You are currently browsing durgamom's articles.
In a NYT blog, one of the authors of Freakonomics recently answered the following question:
What is your opinion on how international adoption affects the economy, race and class divisions, and the widening income gap within U.S.? What do you think of the argument that children are “readily available for adoption” in the U.S., and, further, that adoption is marketed as a product with benefits?
After failing to point out that international adoption is a multi-billion dollar a year industry, Steven Levitt, adoptive father of two daughters from China, goes on to explain why he chose to adopt Asian children as opposed to a Black children and how that decision was, in his opinion, not racist:
“The identity issues faced by a black child raised by white parents would be too difficult.”
“As a parent, I was not willing to take the chance on loving and raising an adopted child, only to know that when he became a teenager he would have to face the choice of being ‘black’ or ‘white’”
“That same sort of racial ‘all or nothing’ choice is not at play for Asian youths in our society.”
This logic, which assumes that Asian identity issues are lesser than to the point of being nonexistent, goes back to resistance’s questions: “What is the right sort of identity for a transracially adopted child? What identity will allow the child to bond with the adoptive parent? Does the child have to be a pseudo-biological one (We’re really all the same! I don’t look at him and see that he’s Chinese, I look at him and see my son!) in which differences are minimized, unspoken, unnoticed or suppressed?”
I guess in Levitt’s view, he’s able to bond better with his Asian children than a hypothetical Black child, because well, Asians are pretty much white or at least white enough to not pose significant problems (for him). Never mind what his kids think or will think. The Q&A is par for the NYT and its notion of Relative Choices.
From left to right: Mary-Louise Parker, her adopted baby from somewhere in Africa and the child’s nanny.
Not pictured: the baby’s mother in Africa.
Paula O. has a fantastic post up addressing how racism superficially targeted towards one race is not diminished racism and still affects a wide range of people of color. Though you think your racism or your family’s racism is directed to a finite group of folks, the net it casts is far-reaching. Racism is not so neatly contained.
After hearing a “joke” (read sanctioned racist epithet) about African Americans, Paula, who is Asian, “felt hurt, disgusted and dehumanized by such ugly and hateful words.” Get that?
Paula writes:
I know for a fact that there are people I’ve encountered in my life who feel that I am white “enough” for them to expect me to understand their compartmentalized racist attitudes and beliefs about other races without me feeling offended or hurt, simply because I am not the race of which they are attacking. That somehow it is excusable and even justifiable for them to hold racist views, as long as I’m not the one being marginalized. ”Don’t worry, Paula”, people would say. “We don’t think of you as one of them.” How was I to explain that I AM one of them? That I AM an other. That I am not white.
This is why when I hear the same old tired excuse from white adoptive parents that they feel comfortable adopting an Asian child but not a Black child, I feel a lot of compassion for that Asian child and immense relief for that Black child.
Pigs may fly occasionally, but here we go again. I’m reading this headline, “1 million Chinese-made cribs recalled” and am wondering what the manufacture of cribs in China has to do with fatal design flaws of American-designed cribs. The article mentions two more times that the cribs are made in China but is completely silent about the company, a family owned and operated business located in Reading, Pennsylvania whose roots “stretch back to Morris Waldman who started the premier toy and children’s merchandise distribution company in Philadelphia in 1947.” Again with the ingrained yellow perilish stereotypes. “1 million Pennsylvania-designed cribs recalled” just doesn’t have the same ring, does it?
Reason 8. No boundaries. No detail about your kid is too intimate to share on the internet. No photo of your “[insert ethnicity] Princess” too private. What gets me the most is when you divulge something major to thousands of strangers that you haven’t even told your kid yet, like the fact that you found their first family. Or when your blab something your child has asked to keep between the two of you. That’s just sad.
Adoptive parents who publish their children’s personal histories, please stop. Your “Journey to Exotic Country for My Child” and “Bringing My Angel Home” books and blogs are crap. Please stop impersonating the voices of first parents too.
