Focus’ Glenn T. Stanton Speaks For Anthropologists

BoxTurtleBulletin Contacts Actual Anthropologists Who Surprisingly Are Able To Speak For Themselves

Daniel Gonzales

March 5th, 2008


From Focus’ Citizenlink publication:

Glenn Stanton, director of global family formation studies at Focus on the Family, said there’s a clear consensus among anthropologists.

“A family is a unit that draws from the two types of humanity, male and female,” he said. “Those two parts of humanity join together, create new life and they both cooperate in the legitimization of the child, if you will, and the development of the child.”

Stanton doesn’t give a source for claiming this consensus nor is Stanton an anthropologist himself. Stanton’s bio on Focus’ website only lists a master’s degree in interdisciplinary humanities with an emphasis in philosophy, history and religion from the University of West Florida.

I thought I’d see what an actual anthropologist had to say about the matter. To be specific, Bill Maurer, the anthropology department chair at the University of California, Irvine. I sent Focus’ article to Maurer who penned this response (reprinted in full) with a fellow professor:

Since its beginnings as a scientific discipline in the 19th century, anthropology has documented the historical and cultural variability of marriage and family forms. From ghost marriages to “female husbands” to polyandry, polygamy and cousin marriage, the cultures of the world exhibit incredible diversity in how they manage the universal problems of cultural transmission and the reproduction and care of the next generation. Indeed, Lewis Henry Morgan, one of the field’s forefathers, documented hundreds of distinct kinship arrangements. For over a hundred years, anthropologists have continually surprised themselves and other Western observers with the diversity of family and marriage arrangements deemed sacred, valuable, and morally necessary for the reproduction of society. The American Anthropological Association, the oldest and largest professional organization for anthropologists, affirms this diversity and noted its support for gay marriage in 2004-05. In fact, the Association requires academic recruiters who advertise with its service to state whether they provide benefits to same-sex partners and whether they forbid discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. It does this because the scientific evidence is on its side: there is not now, and there never has been, one single definition of marriage. Marriage may be universal; but what counts as marriage is not. The current American political debate is thus quite parochial when seen from the point of view of 10,000 years of human history.

For more information: American Anthropological Association; on the gay marriage debate, see this link.

Bill Maurer
Professor and Chair
Department of Anthropology, University of California, Irvine
and
President, Association for Political and Legal Anthropology

Tom Boellstorff
Associate Professor
Department of Anthropology, University of California, Irvine
Editor-in-Chief, American Anthropologist, and
Former co-Chair, Society of Lesbian and Gay Anthropologists

See also:
Now An Entire Association of Anthropologists Disagrees With Stanton
Another Real Anthropologist Speaks About Marriage
Focus’ Glenn T. Stanton Speaks For Anthropologists

Rainbow Scientist

March 5th, 2008

Fan-frickin-tastic response from the anthropologist!

As a scientist myself I have never really understood the argument of heterosexual marriage having been the only kind in existence and the only way to raise offspring properly. Nowhere in nature can we say that there exists only one type of procreative bonding held universally within a species (sexually reproducing species that is). Some species favor lifelong companionship while others the norm is to copulate and then retreat to a particular same-sex cabal.

Even if we look at only humans, how many of our ancestral tribes (of every nationality) left the raising of young to half the tribe (usually women, but not always) while the other half (usually men, but not always) went about other business away from their children. The adage that “It takes a village to raise a child” is not just a quaint idea; once upon a time that is how it was done. Since we as a species are still here today I’d say that it worked pretty well while it lasted.

Why do some argue that more than one type of family is such a radical idea? Could we not, as self-aware animals, espouse the many forms of healthy companionship found readily in nature without tearing ourselves apart?

Jason D

March 5th, 2008

Sigh, anthropologists have been politically compromised!!!

How dare people who’s job it is to observe and record human interaction, social, familial, and political trends — how dare they tell us that we aren’t cookie cutter shapes!

I’m sure if Glenn were pressed on this issue he’d first attack the American Anthropological Association, or stretch the definition of Anthropology to include people who aren’t actual anthropologists, redefine the words “consensus” and “anthropology”, and or demonize anthropology altogether.

TJ McFisty

March 5th, 2008

Ugh ugh ugh…okay, having spent 7 years (3 years completely unnecessary) with a budding/studying cultural anthropologist with emphasis on Jesus study (blah blah blah)–even attempted a doctorate program here at American U. under Bill Leap, and as payback for all those years and time spent listening and attending all those damn symposiums, I’m temporarily taking the title of Authority On How Anthropologists Speak.

First dude: Obvious non-anthropologist twat. One itty bitty declarative statement that says how families work? Oh heavens no.

Second statement: Oh yes, absolutely credible. They got those key words like “variability” and “kinship” going on and while I’m a little surprised it’s only one paragraph, it’s lengthy and sounds like it could get boring. I’m already thinking about reading a book.

Anyway, on its face. First guy is easily discounted simply cuz he doesn’t talk enough or mention post-structuralism or any hip terminology.

The actual substance is crap, too, but his wrapper is easily punctured so there we are with that. Dude should be strung up.

a. mcewen

March 5th, 2008

distorting scientific work is nothing new for stanton and company.

Now they will either ignore Mr. Maurer and Mr. Boellstorff’s words or accuse them of working for the “gay agenda.”

