I am writing an update on the “BJ Lifton Booted” dust-up where I will address some of the questions and issues that have arisen from my recent blog. It’s taking longer than I thought, so in the interim, I’m posting one or two short pieces on different topics–hopefully not as er….controversial. After all, we‘re all on the side. Aren‘t we?.
After all, we‘re all on the side. Aren‘t we?.
Nope. Clearly we are not all on the same side.
And just how long does it take to write a simple, heartfelt apology?
Waiting with eager anticipation, Marley. I wish we were all on the same side, but there seem to be many different sides to all this, and clearly, the adoptee side and the mothers side frequently do not seem to coincide. Too bad, too. We have much to offer each other, in so many ways.
Yes sly,…we share our children,…and in that,…have the world to offer each other in many ways.
“And just how long does it take to write a simple, heartfelt apology?’
Adoptionworld; n., the loose self-contained sociopolitical group of mothers who have relinquished children, adult adoptees, adoptive parents, and clases of parasitic social workers, therapists, reunion professionals and other self-appointed experts. From the outside, Adoptionworld presents as a classic clusterfuck, however, upon close examination all the inhabitants are masturbating.
“Yes sly,…we share our children…,and in that,…have the world to offer each other in many ways.”
Get real !
There’s no such thing as “sharing our children”
One takes from the one who has, and that which is taken is cut in half.
…and in that,…the taker can’t offer anything because it can only be a taker, the one who has can only had, and nothing in world can unsplit that which is taken.
The thing about speculators, gossipers and busybodies is that they never think they have anything to apologize for.
” After all, we‘re all on the side. Aren‘t we?. “
Used to believe that, not so sure anymore. Cannot, will not use the term birth mother.
If that places me into some supposed, other side, that’s not my doing. That’s someone elses doing.
The thing about speculators, gossipers and busybodies is that they never think they have anything to apologize for.
Anonymous,
I was glad to see your wise words this morning. I turned on my computer to have read that another Bastardette was online for 9/11. Hopefully, I thought Marley would have finally written words of redemption after having screwed up big time.
But it was another deflection – “let’s change the topic to Safe Havens and maybe this will just go away”.
I can’t tell you how disappointed I am that you further perpetuated this devisiveness.
Do you really think that those of us who feel strongly about not wishing to be identified as birthing machines are going to go away and forget how we have been treated by so many of you who only wish our help when there is an open record bill?
Get your head out of the sand marley. you are fighting yesterday’s battles while some of us have grown up and moved on. The proof is in the hostile words and fetid attitude that is directed toward any of us who feel differently than you.
“But it was another deflection – “let’s change the topic to Safe Havens and maybe this will just go away”.”
Right – Marley is known for being afraid of confrontation.
LOL – what a hoot!
“Get real !
There’s no such thing as “sharing our children”
One takes from the one who has, and that which is taken is cut in half.
…and in that,…the taker can’t offer anything because it can only be a taker, the one who has can only had, and nothing in world can unsplit that which is taken.”
You don’t have to explain that to me. Common sense alone tells me that there would be no “adoptees” side nor a “mothers” side if “for the sake of the child” noone were standing in the middle of the two claiming the lives of them both for themselves.
Carol C.:
“But it was another deflection – “let’s change the topic to Safe Havens and maybe this will just go away
I can’t tell you how disappointed I am that you further perpetuated this devisiveness. “
“Do you really think that those of us who feel strongly about not wishing to be identified as birthing machines are going to go away and forget how we have been treated by so many of you who only wish our help when there is an open record bill?”
Carol spews: “Get your head out of the sand marley. you are fighting yesterday’s battles while some of us have grown up and moved on.”
Your irony. Nobody called you and your ilk a *birthing machine*. That’s your spin.
“The proof is in the hostile words and fetid attitude that is directed toward any of us who feel differently than you.”
Are you talking to your alter personality again? You’re lying to yourself, and making it up as you go along. It appears you expect the reader to garner sympathy toward you, and I’m asking why? You sure couldn’t be directing this toward Marley. What has she ever done to you? And who are you to demand anything of anyone? Have you read your own vitriol toward many on this blog who do and will continue to hold a different opinion from yours?
Marley owes no one an apology. It’s you who owes ALL an apology for daring to speak for their experience. Who do you think you are, Carol C.?
Grown up and moved on? That’s laughable. If you had really grown up and moved on, the term, birthmother, wouldn’t be hurting you. If you don’t like the term birthmother, simply don’t use it. If someone else uses the term, birthmother, you’ve no business dictating what adoption language they should use.
And btw,you’re stupid. You wouldn’t know sarcasm if it jumped up and chewed you a new one. I specifically used the term, birth whore in previous posts to ridicule your attempts to censor language.
Meagan/Kathy
reunited mother
From the person who refused to change her terminology for a conference: “Lost and Found,” (1979)by Betty Jean Lifton … seems Lifton is more worried about what the adopters think.
“A game that controls reality must control language. Adoptive parents insist that the woman who gives birth to their child must be called the biological, the genetic, or the birth mother; to refer to her as the natural mother would be to imply that they are unnatural.[Chapter 4 (‘The Chosen Baby’), fn 1] p. 19
[Chapter 4, fn 1] Although I prefer the term natural mother, I am using birth mother in this book in order to avoid an unimportant controversy over what I consider an unimportant issue. Also, birth mother has the advantage of acknowledging that someone did give birth to the Adoptee.”
MaeDay said…
” After all, we‘re all on the side. Aren‘t we?. “
Used to believe that, not so sure anymore. Cannot, will not use the term birth mother. >
So what? Is anyone telling you what term you must use? The real issue is that you, the collective you, aren’t in a position to tell anyone what term they must use.
Can you read? It’s about censorship.
If that places me into some supposed, other side, that’s not my doing. That’s someone elses doing. >
Oh boo hoo.
Kathy
reunited mother
Anonymous said…
“From the person who refused to change her terminology for a conference: “Lost and Found,” (1979)by Betty Jean Lifton … seems Lifton is more worried about what the adopters think.”
Isn’t this rich?
It’s OK for you to call the collective group of adoptive parents, “adopters”, but you pout over BJ Lifton’s adoption language?
Kathy
reunited mother
“”your ilk””
Whassup with the ‘ilk’ thingy?
Don’t you dear people know by now.. Marley has just made room for more comments!
Thanks Marley, appreciate it!