Ugh. I had no idea about this product:
Following years of research on Asian skin, L’Oreal Skincare Laboratories invent a new advanced triple action technology that acts at each step of the skin darkening process, for a perfect whitening efficiency.
Ironic, isn’t it, that L’Oreal proudly proclaims that diversity is a priority?
Diversity is a core value for L’Oréal. From the wide variety of people who make up its teams to the products developed, diversity has always been a priority for L’Oréal.
Uh huh.
And I’m not just talking about her name (which falls under several no-comment categories including India-lite .) No, I’m talking about this Mother’s Day article which poor Paisley will get to read some day.
Paisley, who was adopted from India to Arkansas, will get to read that her parents said that India
“would rather [children] be adopted by a poor Bengali family that will raise them in the Hindu faith than for them to be adopted by an American family that can provide everything they need.”
Just taking a look at the family photo and reading her parent’s comments calls into question whether her family can truly provide “everything” that she needs.
And this:
Stephanie pointed out that babies in India are given up for many reasons — mostly because of poverty — but often because they are born out of wedlock. And they can be rejected for something as seemingly inconsequential as being “born under the wrong zodiac sign.”
Born under the wrong zodiac sign? That’s a new one. Why do white adoptive parents fall for this nonsense hook, line and sinker?
And this:
“It is very hot in that country and the conditions are primitive.”
Any guesses as to whether Paisley’s parents ventured out of their hotel? Or whether their “adoption journey” even included a trip to India?
According to Paisley’s medical records, a faint heart murmur was detected at her birth, but it apparently has corrected itself, Stephanie said.
Ah, another miraculous special needs recovery. There are many accounts of children with special needs (including several others from this particular orphanage) whose special needs completely disappear after leaving India. Sometimes the recoveries are explained away by the miracles of modern Western medicine or the benevolence of a Christian God who apparently smiles down only on white families. I think the fact that under India’s adoption rules, children billed as “special needs” get expedited clearance with rules about priority to domestic placement being relaxed has a lot to do with these needs being, in fact, nonexistent.
I wouldn’t say this story is heartwarming so much as it is heartbreaking.
In the style of Peggy McIntosh, I offer up some of the privileges white adoptive parents hold when securing their foreign-born children’s immigration visas:
1. I can pretty much be assured that I will obtain an immigrant visa for my foreign-born child with very little, if any, scrutiny as to whether my child actually meets the requirements for such a visa.
2. When applying for the visa for my foreign-born child, I will be permitted to literally move to the head of the line and bypass the multitude of people of color who are also seeking visas.
3. In general, I will be treated much more kindly and respectfully by immigration officials than others seeking to immigrate.
4. On the slim chance that my child is denied a visa, it will be for a damn good reason.
5. If my child is denied a visa, I will be able to call upon the assistance of my congressmen and the media to apply pressure and force a change in the result.
Adoptive parents may become blinded by these privileges received when their children immigrate. But they need to be aware that their privilege does not rub off on their children once they are no longer young and cute. Heed resistance’s advice.
And take it from those of us who don’t always see the nice and shiny side of immigration laws and officials. The day will come when that category will include your children of color.
According to this article, ”Dozens offer help to mom, daughter,” a woman by the name of Hong Zhang faces deportation to China, resulting in multiple offers to adopt her daughter. One generous couple is even offering to keep Zhang on as a housekeeper. Zhang is adament she does not want her daughter adopted. Zhang has also received blind marriage proposals. Exactly what kind of help is being offered here?
If I were re-naming this post it would be:
Wanting a Daughter, Needing to Change Her Name
or
“I Love You Like Crazy Cakes, but I Hate Your Crazy Name!”
