"Generally". The phenomenon, however rare it is, needs to be studied by sociologists, unless we want our laws to be shaped by this rarest of birds. I only used the expression negatively in my trailer to the article:
The study, therefore, is more significant in discussing the impact of family breakdown in general, than it is in discussing committed homosexual unions who might dabble in parenting.
Let it be studied by sociologists. By all means. But, take it from someone who has been in a “committed” hetero relationship for over 55 years, our laws have already been “shaped” by a political lobby that thinks itself above accepting the conventions of meaning and description, established by society over a protracted period of time, and intends to instead establish by law a meaning conforming to the political objectives of a few.
Definitions, and descriptions, are supposed to facilitate communication, by contributing to the clarification or perfection of one’s understanding of things and ideas, achieved through persuasion, until generally accepted by society. “Reshaping” the lexicon by law is a tactic employed by propagandists.
Sorry for the delay in replying. Almost missed your post entirely.