“”Who do you think you are, Carol C.?””
I believe CarolC. is a human being, a woman and a mother.
Thanks! Anon person..
“””A game that controls reality must control language. Adoptive parents insist that the woman who gives birth to their child must be called the biological, the genetic, or the birth mother; to refer to her as the natural mother would be to imply that they are unnatural.[Chapter 4 (‘The Chosen Baby’), fn 1] p. 19″”
“”[Chapter 4, fn 1] Although I prefer the term natural mother, I am using birth mother in this book in order to avoid an unimportant controversy over what I consider an unimportant issue. “”
So here BJ says she prefers ‘natural mother’ and is using ‘birthmother’ to avoid controversy. The only people I know who have objected to the term natural mother in the past was the adoptive parents. Said it upset them, made them uncomfortable and the term ‘natural’ to adopters implies they are ‘unnatural’. I would then determine the whole language thing was to alleviate, bring comfort and massage to the hurt feelings of adopters and not cause ‘controversy’ among the adopter population. And once again ‘screw’ the natural mother, in more ways than one. Afterall who gives a damn about the hurt feelings of the nmother, who does she think she is? Important? HA!
After all, we‘re all on the side. Aren‘t we?.
Not any more, toots. The game ain’t worth the candle.
I know who loves me, baby, and it ain’t “the movement.”
Isn’t this rich?
It’s OK for you to call the collective group of adoptive parents, “adopters”, but you pout over BJ Lifton’s adoption language?
Kathy/meagan/bh
Why is it OK for Marley to call the collective group of adoptive parents “adopters”?
Do you know what meagan/kathy/birthwhore?
You make no sense at all.
“”Who do you think you are, Carol C.?””
Ch says – I believe CarolC. is a human being, a woman and a mother.
Thanks Ch. My goodness – this woman is oozing hate, isn’t she? Good thing she isn’t on the CUB list because she would have been put on moderated status like the whole list is.
Now that’s censorship. Do you suppose Ch, that anyone here will vilify CUB for shutting down free speech for an entire online list the way they have been Joe?
Nah!
I think this CUB censorship debacle is the coup de grace.
Let the spinning begin!
C’mon Marley – tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Editorial integrity, please.
“Now that’s censorship. Do you suppose Ch, that anyone here will vilify CUB for shutting down free speech for an entire online list the way they have been Joe?”
Joe will kick you off his MSN group in a New York minute if you’re “disrespectful” or are contentious in any way. Adoptionworld is censorious in general, I’ve been kicked off every adoption-related email list I’ve subscribed to, but one, for making trouble, talking politics instead of “healing” or some such bullshit.
I haven’t weighed in on the original controversy regarding BJ’s presentation for a couple for a couple of reasons; BJ and Soll have known each other for a couple of decades, have lived in the same town, and if they don’t know each other’s lexicon, expectations and style by now they never will. That Soll sets ground rules regarding language for his shindigs is no secret to anyone who bothers to go to his various websites and knows how to read. Is this censorious? Yeah, but ultimately who gives a fuck. Soll’s rules work to make the public arenas he controls self-contained and self-referential, and therefore ultimately meaningless, so again, who gives a fuck? It’s not like he has a programmatic strategy for social change based on his theories that can be engaged and analyzed. It’s all about the “healing”. When confronted with “healing” the prudent thing to do is to back away before you get some on you, cuz the struggle *is* a struggle, is confrontational, is polarizing, is fraught with risk and the possibility of hurt. I like the fact that the anti-adoption folks are on here mixing it up, I like people who fight. But until they develop a coherent program for social change, they are more big fish in the goldfish bowl of Adoptionworld, who think that because all they can see of the outside world is their reflection then that must be all there is out there…
“”Joe will kick you off his MSN group in a New York minute if you’re “disrespectful” or are contentious in any way.””
And it appears now that the CUB listserve will do same.
Your above words are not exactly true. I have seen some pretty good cases of nastiness carry on there, mostly by adoptees who want to blast the hell out the mothers there and the occasional troll who feels is her/his right to set us straight, adopted people and nmothers alike. They get some warnings and if they don’t heed the warnings, Adios!Joe does have an established Code of Conduct right on the homesite for adoptese, for his public reading MSN Group (have to join to post). I am of the mind one should read ‘the rules’ of a group before joining. If one doesn’t agree with rules of established group (or has no desire for rules), then one should hunt up a group that suits them and their beliefs. I for one will not join some ‘Christian’ or Republican Only group, when I am a Heathen and a person who leans to the left. My motto is ‘When in Rome do as the Romans do’. I have no desire to join BM groups, so I don’t go there, why aggravate myself.
I basically believe lots of places on the net, have their good and bad points. Some I can deal with, some I can’t, is still a matter of individual choice and preference.
“And it appears now that the CUB listserve will do same.”
Sad.
This isn’t the first time one individual has succeeded in silencing so many other voices.
Just goes to show ya whose side the establishment is on though.
Their own.
I like the fact that the anti-adoption folks are on here mixing it up, I like people who fight. But until they develop a coherent program for social change, they are more big fish in the goldfish bowl of Adoptionworld, who think that because all they can see of the outside world is their reflection then that must be all there is out there…
not sure i understand your point, although you brought up some good points in your post. i like the fact that you have the intellectual curiosity to want to hear the viewpoint of a group of us that you are calling “anti-adoptionists” although you are painting us all with a broad brush. While I am opposed to adoption in all but the most extreme case, other members of the groups that were questioned here, have varying POVs and that’s just fine with me.
but as far as your advice that the collective we can’t be effective unless we develop a coherent program for social change! this doesn’t make sense to me. all of us are involved in a grass roots effort to make change to various aspects of adoption. some of us want to abolish, others claim to wish to improve it, others are concerned only about “open records” and anyone else be damned.
It doesn’t make sense to be critical of anyone who isn’t involved in some well thought out coherent plan – we all do the best we can based on time limitations and our own experience. To be critical though of one faction who thinks other factions are out and out wrong or not worthwhile is senseless.
Anyone who’s been around this issue for any period of time has seen the thousands of new searchers and other people who try to join our groups and support our efforts. I would guess that at least 80% of these folks leave the so called movement after they complete their search because of all this ugly, ugly infighting. Adoptees often have entitlement issues that if the mothers won’t help focus on their open records, well be damned to them.
