As an experimental psychologist, I have long been interested in how bias and perceptions influence our behaviors in often subtle but consequential ways. Last year, I wrote a diary about a lesbian friend's rebuke by her Catholic alma mater. The school declined to include her infant's birth announcement in the school newsletter, as is routinely done for heterosexual alumnae. Although the school's curt refusal was overtly hurtful toward my friend, I also addressed how bigotry can act upon the individual in ways that are covert and implicit. Many examples of research exist which demonstrate the consequences of bias. For example, clever work published in 2010 by an Israeli-US team asked women to describe themselves to a study partner. When the women believed they were being viewed from the neck down by a male partner, as manipulated by the position of a camera, they spoke about themselves less than when they were communicating via audio alone or viewed from the neck up. Scrutinize a woman's body, as may often occur, and her behaviors change. Consider therefore how biases, and our expectations of such biases, can impact how we behave and how others in turn view us.
But what of my title, and a five-year journey toward fatherhood? I recently published a profile for Johns Hopkins University about their alum, Michael George, and his husband, Chad Lord, who formally began the journey toward adopting a newborn five years ago, in October 2008. They wait, and they wait, and they tweak their profile here and there, and add new photos, and update paperwork, and purchase ads on social media. They are, unquestionably, two introverts, and the hash-tag-filled way we communicate widely these days is not their first language. Around them roils the often contentious and never-dull world of public discourse that decides, state by state and gavel by gavel, what we think of the Chads and Mikes and their desires to raise children. Are they fit? Are they going to be somehow less than ideal, and does their push toward parenthood feel acceptable for our notions of family, of proper covenants, of what's truly best for a child? Again pointing to what peer-reviewed research tells us, the science firmly backs the soundness of gay and lesbian couples as parents. Among psychologists and sociologists whose currency is actual careful data, there is no debate. While the rest of us counter resistance to the science and mark gradual progress, Mike and Chad post photos to their Facebook page, "Chad and Mike's Open Adoption," that betray their utter ordinariness: Chad makes his famous chocolate chip cookies for Mike's birthday. Chad enjoys a cozy afternoon nap. Mike poses with a llama on a recent travel adventure. The sunset tonight is beautiful.
It's impossible to confirm if bias against Chad and Mike as gay men, and as potential parents in a motherless household, is principally to blame for slowing their journey toward fatherhood. The fact that they, and I and others as their advocates, spend time wondering about this provides another example of how the journey toward full equality is long and advocacy for human rights must be unrelenting. Meanwhile, Chad and Mike are two individuals who did not choose a spotlight, who merely want what many others want: to share their love within a family.
Johns Hopkins Magazine feature on Chad and Mike
Nice blog write-up of the study on objectifying women's bodies