Harvard professor Randall Kennedy, author of Interracial Intimacies: Sex, Marriage, Identity, and Adoption, declared that trying to pair children with adoptive parents of the same race “buttresses the notion that people of different racial backgrounds really are different in some moral, unbridgeable, permanent sense. It affirms the notion that race should be a cage to which people are assigned at birth…. [It] instructs us that our affections are and should be bounded by the color line regardless of our efforts.”
May 5, 2018
"While the white-savior complex and, yes, orientalism of some adoptive parents can be disturbing..."
The Nation's advice columnist concedes, but presents this as the better view:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
59 comments:
I was raised a poor black child.
It acknowledges an internal bias, that may or may not rise to the level of [color] diversity or judgment.
Interracial adoption is dangerous, Just ask those black kids driven off a cliff by their lesbian 'parents' after being chased out of Minnesota by the KKK.
Derb reports on Charles Murray's comment an Atlantic article "The University of California Stands Out Among Top Schools When It Comes to Serving Poor Students".
Murray asks why the researcher didn't report whether California has disproportionally more East and South Asian poor people.
Probably didn't think of it. All poor people are alike is their assumption.
buttresses the notion that people of different racial backgrounds really are different in some moral, unbridgeable, permanent sense. It affirms the notion that race should be a cage to which people are assigned at birth…. [It] instructs us that our affections are and should be bounded by the color line regardless of our efforts.”
Isn't this an exact definition of the Left's identity politics?
This writer just let the secret out. Most Americans are a mixed race. And nobody cares. Just be a Patriot and learn English.
A lot of secrets are suddenly coming out. The Federal Judge in Virginia just us that told Mueller's team is practicing threats of criminal prosecution to get perjury he can use against The President. And CNN acted like that was a way out impossible thing to think, showing the Judge was a partisan.
The rest of the secrets are coming out soon. CNN to be the most surprized.
"In any adoptive placement of an Indian child under State law, a preference shall be given, in the absence of good cause to the contrary, to a placement with (1) a member of the child's extended family; (2) other members of the Indian child's tribe; or (3) other Indian families." ~ 25 U.S. Code § 1915
"It is important that non-native foster and adoptive parents of Native American [sic] children encourage their children to maintain connections to their tribe and be involved in their tribe’s cultural heritage."
You mean I am always going to be this color?
There are primitive survival responses in infants, (going back to our shared ancestry with chimpanzees) that perceive threat in being amongst an unrelated group-- racial groups are probably at the extreme end of triggering such responses. Blank slate leftists deny the reality of such traits. But I suspect the difficulties of such an upbringing are considerable and endure well into adulthood.
If the Left were obsessed with capitalism, as much as they are obsessed with race, they'd have a few more shekels in their collective pockets, and would have less time to irritate and annoy us.
Capitalism leads to a meritocracy based on individuals...Marxism leads to identity politics.
My son is adopted and is of mixed race (Pacific Islander and white) while we're plain old white. The topic of his skin color and culture is no biggie around here and we talk about it openly and casually. He is intrigued by it and refers to himself as 'rare.' I hope we're doing it the right way and not screwing him up in some way that a woke therapist in the future will have to untangle, but only time will tell.
In other family news, long after he was adopted I was told that I was the product of sperm donation, which turned my sense of identity upside down. It is a shock, and a terrible one, to learn that while your "social" parents love you blah blah (and I'm not even sure about that; conceiving a child via gamete donation is wildly narcissistic when you really consider it) you do not share your father's background and heritage. His people are not your people. At the same time, you are not permitted to claim your actual father's people as your own, because he was promised anonymity upon the sale of his sperm and he and his family are extremely defensive and protective of their status as his actual family. I know who my donor was (thanks DNA!) and I know who his parents were and their lineages, but I am not allowed to claim them and I feel like an interloper even saying simple things such as 'my grandmother was 100% Czech.' Well, she was, but she wasn't 'my' grandmother. I never met her and my half-siblings, who were raised by the donor, take strong exception to the donor offspring referring to her as such. You get me? So you are in this weird, weird limbo where you feel like you don't have a father in the sense of having 'people.' And if you struggle with these feelings or this situation at all, you are told that you should just be happy to be alive, what are you griping about?!
Weird stuff, and you guys are going to be hearing much more about it in the future, as no donor will be able to remain anonymous for long. Intrepid researchers can identify them with distant cousin DNA matches and readily available public records.