I know dozens of first mothers who have been treated with such disrespect by adoptees that thye just go back to their *normal* lives rather than deal with the disrespect.
Look at the trolls who follow the mothers from online group to online group insulting them for a myriad of reasons – terminology, not supporting something they believe in, etc. Does anyone here really think this hate campaign kind of stuff toward Joe or Karen or anyone else who tries to make a difference is going to change anything? do you suppose the people these two have helped are going to suddenly throw up their hands and say”you’re right, Joe is a jerk”?
Of course not. someone needs to make the hate filled people understand that they are doing nothing but setting back any kind of so called *reform movement*. there is NO reform movement. Everyone of us whether anti, pro -adoption is an individual and people are just turned off by this infighting.
I am not looking to point fingers here. It’s just a rant about a pretty hopeless feeling that any of us can ever work together because of the small handful who insist that if we don’t agree on every single point, they will pout, call names and try to destroy any group or individual who thinks differently. It’s truly sad and you can see it with all the hate filled people posting here ready to vilify Joe or others they don’t care for or defend them. …and the beat goes on and nothing gets changed.
Carol C. asks:
“Why is it OK for Marley to call the collective group of adoptive parents “adopters”?
Why isn’t it OK? You, Marley, anyone is free to pick the adoption language which suits them.
While I wouldn’t call someone an adopter, I won’t be told by anyone what I can say or cannot say. Same goes with those who choose to employ the birthmother term. Why isn’t it OK that they use the term they are comfortable with? After reading your self-serving blather, it would appear, you’re either dense or arrogant if you can’t grasp this concept.
The problem with you and your “grassroot” movement, whatever that may be, is that you truly believe you have the right to censor adoption language if it offends your ears. If someone uses the terminology birthmother, why would it offend you? See if you can answer without slinging some of your baggage back at me. Either you are solid enough emotionally from your experience as a relinquishing mother or you are not, and trying to change the world, outside of yourself, will never make you feel whole again. If you want respect, it starts within yourself. It would behoove you to drop victim routine if you are to be taken seriously by anyone.
And btw, jfyi, I was, in every sense of the word, coerced to abandon my first born. I am no pro-adoptionist by a long shot. However, this gives me no reason to hate the adoption or the language someone chooses to employ.
Kathy
reunited mother
“While I am opposed to adoption in all but the most extreme case, other members of the groups that were questioned here, have varying POVs and that’s just fine with me. “
I don’t call myself anti-adoption. I call myself anti-exploitation, pro-autonomy.
If women actually want to give away their kids, fine by me. Believe it or not, there does exist an ultra minority of women who reject their children. As abhorrent as that seems to some of us, these women do exist.
I am going to refrain from commenting on the mental status of a person like that. But I will note that most people would sooner cut off their arm than willingly give their baby away. God knows I often felt I would have been better off dead than robbed of my child.
But, these women aren’t like us, or even like the overwhelming majority of the world’s population. These women are truly an ultraminority. I am talking about two or three women out of all the women talking about this on the internet or in support groups over the years. They are not like us mentally, and they experienced the process in a radically different way.
We were coerced or worse. We were locked up and brainwashed. Some of our babies were taken right out of our arms. Some of our babies were taken right out of our bodies while we were tied to a table.
I’m not talking about that. I’m not talking about us. I’m not talking about normal psychology.
The very existence of the psychological machinery needed to strip us of our kids is proof positive that we didn’t want to part with them.
I’m talking about women who reject their children. For those of us who lost our children and for whom it has become a defining fact of our life, it’s very difficult , hell….it’s impossible…to even imagine that anyone would reject her kid. It’s unthinkable, unimaginable. The thought literally never enters our minds.
Who in their right mind rejects their child? What kind of monster?
But, as incredible as it seems, it does occasionally happen.
There are a few women like that around these parts, and they are vocal.
I am aware of at least three cases of very loud internet “bmommees” who defend the practices we abhor, who defend the language, etc, who shill for adoption, etc. And, when they tell their stories, it becomes obvious that they had every chance to keep their kids. Offers of help from the family, people begging them to keep the kids, the presence of a husband, etc. It’s clear that it was the baby they rejected. They did not want the baby. They could have kept their kids, but they chose to do otherwise. They CHOSE it. If you can believe that.
For those of us who would have done just about anything for the same chances to keep our kids that these women were given, it’s almost impossible to imagine or believe.
These women are happy to have gotten rid of their kids. You can ask them, and they will tell you.
But don’t you dare point out the meaning of their happiness to them, because Hell hath no fury like a rejecting woman, unmasked.
“It doesn’t make sense to be critical of anyone who isn’t involved in some well thought out coherent plan – we all do the best we can based on time limitations and our own experience. To be critical though of one faction who thinks other factions are out and out wrong or not worthwhile is senseless.”
Without criticism there can be no accountability, and without accountability there is no impetus to change. IMO the adoption reform movement has one or two strategies that it deploys although the results have been shown to be less than profound, and has been resistent to critism and therefore has been unaccountable to the constituency it purports to represent.
The question I have for the folks posting here who I’ve called “anti-adoption” is simply this: If adoption is a fundamental evil, what is your plan to dismantle it? Is this plan realistic, in other words is there a good chance it will succeed?
“Anyone who’s been around this issue for any period of time has seen the thousands of new searchers and other people who try to join our groups and support our efforts. I would guess that at least 80% of these folks leave the so called movement after they complete their search because of all this ugly, ugly infighting.”
Or they determine that once they’ve reunited they no longer have a grievance with the adoption system worth fighting for. Or they stick around for a year or two and when they see the snail’s pace of legal change they slip out the backdoor. People engage in politicdal action for a variety of reasons that sometime have more to do with their personalities than with their principles. We are all products of our society, and our society doesn’t encourage discourses of inquiry or actions that would upset its assumptions. Most people are triggered into action by a sense of personal grievance, and if they don’t find that a particular prescribed remedy is working to address their grievance, they move on.
“Adoptees often have entitlement issues that if the mothers won’t help focus on their open records, well be damned to them.”
Adoption is an entitlement issue. A lot of the folks posting in response to Marley are claiming the title of “mother” because they feel that it’s a privileged status (“revered”,etc.), from which they’ve been coercively evicted. They resent those who they feel have usurped their status. Ultimately though the entity that has reserved the power to entitle in adoption is not adoptive parents nor adoption professionals, but the state, the government and its apparatus.
“They resent those who they feel have usurped their status.”
No.
I reasent, nay I hate, those who usurped my CHILD.
To be frank, any normal person would.
In order to do that, they had to
first strip me of my status of mother – a status which you have very correctly observed society reveres.
First they make you out to be
a not-mother or non-mother, and then they take your child.
If they had not been able to convince society that we were not mothers, they could not justify taking our children.
There would be a public outcry.
I am talking about mechanics. You are talking about philosophy.
I’ve called “anti-adoption” is simply this: If adoption is a fundamental evil, what is your plan to dismantle it? Is this plan realistic, in other words is there a good chance it will succeed?
I have no plan. I have a POV and no time to make a plan. And that’s the best I can do right now. I will not stop verbalizing my POV just because there is no plan.
What unified plan do the “we want our birth certificates” crowd have. BN has cut AAC sponsored bills off at the knee because they wouldn’t compromise on the veto issue. I’m not passing judgement on whether they should or shouldn’t compromise, just that the real world is not all on the same page with issues.
One can claim to be against racism but not have a plan other than to do the best they can in their little microcozim of a world. And that’s ok.
The nerve of these people who are telling the rest of us that we can’t voice our opinion unless we have a well thought out plan! I personally have not met or read the work of one single person or organization in the world of adoption whose point I agree with 100%. I would never beat someone up to convince them though that’s it’s my way or the highway. That’s what this blog turned into and i know for a fact that it turned more people off to the craziness and they won’t be back. What a shame…
notice that there are hardly any men posting here on a regular basis either. my opinion of that is that the men often see this as one big angry cat fight and back off. Some of us women can hang in a little longer, but for most of us – this is just way too tedious for absolutely no reward. You have to be a glutton for punishment to be against adoption as it’s been practiced or to wish to shed the term of birthmother. Who needs it?
Who needs women telling other women “bite me” or calling them “stupid”?
Adoption is an entitlement issue. A lot of the folks posting in response to Marley are claiming the title of “mother” because they feel that it’s a privileged status (“revered”,etc.), from which they’ve been coercively evicted.
I don’t agree that this is the reason most of us are posting – that we feel to be a mother is a priveleged status!
Not sure how many times this needs to be explained. I am protesting against being called a term “birthmother” that I find offensive. I don’t care who coined it. My son doesn’t like it and I never chose it as a title.
Everyone is forgetting that most of us are saying that if you don’t wish to call us a “mother” then we prefer first mother or natural mother. Just like BJ did in “Lost and Found”.
Look, all this screaming names and assumptions and making jabs at us isn’t intellectual debate.
Why is it so hard to figure this out for so many of you?
“stupid is as stupid does”
Marley said:
After all, we‘re all on the side. Aren‘t we?
I’m guessing she meant to type “we’re all on the same side,” but this is the actual truth. We’re all on the side, and will remain so if we keep attacking each other. I guess I get where people might think b****mother is a dirty word, inasmuch as I keep waiting for BN to change their name, being one myself. I just don’t think telling my state representative to call me a bastard, or not to call me a bmom as the case may be is the way to get the justice we are supposedly seeking.
But what do we seek? As I type this, this dustup has brought 84 posts to alt.adoption, 311 comments to Marley’s original post and 27 comments to this one–422, for those of you who don’t feel like using your calculator. Hit your back button and scroll down to Marley’s entry about California extending the abandonment period to 30 days–2 comments. If we are going to get wound up about something, shouldn’t it be something like this? With all of this infighting, we marginalize ourselves. We become the characters in the bad cable movies that our opposition portray us to be.
Our anger is understandable, even justifiable. But to show our rage to those who would stop us and those who could help us is just plain foolish. What I’m asking here is that if we can’t use compassion before hitting send, can we at least use common sense?
In the triad, in that ol’ adoption triangle, I remind you that we ain’t the hypotenuse. Because…
“After all, we‘re all on the side. Aren‘t we?”
-Phil, LDA and Rodney King wannabe
“noone were standing in the middle of the two claiming the lives of them both for themselves.”
Oh, longingwalk, how stupid do you think the people here are? Prospective adoptive parents want those babies sooooo baaaaad. They will do anything, go anywhere, pay anything to get their hands on a baby, any baby. (Gotcha!)
When my baby was being taken, I was standing all alone with my baby in my womb while the wolves circled waiting to incapacitate me and snatch him up as soon as he appeared in this world. I was thrown out of my own family, a very nice upper-middle class family that I loved and had previously thought loved me, and told I could never, ever return with “that baby.” The professionals they kicked me to used all their well-rehearsed, well-financed, and purposely secret and unaccountable tactics to get my baby from me. They even used the fact my parents had forsaken me against me. They drugged me, they berated me, they hounded me, they told me my screams for my baby were insanity, they destroyed me–they did anything necessary to get my baby away from me. They even said if I dared to try to keep him, they would throw me–and my baby–in the gutter to die. (No one would give me a job, they said…)
longingwalk, educate yourself then come back and talk to me about adoption.
“longingwalk, educate yourself then come back and talk to me about adoption”
I am so sorry that people abused you so terribly, the mother.
carol c said…
“..i like the fact that you have the intellectual curiosity to want to hear the viewpoint of a group of us that you are calling “anti-adoptionists” although you are painting us all with a broad brush.”
Carol, interesting isn’t it,
this who’s calling who an
anti-adoptionist thing.
Remember this article and
the part about cub:
http://www.bastards.org/byline/byline-1-19.html
LB
“If they had not been able to convince society that we were not mothers, they could not justify taking our children.
There would be a public outcry.”
There is absolutely no public outcry of any consequence to the stripping of parental rights of those outside of the adoption system, the parents of children in foster care. Society reveres motherhood conditionally by privileging it. If society judges you unfit to be revered, for instance if you were a single mother in the forties, fifties or sixties, or a poor mother in the seventies to the present, society feels it is protecting the revered state of motherhood from you, who doesn’t deserve to be revered. You don’t feel a lot of reverence in the societal image of “welfare mothers in Cadillacs”.
“The nerve of these people who are telling the rest of us that we can’t voice our opinion unless we have a well thought out plan!
Who said that? You can voice any opinion you like, just as I can opine that it doesn’t appear that you have a plan for social change.
“I personally have not met or read the work of one single person or organization in the world of adoption whose point I agree with 100%.”
I’d suggest that if that’s the case you could always form your own, but I don’t want to be accused of beating on you…
“What unified plan do the “we want our birth certificates” crowd have. BN has cut AAC sponsored bills off at the knee because they wouldn’t compromise on the veto issue. I’m not passing judgement on whether they should or shouldn’t compromise, just that the real world is not all on the same page with issues.”
Both the AAC and BN have publically recognized legislative strategies, based on their differing political theories regarding adoption. Without going into details, and boring the pants off everyone, I’ll just say the BN analyzed the AAC’s theories and strategy, which had been around for twenty-years or so, critiqued them and formulated their own. Some other group will no doubt come along and critique BN’s strategic plan in light of contemporary facts on the ground and formulate their own. I don’t think the question I asked, or the critique I made, was a demand that there be a Unified Field Theory of Adoption Reform, I was interested in what I consider the lack of a political program by the anti-adoption folks in general, not just the few posters to this blog.
“One can claim to be against racism but not have a plan other than to do the best they can in their little microcozim of a world. And that’s ok.”
Everyone does what they are able, but if everyone did as you, then there would have been no Martin Luther King or Malcolm X, and blacks would still be denied the right to vote (of course, sometimes they still are, like in Florida and Ohio). I had to step down from leadership at BN because I flamed out after four years of sixty-hours-a-week organizing, burnt out and bankrupt. But someone stepped into my place, because it wasn’t about me, it was about strategy guided by principle. And I got a job that paid me to agitate and organize, an experience that now informs my critique that the adoption reform movement needs to develop sustainability to be able to support the people who give their lives to it. Social change begins with theory, and I’ve seen a lot of theories posited here, even the theory that “we don’t need theories”. Theories without action tough, become moribund. We can disagree about this, but without action the social conditions that deprived you of your children will remain in place, depriving other women of their children. I don’t think you think that’s a good thing…
“”If society judges you unfit to be revered, for instance if you were a single mother in the forties, fifties or sixties, or a poor mother in the seventies to the present, society feels it is protecting the revered state of motherhood from you, who doesn’t deserve to be revered.””
I agree with you, bb, is why we ‘unwed’ mothers were annointed with the title/descriptor (social/political policy books) as ‘Deviant Mother’. ‘Motherhood’ absolutely back in our recent history, was only ‘revered’ if the initials MRS preceded our last names, otherwise we were considered ‘deviant’ from social norms. Motherhood was only legitimatized/acknowledged/revered by being legally anchored to a man.
But someone stepped into my place, because it wasn’t about me, it was about strategy guided by principle. And I got a job that paid me to agitate and organize, an experience that now informs my critique that
Not sure where you’re going with this. I don’t wish to bore the pants off anyone either, but I’ve done my share since 1988. I feel that under the guise of you expressing your opinion about what we’re doing here is a lecture about what you think we should be doing.
While I respect what you are doing on behalf of adoptees, I am no longer particularly interested in working toward open records for just adoptees. And, I don’t feel one bit of guilt for that.
I came here to help clarify and right a wrong – Marley’s attack on Joe Soll because of her lack of knowledge of what actually transpired regarding BJ. And Lifton has really disappointed me for not coming forward and being honorable. She let Joe take the flak because she didn’t read a Request for Proposal form closely or if she did – she didn’t give a damn.
Neither marley or the rest of you – even the rationale, smart rest of you are contrite in the least. Instead you’re attempting to tell some of us how we should be helping the movement. Not sure if this is an attempt to recruit BN supporters or you’re genuinely just expressing an opinion but I find it dismissive of the real issue – an accusation of censorship.
Marley could have righted a wrong and she chose not to do so. She’s in fact totally blown it off.
Call me a curmudgeon in my middle age, I don’t much care for people who are lacking in integrity. many of the mothers who came here ONLY to defend our friend were marginalized, figuratively spat upon and insulted. Please don’t continue to insult me by suggesting that you think we are misguided. It’s just another form of being dismissive.
Sorry. These days it’s only about ME and other Mothers of Adoption Loss. I will support open access legislation when it also includes access for mothers to our records. And I do not need members of BN or CUB or other groups who think they know better than me as to what adoption issue(s)I should be putting my energy into. I’m the decider.
I wish you all well on your journey.
Whaaaaaaaatt? CUB? Anti-adoption?
hmmmmmmm…….
http://www.bastards.org/reform.htm
“Neither marley or the rest of you – even the rationale, smart rest of you are contrite in the least. Instead you’re attempting to tell some of us how we should be helping the movement.”
That’s what happens when you enter a public discourse, things take turns you can’t predict.
“Not sure if this is an attempt to recruit BN supporters or you’re genuinely just expressing an opinion but I find it dismissive of the real issue – an accusation of censorship.”
I think the whole Soll/BJ thing is a tempest in a teacup, it’s sort of interesting to watch these two dinosaurs duke it out by proxy, but just barely.
“Sorry. These days it’s only about ME and other Mothers of Adoption Loss. I will support open access legislation when it also includes access for mothers to our records.”
That’s your perogative. That was the position of CUB when Carole Anderson was president.
“And I do not need members of BN or CUB or other groups who think they know better than me as to what adoption issue(s)I should be putting my energy into. I’m the decider.”
As long as you’ve “decided” to sit on your butt while BN and CUB set the political agendas by acting then you’re tacitly allowing them to define what the issues are. When I was in a leadership position at BN, we would look at all the groups, informal and formal, and assess where they stood vis a vis our specific campaigns. The anti-adoption folks were plainly critical of some of our stances, but in the end were considered irrelevant, not because their arguments weren’t valid or not, but because they weren’t organized or programitized in a way that was a credible threat to us. If we felt that way, then how do you think the entrenched groups defending adoption practices feel?
Carol C. whines:
“Call me a curmudgeon in my middle age, I don’t much care for people who are lacking in integrity.”
Your irony.
many of the mothers who came here ONLY to defend our friend were marginalized, figuratively spat upon and insulted.>
That’s the nature of putting yourself out there. Nobody broke your arm or made you come here.
You’re a victim of your own making.
Please don’t continue to insult me by suggesting that you think we are misguided.>
You don’t get to tell anyone what they should think, write or label you. Don’t you get that yet? You made the choice to come here and uh, “get insulted and dismissed.”
It’s just another form of being dismissive.>
Aww, my bleeding heart aches for you.
Sorry. These days it’s only about ME and other Mothers of Adoption Loss.>
You poor thing. It must hurt being so full of yourself.
Kathy
reunited mother
Meagan/kathy/bw says: You poor thing. It must hurt being so full of yourself.
Kathy
reunited mother
Nope, actually I quite like myself. I am not a victim and I don’t behave like one. If you didn’t tell us otherwise, I would guess that your anger, rage and need to judge everyone were the characteristics of a victim.
Actually, everyone I know tells me how much fun I am to be around.
Now don’t worry your pretty head anymore about me – go out and spread more sunshine.
“”You don’t get to tell anyone what they should think, write or label you. Don’t you get that yet?””
Errrrr, kathy? I think you are the person/human being that is not getting it, yet. As a matter of fact any human being can tell another human being what they do or do not want to be called. Now the human being that is being asked does not have to comply. But the human being that is doing the asking, has every right to ASK!
Just like adoptee’s can ASK/DEMAND for open records, doesn’t mean they will get them or necessarily that society in general agrees that adoptees should get what they ask for. But the adopted population has the Right to ASK!
What you consistently fail to comprehend. NO ONE IS TELLING YOU WHAT TO CALL YOURSELF! Hello!!!!!! Some other women/mothers have determined not to be of the same mindset as you. Why is that so difficult for you to understand?
When introducing myself, some people will ask me if I prefer one of two variances of my first name. I tell them which one I prefer and they call me by that. Is not really hard to do.. is called adult respect for another adult. I have no problem calling you a birthmother, because that is what you prefer and I will respect your choice. Can I and other mothers of like mindedness, not expect from you and others, the same in return?
ch, the easter basket of insanity writes:
Errrrr, kathy? I think you are the person/human being that is not getting it, yet. As a matter of fact any human being can tell another human being what they do or do not want to be called. Now the human being that is being asked does not have to comply. But the human being that is doing the asking, has every right to ASK! >
Who said you didn’t have the right to “ask”? Pay attention to what I actually wrote. I wrote: “You don’t get to tell anyone what they should think, write or label you. Do you get that yet?”
Your spin continues to meet the definition of insanity; repeating over and over the same rhetoric, and expecting different results each time.
I’m not convinced you’re playing with a full deck. And that is nobody’s fault but your own.
Kathy
reunited mother
Meagan, Kathy, Birthwhore
(is this MPD?) says
“I’m not convinced you’re playing with a full deck. And that is nobody’s fault but your own.”
Kathy
reunited mother
Ch, don’t even bother – this chick is hostile and is just looking for trouble. She gives mixed messages and then uses her guttersnipe retorts because IMO, she’s feeling a bit intimidated. Who else responds to others posts with quips such as “bite me”???
I wasn’t allowed to play with girls like this as a kid and now I know why. LOL It’s a waste of time – she can’t communicate like a grown woman.
But, I was really struck by the by the fact that even though she keeps trying to bully us, notice the way she signs her name:
Kathy
Reunited MOTHER!!!
Mother!!! Mother!!! Mother!!!
not birth mother, but Mother.
Aw Ha!!! So she’s a Mother. Yet in the next breath she tells us that WE have no right to call OURSELVES mother – although SHE is a Mother, we are mrely birthmothers and should be damn happy with that title. After all it’s been around for years and thus she has the right to call us birthmother no matter what we say.
HELLO??? MEAGAN/KATHY!!!!
Personally, I don’t care what this bitter lady calls me because she doesn’t have one single intellectual point – her words are barbs at us for Goddess knows what reason. I’d be careful with this one … what a waste of time trying to even respond.
And she calls us victims!!! Or says WE’RE angry. Wonder if she ever looks in the mirror?
I’ve seen everything now.
And Kathy. Before you ask “NO, I will NOT bite you! I have interest in even getting close to you.
oh, boy, the demand for a “plan.”
I just had a flashback.
Demanding a “plan” from a mother is a key tactic in adoption coercion–er, ah, counseling.
“”Your spin continues to meet the definition of insanity; repeating over and over the same rhetoric, and expecting different results each time.
I’m not convinced you’re playing with a full deck. And that is nobody’s fault but your own.””
Get off it, Kathy. For some reason you believe you are head and shoulders above every mother here, who does not agree with you. I feel sorry for you Kathy, that you are so hell bent on name-calling and insults. May work well for you on Alt.adoption, but outside of that so-called ng and in the ‘real’ world, will get you absolutely nowhere. You are neither witty nor clever, just spewing forth garbage. Do you seriously know how to discuss a subject, without insult and name-calling?
And rhetoric? Come on.. Asking questions and talking about ‘comprehension’ skills is not ‘rhetoric’.
Try really listening sometime, maybe you just might learn something, other than that ‘spinning’ you seem to suffer from.
You sound like a copy-cat, but you don’t make the grade. No Marley Greiner will you ever be and I mean that seriously. You don’t have the intelligence or the extent of vocabulary that Marley has. Even though I am not a huge fan of Marley’s, I recognize intelligence when I hear it. From you all I hear is a resounding ‘THUD’!
Grow up!
Below is THE LETTER putting us in our place. I am so disappointed at this woman’s disrespect. She just doesn’t get it!
Talk about snide, diminishing comments to mothers (she thinks) and she suggests we take it in the spirit it was intended! Oh, I can assure you I took it in the spirit it was intended.
I could pick up almost every sentence but my manners are better than that. Manners in my world are important and BJ’s lack thereof is appalling. To address Joe and co-sponsors and other mothers through CUB list serve is pretty damn tacky.
This is another old timer who can’t move forward and is so stuck in her narcisstic need to hold onto a word that SHE THINKS SHE NAMED US and if we would just be grateful for her pioneering we would learn to wear that term with pride.!!! How freakin’ out of touch and rude is that?
I have no interest in anything else this lady writes or says – maybe it’s her age or maybe it’s her adoptee issues but IMHO, BJ has left the building.
Dear Joe, Origins members, and other co-sponsors of the “Shedding Light” conference:
I am writing this not to dissuade you from using your “first mother” term, but to throw a little light onto the history of “birth mother,” so that you do not see it as a “pejorative” term that is capable of “re-injuring” your members. And also, as a pioneer in the adoption reform movement, I’d like to recount a little history for your new members, who may not have knowledge of our struggles in the past.