It seems incredibly rare for parents who have adopted from
China (and other countries I might add) to retain their children’s names. Why do so few adoptees get to keep their names? Adoptive parents have a variety of reasons for changing their child’s name, commonly along the lines of:
“It’s just an orphanage name; she never even knew it” = the child’s original name is just a fluke and we “just know” it is of no importance to her.
“It’s too hard to pronounce” = SHE has to adapt, not us.
“All the American-born Chinese girls at Chinese school have Western names” = since “real” Chinese people do it, we can too.
“We don’t want her to get teased on the playground” = we haven’t really given much thought to whatever else she’ll be teased about.
“She can change her name back any time she wants” = she’ll have to pay money to do it after a time when everyone has known her by the name we gave her, and despite what we say, she will have to soothe over our hurt feelings in the process.
“By re-naming her, we are ‘claiming’ her” = “She’s our property damnit and we are exercising our right of entitlement!”
Adoptive parents surely must take great care in choosing just the right new name for their child. Sadly, it seems the names given by adoptive parents to their children from China often fall into the following predictable categories:
Place Names: These names typically come with altered spellings to designate a place. They almost make sense when the designated place is somewhere Asian, but even when they are not, they are downright laughable.
Examples: Asia (also spelled Aja, Azah), Chynna,
London
China-Lite Names: These names are like fortune cookies and crab rangoons – they are pseudo-Chinese with a decidedly American flavor. As sinoangle suggests, they smack of orientalism.
Examples: Jasmine and Jade, Mei Li, Maylee, Mayleigh, Meilee, Lusi (pronounced “Lucy” despite the fact in Chinese it wouldn’t be pronounced this way)
Resume Names aka Double-Take Names: These names are firmly Anglo in origin; they are intended to show the world that the child is “just like us.” One could also call these “whitewash names.” They may be designed to avoid red flags on a resume so that the child will not face discrimination in hiring. Ummm, have these parents not heard of in-person interviews?
Examples: Emma, Heather, Grace
Suckerpunch Names: These names provide some gratuitous social commentary, and are shockingly transparent in showing exactly why these parents adopted.
Example: Charity
Listen to what many adult adoptees tell us about retaining a child’s name: A name is an integral part of the child’s identity no matter who named her. To take away a child’s name is to erase a part of her past. Add if you must, but don’t take away (unfortunately, many adoptive parents run with this bit of advice by tucking away the child’s given name as a conveniently forgotten and never-used middle name). Most importantly, honestly examine your motives for wanting to change your child’s name, and decide whether you are really doing it for her benefit or for yours.
A blurb on Arianna Huffington’s blog about “shocking research” on abandonment and infanticide in China presented not by a UN Commission, Human Rights Watch or an NGO in China, but by the author of a book called China Doll (which is about a “celebrity’s quest to ‘save a baby’s life”).
Taking resistance’s cue, if you are white and were asked to speak on a white panel, would you feel like a bug under a microscope in answering these questions?:
1. Give us a brief description of yourself including where you were born, where you grew up, and what you’re doing now.
2. When did you first realize that you were racially/ethnically
different from children of color around you in school? Do you have any recollection of what that felt like as a young child and how you dealt with it?
3. What are some things you enjoy and value about being white?
4. What are some privileges you’ve had to face as a result of being white?
5. Describe a moment when you felt more white than American.
6. Describe a moment when you felt more American than white.
7. Fill in the blank: These parts of me are more white than American
8. Fill in the blank: These parts of me are more American than white
9. What are some personal strategies you’ve developed to negotiate between expectations of the monocultural white community and a diversified multicultural American community?
10. Do you self identify most as white-American, European-American or American? Why? At what point did you reach this self-identification? Has it changed over time? Does it change according to social environment?
11. What is your experience with racism? How did it
affect your day to day life as a kid? a teenager? an adult?
12. What messages did you receive in school, either implicitly or
explicitly about your race and culture?
13. What messages did you receive from your parents, either
implicitly or explicitly about your race and culture?
