Trans argument comparing adoptive parents to trans people

[NotTerfNorCis]

This analogy seems forced to me, but it got me thinking.

The article says:

Nobody sensible thinks that the existence of adoptive parents undermines our understanding of what it is to be a parent. On the contrary, it extends it.

By implication, the existence of transwomen 'extends' our understanding of what it is to be a woman.

I feel the analogy doesn't work for two reasons.

Firstly, 'parent' is also a verb, and parenting is a role and responsibility. 'Womaning' on the other hand isn't a defined role. There isn't a verb 'to woman', meaning wearing make-up and feminine clothes, working in a low-paid, caring job and deferring to men. 'Woman' is a physical reality - it means adult human female. Anyone who thinks 'woman' is a distinct social role is probably a conservative and not a feminist.

Secondly, 'parent' is a relationship. It's defined entirely in relation to others. 'Woman' is not, except perhaps in the most conservative societies. I know there's a theory that the word 'woman' comes from 'wife of man', but having Googled it that seems to be a misunderstanding.

If the assumption behind the adoptive parent analogy is that 'woman' is a role and a relationship, this speaks volumes for the traditionalist views behind trans ideology.

I find the article truly shocking.
Adoptive parents are not appropriating parenthood. They ARE parenting
Theyre not trying to stop people talking about giving birth.

Im incredulous. Its nothing like the same thing.

I am even more shocked now I realise the author is a feminist philosopher at the Open University. The attempt to weld two completely different things together in that article (adoptive parents and trans people) seemed quite desperate.

I'd like to add that no-one tells lies about adoption. No-one pretends that their adoptive children are biologically theirs. No-one reissues a new birth certificate with the adoptive parents's names on it.

The whole world isn't forced to lie to not hurt the feelings of adoptive parents and their children.

There are some parallels re the creation of a legal fiction and persons taking on a role (although I agree 'womaning' isn't really a role unless you come at it from sexist stereotypes).

As someone who is an adoptee from many decades ago I can say where the analogy parts way is that we now understand that lying about the truth of biological origins is inherently harmful and not considered good practise. Transactivism has yet to catch up with that.

Adoptive parents don't tend to talk about their cravings and morning sickness and what drugs they had or how many stitches.

They're also not saying that mothers and fathers are causing them harm by calling themselves mothers and fathers

These desperate organisations and individuals will appropriate anything - no matter how sensitive an issue - in order to gaslight the rest of us into accepting their narrow view of life.

As an aside, that type of blog makes me wonder how many TRAs are using MN to gather information GhostTess seems to have (finally) had some of her posts deleted from near the start of this thread

She's disappeared/namechanged now, but should have been banned for numerous deletions across multiple threads; apparently posters can get as many strikes as they like for appalling insults to and about women, adoptive parents and infertility without being banned. Which means they can namechange and continue, because they aren't PBPs.

It's fucking ridiculous.

How is it a legal fiction?

It's passing on the legal right to parent children from one set of people (the biological parents) to another (the adoptive parents). Nothing fictional about it at all [baffled]

Actually, Maryz, they do get a new birth certificate with their adoptive parents name on it. However, my son's birth certificate just says we are his parents, which we are. It doesn't lie and say I gestated him in my womb for nine months and then squeezed him out of my fanjo. Neither does it cross his birth mother's name out and say she is no longer his mother or that she is deadmumed or something. She will always be his mother.

I am steeling myself to read this article. As a gender critical adopter, I sense it is going to push every single one of my buttons.

As an adoptive parent, I parent. I have the legal responsibilities of a parent. But nowhere is there a birth certificate trying to claim I gave birth to my daughters. If I see a medical professional and they ask if I have children, I always check whether this is chit-chat (answer yes) or medical (answer no) - no medical fiction that I gave birth to them.

My children also can't claim medical inheritance from us. Their birth certificates either don't mention parents at all (short form) or state they are adopted (long form).

Oh, and we had to go through tonnes of intrusive assessments to adopt, we couldn't just 'self-id' as adopters either …

Nobody sensible thinks that adoptive parents are, typically and as such, a threat to other parents.

No but they are not pretending to be something they aren't. If they're parenting a child, they're parents. What does a transwoman do to make them a woman?

There are some adoption practices in parts of America that are a bit Handmaids Tale but overall I agree that parenting is a verb and womaning is not.

Nobody sensible (to coin a phrase) buys the insulting analogy

The comments below the piece are good

This is one of the few posts by GhostTess about adoption that haven't (finally) been deleted:

GhostTess Mon 18-Jun-18 10:15:19

If it's not about reproductive ability and only role, then I can be a mother through adoption and then the female definition is correct and inclusion of trans women and so can literally anyone.

It seems to me that if a man can claim to be intersex (in his head, naturally, not via diagnosed chromosomal condition), have cosmetic surgery to imitate a female body, and become a parent by adoption, then, voila, he's proved he's a woman.

Obvious, isn't it?

Infertility, adoption, secondary sex characteristics, ladybrain, infertility, what's next? What is the next thing they are going to latch onto to prove men are women because. Well just because.

NotTerfNorCis

What does a transwoman do to make them a woman? Indeed

Try to make everyone else believe it. "Prove" it by going to places where women go, win prizes women have formerly won.

A parent is anyone who identifies as a parent.

Saying that only people who bring up children can be parents is hateful and exclusionary.

I don't have a long form birth certificate, only the short one that has my (adoptive) name, dob and place of birth on it.

I don't believe a long form one with my adoptive parents name on it exists, or at least I've never seen it if it does. This might have changed since the 70s though.

My understanding is that if I want the long form version I have to apply for it and it will have my birth name and birth parent(s) on it rather than my adoptive parents.

The analogy would work in regards to the wives in The Handmaid's Tale. Where the wives go through the labour and all that and take the role of mother away from the handmaids without their consent. I think everyone can agree this is not something to aspire to.

Barbadosgirl, where I am, it's not a birth certificate. It's an adoption certificate - my children's certs say "extract from the adoption register" or something like that. Only the short form says "birth cert" and that can't be used for anything official.

I think it's the same in the UK isn't it?

Maryz I think the certificates are the same in England as you describe. The short form is a birth certificate but doesn't name the parents at all. the long form is 'adoption register' so it is clear we are the adoptive parents.

I'm a little comforted that the comments on that article/blog/whatever it is are agreeing with us.

Thanks Teen, I thought maybe the UK had changed recently.

I know my children used to be upset at a few sports clubs etc that demanded the long form; they mostly use the short form for "social" things such as school, but needed the official, long, adoptive certs for passports, identity cards, exams and university entry, which I think is good - it means they don't have to tell all and sundry if they don't want to, but legally no-one is pretending that they were not adopted.

Unlike some men who are now demanding we all agree they were born as biological women - with penises and XY chromosomes, which are now, we are forced to say, female penises and female (or worse, intersex) XY chromosomes.

The whole adoption/trans argument is a completely false analogy.

That article just peak transed my (newly adoptive parent) DH. Sport had kind-of already got him seeing there, but reading this has tipped him over the edge and made him finally get it.

As someone that's in favour of extending the definition on woman to include transwomen, even I find this analogy flawed.

A more accurate analogy in my opinion is national identity.

Maryz have just checked and you are quite right! Bit worrying I had not noticed that before...

I love the Miranda Yardley comment on the article.