O Solo Mama

Single momhood, adoption, middle age. All together now.

Are men attracted to smart women?

This all started because I noticed recently that this post, in which I confessed to loving David Gergen and one my colleagues blurted out that

ahahaha! did you see him blush in the video? he’s so cute when he’s all “Gergeny!” i just love his baked potato head. it’s full of smartness and stuff. *swoon*

. . .continues to have a nice viewing audience. Also there was something about the image of the baked potato head being “full of smartness and stuff” that kept making me laugh out loud and then the big rock fell on my head: women really do think smart men are sexy.

And the reverse is not true.

Men learn to love smart women but it doesn’t come naturally. Smartness for men, I would wager, intially reduces sex appeal but it’s something they can think themselves over. If they’re smart, heh-heh.

The same doesn’t go for gay men or lesbians, though.

Smartness is sexy for lesbians and gay men and their partners, all-ways, two-ways, every-ways because they’ve freed themselves from continuing the species. Lucky them–the same rules don’t apply.

Straight men need to father as many children as possible. Straight women need to pick that special guy who can help her raise a child.

Hence smart men are sexy.

Smart women are the equivalent of the species thinking outside the box.

So don’t go all insane on me. In answer to my own question, yes. But not immediately.

Filed under: Hillary, critical thinking, life, solo life , , , , , , , , ,

Christian publisher angers Asian-Americans with gibberish cover and fake accents

deadly viper“Kung Fu” to sell Christian books was Zondervan’s brilliant publishing and marketing strategy.

Gulp.

The Michigan publisher’s 2007 book Deadly Viper Character Assassin: A Kung Fu Survival Guide for Life and Leadership was supposed to help Christians develop character and integrity but instead it’s recently ignited a firestorm about appropriation of Chinese and Japanese (“what’s the big diff?”) cultures by two white authors, one of whom is a pastor and the other who runs a place called www.xxxchurch.com

Can’t say for sure if this idea got passed around the way publishing ideas are supposed to, but I suspect not. Missing—the guy or gal who looks you in the eye and says, “You wanna do WHAT?”

So now Soon-Chan Rah, an evangelical Christian, author, and professor has called the authors and Zondervan on the racist overtones of the book and charged them with appropriating Asian cultural symbols for their own profit. You can read a series of blog posts on the subject here (where you can see some icky promotional pictures) and here. Please note that the Facebook videos appear to be locked down and if you aren’t a member, you won’t be able to access them.

To see how one of the authors reacted initially, go here. Both authors are now in apology mode but so far, Zondervan isn’t.

Highlights:

  • The book uses gibberish Chinese characters and kanji (Chinese characters used in modern Japanese). That’s right; apparently, that red stuff on the cover is just a bunch of nonsense squiggles.
  • The book “orientalizes” threats to integrity of character starting with the creepy cover image and then embracing other caricatures.
  • Its marketing videos and images are offensive and stereotypical.
  • It confuses and conflates the distinct cultures of Japan and China.
  • The two white dudes don’t have anything to do with Japan or China.

I should add that some people think this is OK.

Filed under: critical thinking, life , , , , , , , , ,

Rescued from Buddhism: A brief history of the Christian adoption movement

Adoption-Celebration-and-Benefit-AuctionA few years ago when the 2008 US presidential election campaign was getting underway I became interested in the left wing of the evangelical movement. Remember the book God’s Politics: Why the Right Gets It Wrong and the Left Doesn’t Get It? That book, written by Jim Wallis, examined how the Religious Right had “hijacked” religion, making it synonomous with Republican Party principles and reducing it to a few hot-button issues like abortion and gay marriage.

