Homofauxbia and the Third World Womb

Or: Hot Girl-on-Girl Colonialism and Exploitation!

This is the continuation of a previous entry in which I started analyzing a post from a blog called Subversive Writer (which is about as subversive as a minivan) that is just so chock full o’ what’s wrong with the current culture of adoption (especially international adoption) that the first two paragraphs were enough to generate a whole post’s worth of criticism. At long last we can move on to paragraph three:

Asia is now officially off the map in terms of singles adopting – China, South Korea and India all demand that couples be married (and of course, heterosexual). As if it wasn’t heterosexual couples who had abandoned those little girls in the first place!

Well, this is telling. There are two different things going on here, in addition to the continuation of the previous theme of adoption as entitlement. First, we have a covert attempt to frame adoption as a gay and lesbian moral imperative: those breeders are abandoning kids left and right–it’s up to upstanding gay and lesbian couples to save the children! Only a completely irrational, homophobic person, then, would dare interfere with this noble attempt by adoptive gays and lesbians to clean up the straights’ messes. This is really just another version of The Wrong Tummy in which heterosexual reproduction is God’s screw-up and the resulting helpless little bastards are saved by gay angels. No wonder Rosie O’Donnell likes that stupid story so much.

Second, we have the overt construction of child abandonment as something done by heterosexual couples. Wow, can you really be a lesbian without being a feminist these days? How much ignorance does it take about the realities of heterosexual relationships in highly patriarchal societies, gender roles in traditional Chinese culture, and the population policies of modern China, to actually try to claim that heterosexual Chinese couples are coming to mutual decisions to abandon their daughters, and that those decisions are made without any external pressures? Now, I am not defending child abandonment here (being an adoptee, that’s pretty low on the list of things I would try to defend). I’m saying that no honest, thoughtful person would dare try to imply that it was a casual choice that two people arrived at mutually without any social context.

“Honey, what do you say we go dump that baby girl in an alley and then return quickly so we may resume having vaginal intercourse without birth control?”

“Sounds good to me, snookums. Can we stop for a bite while we’re out? All this irresponsible sexual reproduction is making me hungry.”

Um, yeah. That’s totally how it goes down, every time. Not only does this allegedly subversive writer ignore the systematic oppression of women in patriarchal societies and the social institutions that perpetuate that oppression, she wants to reap the fruits of it. Yes, I guess you can be a lesbian and an overt misogynist at the same time! I blame The L Word. But this is just the tip of the iceberg.

HOWEVER, a new wave is on the horizon. Surrogate mothers, both in Asia and India, are now presenting a new way for gay couples (and heterosexual singles) to have a family – at a much lesser price than even the cost of going through conventional adoption agencies.

Reproductive tourism” is a booming business.

The irony here is that reproductive tourism is exactly the phrase I would have used to disparage this practice, as I have called some particularly shallow international adoptive parents “adoption tourists” in the past. I guess there’s something to be said for just being overt about it.

I’m just going to leave you with that. I was quite disappointed (but not really surprised) to discover that our “subversive writer” is just a little too hungry for attention and is now going out of her way to provoke adoptees. Clearly the two or three dozen additional blog reads that came from her blog’s mention on an adoptee forum have gone to her head and I’m not going to encourage her anymore. Instead, I will let this serve as a segue to the much more interesting and important topic of international surrogacy and the globalization of human reproduction.

Farewell, Elisa. Keep on raging for the machine!


9 Responses to “Homofauxbia and the Third World Womb”

  1. 1 Sunny July 3, 2007 at 4:49 am

    Well, iBastard, you may not think she’s subversive, but all her humorless (also a requirement for lesbians these days) womyn in her Women’s Studies classes think she’s hot! If you could just get out of your privledged, white male mindset, you could see that. This “writer” is as insensitive as a toad. Heaven help us if she and her wife? procure a kid. Bravo for saying so well, what so many of us think.

  2. 2 iBastard July 3, 2007 at 4:56 am

    Actually, if she had ever taken a women’s studies class (and paid any attention) she would know better than to write most of the things she’s written. She is incredibly ignorant.

  3. 3 joy21 July 3, 2007 at 5:59 am

    yay iBastard!!!


  4. 4 imtina July 3, 2007 at 6:26 am

    The term ‘reproductive tourism’ makes me want to hurl.

  5. 5 Julie July 3, 2007 at 7:03 am

    OH yah, since we can’t get Asia or India to fork over any of their existing abandoned children to us, let’s create our very own abandoned child. And on the cheap, too!

  6. 6 Theresa July 3, 2007 at 11:17 am

    “can you really be a lesbian without being a feminist these days?”

    Um. yeah. As long as a poorer woman has something you want, then the idea of sisterhood is global can fly out the window.

  7. 7 Sue July 3, 2007 at 1:53 pm

    LOVE the title because that is what it is, FAUX. And a red herring besides. (Btw she is wrong that India is off the map, they do adopt to singles and at this point they don’t seem especially concerned with whether those singles are or are not het.) The use of Indian women as surrogates is very disturbing, exploitation at such an extreme that it should be a no-brainer how f-d up it is. As for “subversive”, treating adoption as if it is a consumer rights issue is just plain mainstream.

  8. 8 Katy July 3, 2007 at 2:55 pm

    I don’t see how using an impoverished and desperate paid surrogate in India is any less disgusting that men who pay desperate impoverished women for sex. In fact it’s worse. As a women both sound unthinkable to me. But, I’d rather give up my body for money than my baby. People talk about paying a surrogate like it’s just peachy, but they probably wouldn’t talk about their recent visit to a prostitute. They both seem like taking advantage of anothers desperation and pverty for your own selfish purposes.

  9. 9 Valentina July 5, 2007 at 6:51 pm

    “Yes, I guess you can be a lesbian and an overt misogynist at the same time! I blame The L Word.” – Oh yes, you can! Your L Word comment made me laugh.

    “As long as a poorer woman has something you want, then the idea of sisterhood is global can fly out the window.” – No kidding, Theresa.

    “…treating adoption as if it is a consumer rights issue is just plain mainstream.” – I agree, Sue.

    Katy, I nearly had whiplash from the 180 I experienced on the subject of surrogacy when I started my search and after having a child myself.

    “Reproductive tourism.” Pfft. Just call it what it really is.

    Looking forward to your segue into international surrogacy and the globalization of human reproduction.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: