So, now I’ve been banned from posting on the CAICW FB page. It’s ironic that the co-founder and Executive Chair of the largest adoptee civil rights organization in North America isn’t allowed to post on a FB page promoted in part as an adoptee rights page. I must have been banned after the polite comments I made a couple weeks ago
I guess “adoptee rights” for these people means the right of babies to be adopted by worthy (straight, married) suburban white folks with prayer partners PR hacks, and $480/hr baby carriage chasers. Two cars in every garage. A chicken in every pot.
In case you missed it, my old komradista Suzi Kidnap posted a comment in the blog below published earlier today, saying that she was banned, too. Suzi made the mistake of posting a polite comment regarding natural parent loss. Suzi, too, is a long time activist in adoptee and first parent rights. Yeah, you never want to hear from those kind of people.
Suzi doesn’t have a copy of her original post. She says “the post below is basically a reconstruction of the comment deleted from the caicw page, with the comment about whose dollars fuel everything and the for every family you know parts added” [to this comment].
i left a comment on that post last night. it was a very polite comment that simply pointed out that natural families suffer from ptsd, that they oftentimes do not know the fate of their child, that they witness their children being carried away, that they have nightmares.
in no way did i point out that for every one family so affected by having to return an icwa child, there are probably thousands of natural families suffering. i did not even come close to suggesting that people whose dollars fuel adoption are the root cause of all this trauma.
i did ask her if her god is indifferent to the suffering of natural families.
when i went to bed last night, the comment had two “likes.”
as can be expected, by this morning my comment had been removed, and i permanently banned from that page.
If you’ve been banned from posting on the CAICW FB page for posting polite comments, please share your experience with a copy of your banned post if possible, here in the comment section at the end of the blog.
As I said a few weeks ago, owners of pages have every right to ban someone, but it is obvious that civil discourse and a diversity of views is not one of CAICW’s strong points.Anyone who disagrees with their attempt to de-ball ICWA and tribal sovereignty is doing the Devils’ Work and is probably racist to boot..
BTW, I’m on a roll. A few weeks ago I was blocked , as were other adoptee rights activists, from posting on the CHIFF FB list.
I am not as nice as Suzie Kidnap. I wrote: “Women who lose their children to adoption do not need your prayers, I guess. They experience no stress, nor fear of what might happen to their children in the hands of adopters. In fact, they are less than human. They exist only to provide you good people with babies.”
Well, apparently I’m banned from commenting although I don’t remember commenting on that page…I guess my birthmother tattoo was showing.
Glad to know I’m in such good company!
I think I posted something about getting both birth parents’ consent to someone complaining about the Cherokee nation involved in some case.
I was treated respectfully but I think they saw my website and now I’m banned.
I’m so incredibly sad.
CAICW is incredibly small potatoes. It had revenues of less than $50,000 in 2012. It’s located in a flyspeck of a town in North Dakota, mid-way between Fargo and Grand Forks, off of I-29. If I recall correctly, Hillsboro has a small state school.