Wallis, himself a noted evangelical, charged that the Christian Right’s narrow focus on these two issues was often mean-spirited (read: intolerant and homophobic) and ignored the social gospel entirely. Where was the concern over “issues such as poverty and pandemic diseases, environmental care and climate change, trafficking and human rights, genocide, war and peace”? Recall that in 2005, the year of the book’s publication, objections to the Bush admin and America’s presence in Iraq were peaking and leftie evangelicals were a big part of that movement. Read the rest of this entry »

Filed under: adoption, critical thinking, fatherlessness, kids, life, solo life , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Single moms need reform school?

At NewMajority, where they have boldly dedicated themselves “to the modernization and renewal of the Republican party and the conservative movement,” the following photo was selected for a story about kids of single moms doing badly at school. (“No School Reform Until Single Moms Reform“)

single moms picture

Isn’t that ripe?

How sweet and innocent the child. How awful that mother, bold as brass in her bikini . . . dragging on her cancer stick and throwing her son a baleful look. Why not just stick a thought bubble on top of her head that reads, “Look kid—you’re interrupting my tanning time and I gotta hot date tonight. Now beat it.”

No wonder all our kids are doing badly, right?

Filed under: Single parents have stupid kids, critical thinking, fatherlessness, kids, life, solo life , , , , ,

Adoption gave her cachet

Biting satire alert.

You know those people who return from their international adoption trek feeling so . . . international?

Someone has captured that here.

Filed under: adoption, critical thinking , , ,

Inappropriate adoption stuff that’s true whether we like it or not

This post is a continuation of the previous post so if you hated that one, you won’t like this one and it might be best to quit reading now. On the other hand, I’d prefer if you’d stay and comment.

A friend contacted me about Monday’s post, saying, “Questions that bug us like that usually have some truth to them.”

Uh-huh.

That’s why we have Miss Manners to tell us that probing questions are rude and “It’s personal.” This, btw, is Miss Manners’ exclusive come-back to any adoption question: “It’s personal.” That got me thinking about how far one would take that and if hearing these words every single time someone raised adoption in front of my kid would actually benefit her. I think some of this is style—our personality style, our ability to be put on the spot with strangers, our instinct to defend, deflect, or educate. I don’t think there’s one right or wrong way.

When we adopt, we should expect questions. We can spend a lot of time dreaming up snappy comebacks to them (been there, done that) or we can think about what the person is really asking, which is something I’ve only recently begun to do. Below, my top-10 list of rude-or-are-they?-comments*, along with some thoughts. I welcome yours.

*Note that each of these comments has been described as “rude” in various forums, which is why I chose them. Note as well that most of them deal with IA.

No. 10

Are they brothers?

A question I might even ask myself, especially if I knew the children came from the same orphanage or were adopted at the same time. When people ask this question, they are specifically asking if there is a biological sibling relationship. That does not invalidate the brotherhood or sisterhood kids can share beyond DNA. But people aren’t asking about that–they’re asking about former family ties. “Yes, they are certainly brothers but not by birth” is one response that occurred to me.

No. 9

At least they have each other.

Adoption comments that evoke pity or anxiety in your child are a no-no, so this remarks sucks on that basis. Having said that, if you were adopted, would it not mean something to be able to remain with your biological sibling and keep that connection to your past? This is basically what the questioner is trying to say. Along with the fact that losing your family is not exactly fun. “I am so glad they are growing up together” could put Miss Opinionated in her place while respecting the truth of the sentiment.

No. 8

Is her father Chinese? (Korean, Thai, Ethiopian)

Duh, YE-AH. And her mother too! Single a-mom Anne Brittle has pegged this as a “difficult question” in her article about uncomfortable questions for Families With Children from China. But it need not be . . . if answered directly.

No. 7

Do you know anything about her real parents?

My own story with this question here.

No. 6

Has it been hard for him to learn English?

Honestly, how is this rude? Any child adopted at one year or older has already passed several language milestones in his mother tongue. What if one of your born kids were suddenly adopted at 18 months? Would you be thinking that “English doesn’t count”? Do we really think our kids are a blank slate and that English is their first language? Check out the following article on IA children and language delays and difficulties. This is a vastly misunderstood area.

