#the original transracial adopter

[inact-ice]

No bc I do find it hilarious that so much of the batfam isn’t white, Dick is half Romani, Damien’s a quarter Arab and a quarter Chinese, Cass is Chinese, Duke is Black. That’s like a little under half of the Bats being some kind of not white (or rather not JUST white) if you’re counting Babs and Steph, but if you’re only counting family family, that’s half of the family and most of the kids

[red-envelopes]

I wonder who decided on my original name and what it means. I wonder how it's pronounced and what thought was put into choosing it. I wonder if it meant anything at all, or if it was a stock name chosen for the sake of giving the baby a name. I wonder if it was my birth mother, father, or one of the many siblings that gave me that name. I wonder if there are that many siblings at all. I wonder about the life that that hypothetical original child would've had with that original name, whether she lives a long life, a short life, a sad, content, happy, boring, fearful life if she had stayed with the birth family. The original name is for that original child who doesn't exist.

I don't really feel connected to that name. Part of it is now my middle name but I don't use my middle name anyway apart from official documents. Its existence as my name is a bureaucratic obligation, or a hypothetical scenario that I can't quite imagine. I would like to feel a connection to that name, but I don't feel anything towards it at all. I'm lucky to still have a Vietnamese name, otherwise I would've changed it to one, but even still I don't know if that original name would've fit if I had to change it. The one I have suits me.

I feel huge attachment to my current name, so much so that I don't want anyone to have the power to take it away from me. I keep it to myself so no one else can have it.

[fae-morrigan]

Superfam and Found Family: What it Means to Choose

I have seen a lot of my beloved mutuals talk about adoption as a theme in the superfam, and thats true, thats very much a thing, but thats more a subsection of the larger idea with the superfamily: You get to choose your family, and define your relationship to them.

Clark and Kon come to mind. They've been discussed a lot lately, huh? Namely people saying Clark does not treat Kon well. This is false, by the way, they get along great.

But let's sort of dig into the actual story told by their relationship here: Kon was created by Lex without Clark's consent. Clark had no say in how part of his DNA would be used to create a new life.

(This is coincidentally why it irks me that certain fans will act like Clark is a monster for even HYPOTHETICALLY not wanting a relationship with Kon. Guys, you sound like pro-lifers. Lets watch it!)

Despite this, Clark accepts Kon with open arms. Now, as myself and others have pointed out, Kon's technically... he's not a clone, he's a test tube baby. Technically, biologically, he's Clark & Lex's son. D.. diversity win...?

But thats not how Clark and Kon choose to define their relationship. They instead decide, hey, we were raised by the same people, we're brothers.

Kon is not an outsider to the Superfam, even as he is an outsider to this world- He is welcomed with open arms once it is clear he needs a home. And with Clark and Kon, they get to choose how they define their relationship, not Lex, not anyone else.

Then, John Henry and Nat. John Henry is not Natasha's father, but their relationship is very complex and often veers into that territory, for the simple reason that he shows up for her in that capacity when Natasha's own father fails her.

Even while their relationship has its ups and downs (read 52 guys for THEM), they manage to forge a relationship based on mutual respect, enough to the point where during Steelworks, she is not just his niece, but his partner in building a better tomorrow. It is a fatherly/daughterly relationship built on mutual respect largely independent of their blood relation, built on the security that Clay failed to provide Natasha with.

Of course, to talk about adoption, Clois adopting the twins. I think Phillip Kennedy Johnson handles the topic of adoption EXPERTLY with Otho-Ra and Osul-Ra, specifically as a metaphor for transracial/transethnic adoption.

Clark's relationship with the twins is built throughout the Warworld saga, and does not start... great (they discuss looting his corpse lol), and often they. But Clark understands that the kids are traumatized, and seeks to guide them to a better situation.

Now I would be irresponsible to not mention that, during this time, Clark is still struggling with Jon's age up. He mumbles, disoriented during their first meeting, that the kids are the same age as his son (no they are not). In a less tightly written book by a worse writer, it'd be a thing where Clark completely uncritically finds 'replacement kids' in the twins... Which is NOT what happens here, because PKJ is the GOAT.

