still in the process of refollowing ppl. unfollow this old blog if you already got the new one.

roma★
art blog(derogatory)
Sweet Seals For You, Always
PUT YOUR BEARD IN MY MOUTH
No title available
🩵 avery cochrane 🩵
Not today Justin

No title available
No title available
untitled
macklin celebrini has autism
Mike Driver

Origami Around
𓃗
One Nice Bug Per Day

bliss lane
EXPECTATIONS
🪼
$LAYYYTER

gracie abrams

seen from India

seen from United States
seen from Venezuela

seen from Brazil
seen from United States

seen from Germany

seen from United States
seen from Côte d’Ivoire

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Colombia

seen from Malaysia
seen from Colombia
seen from United States

seen from Germany

seen from Germany
seen from United States
seen from United States
@dustoffvarnya-blog
still in the process of refollowing ppl. unfollow this old blog if you already got the new one.
top chef rant and then i'm off to the new blog. 1. nick should've never made it this far. only a white guy could get away with being judged as under seasoned for so many challenges and make it to the finale. dude begrudgingly seasons his food properly. wtf?! and i still think what he did to stephanie was rotten. and for crying out loud, he needs to rein it in with the family sob story. ugh, even the viewer polls for the last few episodes showed that no one likes him! 2. nina and shirley should've been the last two competing chefs. they even went into the finale with that plan in mind. 3. louis is still a hot dad in my opinion. oh look, nick. he's got a family too! 4. i want nina to win and nick to cry his loser tears over his "subtle" (read: bland) and overcomplicated food.
made a new tumblr. ask if you want the url.
highlight of yesterday: seeing melissa harris-perry lecture at my alma mater. downside of yesterday: seeing former friend work the event.
"is that a dick outline"
he's a bit on the thin side, but i think the last tycoon deniro is my preferred deniro.
watched inside man. disappointed that there isn't going to be a sequel.
cool my computer meets none of those requirements. can't upgrade safari, so tumblr acts all weird. can't upgrade to the newest firefox either. and chrome makes my cpu go fucking haywire.
caffeine-related low blood sugar sweats.
Cyclo (1995) dir. Tran Ahn Hung
Cyclo (1995) dir. Tran Ahn Hung
Cyclo (1995) dir. Tran Ahn Hung
Reproductive justice As an adult Korean adoptee, I knew first hand how it felt to grow up divorced from the language, culture and people of my birth country. The undeniable question for me involved whether I could reconcile my political beliefs with participation in international adoption. Could I call myself a feminist and social justice advocate and still adopt? I realized that for me, the answer was no. I am part of a growing number of adult adoptees who view adoption as a feminist issue, part of a continuum of reproductive rights. This perspective extends to the right to raise one’s child the same importance as the right to choose whether or not to bear one. In her book “Beggars and Choosers: How the Politics of Choice Shapes Adoption, Abortion, and Welfare in the United States,” feminist historian Rickie Solinger examines adoption through this lens of reproductive rights. She states, “I believe it is crucial to consider the degree to which one woman’s possession of reproductive choice may actually depend on or deepen another woman’s reproductive vulnerability.” In other words, how might an individual woman’s right to choose adoption actually exploit another woman’s lack of rights?
Myths of the legitimate mother Conventional language around child relinquishment has often fixed birthmothers in a position that simultaneously acknowledges and negates them. As an example, here is the story I was told about myself when I was a young girl: You were abandoned on the doorstep of an orphanage with a note that read “Please take care of my child.” Your mother loved you very much, but since she was probably a prostitute, a very young (probably teenaged) girl, or a single woman, she couldn’t take care of you. So, she did the most loving thing a mother could do, she gave you up for adoption so that you could have a better life. I accepted and retold-indeed, even took pride in-this story for years. This narrative, conveyed by my parents who first heard it from the adoption agency, illustrates the sort of manufactured positioning that Kim describes. It marks my birthmother with a presumed status, and this status ranks her on a social scale, at an inferior placement that highlights her lack of resources and defines her as therefore illegitimate for motherhood. Her economic and social vulnerability is an unquestioned given. The story further implies certain suppositions about what “a better life” means. In this scenario, “better” clearly means American, but it also suggests wealthier, Caucasian, and most important, not with my birthmother. This notion of “a better life” has permeated adoption narratives since the practice began, often used as justification for its existence. Who benefits? Over the years the social justice argument for adoption has proved increasingly problematic for many. In her article “Birth Mothers from South Korea Since the Korean War,” scholar Hosu Kim states, "Although it often has been understood historically as a humanitarian effort … I argue the practice of intercountry adoption is a radical example of global inequality played out at the site of actual woman’s bodies and often pits two women-the birth mother and the adoptive mother-against each other in a struggle to claim a legitimate motherhood."
