Well I'm sure some families exist that match what those who trump the concept have in mind. But it is indeed a myth that it was ever dominant in our society. It was once much more common on paper than it is now, but the underlying realities very often didn't match the idealistic stereotype. Many women were stuck with alcoholic dead-beat husbands, or were viewed as unmarriageable if they left them, because divorce was frowned upon -- and children were stuck in the miserable home. And most people didn't marry for love, they married out of economic necessity and lack of any other available marriage partners in their area, or due to the woman being pregnant. Now that there are lots of other options for how to arrange one's personal life, I suspect a much higher percentage of traditional-on-paper families are actually happy, functional family units, than in the past (there are just a lot fewer of them). I once saw Jocelyn Elders say the exact same thing. She, also, had no proof, no statistics to back it up - she just stated it as fact, like "Everyone knew it".
Shall I post the stats showing that children of married parents have a FAR less occurrance of major pathologies, than say, children whose parents have chosen to arrange their lives in a single-parent home? After all, it's just another lifestyle choice - and nobody gets hurt, right?
Don't even go there, Warren.
The first thing I learned in statistics class is that statistics don't lie, but they can always be skewed.
Will you ignore the studies that show children raised in gay families have a HIGHER rate of college attendance, economic stability, and emotional well-being than children raised in the so-called "traditional" family?
It doesn't mean anything. Stats are as useless as the people who spout them.