Adoption - Vyoos

Vyoos

follow this blog

32 followers

235 daily readers

rank of 25

E-mail Subscription

Receive an e-mail notification of new posts on this site:

Blinkered in rural Arkansas

January 28th 2011 02:32

: Vyoos news

David Furnish and Elton John

VYOOS EDITORIAL
Elton John is fuming, and he has every right to be. Just last week he said he was getting increasingly annoyed by anti-gay sentiment, and now this.

With the world looking at pictures of a grinning John and his partner, David Furnish, with the baby they have just adopted, a supermarket in a rural US community has decided the pictures are offensive.

The Harps store in Mountain Home, Arkansas, has decided to hide magazine covers featuring pictures of John, 63, Furnish, 48, and Zachary, born on Christmas Day, covering the happy family in wrapping normally used on pornographic magazines.

The supermarket said it decided to wrap the magazines after customer complaints and to "to protect young Harps shoppers".

Now the world is crying "homophobia". Maybe so - as mX columnist Anna Brain wrote today, one assumes it is not the baby that people are protesting about.

But I don't call this homophobia. I reserve that noun for cynical acts of hatred or violence against gays. I don't think this is a homophobic act. I think it's an act of ignorance, and I think criticising it is the wrong response.

A person or persons in rural Arkansas was offended by an image of a gay couple celebrating parenthood. It's an unenlightened reaction, but there will always be an uninformed minority, and there will always be a need for tolerance towards them.

The supermarket to which the complaint was directed decided to take action, meaning its management was as naive as the complainant. This is a Keystone Cops sequence of the dumb influencing the gullible. Instead of labelling them homophobic, we have a chance to explain how and why majority perceptions differ from their own.

It needs a gentle approach.

Now get those moronic covers off those magazines, and give Elton a quiet day or two until the next piece of stupidity comes along.
news.com.au

Vote

Add Comments

[ Link ]

Posted By: Chris Champion - Category: Adoption, Celebrity watch, Gays, gay issues, North America, US, Vyoos Editorial

Email this Post to a Friend

Should people adopt children of a different race?

January 24th 2009 05:18

I saw this question on a blog recently: should people adopt children of a different race?

My first reaction was distaste because the question implies a moral dilemma which I couldn't see. But it got me thinking, and a little research suggested that the question could perhaps be a fair one in some circumstances.

In the United States, for example, there are more people looking to adopt than there are children in need of adoption. This has led to many Americans looking overseas, and especially to poor countries, where for all sorts of sad political, economic and social reasons, there are plenty of orphans. Many of those Americans are caucasians whose first choice would have been a caucasian American child.

But now I find myself thinking, is this the same question? Isn't the question in these circumstances: do you understand what's involved in adopting a child from another country?

There are good reasons why people choose to adopt children from different racial or cultural backgrounds. They may have lived in another country and developed an affinity for it, for example, or they may have ancestral links.

And there are potential negatives, such as people not understanding that a child may need time to assimilate, may need help forgetting a traumatic past, and may later develop an interest in the identity and culture of their birth, an interest which the adoptive parents can't intimately share.

Internet research reveals that the experts disagree on some basic points. What a surprise.

One school of thinking is that children available for adoption need at least one parent of the same race or culture as the child so the child can develop a racial or cultural identity. Another school disagrees, saying a loving family is all that matters. A third "expert" actually suggests adoption agencies should work hard to place children with families of the same race, but failing that the child should be placed with a loving family of any race or culture.

I have returned to my original feeling of distaste. The question "should people adopt children of a different race" suggests censure. It sounds like a platform for moralising and sermonising.

It's the wrong question. The real question is simpler: is someone ready to adopt a child? Because if they are, they will know that all children are different and they have to be committed to meeting the needs of the individual. They will also know that a child - any child - will thrive on care and affection and love.

What on earth has race got to do with it?