While Googling my website (The Multiracial Activist) I came across a posting by So Yung on TransracialAbductees, a website sponsored by activist Emi Koyama. Ms. Yung, makes it clear that she hates "transracial" adoption and anyone involved with it or advocating it's legality, etc. I fit that description, as I believe that childen should be adopted without requirements that the adoptive parents be of any particular "race." Further, my newfound critic takes issue with my valid criticism of the National Association of Black Social Workers (NABSW) who oppose "transracial" adoption with bogeyman visions of adoption holocausts and complete destruction of the "black" community. A few years ago, the Chicago chapter of the NABSW went so far as to claim that there are no "biracial" people in the U.S., an obvious advocation of the perverse "one-drop" rule. Hmmm, why would I take issue with that type of nonsense?
Geez, what kind of an evil person am I to advocate that children not fester in foster care and orphanages. The individual behind that posting calls it "transracial abduction" and Ms. Yung slanders transracial adoption advocates repeatedly. I call it good old fashioned segregationism for advocating that a child stay in foster care due to "racial" classification, rather than go home with loving parents who may not necessarily look like the child. Ms. Yung should be ashamed for projecting her childhood traumas onto everyone else instead of dealing with them like an adult. Maybe some counselling is in order? She may have had a bad childhood, or more likely she's been programmed by the segregationist neo-Marxist drones that occupy faculty positions in our nation's institutions of higher learning. Further shame is visited upon her for backing up a "racist" organization like the NABSW who along with opposing "transracial" adoption, have previously spoken harshly about "interracial" marriages and the children that result. Ms. Yung's support of this type of organization puts her in the company of such esteemed individuals as David Duke and Matt Hale.
A little bit of digging around on the sponsor's website (Ms. Koyama) revealed an obvious uber-leftist political stance. You'd be suprised at how many lefties, especially those claiming involvement in the "diversity" and "multicultural" fields or "anti-racism" activism are opposed to "transracial" adoption, "interracial" marriage, etc. Their rhetoric isn't much different from what you get from Tom Metzger and Don Black. They favor "cultural integrity" and similar nonsense, which is really just a leftist way of endorsing segregation. It is seldom talked about, but a very real scourge that those on the left pretend doesn't exist. No one wants to talk about that old pink elephant in the living room. They just pretend it ain't there and try to walk around the elephant droppings.
UPDATE: EurasianNation has an interesting discussion on the individuals behind Transracial Abductees.
Weenies.
I wonder how many children she has adopted? Children languish in foster care in the United States while U.S. parents are flying all over the world to adopt children from China and Russia, because they are too afraid of the complications and horror stories of U.S. adoptions. A few high profile legal cases made lots of news, in several cases because the parents in question didn’t go about their adoption in a legal manner in the first place, and everyone is afraid to adopt in the US.
My daughter: half-Afghan and half-African American. She needed a home. We wanted a another baby, and didn’t and don’t care about ethnic background. The birth-mother — who was able to pick from several families — picked us because my wife is half-Lebanese.
Where does some third party get off suggesting that there is something wrong with that?
Check the url for a picture of the sweetest little girl in the world.
James, I think that you’ve totally missed or ignored the major points of So Yung’s website and have instead focused on the fact that she is soured to transracial adoption because she has had such a terrible experience.
I believe that she states in so many words that:
1) Her website doesn’t speak for everyone, but it does speak for a group of underrepresented people who are in desperate need of a voice.
2) Not everyone who wants to adopt a child is fit to be a parent. Nor do they necessarily have the child’s best interests at heart. In fact, some of them adopt children for selfish reasons and do it under the guise of charity. She and her subscribers are living proof of that.
Also, you compare her to the likes of David Dukes, and yet your example only strengthens her argument. Racism and the power to exercise racist beliefs are the hallmark traits of white supremacists (minorities can be racist as well, but they don?t have the power to put their racism in to practice in America). So Yung and her cohorts were FORCED into narrow racist stereotypes by their adoptive parents. In this situation, adoption was in fact the ultimate form of forced assimilation. It seems obvious that her bitterness is retaliatory, and not something of her own creation.
Finally, I think that So Yung (and I believe that her last name is Kim) deserves our sympathy and more importantly our support. You have taken personal offence to her website when you may not even be the target of her resentment. If you truly have the best interest of the orphans at heart, then I think that it would be wise to inform prospective adoptive parents of some of the dangers of transracial adoption rather than dismiss them as total nonsense.
Charles, it sounds like your adoption has turned out fine and you have the child?s best interests at heart. That is wonderful.