The reform movement tangled with the issue of language as early as the seventies. Lee Campbell, the founder of CUB, just reminded me that I argued for the term “natural mother” because it was the one used in all the historical texts. It was the term I used in my memoir Twice Born, which came out in 1975. And I still prefer it. But somehow the struggle with the agencies and adoptive parent groups narrowed down to “birth mother” and “biological mother.” I was against “biological” because I saw it as a cold physiological term. While “birth” resonated with me, as it does with many adoptees, because it meant that we were born. And not only were we born, but we carried a longing for the woman who gave birth to us while growing up, no matter how close our relationship with our adoptive mother was. When in the eighties and nineties adoptees b egan t o search, it was for the woman who had birthed them. That connection had not been broken after their separation, and is not broken even when a reunion does not go well. It seems to me that to deny the word “birth mother” is to throw the baby out with the birth water. They may take the baby away from you, but they cannot take the act of birth away from you. They can have Adoption Day, but it can never replace Birthday. You may pride yourself on being the “first” mother, but it does not have the primal quality or importance of being the “birth” mother.
We pioneers are proud that we won the language battle and that “birth mother” is now the accepted term in all usage. To show you how old this issue of language is, I have a chapter called “Birth Mothers – Are They Baby Machines?” in Lost and Found (1979). In it, Lee Campbell says things like “We’re tired of being considered mere incubators or baby machines.” (Sound familiar.) And she adds: “We’re grateful to you Adoptees for waking us up. If you hadn’t come out of the closet, we birth mothers would be in pain forever.” (I put capital A for adoptee all the way through that book, as a way of making us visible.) In that chapter (which I wish you could all read), I interview many women who surrendered their babies, much like Ann Fessler did in her excellent book. One of the women in my chapter says she’s more angry than depressed now, but is go ing to channel her anger into constructive action, working for social and legislative change.
One other “birth” thought – on the name of your group – Origins. According to the dictionary, origins means beginnings. And for the adoptee, the beginning is one’s birth. My son Ken was born in Japan in 1961. When we left the country, the stern immigration officer wanted to know his “point of entry.” My Japanese was not good enough for me to explain that I was his point of entry. Finally, through much pantomime, he understood.
And so, though you all may value yourselves as “first,” do not denigrate the importance of being your child’s point of entry.
In closing, let me bring in one of the many ghosts who haunt my talks. At one conference I was listing the ghosts who accompany the birth mother – the ghost of the child she gave up for adoption, the ghost of the father of that child, and the ghost of the adoptive mother. In the question/ answer period, one woman said she’d like to add a ghost: “The ghost of the mother I might have been.” That ghost has been included in all my talks. I have great respect and empathy for her, and I hope that she, as well as all of you, accepts this letter in the spirit in which it is written.
Peace,
BJ Lifton
http://www.bjlifton.com
Ch says:Even though I am not a huge fan of Marley’s, I recognize intelligence when I hear it. From you all I hear is a resounding ‘THUD’!
Grow up!
Ch! KAPOW!!!! You constantly outthink, outtalk and outsmart this cheeseball! She thinks she’s quite the linguistic wizard with her “bite me” comments.
oh excuse me – i didnt mean to call her names – cheeseball was maybe pushing the envelope a bit, yes?
“And for the adoptee, the beginning is one’s birth.”
Well, Ms. Lipton doesn’t speak for my son who feels his beginnings started with two people, not the act of being birthed.
“oh, boy, the demand for a “plan.”
I just had a flashback.
Demanding a “plan” from a mother is a key tactic in adoption coercion–er, ah, counseling. “
If coerced relinquishment is evil, then what do you plan to do about it? That’s not a demand, that’s a question. I don’t have the power of the state behind me to demand an answer, so you can dodge it as much as you like. Your family won’t turn against you if you don’t answer, society won’t judge you one way or the other. There’s nothing I can do about it except note that you appear not to have a plan for social change that would rid the necessity of any other women being forced to do what you did. I don’t have a right to demand this of you, but I have every right to ask you.
BB Church said…
“I don’t have a right to demand this of you, but I have every right to ask you.”
BB Church
The fact that your asking for a plan from those whom you call
“anti-adoption” insinuates a bedfellowship with the NCFA who also calls anyone who disagrees with them “anti-adoption”.
Look BB, your asking about a plan and giving the third degree not only raises suspicion to your interests and intentions, it stinks to high heaven of infiltrative curiousity. You must think we’re stupid.
If your really thirsty why not sip on a particular post at
Marley’s other article on BJ Lifton
Reference is the new post
written by
Di Wellfare,
Founder Origins Australia
-signed, Enough
Enough: wrote:
BB Church
The fact that your asking for a plan from those whom you call
“anti-adoption” insinuates a NiceNicbedfellowship with the NCFA who also calls anyone who disagrees with them “anti-adoption”.
Nice try, Joe! Since OUSA has declared itself “anti-adoption” why are you complaining if somebody calls you that?
I don’t think BB Church was denigrating you for calling yourself anti-adoption. He was simply asking if you had a plan to accomplish your goals or if you’ve designed a set of goals to start with. That is a reasonsable question, especially in light of the now 3 1/ years BushCo non-plan for Iraq. Wny would anybody sign on to your program, if you have no program or strategy?
Marley Greiner said…
“I don’t think BB Church was denigrating you for calling yourself anti-adoption.”
Who said anything about feeling denegrated? There’s been more than one group that NCFA has called anti-adoption, and I know you know that.
It’s just really funny when one of those groups in turn calls someone else “anti-adoption” unless they actually do agree with NCFA.
“He was simply asking if you had a plan to accomplish your goals or if you’ve designed a set of goals to start with. …Why would anybody sign on to your program, if you have no program or strategy?”
The goal and reasons are no secret. One either agrees or they don’t.
If one don’t agree with the goals and reasons, plan & strategy is moot unless it’s out of infiltrative curiousity.
-signed, Enough
CH, Carol C., Annonymous clone:
You seem confused. You respond with anger, pounce, but when anyone dares to question you, you pull the victim card.
I never brought the term birth whore to this board. Uh, you did.
You played the victim card by saying Marley referred to ALL relinquishing mothers as BIRTH WHORES. Marley has always been respectful toward me, and other mothers who have relinquished without categorization. Where you came up with that lie is beyond me.
Perhaps you wanted to feel abused so you can continue to play the eternal victim? If one wants to work for real change within themselves…. …..they don’t let things like semantics get under their skin.