In the end, his relationship with the twins is built not only independently of his struggles with Jon, but the way he connects with them helps Clark realize that whats done is done. They need him to be Clark, not a man hanging onto the past he will never get back. To move forward, they must do it together, it won't work if the twins remain on Warworld and he remains mentally in Hamilton. Its why it is SUPER important, also, that in the end, Clark doesn't ask them to come with him- rather, they ask to go with Clark.

(Sidenote: The twins lost not only their parents on warworld, but an older brother, too. Clark isn't the only one who finds a healing way forward via the Ra-El relationships, but that's gonna be another post!) And their hero names, Red Son and Starchild, are from their original culture (the Phaelosians), a culture that was systematically robbed from them when Warworld trafficked them into service. Rather than forcing them to conform to the house of El and their legacy, they help the kids reconnect.

These are his children. They found each other in the scariest place in the universe, and together, they find a way past the things they've both suffered through.

I'm afraid I don't know much about Kara (kara mutuals, reading recs appreciated! i've only ever read WOT and a few issues of the most recent Supergirl run) but I do know that her relationship to Clark is inherently different than it was supposed to be, and she has to roll with it and redefine it accordingly. She was supposed to be older than him, be able to take care of him, but by the time she actually finds him, he's the one doing that for her.

(I dont really have a panel here I fear, so look at the pretty art from Woman of Tomorrow. If someone wants to say more on Kara, you're welcome to hijack my post for a bit!)

Kenan is an example of this theme going kind of sideways and being examined from another angle- He's forced to choose between his two found families, and with either choice, he stands to lose something. Either his connection to Superman, or his connection to home:

Kenan already has a messy relationship with family, considering the soap opera level drama his parents inflict on him in his solo. Now, separated from his culture by circumstances he can't control, Kenan's relationship with the Superfam is forced by circumstance, even as it isn't unwanted. He's forced to make the most of what he has.

Then you have Clark and Jon, where the 'and define your relationship to them' part of my thematic statement REALLY becomes important.

I've seen it argued many times that giving Jon the Superman mantle weakens the theme of found family, but I'd argue it strengthens it, because Jon not having a choice in becoming Superman is EXPLICITLY framed as a bad thing.

Jon's not ready to be Superman. He doesn't even really WANT to be superman. But because of the circumstances of his birth, the world, and his father, push him into it. Clark never asked Jon to be Superman, during the Son-of-kal-el + Warworld era. He assumed he would be.

It tarnishes Clark & Jon's relationship, actively preventing Jon from connecting with his father and the WORLD fully in the way they both want. This is a key theme of Superman: Son of Kal El, from the very moment of Jon's actual birth:

All throughout post-age up Jon is the idea that Jon is just as burdened by the expectations placed upon him by his blood as he is comforted by what the mantle represents.

(I know I use this panel like every analysis but its a GOOD PANEL, SHUT UP) And there's of course the fact that... y'know. Well. Y'know.

Y'KNOW.

I think there's a potentially strong story in either Jon walking away from the mantle entirely, or redefining it to be his own. But first, he's going to have to suffer for the fact he wasn't ready for what many people call his DESTINY, including his abuser.

And where does this leave Jon and Clark?

Here.

The last note before Absolute Power of these two is this bittersweet moment where Jon still isn't fully heard. Where he still doesn't get a full say in what he and Clark's relationship will be. And judging by THIS interview from Mark Waid, this particular idea is about to finally come home to roost:

Lastly, there's of course the Most Found Family Thing Of All that i basically see NO one talk about: The fact that the Irons and the Kents just. Share all their big life events with each other. They're literally not related to each other by blood at all, but throughout PKJ's Action Comics, they ARE family!

Teamwork makes the dreamwork guys!

The superfamily is a wonderfully diverse cluster of relationships and examinations of the way family finds each other. Even moreso than the Batfam, which is often defined by their father-son relationship with Bruce in fanon, the Superfam displays a wide array of the various ways non-nuclear families can build each other.

This is all to say you guys should read PKJ's action comics run. It rules.

(This is also to say Superman 2016 sucks ass.)

[itselfromhell]

As I’ve previously mentioned, I wrote an article about lohsebille for uni and now that I’m doing a proper Sebille origin run I have some further thoughts that I wanted to share here regarding Sebille’s relationship with Tir-Cendellius and how it parallels Lohse and the demon’s relationship, along with some thoughts on my Sebille origin run (with lone wolves Lohse)

There’s very clear parallels between Lohse and Sebille’s relationships. Both have been taken advantage of by men in their lives and have had their bodies used and taken control of in an incredibly violating manner. but what’s especially interesting to me is how this cycle continues to be perpetuated in Sebille’s life.

First, she runs away from the Mother Tree and her role as a scion, which arguably, is not dissimilar to what happens in the future to her. She doesn’t have control or autonomy and is forced to engage with a cycle of violence. Then she is enslaved, and subjected to that horrifying trauma. But when she properly meets Tir-Cendellius, I was surprised to see this reiteration of the same cycle in her interactions with him, especially since I don’t think I’ve seen anyone talk about this before.

Tir belittles her and blames her for being enslaved. He treats her in the same manner, taunting her and branding her. When Sebille threatens to mark his name on her wrist and kill him, he brands his name on her for Sebille in the most painful way possible. Then the emotional whiplash ensues as he declares her his champion and swaps his name for her own, claiming that she is her own owner now. This is incredibly reminiscent of Lohse’s interactions with the demon and how he flips between praise and belittlement.

I was shocked mainly because Tir’s reaction is so different to what I experienced playing a custom elf character previously.

I do not know as much about this, but from what I have read, Ifan also has a terse relationship with Rhalic, partly due to his transracial adoption into an elven tribe (I think?) I don’t know much about this so I’m curious if anyone else does.

Finally, I’ll add that in a conversation I had with someone, they pointed out that Sebille has decided to stop running away from her past whereas Lohse still does. I think that this is true to an extent, though now playing her origin I see a lot more of her fear and dread regarding her whole story, things she holds close to her chest.

Sebille appears cold and calculated but her motives are purely emotional, and she hides this from the world to protect herself. But in her romance she slowly starts opening this up more. In many ways her pain and trauma are a large part of how she presents herself, she doesn’t hide it, but she presents it in a rather curated way, as opposed to Lohse, who tries to completely hide it and fails.

Anyway, felt the need to get some 2am thoughts about this game out. Curious to hear other perspectives on this.

[problematic-polls]

since thereve been polls with this included...

did you know that "transracial" is a term originating in adoptee communities to describe being a different race than your adoptive parent(s), and it was in fact stolen from us by the racist notion that you can transition to another race?

- yes i knew already

- no, but i know now

- i don't care either way

[crippled-peeper]

Do transracialism next

I’m white and not adopted, so sharing my “hot take” on this terminology would be massively inappropriate

“transracial” is a term sometimes used by adoptees to describe having a race different from your adoptive parents. It’s not a bastardization of trans identity the way “transabled” is, because they have separate origins and mean different things

Hope that clarifies things a bit

[fluffytimearts]

"Transracial" Definition

Transracial is the state of someone who was born with one ancestry or race, but has taken on the customs, traditions, and behaviors of another racial group. An example of a transracial person would be someone of Asian descent who grew up in the United States with a strong attachment and identification with the American society and culture.

How "Transracial" is used and coined.

Rachel Dolezal, for example, is a white woman who claimed to be of Black ancestry, and used this claimed heritage to advance her professional, academic, and political career. This act of cultural appropriation is an example of the misconception many people have about the word transracial, which is not actually someone transitioning from one race to another, but rather someone born with one racial ancestry who has taken on the identities, norms, and traditions of another race. You could say she among many changed and coined this term of transracial.

"Transage" or "Transagism" Definition

Trans-agism or transaging is the theory or practice of a person becoming or identifying with a different age to their chronological age. Transaging is a toxic myth and is often used to mock the trans community. It is not a legitimate scientific or psychological theory. It has no basis in scientific research or fact. In fact, transaging is often used to make fun of and invalidate the real experiences and feelings of trans people.