Back to my son: I try to apply what I'm learning through my donor-conceived journey to him and to continue to validate his desire to know his people and where he comes from. I didn't realize quite how deep that need is in us humans until I felt it myself.
With American indigenous peoples, it is not a question of race and assimilation/separation, but a matter of nationhood and sovereignty. Adopting out a member of one of these groups means the continuing destruction of that group as a people/nation. Moreover, since they have their own unique sovereign status, it is none of our business as a bunch of people from the U.S. nation.
That "white-savior" nonsense comes from a textbook, and not any personal knowledge of the adoption community.
Althouse is reading way too many Nation articles. That's not healthy. Were I Meade I would sleep with one eye open until she gets past this stage.
“Concedes”. A Nation writer concedes other people aren’t up to his standards, and fit his prejudices.
Everybody is "of mixed race" with the possible exception of previously "un-visited" Indian tribes in the upper Amazon basin, but even those have probably been "visited" by nearby tribes who in turn have been "visited," and so on.
"buttresses the notion that people of different racial backgrounds really are different in some moral, unbridgeable, permanent sense. It affirms the notion that race should be a cage to which people are assigned at birth"
What Gahrie said.
Without that notion the prog pursuit of "diversity" makes little sense.
Blacks who want to leave the cage behind get the Maxine treatment.
Of course, for progs the meaning of race, like anything else, is strictly instrumental: if essentialism serves their momentary purpose, they will use that, if not, they become strict social constructionists.
Why does Michael Jackson get a pass?
He adopted white children.
Hagar said...
"Everybody is "of mixed race" with the possible exception of previously "un-visited" Indian tribes in the upper Amazon basin ..."
Oh, bilge. If you need to demonstrate that you are an ignoramus, just write "There is no such thing as race". Much simpler than nattering on about the Amazon basin.
Hagar: Everybody is "of mixed race"...
Yes, we are, somewhere along the line, but that's not really the point, is it? As Pant's @9:15 post so movingly points out, human beings care deeply about their roots - in Pant's words re her son, the "desire to know his people and where he comes from".
There's something so inhuman in dismissing all this with glib "oh, we're all mixed, we're all just human", and something downright vicious in trying to frame any manifestation of this deep human need as "racist". Or as the Harvard professors says, a "cage", a "color line" - as if the real feelings of many adoptees, chldren of sperm donors, etc. were just so much fluff that requires ideological correction. Dear God, seriously, what is wrong with these people?
I don't mean to jump all over you, Hagar, or read more than you meant into your comment. It's just that the truism that "we're all mixed and have been mixing since forever" is being misused for very ugly and inhuman ideological and political purposes these days. If we're all mixed and have been mixing since forever, we're very well aware of the problems this sometimes entails for individuals, well aware that those problems arise mostly because of human nature, not because of corrigible "racism". And we sure as hell don't need social engineers to instruct us on how to go about doing what we've been doing forever, and the "correct way" to feel about it all.
White savior complex - he's got that right.
There's something mentally wrong with a LOT Of white people.
I’ve been watching the fascinating Rachel Dolezal documentary on Netflix, and transracial adoption is at the center of the story. The whole thing is far more nuanced than you would imagine from media reports, though I suppose it’s dumb to make it seem as though that comes as a surprise.
A lot of secrets are suddenly coming out. The Federal Judge in Virginia just us that told Mueller's team is practicing threats of criminal prosecution to get perjury he can use against The President. And CNN acted like that was a way out impossible thing to think, showing the Judge was a partisan.
Traditionalguy, my concern is that Mueller would say, "Yeah, ain't it cool?" ISTM most law enforcement works that way.
Cucks gotta cuck.
My wife and I are white foster parents currently raising three older (9,11,13) black siblings that need a permanent home. Nobody cares about the color or sexual orientation of potential parents. Great kids, please contact me. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vexKWF7HxUA
Tank is working on his tan. It's a slog when you start out as almost albino, but then, you don't want to blind the kiddies at the beach when you take your shirt off.
I wonder if we conflate the desire for a heritage with belonging to a "race". Is our desire to know about our grand-grand parents and all the past generations because we want to bask in our particular "colorness", or are we trying to connect ourselves to a grander thread, to know what cultures and peoples we can trace ourselves back to? I have 6 adopted children in my house and I carry the last name of a man who did not contribute his genetic material to me, and I have no knowledge of who my mother's father is. I do wonder at times about the story of my father and grand-father and I take some personal pride in knowing the story of the maternal line of my heritage. So maybe knowing some heritage gives me sufficient anchor in the world.
My children, on the other hand, have no knowledge of their families at all other than knowing quite clearly what heritage they had and thus some idea of potential sub-heritages based on what region they were born in. Of my 4 teems, three are content and happy about their life and past, the 4th is mad at the parents that are no longer there.
In my experience, who we are raised by covers a different need than where our past progenitors came from. The first gives us love and security, the other gives us pride and history. My philosophy with my 6 children is to always be upfront and honest about their past so they don't feel betrayed in their future when what they knew about themselves turns out to be false. Lying to your children about who they are is a pretty good way of getting them to doubt other things you have told them including "I love and will always love you."
Can anyone explain the use of "orientalism" and why it is concerning?
My grandfather used race, people, and nation interchangeably in his writing.
The first time I saw a Black person was in Oslo in 1952, and I turned around and followed him for a block on the opposite sidewalk, sneaking a peek now and then.
Here in America there is rather a lot of Black people, so I soon got used to it, and I found it was no problem for me to get along unless the other person had a problem with being Black.
And once more we jump from speaking of races in general to White vs. Black.
So what is underlying this? Is the need for white people to raise BOCs (babies of color) driven by the need for white people to feel good about themselves, the failure of other races to get their shit together, or the difficulty of adopting here in the USA? We know why so many white Americans adopt Chinese girls and it is an ugly story.
I always thought that mixed race adoptions were more based on supply and demand rather than a white savior complex. There were just more Asian and black kids available for adoption.......I'd rather be adopted by Madonna than grow up as an orphan in a Sudanese refufgee camp. It's a pretty low bar to achieve savior status.......I clicked on the link supplied by Sal at 8:46 about the lesbian couple being chased out of Minnesota by the KKK. I would bet that the more likely scenario is that the couple manufactured incidents of racial bias to highlight their exceptional nobility. People who murder children are often erratic in other aspects of their behavior.
It really makes me angry when people like those speaking here about what race "should" be are so enthralled with their own project - that of freeing their own identity from constraints ("I can be whatever I want; we should all have the power to simply choose reality; none of us should be constrained by external reality") - that they are simply indifferent to the pain they inflict upon the children they use.
As a kid, I had close friends who were mixed-race adoption. As a parent, my kids befriended and dated mixed-race-adopted kids. (This is no doubt because people seek out others with their own issues & my family has adoption issues.) I have never met a kid adopted by parents of a different race who did NOT have issues, pain, identity problems. Not once. The stories are horror.
The problem isn't the "white savior complex" parents. The problem is that when mixed-race adoption is necessary (if it weren't necessary, it should never be chosen, but as William says "supply and demand"), the so-called "experts" are not recognizing and helping with the problems involved. Mixed-race adoption is a special needs case. The family needs extra support. The parents really love the kids and the kids really love the parents but identity is something different from love, and mixed-race adoption interferes with how kids form their identity, because they can't just take identity from their parents in the same way as biological kids can, just like a girl being raised by two men or a boy being raised by two women can't - because we are so preoccupied with the wishes and fantasies of the adults that we're simply not paying attention to how the kids feel, and so we aren't recognizing that loving the parents isn't the same thing as being able to use that parent as a role model or a basis for identity.
Ultimately, it's because of narcissism. We still view children as things to possess, as something one has a "right" to - and, increasingly, as something identity groups have a "right" to.
"You mean I am always going to be this color?"
No. It's only a matter of time until adoptive parents have the technology and thus the "right" to dye their new baby's eyes, skin, and hair to whatever hue they prefer.
The trouble with adopting a Chinese infant is having to learn Chinese so as to understand her when she starts talking.
We know why so many white Americans adopt Chinese girls and it is an ugly story.
5/5/18, 12:27 PM
? family friends adopted a Chinese girl. what are you getting at? I quite doubt they got CJ in order to abuse her or whore her out or whatever.
Or do you mean it's because Chinese baby girls are a drug on the market because of one-child and the Chinese preference for boys?
What a terrible form of retaliation for the Magnitsky Act, that Russia blocked foreign (or American) adoptions.