Just asking. And this time, I am asking with genuine interest, and will leave my sarcasm meter at the door. But who died and left you to play the role of Adoption Language Police?
Look, I don’t care what you call yourself, and you claim not to care what I call myself.I doubt that seriously. Just because your belief is anti-adoption, it does not mean I am a happy birthmom who works for a pimp. No one will ever speak for me, and that means you and your silent and not so silent legions. I continue to be amused by your rhetoric.. What I do take issue with is your arrogance, attempting to correct another’s chosen adoption vocabulary. Anyone’s. Worry about your own adoption vocabulary, and you’ll be home free of baggage. JMHO. And please stop speaking for ALL mothers. You sound like a graduate of the Dian school of clones… You’ll never be taken seriously until you respect the fact that we don’t need to be nannied, nor do we, the collective we, need to have anyone speak for our experiences.
Imo, BJ Lifton, has every right to use her own terminology with or without your motherly permission. Respect is a two way street. I suggest you begin to respect her right to choose her own language.
In closing, I never told you to BITE me. You seem to confuse what other posters have written to or about you. In fact, I think this is another shining example of just how confused you really are.
I don’t know you, but I wish you peace. Let’s just say it’s from one mother to another. It wouldn’t make any difference if I said from one birthmother to another birthmother, would it really?
Respect yourself. It will never come from demanding what others should call you. Even if you ask them nicely not to call you a bmom at a public conference, or on a blog..Your respect must come from within yourself.
Kathy
reunited bmom/mother/first mother/nmom/ad infinitum_______you fill in the blank
“BB Church
The fact that your asking for a plan from those whom you call
“anti-adoption” insinuates a bedfellowship with the NCFA who also calls anyone who disagrees with them “anti-adoption”.”
I can’t even figure out if I disagree with you since I don’t know what you think should be done. Perhaps my mistake is conflating folks who are posting here with individuals and groups who do self-identify as anti-adoption. If that’s the case, then my apologies.
“Look BB, your asking about a plan and giving the third degree not only raises suspicion to your interests and intentions, it stinks to high heaven of infiltrative curiousity. You must think we’re stupid.”
If I thought you were stupid I was say so flat out, I’m not generally shy about that sort of thing. This isn’t some third degree, I haven’t got you hostage, I’m not shining a bright light in your face. It seems, though, that the question I’m asking makes some folks uncomfortable enough that they feel its coercive. It’s a pretty standard question in the ” outside world”, as one poster called it. You have a grievance, what are you going to do about it.
In a following post Enough wrote:
“Who said anything about feeling denegrated? There’s been more than one group that NCFA has called anti-adoption, and I know you know that.”
Sure, I even referenced it in an earlier post to this blog. If I made a mistaken assumption by conflating individuals on this blog with others who do self-identify with the term “anti-adoption”, then I apologize. And that’s something Nikfa never does.
“It’s just really funny when one of those groups in turn calls someone else “anti-adoption” unless they actually do agree with NCFA.”
Hey, if you run around waving signs that say “Adoption is Soul Murder” and “Stop the Adoption Holocaust” it may give the distinct impression that you’re anti-adoption.
“The goal and reasons are no secret. One either agrees or they don’t.
If one don’t agree with the goals and reasons, plan & strategy is moot unless it’s out of infiltrative curiousity.”
I agree in principle that coercive adoption should be abolished. I believe in principle that mothers who’ve experienced coercive relinquishment have a critical role in this struggle, perhaps a central role. My personal and professional experience leads me to believe that without a plan for social change, social change won’t happen. It doesn’t matter if the social change is about racism, sexism, whatever. Without action nothing changes, or more precisely, change occurs without respite and without a plan that change happens without your input or direction, and usually to your detriment.
This “infiltrative curiosity” business is interesting, very spy vs. spy. I wouldn’t expect anyone to divulge sensitive stategic information in response to my questions, presuming they had any, but I do think that individuals or groups that publicly pose a critique of a social ill could expect to have a public response about how they plan to change that system.
Quote of the month: “Your respect must come from within yourself.”
Author – a self confessed “birth whore.”
Kathy/Meagan/BW/But Never a CB said to Carol C specifically (and to all and sundry):
“You seem confused. You respond with anger, pounce, but when anyone dares to question you, you pull the victim card.
I never brought the term birth whore to this board. Uh, you did.
You played the victim card by saying Marley referred to ALL relinquishing mothers as BIRTH WHORES. Marley has always been respectful toward me, and other mothers who have relinquished without categorization. Where you came up with that lie is beyond me.”
I made that point in the comments section of Marley’s previous post (where Carol made that accusation, as well as accusing me of attacking ALL mothers), and asked her to put up or shut up.
She refused.
Her only response was to call me “a shrew” and suggest I get a place on “My Space” for being so juvenile.
Oh wait, different post.
That one was when I objected to being characterized as a “slave”.
While I wouldn’t characterize Carol’s inability or refusal to back up her spurious claims as pulling the “victim card”, I do think it calls into question the legitimacy of anything she posts.
Which is a shame, because I’ve been following and she has some good points.
But since she can’t or won’t substantiate her previous claims, it seems like everything she posts flys out of her butt like a winged monkey.
But since she can’t or won’t substantiate her previous claims, it seems like everything she posts flys out of her butt like a winged monkey. >
Ya know, all these CB(s) have the same MO…..it’s all about them, and they rarely answer questions which could give them some credibility.. And you know why that is, lil adopted child,(?).. because they think they are the only ones that ever suffered or got a raw deal….. They are not interested in reform. They care more about being HEARD,than anything else at all.
Kathy
reunited _______ ( you fill in the blank)
Meagan said…
“They are not interested in reform.”
Here’s a quote about reform:
Reformers who are always compromising, have not yet grasped the idea that truth is the only safe ground to stand upon.
– Elizabeth Cady Stanton
Here’s a quote about reform:
Reformers who are always compromising, have not yet grasped the idea that truth is the only safe ground to stand upon.
– Elizabeth Cady Stanton >
Those are some big old words coming from anonymous spelled with a capital ‘A ‘.
Now tell us all what it means for anyone else but yourself. O-this ought to be a hoot!
anonymous with a lower case ‘a’
(who knows the meaning of their own truth)
anonomous aka Megan said:”Now tell us all what it means for anyone else but yourself. O-this ought to be a hoot!”
You’re kidding right? Anyone with a functioning brain cell would get it.