How "Transage" is used and coined.

The term "transage" was probably coined by a group of internet users who wanted to create a term that could be used to mock and make fun of the trans community. It may have been originally used in a joking or sarcastic way, but the term has been since adopted and used by people who are actually trying to invalidate trans people and their identities.

"Transage" is different from age regression.

The biggest difference between Transage and Age Regression is that Transage refers to a person who genuinely identifies as a different age than their chronological age. Age regression, on the other hand, refers to a mental state in which an individual psychologically reverts back to a younger age.

Although both terms refer to a person’s relationship with their age, the underlying motives are different. Whereas Transage is an identity, Age regression is a coping mechanism to deal with negative emotions and events.

"Transabled" or "Transabilism" Definition

Transability, or transabled, refers to a person who believes they should have been born with a physical disability but were not, and as such they may attempt to induce disability via methods such as amputation or other forms of mutilation in an attempt to “achieve” their disability

Transability is toxic because it encourages people to physically mutilate themselves in order to “acquire” a disability, which can be extremely dangerous and damaging to their physical health and mental health. It also serves to mock and invalidate the real experiences and struggles of people with genuine disabilities.

How "Transabled" is used and coined

The term "transability" or "transabled" was likely coined by a group of internet users who wanted to create a term that could be used to mock or invalidate people with genuine disabilities. It has been since adopted by people who actually do attempt to disable themselves in an effort to "achieve" their disability.

The fact TERFs, Radfems, and the like try to use these made up or changed definition terms just to harass trans people. Go outside and touch grass or somethin', damn. Y'all annoy me with these stupid ass excuses like "oh if transgender exist then going by that logic --" shut the fuck up. Go study, research, and actually learn before opening your mouth like the size of Texas and spouting repeated words from others without actually looking it up.

[scarlet--wiccan]

Not completely sure how to word this and sorry about it being so long, but do you think a good way of making it make sense that Billy & Tommy are not white but were born to and raised in white families with no concerns about adoption or affairs or anything that both of their families assumed that what’d happened was something like what’d happened with Liam in Shameless US? If you’ve never watched that show, basically Liam was born to Frank and Monica, two white parents, while looking fully black and being played by a fully black actor, and basically they explained how this was possible in-universe by saying that Frank had one black grandfather, and somehow because of that, Liam turned out to look fully black, so basically my idea is that Billy’s & Tommy’s parents each had like one Desi or Romani close ancestor, and they just assumed that they turned out to be brown because of them.

I want to clear up a couple things here-- first of all, Romani people are not desi. The diaspora originated in what is now India and Pakistan, but we are not interchangeable with modern-day Indian or Pakistani natives. Second, that Shameless storyline is weird as hell to me, on several levels, and I would advise you to never compare it to real-- or fictional, for that matter-- mixed-race people or families. I come from a mixed background, and I will admit, genetics are crazy, and you'd be surprised the way features can skip a generation. But casually and retroactively making an entire family of white characters, played by white actors, part Black for laughs is not what I'd call authentic representation.

I actually answered a very similar question a while back, and you can read that here. I recognize that acknowledging Billy and Tommy's heritage and/or depicting them as people of color creates a weird discrepancy, and there's no perfect solution to that. I think if Wanda had been drawn or more commonly recognized as a woman of color back when Young Avengers was written, we probably wouldn't have this problem-- most writers, I hope, would not choose to magically turn characters of color, even babies, into white people.

I do actually think that giving the Kaplan and Shepherd families mixed Romani and Jewish heritage is the easiest solution, but not if you're going to frame it the way Shameless did. I also think it's actually important that Billy and Tommy were not fully aware of this heritage growing up, or that they each arrive at different parts of their identities differently, because that is a real experience within diaspora. Having that experience represented within this family adds to the diversity of the story.

As far as character design goes-- if you assume that their parents are white-presenting, it might be more realistic for the twins to be somewhat lighter or more ambiguous in appearance than Wanda, just to diminish the obvious questions. But these are also magical cartoon characters, and Wanda's canon design is not that dark in the first place. It should be pretty easy to suspend disbelief, especially when we don't see the Kaplans more than once a decade. I've been using edits and recolors to make my point about representation for years, but at the end of the day, I think the look is a lot less important than understanding Roma identity and the historical context these characters exist in.