Rabel asks: can anyone explain the use of the term "orientalism"? I found the terminology confusing as well. I think the term is used to mean "the practice of white people who adopt the traditional clothing or style of an Asian culture" -- I guess because they think it makes them look exotic, or otherwise cool. Here's a blogpost that uses the term in that way: http://reappropriate.co/2014/04/hey-air-france-your-orientalism-is-in-the-air/
So (now I'm not so sure about what I'm saying) a white couple that adopts a Chinese child is "orientalizing" in the sense that child is a being used as a stylish accoutrement for the adopting couple, encouraging others to see the couple as exotic or cool or "multicultural" or generally more interesting.
Didn't Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie adopt a number of kids from third world countries? And is it a stretch to see those adoptions as part of a publicity campaign?
A baby like that who'd kill his brother,
Forget that baby and find another,
One of your own kind,
Stick to your own kind!
A baby like that will give you sorrow,
You'll meet another baby tomorrow,
One of your own kind,
Stick to your own kind!
buttresses the notion that people of different racial backgrounds really are different in some moral, unbridgeable, permanent sense.
Why is the word "moral" in there? Ubridgeable and permanent? Perhaps. But even if the latter two were 100% known to be true, what difference does it make? The fact that the races differ in biological ways is no reason to consider anyone of any particular race less human or deserving of human dignity.
before being able to adopt our daughter from India, we had to get the “approval” process done here. Other than the usual triplicate signatures upon triplicate signatures, we had to go through education from Pearl S. Buck adoption agency. In a day long course we were repeatedly told how matching race was important. Finding that odd, I mildly challenged the instructor. That did not go over well, especially with my wife. Not being exactly dumb, I shut up.
Orientalism means a lot of things, or is used to imply a lot of things.
Basically in modern intellectual circles it means western prejudice against third-world cultures combined with a tendency to go into a "gorillas in the mist" sort of minimizing romanticism.
Alternately one can also call it an epithet used by third-worldists out of envy and resentment of the ex-colonizers.
Edward Said, writer of "Orientalism", can be considered alternately the exponent or the initial case of one or the other.
In art it was a 19th century genre of pictures of exotic foreign places and peoples, sometimes with a prurient edge, all those slave-girls and harems. There was and is still a fad for exotic tchochkes. I guess this is a point about trans-racial adoption, that its just the acquisition of exotic tchotchkes.
And the complaint about the aesthetic-tchotchke fashion is based on Edward Said's analysis, or his hurt feelings, as above.
Oso Negro,
I would like to see your sources for the ugly side of Chinese girl infant adoptions.
I have adopted 6 times, as I mention above,and I am relatively familiar with numerous families who have adopted and their reasons. I can say from my own experiences, that international adoption is quite a daunting task, and the Chinese government itself is rather picky about who they would allow adopt. While I have seen adoptions go through that I question the due diligence of the agencies involved, the vast majority of adoptions are well vetted affairs. Chinese female infants were highly sought after by some people who were looking for the closest thing to replace their own desire to have a bio infant of their own. But that is not all the cases, Many adoptive couples adopted from a heart of love and compassion for children who needed homes. Currently almost all adoptions from China are children with special needs, sometimes significant ones. The number of boys available for adoption is about 3 times that of girls from China. Currently, though I don't have handy statistics on the actual adoption rates by sex.
Again, I know many families that have adopted numerous children, often most with special needs, which is our case. All of our children are special needs, 3 boys and 3 girls ranging in ages from 16 months to 8 years old at the time of placement. We chose to adopt internationally due to the legal climate in the US. We considered the risk of legal family repatriation too high and did not want to have to deal with custody battles with parents who change their mind.
There are about 60,000 adoptions in the us that are called stranger adoptions (child not related to the family in any way include as step child), with about 20,000 of those coming internationally. About 250,000 children from other countries have been adopted by Americans over the last 30 years, and as far as I know, very few children have suffered as a result. I know for sure that if China had any hint that the children they adopted out to US families were in any way at risk, they would have pulled the plug immediately. They have a long history of restricting adoptions on the slightest news of a problem. Even now, adoptions are about 1/3 the rate they were 10 years ago due to increased requirements from the Chinese government.
Wa St Blogger said...
Oso Negro,
I would like to see your sources for the ugly side of Chinese girl infant adoptions.
I'd be happy just to know what the hell he is getting at!
"You mean I am always going to be this color?"
No. It's only a matter of time until adoptive parents have the technology and thus the "right" to dye their new baby's eyes, skin, and hair to whatever hue they prefer.
You really hate those cans of oil, don't you?
With American indigenous peoples, it is not a question of race and assimilation/separation, but a matter of nationhood and sovereignty. Adopting out a member of one of these groups means the continuing destruction of that group as a people/nation. Moreover, since they have their own unique sovereign status, it is none of our business as a bunch of people from the U.S. nation.
And how to divvy up the casino profits.
I’m very cynical.
One should remember that not long ago, a Brit marrying a German was an "interracial" marriage, and a brit marrying someone slavic was unthinkable.
Unknown: One should remember that not long ago, a Brit marrying a German was an "interracial" marriage, and a brit marrying someone slavic was unthinkable.
Not really.
One should remember that not long ago, people used the word "race" differently than it's used today. And no, your average Brit back then didn't think that his daughter marrying an African or a Chinese was the same sort of thing as his daughter marrying a German. Or even a Pole. "Not long ago" people categorized humans pretty much the same way we do today - in a pattern congruent with what modern genetics says about human genetic clustering.
The idea that people "socially constructed" human groups in markedly different, arbitrary ways then and now, or thought that Brit:German::Brit:Dahomean, is an academic "urban legend". Then and now people thought in terms of smaller and larger concentric circles indicating closer and more distant affiliation.
Going Oriental was also a term used about Marines that served long stations in China and the Phillipines leading up to WWII, and thought a little differently. But they fought as well or better. Wonder if Buwaya has ever heard about Manilla John Basilone.
File "white savior" bit under No good deed goes unpunished.
But if that author continues along the lines of the following thoughts, might collide with the notion that school staff and other mentor/authority figures need to be of same race as a kid to make an effective impression.
Or maybe it's just not fair to subject the poor kids to the "Are those really your parents" questions throughout their childhood and adolescence?
"I would like to see your sources for the ugly side of Chinese girl infant adoptions.
I'd be happy just to know what the hell he is getting at! "
Probably a reference to a scandal I remember reading about awhile back where Chinese people were stealing Chinese infants for the purpose of selling them to outfits that dealt with adoptions to Western families. ( https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/adoption-stories/200909/la-times-chinese-babies-stolen-foreign-adoption note the title at the original LA times story was changed http://articles.latimes.com/2009/sep/20/world/fg-china-adopt20 ) Doubt this is specific to China, though. As long as babies remain highly profitable items, there will be stolen babies.
As adoption scandals go, THIS one www.reuters.com/investigates/adoption/#article/part1 seems far scarier to me.
As it turns out, broken adoptions are far more common than one might imagine. According to statistics from the federal Children’s Bureau, as many as 10 percent of adoptions are “dissolved,” meaning the parent-child relationship is severed after the adoption is finalized. As countries such as Guatemala and China close their international adoption programs or implement strict new rules, the pool of adoptable babies has shrunk dramatically in recent years, leading to a rise in more challenging types of adoption of older or disabled children that are more likely to end in dissolution.
http://ideas.time.com/2013/09/20/broken-adoptions-when-parents-re-home-adopted-children/
Indiana118,
China takes a very harsh view of baby trafficking. If I recall correctly a number of Chinese officials faced the death penalty for baby trafficking, so while it is likely to happen due to the fact that there is money involved, it is a crime committed by individuals and not a systemic problem.
I remember reading about the re-homing issue you also brought up. I do know that re-homing exists, and I am on the list at my agency to be a placement home should another family need to disrupt their adoption. This is nothing like what that article describes, and it is clear that some of these original placements should never have happened, but even if everything is done by the book, there are still great unknowns about any institutionalized child.
Adoption is definitely a caveat emptor undertaking. In my book if you are going to invest tens of thousands of dollars in the process and then accept a person into our home that will require large portions of your life energy and future earnings, you should take care to insure that it will be successful. Unfortunately I think some people lose sight of the risks and get lost in the overwhelming desire for a child or let their compassion for need cash checks their bodies can't cover and get in way over their heads.
I am very thankful that I learned about the risks of Russian and eastern European children before I ended up adopting from there. Their track record is not good. The systems that these orphans are living in can be horrible and many of the children are emotionally, physically and mentally scarred. It takes a very special family to be able to cope with that.