Peterson Toscano

March 5th, 2008

Great work Daniel. This is awesome stuff!

Buffy

March 9th, 2008

Focus on the Family lie to advance their agenda? Say it isn’t so!

Very nice work getting opinions from real anthropologists.

Jose

December 30th, 2008

Here is an article by an “actual” anthropologist regarding the credulity of the American Anthropological Associations statement regarding the impact of same sex marriages through the ages.

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/wood200504260810.asp

Lets be clear. There have been various forms of marriage throughout the ages, (I don’t believe anyone has ever disputed this), but except for very rare exceptions, all of the above mentioned types of marriage have involved marriages between man and woman, be they monogamous or polygamous. Even in predominantly matriarchal societies, where property and kinship ties are inherited through the woman’s line, marriages are still, (again with very rare exception) between men and women. To argue that because marriages have taken different forms throughout the ages, and then omitting the fact that practically all of these marriage arrangements involved men marrying women, is simply disingenuous, and not objective. Even “Ghost marriages” practiced among the Sudanese, entailed marriage kinship ties between men and woman! And female “husbands” which seem to have been a social arrangement, and not a sexually mitigated one. The preponderance of history demonstrates that Civilization as we have known it has depended until now on exclusive heterosexual marriage.

Jason D

December 30th, 2008

“Civilization as we have known it has depended until now on exclusive heterosexual marriage.”

Hardly. Civilization is dependent upon “people”. The basic unit of society is a person.

Priya Lynn

December 30th, 2008

Jose, even after gays achieve full marriage equality marriage will remain virtually exclusively heterosexual, so you have nothing to worry about.

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required)
(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

 

Latest Posts

Jubal

Another Temporary Hiatus

Today's Agenda Is Brought To You By...

Today In History, 1971: Minnesota Couple Stake Claim To First American Same-Sex Marriage

Today's Agenda Is Brought To You By...

Today In History, 1954: "Perverts Vanish" From Miami

Born On This Day, 1907: Evelyn Hooker

Born On This Day, 1925: Fr. John J. McNeill

Featured Reports

What Are Little Boys Made Of?

In this original BTB Investigation, we unveil the tragic story of Kirk Murphy, a four-year-old boy who was treated for “cross-gender disturbance” in 1970 by a young grad student by the name of George Rekers. This story is a stark reminder that there are severe and damaging consequences when therapists try to ensure that boys will be boys.

Slouching Towards Kampala: Uganda’s Deadly Embrace of Hate

When we first reported on three American anti-gay activists traveling to Kampala for a three-day conference, we had no idea that it would be the first report of a long string of events leading to a proposal to institute the death penalty for LGBT people. But that is exactly what happened. In this report, we review our collection of more than 500 posts to tell the story of one nation’s embrace of hatred toward gay people. This report will be updated continuously as events continue to unfold. Check here for the latest updates.

Paul Cameron’s World

In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote that “[Paul] Cameron’s ‘science’ echoes Nazi Germany.” What the SPLC didn”t know was Cameron doesn’t just “echo” Nazi Germany. He quoted extensively from one of the Final Solution’s architects. This puts his fascination with quarantines, mandatory tattoos, and extermination being a “plausible idea” in a whole new and deeply disturbing light.

From the Inside: Focus on the Family’s “Love Won Out”

On February 10, I attended an all-day “Love Won Out” ex-gay conference in Phoenix, put on by Focus on the Family and Exodus International. In this series of reports, I talk about what I learned there: the people who go to these conferences, the things that they hear, and what this all means for them, their families and for the rest of us.

Prologue: Why I Went To “Love Won Out”
Part 1: What’s Love Got To Do With It?
Part 2: Parents Struggle With “No Exceptions”
Part 3: A Whole New Dialect
Part 4: It Depends On How The Meaning of the Word "Change" Changes
Part 5: A Candid Explanation For "Change"

The Heterosexual Agenda: Exposing The Myths

At last, the truth can now be told.

Using the same research methods employed by most anti-gay political pressure groups, we examine the statistics and the case studies that dispel many of the myths about heterosexuality. Download your copy today!

And don‘t miss our companion report, How To Write An Anti-Gay Tract In Fifteen Easy Steps.

Testing The Premise: Are Gays A Threat To Our Children?

Anti-gay activists often charge that gay men and women pose a threat to children. In this report, we explore the supposed connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse, the conclusions reached by the most knowledgeable professionals in the field, and how anti-gay activists continue to ignore their findings. This has tremendous consequences, not just for gay men and women, but more importantly for the safety of all our children.

Straight From The Source: What the “Dutch Study” Really Says About Gay Couples

Anti-gay activists often cite the “Dutch Study” to claim that gay unions last only about 1½ years and that the these men have an average of eight additional partners per year outside of their steady relationship. In this report, we will take you step by step into the study to see whether the claims are true.

The FRC’s Briefs Are Showing

Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council submitted an Amicus Brief to the Maryland Court of Appeals as that court prepared to consider the issue of gay marriage. We examine just one small section of that brief to reveal the junk science and fraudulent claims of the Family “Research” Council.

Daniel Fetty Doesn’t Count

Daniel FettyThe FBI’s annual Hate Crime Statistics aren’t as complete as they ought to be, and their report for 2004 was no exception. In fact, their most recent report has quite a few glaring holes. Holes big enough for Daniel Fetty to fall through.