Additionally, I think that Billy and Tommy's unique situation makes the most sense if you view it as a metaphor for transracial adoption. It doesn't answer the practical questions about their birth or looks, but it is a real experience that maps very closely onto these characters and their identities. For Romani people, in particular, this is a very sensitive part of our history that ties into where the Maximoffs come from and what they've been through. Exploring that experience, even through allegory, adds a lot of depth to the representation these characters provide.

[sbrown82]

Might be controversial, but this why I don’t support transracial adoption, at least, when it comes to white adopting parents because many of them don’t seem to think. They just pick out a non-white kid and don’t do the work to make sure that child grows up supported racially and knowing their culture. Some do, but it seems like a lot don’t. Like why adopt a child you know nothing about or how to even do the basic things for? And when it comes to a little black girl and her hair, we had to have a whole crown act, don’t have that child going to school looking crazy and have her hating herself and being picked on because you didn’t think about her hair BEFORE adopting her. Makes me think what other things he failed to learn about regarding black culture and racism, which he will need to know when raising her to make sure she’s prepared. We all know we’ve had those “black talks” with our parents. She won’t get that. I hope he isn’t one of those “I see no race” people because little girl is going to be in for a very rude awakening at some point in her life when she realizes “I’m just me at home, but I’m black out in the world.” I think it’s absolutely neglectful for a white parent to not make an adopted child aware of what she will walk into concerning the world. Plus, every time I hear about these types of adoptions, I can’t help thinking about that lesbian couple who adopted all those black kids, took them around for photographs to absolve white guilt, then ended up killing them. The one child hasn’t been found to this day. Idk it always sus to me.

I don't disagree with transracial adoption at all, because first of all EVERY child deserves love and to be cared for. But it is true, if you adopt a child of another race, it's your responsibility to engage them in their culture so they can feel comfortable, appreciated and walk through life with a bit more ease. I think Angelina Jolie does a great job at that. She's always seemed very invested in her children's lives, their unique cultures, and respects their differences. She even takes lessons in their native languages and lets them visit each of their countries so they know and remember who they are and where they came from and I think that is beautiful.

Here's her in Cambodia (where her eldest son Maddox is originally from) teaching journalists about the local food culture and how the people there have survived off of the diet:

[bi-kisses]

Transracial is also an appropriated term that has nothing to do with transgender. It originally comes from transracial (people adopted by people outside their race. Like a black child adopted by white parents) and the unique difficulties that they have. They always stand out with their own family. They have few to no ties to other people like them. In cases like my example they might not even know something as basic as HAIRCARE!

I have seen a lot of people talking about how much they love their adoptive parents and wouldn't exchange them for anyone, but still talking about the issues of not being the same race. And on the other side we get cases like that one white lesbian couple who adopted like 6 black kids and tortured them, apparently they WERE extremely racist towards the kids and then eventually killed them all...

The people co opting this term piss me off so much. I'm not even involved, but it's important to be able to discuss it. And people who want to pretend to be black or whatever do not deserve that term

I googled this just to be sure but wow yeah I had no idea that's what it actually meant/is supposed to mean! It's fucked up as hell to use a term with existing history and community for your own batshit identity, especially in this instance.

It sounds like transracial adoption is a very interesting and nuanced issue that probably lost a lot of potential support/awareness thanks to creeps like Rachel Dolezal.

[aacalienz]

Just to be clear do you believe in trans racialism and “FtF” trans people and do you think it is deadnaming if a cis woman goes by a female nickname and people decide to call her her original name? For example if someone decided to change their name from Janice to Jane. Because to be clear that is what one of your mutuales believes

I’m fairly certain you’re just a troll at this point tbh

but I believe in transracial. As in the term coined by adoptees of color adopted into white families. But not in the you can change your race way.

I believe in intersex people who have complicated gender experiences using terms like FtF or FTMTF. I also believe detransitioners can use what words make themselves comfortable. Unless of course their real reason for using them is to harm trans people.

I believe that anyone can have a deadname. But cis people going by nicknames doesn’t automatically make their former name a deadname. Most cis people who change their name and call their former name a deadname are abuse survivors. And I respect their right to leave their deadname name behind them.

[neuroticboyfriend]

saw the anon about transracial and just wanted to add that that's a term appropriated from its original context, where it refers to children (usually children of color) who are adopted by people of another race (usually white people). Transracial was used in the context of adoption long before racist whites started stealing it, and I just wanted to throw this out there because adoptees/foster kids are already erased pretty much everywhere (not an attack on you or the anon, just a genuine "I really just want people to know what 'transracial' actually means" type thing!)

! yes, i knew but slipped mind to mention bc tired. thank you for sending this ask, its very important.

[beetlejuiceearrings]

Preface for the post: original transracial meaning: Transracial adoption, placing a child of one racial or ethnic group with adoptive parents of another racial or ethnic group. Original meaning of xenophobia: dislike of or prejudice against people from other countries. I suppose xenogender users and I do not support people who use transracial for any other meaning than the one listed.

I feel so bad for people that who are actually transracial and had the term stolen from them. People need to stop stealing words without doing any research of what it could've meant before and just changing them; like people using xenophobic to refer to xenogenders. Before you use a word, do your research. I support actual transracial people using the word for its original meaning, not "transitioning from one race to another," and I support xenogenders but please do not use xenophobia to refer to xenogenders.

(Reblogs appreciated, I want more people to know about this kinda stuff)

[hello-god-its-me-sara]

hi i would just like to add an interracial adoptee's perspective to this as well since if you continue this will be an important point in your story [disclosure: i am a chinese adoptee of two white parents]

1. ADOPTION IS TRAUMATIC

it's a common misconception (that i myself used to hold) that children can be too young to experience trauma because they don't remember it, this is false

being separated from your biological parents, specifically your biological mother is severely traumatic for a baby

to add when you experience trauma that young, before you can even retain memories, you're just stuck with violent trauma that you can't fully cope with, i've had talks with my therapist about abandonment and separation anxieties i have and there's only so much we can do because it happened to be all before i was one years old

second- if it happens to you when you are that young, growing up you don't recognize it, it might be hard for other people to recognize it, it might manifest in uncommon ways making it harder to recognize. i don't have physical separation anxiety, i have emotional separation anxiety. i did sleepovers, i did summer camps, being away from my parents never bothered me as a kid. any type of family separation sent me into a full blown meltdown as a kid and still upsets [viscerally] me to this day. my parents didn't let me watch finding nemo for a while because the first time they put it on i unexpectedly started screaming, like a wailing breakdown. i don't even remember this i think i was so young. if i had to guess it was either when the barracuda ate the mom or when he got kidnapped

please to research into adoption trauma

2. people are super fucking shitty to adoptive families and it's worse and also weirder if the adoption is interracial

this of course is also dependent of the culture, i can only speak from a western/american experience where the idea of a nuclear family is still very strong

people are also nosy as fuck and if it's something you can't hide like interracial adoption you might as well have a neon sign over your head

as a child i had full grown adults try to mine at me for answers (they still ask by the way, i just think it's extra wrong to ask a child), why did my parents adopt, do i have any biological siblings, when they found out my parents didn't have biological children of their own they immediately assumed fertility issues and tried to get that answer out of me as well

people also act like your adoptive family is not a valid form of family, "real parents/family" is something i never want to fucking hear again in my life, "do you ever want to meet your real parents?", [i have a sister, also adopted] "is she your actual sister?"

also people don't believe that your parents are your parents. i never had this problem because white/asian adoption is so common in the states, but i have heard from other interracial adoptees that they've had people not believe that their adoptive parents were their parents, i could never imagine it

3. cultural dissociation/"transracialness"

despite the bastardization of the term 'transracial' by one british man, it was originally coined by interracial adoptees to describe the cultural/racial dissociation they felt being raised in a culture that did not align with their ethnicity. and honestly how better could i describe the feeling of being raised white, of having a majority white experiences, but being perceived asian by the rest of the world? unironically i "identify" as a white person, i "consider" myself white. and it's not been near as hard on me where my "white assimilation" is more accepted as an east asian person.

sometimes adoptive parents (i find usually white) ignore their children's ethnicity and try to raise them "colorblind", and sometimes they try to help a child reconnect with their heritage but it's just not the same

how the parents/family addresses the transracialness does affect the adoptee in major ways, is the wider adoptive family receptive to the adoptee and their different heritage? is it treated with respect? what kind of internalized bias could the adoptee pick up even if it's unintentional and/or non-malicious?