However, you make two unusual points. First, you question how many children Ms. Kim has adopted. Perhaps, she doesn?t feel that she is fit to be the adoptive parent of a different race child, an adoptive parent, or even a parent at all. Simply because one doesn?t adopt a child doesn?t mean that they are proponents of child abandonment.
Second, you mention that adoptive parents in the US would rather get children from other countries because of a fear of litigation. Again, this calls into question the parent?s motivation for adopting children. If they want to adopt in order to keep a child from languishing in foster care, why do they allow American children to languish but not foreign children. Of course not everyone feels that ?charity begins at home?, however that still doesn?t explain why the cultural and racial complications of transracial adoption are not considered. Even in your own personal example, the birth mother of your child considered race and culture important factors when choosing parents for her child.
Mark said: “you compare her to the likes of David Dukes, and yet your example only strengthens her argument. Racism and the power to exercise racist beliefs are the hallmark traits of white supremacists (minorities can be racist as well, but they don?t have the power to put their racism in to practice in America).”
By playing the only “whites” can really be racist card, you invalidate your entire posting. Tell that to the “biracial” child getting harassed and called “wannabe” and “Oreo” by “black” classmates and adults alike. Tell that to the “interracial” couple getting harassed by “racists” of all hues. Tell that my “biracial” children when it happens to them. I don’t make excuses for “racism” by pretending that only certain people have the power. Power comes in many forms. It can be wielded as an emotional hammer, in the form of a fist or a gun or, in the case of political power. When the NAACP declared that “biracial” people had no right to identify with all of their heritage on Census forms and then engaged in a political campaign to deny them that right, they were wielding a “racist” political power, whether the apologists of such “racism” wish to pretend otherwise or not. As someone who played a role in the 2000 Census debate I have first hand knowledge of just how much power certain organizations can wield. As editor and publisher of The Multiracial Activist I’ve heard it all and you’d be suprised how often I get complaints from readers with regards to their children being subjected to “racist” intolerance. A large segment of said intolerance comes from “black” power types, petty bureaucrats and one-drop advocates. It ain’t only “white” folks with power in this country Mark. Quit peddling that crap. I know better.
Mark said: “Finally, I think that So Yung (and I believe that her last name is Kim) deserves our sympathy and more importantly our support.”
She didn’t ask for support, she instead took up the charge in support of the segregationists at the National Association of Black Social Workers, a group that has been attacking “interracial” families for 30 years now. This is the same organization that believes that “biracial” children should be forcibly removed from their “interracially” married biological parents and placed via government force into “black” only homes. Why? Because they oppose “interracial” families and see them as an affront to the survival of “black” culture. That’s segregation and “racism” Mark. Don’t softpedal it. Its shameful. And these are the people that the founders of Transracial Abductees support? And you are making excuses for this? If they really wish to be taken seriously, they’ll have to start by shedding their “racist” alliances and they’ll need to make a public accounting of such. I don’t support “racism” in any form. Busting up “interracial” families IS “racism”, even if some folks want to pretend otherwise. Again, I don’t make excuses for the racists at NABSW. Its called principle. No excuses.
Mark said: “You have taken personal offence to her website when you may not even be the target of her resentment.”
I will always take personal offense at those who make excuses for “racists” like those at NABSW. To do less is to condone such assaults on the rights of “interracial” families and the rights of “biracial” children. The NABSW would turn back the Loving v. Virginia decision if they had the power. Fortunately, their power is limited to their control of the foster care system. And there, they run the show like a bunch of Napoleons.
Mark said: “If you truly have the best interest of the orphans at heart, then I think that it would be wise to inform prospective adoptive parents of some of the dangers of transracial adoption rather than dismiss them as total nonsense.”
Really Mark? There are more bad parents in purely biologically-related families than in adoptive families. The same arguments she uses against “transracial” adoption could be used to outlaw damn near everything. Because some people drink and drive, perhaps we should outlaw drinking. Or perhaps driving. Or perhaps both. Because some people break the law on the internet, perhaps we should outlaw the internet. Or perhaps computers. Or maybe we should just outlaw all forms of electronic technology. Because some biological parents abuse their children, perhaps we should outlaw biologically connected families. Or children. Or both. Whenever we allow the exceptions to dictate the rule we end up in absurdist locales like that advocated by the ladies who have taken up the cause of supporting “racists” who target “interracial” families and who’ve publicly denied that “biracial” people even exist. They want “transracial” adoption outlawed and they’ve decided that criticism of NABSW is wrong. I’m sorry, but the NABSW is a “racist”, segregationist hate group and I won’t make excuses for their behavior based on skin color. You are free to do so if you wish, like the Transracial Abductees founders do. I won’t be joining you in this nasty circle. I abhor “racism” in all its forms without ridiculous excuses.