All The (Adoption) News That They See Fit To Print

I was really excited when I read that one of my favorite bloggers, Sume, of Ethnically Incorrect Daughter was going to be a contributor in a new blog called Relative Choices: Adoption and the American Family in the opinion section of The New York Times.  If you haven't read Sume's piece already, please do.

And as thrilled as I was to see that Sume's voice was amongst the adoptee's voices in this series, I couldn't help but think, where was another favorite blogger (and personal inspiration) of mine, Jae Ran of Harlow's Monkey?  (More on that later.)

So last night, after re-reading Sume's amazing piece, I was perplexed (to say the very least) to come across the most recent article in the blog written by adoptive parent and author, Tama Janowitz. 

I am not familiar with any of Ms. Janowitz's work, but after only a few sentences into her post, my first thought was to double check that I was still on the NYT Opinion page.  I personally found each subsequent paragraph of Ms. Janowitz's essay to be more offensive than the last.  Insulted, disheartened and thoroughly disappointed, I waited anxiously to read the comments from other readers and to hopefully engage in a dialogue with all those that shared an opinion about Ms. Janowitz's piece.

But wait.  Apparently, it turns out that certain comments are not being published or are being censored.  Certain comments that just happen to be authored by adoptees.

**Please check out these posts from Jae Ran and Carmen at Racialicious about the censorship of adult adoptees by the NYT.**   

If you can, please take the time to read all of the comments submitted thus far, not only to Ms. Janowitz's piece, but to all of the articles.  I'd be interested to know if others have observed the same obvious, recurring theme to the published comments that I have, and if they are able to identify whose voice clearly dominates the discussions.

It just so happens that my comment to Ms. Janowitz's article was published.  You'll find it under Paula O., comment #55*.  It reads:

"To be honest, I’ve never understood the seemingly insatiable need that many fellow adoptive parents have to declare themselves the “real” mother or the “real” father. To invoke the familiar litany of qualifications that supposedly make a person more “real” as a mother or father doesn’t make the argument any more convincing to me, but instead leaves me wondering “What are they so afraid of?”

When people ask me about our son’s “real” mother, I tell them that he has two moms, both of whom are real. Just because his Korean mother is unable to partake in the daily events and happenings of his life does not make her any less of a mother in our eyes. Honoring our son in his totality means recognizing and appreciating his entire history, which includes acknowledging that he is a child of two people who deserve to be called mother and father, without any qualifiers.

As a Korean adoptee myself, I’m appreciative that my mother and father were secure enough and wise enough to let me know that all four of my parents are very, very real and that I am who I am today because of each one of them."

I can't help but wonder if the only reason that my comment passed the test is because my status as an adoptee reads more as an after-thought in this particular remark and if the moderator(s) interpreted my role as an adoptive parent to be the more dominant voice in this comment, therefore getting the green light.  Or perhaps it's because I used the word "appreciative" when talking about my parents, an adoption sentiment that always seems to garner approval.  Or maybe they thought by publishing my fairly innocuous comment they can at least say, "Look, here's a comment by an adoptee!  What's all the fuss about?!" 

I am concerned and I am upset that so many other adult adoptees voices are being censored.  Voices of those who know better than anyone what it truly means to be "touched" by adoption. 

I have lived the life of an adoptee for almost 37 years, yet have only been an adoptive parent for all of 30 months.  But guess which role allows my voice to be heard without being assigned any labels?  Without the criticism?  Without the accusations of not loving my parents enough or being grateful enough or for not using my status as a "crutch"?

I hoped for and had expected more from the NYT.  I was excited at the prospect of adoptees finally having such a prestigious, public forum in which all adoptee experiences, thoughts and feelings could be represented and expressed in their entirety.

From where I stand, it appears that they just don't feel that some adoptee's voices are fit enough to print.  And no matter how anyone tries to spin it, that indeed is a sad commentary all around.

* I just noticed that my comment, originally number #55, is now listed under number #57.  I'm not sure exactly what this means, but I'll keep you posted. 

Comments

[Jae Ran]

It means that they're "adding in" some previously withheld comments. Those slick NYT editors!

[Laura]

Like I said over on Jae Ran's blog...YUCK...I am embarrassed that she is an adoptive mom to a beautiful little Chinese gir who has to listen to her nonsense. I hope her daughter has others around her to embrace her with the love she deserves : )

[cheryl]

I'll have to go back and read the added comments.

I can't speak for adoptees (not one) but, I felt that Tama's editorial was trying to come off as wity and funny, but not succeeding, at either one. I was really looking forward to reading a piece from an enlighted adoptive parent. Unfortunately she is one of those people that further perpetuates the stereotype of ignorant adoptive parents.

I've come to the conclusion over the last few months that some adoptive parents are just not as adoption educated as others (and probably never will be) and unless I'm having a face to face conversation with them, alot can be lost in translation.

I try to ignore the ignorant and do my part to educate myself to be the best adoptive parent possible to my adopted child.

[cloudscome]

I put up my 2 cents.

[Paula O.]

Thank you to all who have voiced their opinions about this.

Cheryl, I couldn't agree more about her misguided and failed attempt at employing humor to get her point across. Humor isn't funny when it hurts other people.

[ms. p]

great,thoughtful post on tama janowitz's article and the new york times adoption pieces.

i'm a korean american adoptee - and i blog for the louisville courier-journal's weekly edition, velocity. the nyt blog and the subsequent adoptee blogs prompted me to write a bit about my own story.

to paula o... "humor isn't funny when it hurts other people." so true. i wish more people understood that! i can't tell you how many times people have told me to lighten up when i take offense at their racial huomr. sigh.

[ms. p]

ok, paula. i'm daft and i apologize. i didn't realize that you were the author of the post.

i want to run another post on adoption sometime in the near future - do you mind if i link to your blog?

thanks.

[Paula O.]

Hi ms. p: Welcome and thanks for reading. And yes, you may link - thank you for asking. :)

I am looking forward to checking out your blog. It's great to have another adoptee's voice out there!

[ms. p]

thanks for the comment on my piece! it's been so neat finding all these blogs by other ka adoptees. i can't believe i never thought to look before!

also - heart, mind and seoul is a brilliant blog title!

[rob]

I think your comment was accepted because it was downright amazing.

In your next blog entry, most of the comments you listed up did not really resonate negatively with me (other than the factory worker thing).

So, that is why I am so glad and appreciative to have your perspective.