4. reunification

how does the adoptee handle being recconnected/reunited with his biological dad? you said the adoptive dad assumed the biological dad abandoned his son, does the son also share this opinion? how much does the son know about his adoption or his biological dad? how much has he wanted to reunite with his biological family both younger and now? has it changed? does the son also perceive the biological dad as a threat to his current family situation? do either dads feel a sense of entitlement over the son? do either dads listen to the son's opinions and feelings throughout the entire situation?

adoptees are not a monolith, we all have different situation and opinions on our adoption and out biological families. it is also heavily affected by the information we have on our adoptions, our biological families, and possibly most importantly our adoptive family's feelings toward our adoption and biological family. some kids are abandoned and/or feel abandoned and they want absolutely nothing to do with their biological family, sometimes they grow out of it, sometimes they carry it into adulthood. some kids want nothing more than to learn about their biological family and it gives them a great sense of grief and anxiety to have been given up by their biological parent/s. maybe they were abandoned and want answers, maybe they were left a little bit of information and feel like their biological family would be receptive to reuniting. no feeling or reason is invalid but please make sure to address and explore it because it plays such a huge role in the story.

personally i'm indifferent and have always been indifferent. i would be interested in finding my biological family but if i die never meeting them at the moment i can't say i would care. i was fortunate that my parents were very open about my adoption and the circumstances i was adopted under, they gave me all the information they had, did the best to answer my questions on it, when i was older we even went back to china, to the orphanage i stayed at, and attempted to look for more answers. the information we had was very limited and it will probably remain limited.

those were the main issues specifically pertaining to adoption that picked my head when i read this post, i'm also more than happy to further discuss :)

Desi Parenthood, Adoption, and Stereotypes

I have a story set in the modern day with supernatural traces, with three characters: a young boy, his bio dad, and his adoptive dad. The boy and his bio dad are Indian, the adoptive dad is Chinese. The bio dad is one of the few people in the story with powers. He put his son up for adoption when he was a child because at the time he was a young single father, had little control of the strength of his powers: he feared accidentally hurting his child. The son is adopted by the other dad, who holds spite to the bio dad for giving up his son since he lost his father as a young age and couldn't get why someone would willingly abandon their child. This also results in him being overprotective and strict over his son. When the child is older, the bio dad comes to their town and the son gets closer to him, which makes the adoptive dad pissed, mostly acting hostile to the other guy, paranoid that he'll decide to take away the child he didn't help raise. Later when they get closer he does change his biases. I can see the possible stereotypes here: the absent father being the darkskinned character, the light-skinned adoptive dad being richer than the bio dad, the lightskinned character being hostile and looking down on the darkskinned character, the overprotective asian parent, the adoptive dad assuming the bio dad abandoned the son. The reason for his bias isn't inherently racist, but I get how it can be seen that way. Is there a way to make this work? Would it be better to scrap it?

Two problem areas stand out with this ask: 

You seem confused with respect to how racial stereotypes are created, and what effect they have on society.

Your characterization of the Indian father suggests a lack of familiarity with many desi cultures as they pertain to family and child-rearing.

Racial Stereotypes are Specific

Your concern seems to stem from believing the absent father trope is applied to all dark-skinned individuals, when it’s really only applied to a subset of dark-skinned people for specific historical/ social/ political reasons. The reality is stereotypes are often targeted.

The “absent father” stereotype is often applied to Black fathers, particularly in countries where chattel slavery or colonialism meant that many Black fathers were separated from their children, often by force. The "absent black father" trope today serves to enforce anti-black notions of Black men as anti-social, neglectful of their responsibilities, not nurturing, etc. Please see the WWC tag #absent black father for further reading. 