No. 5

What country will you be buying your child from?

Oh, just get over it.

On some level, this is a transaction. We hand over the cash and someone hands us a child. In some instances, the cash will go to pay for something good, like rebuilding the social welfare program in China. In other cases, it’s probably just going to line someone’s pockets. Whatever the case—your adoption, my adoption—is an economy, a system of production, distribution, and consumption. The more we understand that, the better we can come to grips with the totality of our kids’ stories.

Maybe this flashback will put it in perspective. Me, 11 years ago . . . fresh from the bank and keenly aware that the $3000US China orphanage donation is costing me $4000Cdn. Have also made several unsuccessful trips to the diaper aisle and the bottles-and-liners thing has me spooked beyond belief, so I pick up the phone to call my sister in Illinois to tell her what a *wreck* I am.

“BUT–” I point out brightly, “I have the uh . . . the pouch and . . . you know, the US bills I need to uh . . .”

“Buy the baby?”

YUP! My sister said that. She just blurted it out. She even laughed.

No fool she.

No. 4

Is she really yours?

On one level, she isn’t. He isn’t. They aren’t. Those are somebody else’s kids we get to raise. Let me be clear: I know this isn’t our intent—to run out and raise another family’s child. Our intent is to raise a child who can’t be parented, but let’s face facts here. (Breathe: Yes, we’re all real parents and we can answer this question in that spirit.)

No. 3

Does she know she’s adopted?

Hardly a question to shy away from because there’s only one answer: “Of course.” When your child is old enough, you can pass the ball to her with the look that says, “Nitwit here thinks you don’t know you’re adopted” (hard to hide in our family) and let her take over. This is great practice for kids who must often field difficult questions on the playground.

No. 2

What will you tell her about her birthparents?

As much as you know. Again, not a question I’d start shielding my child from, although I’ve definitely been educated about some harrowing stories of hardship from Eastern Europe on the Yahoo search group. So maybe the best way to answer this question is to say, “Whatever information there is, it will be hers.” But better to be asked a few times and for your child to see you dealing with this question than to be repeating over and over, “That’s personal.”

No. 1

Couldn’t you have one of your own?

The granddaddy of them all. People hate it. It’s rude; it seems to say that adopted kids are second-best. But I’d like you to look at the way this subject was handled on Rainbow Kids when it came up:

There are times when we may need to let a particular comment pass and help our child to understand it later. Recently my husband and I were entertaining one of his important clients, and our Colombian-born son was present. The client remarked that she had friends who had adopted two Korean children and later had had two children “of their own.” It seemed best not to risk offending the woman by correcting her choice of words.. The next day I asked our son it he had been bothered by the remark, explaining it as a problem in our language. He replied that he hadn’t minded it at all. I felt reassured that whatever damage might be done by others is within my power to assess, and to repair if necessary.

Don’t get me wrong. I am not saying that these questions are automatically appropriate or that we must answer them in detail or answer them at all. I’m just sayin’ that behind these question are some realities that we have conveniently forgotten in the rush to make families by adoption the new normal. And I think those realities are worth thinking about.

Filed under: adoption, critical thinking, kids, life, solo life , , , , , , , , ,

Adoption: On the real parents

There isn’t another question out there guaranteed to light the adoption stink bomb like “real parents”. As in, are you her real parents?

The Brotherhood of Joseph, an adoption memoir by Brooks Hansen, includes an episode in which Hansen overhears a teenager saying to another (upon hearing she was adopted): “Oh yeah, so have you tried to contact your real parents?” Hansen then writes:

I damn near took him out at his knees . . .

[T]hat was a first for me, feeling the sting of mere words, but there’s no denying: Depending upon the ears that heart it, that phrase “real parents” is right up there with “nigger” and “cunt.” Except that no one out there appears to be remotely aware.

Overreaction much? What is it about this question that makes people insane?

