else. We do not have to agree with one another; however we are trained to make our assumptions explicit and to have our methods match our research questions. I know many sociologists who conduct studies that go against my political and personal beliefs and yet I can engage in useful and challenging discussion because the data and methods warrant attention. Crappy science still warrants attention, but for all the wrong reasons. What a shame that Regenerus’ lax methodology will only fuel public fear and misunderstanding, rather than making a contribution to empirically-informed debate. 

Read Amanda’s excellent article at Sociology Lens.

united-nations:

On 2 April, World Autism Awareness Day, watch this special video featuring United Nations staff whose families have been touched by autism. The annual observance highlights the need to help improve the lives of children and adults who suffer from the disorder so they can lead full and meaningful lives.

Also launched this week are new stamps from the UN Postal Administration designed by artists with autism.

Related events taking place at UN Headquarters in New York City

Race and incarceration in the USA: the effect on families

Philip N. Cohen posted this chart comparing the rates of incarceration across racial groups in the USA (via Sociological Images). Cohen writes:

to understand the disparate impact of this change on Black men in young adulthood primarily — and secondarily, Latino men — here are the rates of incarceration for men by age and race/ethnicity (Blacks here exclude Latinos; Asians and American Indians are not included in the statistics):

Just to make sure you read the scale right, that incarceration rate for Black men in their early 30s is 9,892 per 100,000, or 9.9%, or one-in-ten — more than five-times the rate for White men.

I come at this largely from its effects on families. In a nutshell: The overall trend is largely a consequence of how the U.S. has waged its drug war over this period; these policies fit into a web of practices that deny families to millions of people in the U.S. (only a minority of whom have been convicted of crimes), including by simply removing men from communities and increasing the number of single-parent families.

Cohen via Sociological Images.