Where is All the "Angry," Well...Everyone Else?

Clicking around on adoption-related things online I have noticed increasingly people asking the question "where are all the 'happy' adoptees?" and "are all adoptees 'angry'?"  I think there are people who are looking for and willing to listen to adoptee voices--just so long as the adoptees are saying what they want them to hear.

Outside of the Adoption Reform community of blogs, there is an absolute dearth of diversity in the blog rolls on adoption blogs.  Big, huge blogs, about adoption, have not one Adult Adoptee blog to be found on the blog roll.  Not everyone will enjoy everyone else's writing, I understand that.  But there is not one adoptee blog one can find to link to?  Not one book written by an adoptee to reference?  Not one?

"Everyone except the adopted has been talking about adoption.  About certain parts of adoption, the parts that can be seen and the parts that can be heard.  The rest is silence--or was.

What other human institution has so little comment from those within it?  Of what other group is so much said from without and so little from within?  How has it been that the adopted seem to have had nothing to say, whereas it is conspicuous herein that they have waited only for an invitation, and that their thoughts have been long?"  --Jean Patton, 1954, the Mother of Adoption Reform

I've read and heard few times that when people read things Adult Adoptees write that sound unhappy, they just assume that the adoptee's Adoptive Parents made all sorts of mistakes. I am not saying that everything any adopted person's parents did was perfect (no parent is perfect) but I think if more people were listening to Adult Adoptees they'd understand what it feels like to have your personal opinions dismissed because of assumptions about your parents.  Again, that's an issue the adoptee community faces.  Despite being independent adults, when adoption comes into play, people have difficulty seeing us as having opinions outside of what must involve our parents.

How can people when writing on, speaking about, or forming opinions on adoption, not include adoptee voices?  Is it because so many of us are from closed adoptions or that our adoptions were so long ago that we can't have an opinion on an era in which people think is so radically different?  Is it because people think that adoption policies don't impact adoptees who are adults?

In the comments section on Op-Eds that reformers work very hard to prepare, it never ceases that someone comments to the adoptees there with one blanketed answer as to why all of us were surrendered, what all of our mothers wanted, and how we are all terrible for not being able to respect that.  Stereotypes.  If they were listening, they would not only know the stereotypes aren't true but they probably don't fit half of the reformers personal narratives.  Many of us know our mothers already, we know the answers to those stereotype and assumptions, and if people were listening, they'd know too.  One person on an Op-Ed commented recently that wanting our Original Birth Certificates signified the fact that we can't just accept that our Adoptive Parents are our "real" parents.  If they were listening, they would know OBC access has nothing to do with who is "real" or not (all of my parents are "real," by the way) but equality.  And my parents?  Well they had their names carried at the Adoptee Rights Demonstration last years as being a part of the demonstration in spirit.

And of course, those responses on Op-Eds do irritate me and has me on my mini-rant today.  If you don't care about Adoptee Rights, that's fine.  But why suggest that I, as an adopted person, shouldn't care about it?

Wanting to be listened to is not about being a "negative person."  Others deeming you not worthy of being listened to is negative.  Being in a group with diverse experiences and perceptions and only being acceptable if you fit one mold is negative.  People deciding, because I have the "adopted" label, how I, my mothers, my parents, do feel, have to feel, or must feel is negative.

Yet, you're the "negative adoptee," even if you point that out.

It seems like when you're adopted, what "happy" or "successful" means for others is different than what it means for you, in the eyes of society. What does "happy" and "successful" mean? For some it might mean having a job and/or a family. Perhaps it means being involved in community work, improving the lives of others. Perhaps it means having good morals and doing your best to always do what's right. Some of my closest adoptee friends are some of the smartest people I know who work hard, love their families, are very active in making a difference for other people, and follow their conscience in the decisions they make. But they're probably not what people would call "happy" adoptees.

Some people respond to adoptee concerns "well, my kid just won't turn out like you."  "Like me"...what does that mean?  That, they won't turn out to be a hard-working and loving people who are dedicated to their family and to making a difference in the world (that's what I consider "like me" and like a lot of "us")?  Or does that just mean they won't turn out to be people who form their own independent thoughts on adoption that might end up being different than their parents' opinions?

When you're adopted, being "happy" and "successful" as a person has an additional requirement: you have to love adoption too and have only good things to say about it.

I think if people actually listened, they'd understand why many adoptees are unhappy about certain things.  Few people understand what it's like to happen upon things published about adoption that are marginalizing to adoptees.   Few people understand what it's like, to not only not have information about your life pre-adoption, medical history, and ancestry, but to not be allowed to access it.  There are adoptees out there who aren't interested in accessing said information, and that's their decision, but I think the fact that they likely couldn't if they wanted to is pretty ridiculous.  It's not a matter of "being negative" as a person.  Inequality and a lack of the legal right to access the same things that everyone gets to know about themselves, when you are a grown adult, are negative.  Being offended when you can't enter into a single dialogue about issues in adoption without someone bringing up abortion, reminding you to be "grateful," or uttering some other stereotype is not about "being negative" as a person.  An entire group being subjected to marginalizing stereotypes is negative.  We never asked for the stereotypes and we never asked for our information to be sealed.  Yet, we are required to be "happy," or at least speak "happily" about all of it.

That doesn't make sense to me.  Instead of asking where are all the "happy" adoptees, I ask where are all the people who acknowledge each adoptee's uniqueness, who want to hear a variety of adoptee self narratives, and who appreciate points of view outside of the mold of "acceptableness."  Where are people who care about the issues we face? 

"Where are all the happy adoptees?" 

No. 

"Where is all the 'angry' everyone else?"

*those of you who do listen, whether our points of view are the same, or our views on each issue are identical or not, do not go unappreciated.