14. What messages did you receive in the media about your race and culture?
15. Would you say you’ve reached a point where you’re comfortable with your white identity despite the inevitable presence of some level of unresolved questions or internal conflicts? If yes, what were key experiences or individuals or realizations that helped you arrive at this point?
16. What are some current white issues that you’re working
through in your particular stage of life and environment?
17. How do you believe being white has enriched you as an
individual?
Why aren’t there more white panelist discussions on racial identity?
Sinoangle’s post about the 11-year-old girl who could not play soccer unless she removed her hijab triggered my memory about a recent story out of the UK where a 12-year-old schoolgirl lost a legal challenge to wear a niqab at school.
The judge ruled that the following factors weighed in favor of the ban:
• the veil prevented teachers from seeing facial expressions - a key element in effective classroom interaction
• the necessity to enforce a school uniform policy under which girls of different faiths would have a sense of equality and identity
• security - the head teacher had said an unwelcome visitor could move around the school incognito
• the need to avoid peer pressure on girls to take up wearing the veil
Is there not a discriminatory subtext behind these mostly hypothetical factors?
The school’s headteacher had the gall to claim that the school, “was proud to welcome pupils from all faiths and religions with a view to helping them achieve their potential in a supportive learning environment.” Ruling against the girl is incongruous with a supposedly welcoming and supportive learning environment.
Worse yet, the ruling has prompted the UK’s Education Secretary to reassure schools that (mostly White) head teachers would remain totally responsible for setting uniform policy.
In an article about the high rate of adoption from China in Spain, an adoptive mother shares the following. What’s wrong with this picture?
“We have never had any problems with racism — if anything, people see Maria as exotic,” Vacas Arlandis said of her daughter.
Hint: See resistance’s post on Microagressions, “Exoticism of Asian Women.”
She added that Maria does not yet see herself as different: “She tells me, ‘Mommy, I am pretty like you.’”
What? Are “pretty” and “different” mutually exclusive?
I read about a fascinating* case concerning a Chinese-American couple who sought to adopt a white Christian baby infant in 1885. Two archived articles in the New York Times are all I can find about the case, but I’d love to know more.
In the first article dated February 25, 1885, “Asking for a Christian Child,” the judge was said to be perplexed by the unusual application. He said he was unsure what should be done but “that he would at all events require positive proofs that the Chinese people did not intend to return to the Flowery Kingdom.” God forbid!
The next day another article appeared which described the Judge’s ruling “which must have damped the hopes of the Chinaman and the wife.” The judge stated:
It was the first time in my knowledge (and I have since yesterday made some inquiries) in which natives of China had applied for the adoption of a white male infant, and while I am satisfied that the petitioners here, Dong Tong and his wife, are reputable people, it seems to me there is a bar to the adoption of an infant born into civilization by parents whose traditions are from an alien civilization. The controlling consideration is the welfare of the child. The statute requires the court, before making a decree of adoption, to be satisfied that the proposed adopting parents are able to give the child suitable education and nurture, and that it is in all respects proper that the adoption should be allowed. It is not enough that those parents are moral and enlightened in the arts and civilization of their own country. If they cannot give the child a Christian education they are unfit to have him in their custody. If a decree in this case is to have the same effect as in all others there is no power on earth to prevent them from taking the boy to China if they see fit to do so. If they remain here the child, as he grows up, will be an object of aversion and insult to his companions. Moreover, even if I were satisfied that a decree of adoption would be to the child’s advantage in this case, I should be unwilling to establish the precedent. For these reasons the petition is denied.
One could decry the blatant xenophobic reasoning in the decision as an unfortunate relic of the past that has stayed in the past. Yet, I can’t help but see the parallels in this century+-old case and the long battle over Anna Mae He as I recall Judge Childers’ lower court ruling reeking-ripe-stinking full of xenophobia and the Bakers’ fears that she will be taken to China.
How far have we really come?
*Another substitute for “interesting”.
Wut they sed