Now, it’s true many desis have dark skin. There are also Black desis. I would go as far as to say despite anti-black bias and colorism in many desi cultures, if one was asked to tell many non-Black desis from places like S. India and Sri Lanka apart from Black people from places like E. Africa, the rate of failure would be quite high. However, negative stereotypes for desi fathers are not the same as negative stereotypes for non-desi Black fathers, because racially, most Black people and desis are often not perceived as being part of the same racial group by other racial groups, particularly white majorities in Western countries. Negative stereotypes for desi fathers are often things like: uncaring, socially regressive/ conservative, sexist. They are more focused around narratives that portray these men as at odds with Western culture and Western norms of parenting. 

Desi Parents are Not this Way

Secondly, the setup makes little sense given how actual desi families tend to operate when one or both parents are unable to be present for whatever reason. Children are often sent to be raised by grandparents, available relatives or boarding schools (Family resources permitting). Having children be raised by an outsider is a move of last resort. You make no mention of why your protagonist’s father didn’t choose such an option. The trope of many desi family networks being incredibly large is not unfounded. Why was extended family not an option?

These two points trouble me because you have told us you are writing a story involving relationship dynamics between characters of both different races and ethnicities. I’m worried you don’t know enough about the groups you are writing about, how they are perceived by each other and society at large in order to tell the story you want to tell.

As with many instances of writing with color, your problem is not an issue of scrap versus don’t scrap. It’s being cognizant of the current limits of your knowledge. How you address this knowledge deficit and its effect on your interpretation of your characters and the story overall will determine if readers from the portrayed groups find the story compelling.

- Marika.

I have one response: what? Where are the father’s parents? Any siblings? Is he cut off? Is he American? A Desi that has stayed in India? 

Estrangement is not completely out of the question if the father is Westernized; goodness knows that I have personal experience with seeing estrangement. But you haven’t established any of that. What will you add?

-Jaya

[trenchgardens-ooc-ooc-ooc-ooc]

i don't particularly care about tulpagenic systems as i don't have strong opinions on endogenic systems in general, but the biggest gripe with them in particular is the appropriation of the tibetan buddhist tulpas. i've seen people within the community propose a different name, but idk how widely adopted it is.

and also as a side note here the "transracial" identity concerned is not the legal one (someone who is adopted by a family of a different race, such as a white family adopting a black child) and is more literally someone identifying as a different race than they were born

i had no idea there was a legal term called transrace. Yeah i was assuming itd refer to someone who wants to transition from one race to another. This still changes nothing about what i said, id need to know someone to be able to judge, ive never interraced with someone who felt that way before.

interresting about tibetan tulpas, i felt like id heard the origins of the word before but i wouldnt have been able to tell you if you asked.

i might just be grumpy because i just woke up but i dont see the point in sending this message. Unless you're just aghast that id be like idk relaxed about this.

transrace as a legal term sounds like it could be fucked up though i might look in to that. it sounds like something that could totally be used to encourage eugenics in multiple directions, i.e. how the US and Canada and utilized adoption programs to culturally erase indigenous peoples, or to do segregation. that was just my gut instinct though in seeing the phrase 'transracial, legal term'

i might forget to look that up though- i did just wake up. i should probably stop rambling.

[jadeddiamonds]

Adoptions Lately [cringe]

Hey girls and guys! Today is a reaction pod on a trending topic from tiktok regarding the white man Will Powers viral video asking for advice on his "black" babies hair care. The original video that inspired my chat, is embedded in my commentary. I just wanted to give my perspective and start dialogue. Links to the article referenced will be below. Don't forget to subscribe!

  Article Referenced: Six Words: 'Black Babies Cost Less To Adopt' https://www.npr.org/2013/06/27/195967...

Video mentioned to watch: The Reality of Transracial Adoption:   

 • The Reality of Transracial Adoption |...  

  Indian Child Welfare Act:

https://www.bia.gov/bia/ois/dhs/icwa

Check out this episode!