Adoptive parents want to be recognized as real parents but they suspect they might not be.

That is the crux of it. No one gets that crazy when they’re 100% sure of something. Assuredness is a soft blanket; doubt is a bed of nails.

All a-parents have worked through this question in degrees. But if it still makes you insane, it’s probably something you need to explore further. It took me some time.

In the beginning I was armour-plated. I answered Are you her real mother? only one way: No, I’m a hologram; the real one’s napping. Smart alecky isn’t deep but it has a way of moving the conversation along or stopping it altogether so one of us can leave. Fact is, I had no interest in answering that question because I wasn’t sure.

The switch began to flip when we started going more places together. Since we didn’t own a car, cab was our transport of choice if going any distance. Now, the Toronto cab driver population is one of the most educated in the world—guys from Europe, Africa, and Asia with engineering, law, medical, and architecture degrees, many of them waiting for certification in Canada while driving or working in other areas for which they are overqualified.

Often a driver would check us out in the mirror ask if my husband were Chinese. “No,” I’d explain. “I don’t have a husband. My daughter’s adopted.”

“Ah—adopted.”

Pause, with head-nodding. “Do you know anything about her real parents?”

Yup, this was where I finally lost my Are you her real parents? virginity. In the back seat of a cab. With the driver peering politely at me through the rear-view mirror asking a legitimate question. Initially my response was, “Do you mean her biological parents?” Let it be noted that not one of these guys ever said, “Oh, sorry nice-adoptive-parent-lady, of course, that’s what I meant to say and so sorry to have said something THAT stupid and crass.” Nope. Nobody was buyin’ that one.

Truth be told, I didn’t know anything about my daughter’s parents. (Mercifully, she was asleep when most of these conversations took place.) So I’d pay the fare and that would be that. But something stuck with me because after the question had been asked so many times, it didn’t bother me as much and I decided to drop my pretentious “Let me educate you about the bio-parents” thing and just say no.

No, we don’t know anything about them.

No, it would be hard to find them.

No, but one day she might look for them.

The difference between using “positive adoption language” and talking about real people and real situations started to rub off. The stupid and the smart-alecky made fewer appearances.

Fast forward a couple of years when my daughter got to public school. At least a few times I fielded the Where are her real parents? question from kids. By then my response had become, “Do you mean her parents in China?” The child would often nod enthusiastically because kids like it when you get what they’re saying. And that was exactly what they were asking. Where are the other people–her other family? They were not suggesting that our relationship was imaginary or that I was unreal. They just knew they weren’t seeing the whole picture. (BTW, this remains my response if I am ever asked this question today. I make it a point of assuming the questioner is not hostile even if he or she is. It usually works.)

It’s a shame the way real has been hijacked by both pro- and anti-adoption camps with an axe to grind. The word has no meaning when used in a contest of parenthood. Both of sets of parents are real; neither set is imaginary. Of course, amended birth certificates do not mirror that truth in any authentic way. They actually say that what is not real is, and that not defensible.

Neither is it defensible for someone to claim that I cannot love my child or have the same connection to her as I would to a natural child. That she has only one real mother. Not only is that untrue, but it denies my daughter the chance to have a family–a substitute family, if you will–but a family nonetheless. I am not, and never have been, in the business of chaperoning.

Bottom line: real is a charged word. But the closer we draw to our kids, the more we get to see more kinds of real. If this question still makes you insane, don’t let it anymore.

Filed under: adoption, critical thinking, kids, solo life , , , , , , , , ,

Adoption: No words for this one

I saw this picture of an “ultrasound” on an adopt-from China blog recently. Words fail me. However, I have a feeling this thing is making the rounds under the postive-thinking category. If everyone’s seen it before . . . well, it just goes to show how much I miss in a day.

ChinaUltrasound1

Filed under: adoption, critical thinking, kids, life , , ,

Adoption principles drawn from the Anita Tedaldi case

I mentioned in a previous post that I didn’t think Motherlode editor Lisa Belkin’s statement about Anita Tedaldi’s column—

The point was not to say, ‘Look, this happens all the time,’ and to frighten people away. The point was to say, ‘This happens sometimes and knowing about that going in — more information — is better.’

—was especially on-target. That’s because the public confessional moment of Tedaldi’s adoption disruption has overshadowed the information part. I honestly think a lot of people are OK with what Tedaldi did because she tried. Do they really care what the implications are for adoption practice?

Here are some principles I’ve been mulling over:

1. It’s not OK simply to try. Adoption is not a try-on. It’s not OK to go into it with good intentions but thinking that if the “match” doesn’t work, we can jettison a child like bad spouse or crappy girlfriend and that the implications of so doing are exactly the same. They aren’t.

2. Just because we passed the homestudy is not necessarily an indication of our true readiness. Has the social worker painted the worst-case scenario with a special-needs child—having the child push us away for months and possibly years? Acting out behaviour including violence towards us or our other kids? Self-destructive behaviour that may be agonizing to watch? It may be important to consider those things but also our own reactions to them. What would we do? How would we feel? Can we do it? Have we played those scenes back while we watch ourselves cope?

3. It’s OK to say we are not up to something.

Before we adopt.

I know some people feel that infant adoption should never occur and that all PAPS should just pony up to the local Children’s Aid Society and take the children that are offered to them. After all, those are the kids in need. And if we were really unselfish (it is implied), that’s what we’d do.

In an ideal world, it would be wonderful if more PAPS were ready for that journey. But what’s the point of fobbing kids off on parents who can’t meet their needs? Better for the system to gently waft people toward fostering and foster-to-adopt (because that is where the need is) while investing a lot more time in education and support. Eventually, there may be a turning away from private infant and international adoption but it won’t be an overnight thing.

4. Public confessions don’t necessarily educate. They garner sympathy for the confessor, unless she is truly delusional and weird like Octomom. Beware of any useful information actually coming from a public confession.

5. Adoption disruption should not be normalized; it should be prevented as much as possible through more thorough screening and education and the understanding that there is no parachute. That should be mandatory social worker talk, the first thing of their mouth when they meet the PAPS, not “Hi Mr. And Mrs. Smith, we’re here to get you a baby.” That won’t prevent 100% of disruptions but it will kill the tone of today’s “I disrupted” conversation, which is entirely too sappy and self-congratulatory.

6. There is a difference between placing a child in an residential setting for a period of time and abandoning a child. (This has been pointed out already by another blogger and it’s an excellent point.) As the sister of someone with autism, I follow several autism blogs and get that children with serious issues can overwhelm parents’ capabilities. Parents deserve help. But it’s all about the kind of society we want. (Universal health care, anyone?)

My principles are obviously stated from the viewpoint of the a-parent. I wonder what others think?

Filed under: adoption, autism, critical thinking, kids, life , , , , , , , , , , ,

Hampton University plugs marriage to students: Single parents chopped liver

Boo.  Hiss.  Strange that an institution claiming to promote “strong critical, analytical, and communication skills” would hop on the marriage bandwagon.

You know, it wasn’t long ago that if you were a woman, going to college to get your “Mrs” was considered something to poke fun at, not exalt. Read the rest of this entry »

Filed under: critical thinking, fatherlessness, kids, life, solo life , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Ms Single Mama

Single Parent Blogs Kick Butt


O Solo Mama - Blogged

Progressive Bloggers

Twitter Moms: The Influential Moms Network

COPYRIGHT NOTICE

No part of this website may be reproduced for articles in print media without permission of the author. Material on this website may be quoted freely in other blogs as long as it is credited. Please contact Jessica Pegis at jessica.pegis@rogers.com

 

November 2009
M T W T F S S
« Oct    
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
30  

Follow my Tweets!