So, with that in mind Mrs. blogger and I took great care in selecting our agencies (a clear track-record of placing the the welfare of the child above the desires of the adopting families.) We then had each of our children's dossier evaluated by a special adoption pediatrician. In our case this Dr. had adopted herself and had a practice that included many children who were foreign adoptees. She and her partner had a keen eye for spotting the risks that come from the various symptoms and development milestones and can give you an good idea of what the range of possibilities are. We passed on adopting one child due to the potential risk being beyond our ability to handle which would be unfair to the child and to the rest of our children had we gotten in over our heads. Still, it is not perfect. One child we adopted needed much greater care than we anticipated, including brain surgery, but even knowing that, we would have adopted that child. Note, that children born to couples also have risks.
With the newer Hague requirements it is much less risky. Countries that are signatories to that are required to be upfront and open about the child's condition, and the agencies in America have to meet exacting standards regarding vetting potential adoptive parents.
indiana118
I have never met a kid adopted by parents of a different race who did NOT have issues, pain, identity problems. Not once. The stories are horror.
I personally knew of only one, which ended in suicide by carbon monoxide, which also killed the elderly father. A childhood friend told me of another example, of a black kid adopted by white professionals, who ended up in prison. She and her sister, being of the Afro-American persuasion, were used by the adopting family to give their black adopted kid some exposure to blacks. This was a lily-white area. She told me that the adopted black boy was very uncomfortable with seeing her and her sister.
There is a further problem with adoptions which has nothing to do with race. I refer to professionals who adopt children who most likely will be closer to average intelligence and not at the intelligence level of their adopting professional parents. I suspect that creates problems, and that it did for the above two cases.
My father's STEM Ph.D cousin and his M.D. wife adopted a white girl because their son said he wanted a sibling. The intelligence gap between the adopted child- who did get a bachelor's degree- and her very bright, driven parents, created problems.
Sal:
Interracial adoption is dangerous, Just ask those black kids driven off a cliff by their lesbian 'parents' after being chased out of Minnesota by the KKK.
Given the behavior of the lesbian parents- driving them and their kids off a cliff- I would be skeptical of their reporting that the KKK chased them out of Minnesota. In addition, not many would view Minnesota as a KKK stronghold.
Re Basilone - no not really; he was boxing in the Army during his prewar stint in the Philippines, but I don't think he ever fought the only boxer we knew, of the period - Look up Luis Logan (Pellicer), a remarkable fellow - probably because they were of different weight class and because being in the Army Basilone couldn't be a pro.
Indiana118
I have never met a kid adopted by parents of a different race who did NOT have issues, pain, identity problems. Not once. The stories are horror.
Wow.
Not sure how I missed this comment the first time.
I have known scores of children adopted in through mixed race and cursory connections to hundreds. I have been connected to the adoption world for over 20 years. In all that time, with all those connections I have not seen or heard of even one serious issue of pain or identity issues. I can tell you my kids do not have that. I have an 18 YO who is just about to embark on an international study program in Japan and who has traveled 7 time to her birth country, the most recently on her own. She has no identity issues and is about as well-grounded a young woman as you would find.
Now granted, maybe I just don't know the hidden secrets of people not in my family, but I am very well connected with all sides of the community and simply do not see any hint of wide-spread identity crisis. I do however, see many other children who were not adopted and who were not in mixed race families who have serious identity issues. I would match up any random selection of adopted kids from the community I know against any group of non-adopted kids any day and expect the first group to be more well-adjusted.
We have five sons, two by birth, three by adoption - two foreign. Would the people at The Nation who are distressed at our white-savior complex have preferred we left them in orphanages/foster care? I used to be infuriated at such things, but I accept that this is how some people are, looking for someone to blame whenever reality doesn't look like their fantasy.* I don't think anyone has said such things to our face. Most don't even write about it directly; one only hears about such people from the report of others. It is always people of the left who even mention this. I can recall no exceptions. To be fair, people of the left have also been among our best supporters.
People do say complimentary things to us about how wonderful we are. All very nice. That covers about 1% of what you need emotionally to raise a child.
*I am often struck by the fantasy vignettes some liberals expect of the world - much more simplistic and sentimental than anything by Norman Rockwell, who they generally despise. Environmentalists want the world to remind them of summer camp. Social engineers write perfectly multicultural picture books for children and then double down on it for the next twenty years. Bright perpetual highschoolers, that's what they are.
Just let the kids die. That would be much better for them.
Post a Comment