As a woman dealing with the pain of my own infertility, I did not want to think through all these questions when I first considered adopting a child. Frankly, I just wanted to be a mother. My decision not to adopt after realizing that adoption was in conflict with my political beliefs is my personal choice. I do not condemn all adoptive parents, my own included, whom I love profoundly. Nor do I condemn adoption across the board. I do think, however, that we need to reframe our discussion of adoption. And though this story is about international adoption, I believe this discussion should include domestic adoption and foster care. I believe that if the spirit of feminism creates solidarity between women across social, economic and racial barriers, feminists should work to remove the obstacles that render women around the globe so powerless, rather than using their situations as a reason to take their children from them. We should also question adoption language that carries implicit judgments of who makes a legitimate mother. Other issues to address are using children as a commodity, and racial coding of mothers and children. And we should work toward the extension of reproductive rights to include the rights of women to raise their children.
YES! finally found this link again, i’ve been searching for it again for ages (too many links in my resource list). this is a PERFECT commentary on how i feel about the fundamental problems of adoption and the right to parent.
Feminist lens on adoption - Minnesota Women's Press - St. Paul, MN
why i'm an adoptee who is against the babybox
i am a korean-american adoptee activist who has been living in seoul for nearly 7 years, volunteering actively with both other adoptees and unwed mothers’ groups. i suppose i should start by saying why i oppose the baby box. abandoning babies is illegal and the baby box facilitates the abandoning of babies. this is why the UN has suggested time and again that baby boxes be banned internationally. additionally, experts have said that there is absolutely NO PROOF that the presence of babybox reduces infanticide, it merely facilitates the increase of unethical adoption. (UPDATE: friend and fellow activist jane jeong trenka’s research PROVES that the babybox is not decreasing infanticide - that means the children left in the babybox are the children who otherwise would’ve been adopted through ethical channels, like i said. what this means is that the children being left there aren’t babies who would’ve otherwise died on the street or been flushed down the toilet (as people like to sensationally argue), they are the children who would’ve been relinquished legally and ethically through an adoption agency or been raised by the mother herself if this babybox wasn’t being praised throughout the media as it is being).
to people who say that without this babybox, babies in korea would die - that if there wasn’t the ‘humane’ option of abandoning a child in the babybox offered by the church, these women would just leave their baby to die on the street -i say: that opinion is couched in the deep stereotypes against unwed mothers and as someone who has worked for many years with both unwed mothers and parents who have lost their children to adoption, i don’t believe that. i believe that if the church didn’t give them this option (which is painted as a saintly deed by the church and a mother’s ‘final act of love for her child’ in the korean media) that these women would either 1) realize that maybe they have the right to raise their child or 2) choose to go through the proper, ethical procedures for the adoption of her child NOT leave them to die in the street. this line of thought is based on the notion that these women are inhuman, moral-less women who are just trying to get rid of their baby in any way possible. again, as someone who actually works with unwed mothers on a close, regular basis - i don’t accept this line of thought.
many of the people on this thread have NO IDEA the situation of unwed mothers in korea. do you know for example that unwed mothers receive a laughable 70,000 KRW (less than $70) a month in support from the government but adoptive parents receive over twice that from the government. do you know that unwed mothers are routinely discriminated in hiring and/or forced to resign from their jobs when they are found to be pregnant. do you know that even unwed mothers who run their own businesses suddenly lose all their customers when they find out they’re unwed mothers. do you know that although legally fathers are required to pay child support, if the father chooses not to, there is no system to enforce it? the answer is not to give women a way to abandon children but to give them the choice to raise their children if they want. the word “choice” is a tricky one. we have to be critical about the word choice. choice doesn’t mean that no one had a gun to your head. when we consider that unwed mothers are pressured to get abortions (96% end up getting abortions) up until 8 months of their pregnancy. when we consider that most of them are kicked out of their homes and thereby forced to go to unwed mothers’ facilities during their pregnancy. when we consider that roughly half of the unwed mothers facilities in korea are run by adoption agencies. when we consider that the percentage of mothers who DON’T give up their children in adoption agency-run homes is 37% compared to 82% in non-agency homes. when we consider the fact that unwed mothers who give up their children but change their minds are told that they owe money to the adoption agency for each day that their child stayed in their facility. when we consider that one mom told me that after she went back to get her child from the adoption agency, they showed her photos of the adoptive parents in the US and their house and kept telling her how much better the child’s life would be in the states AND that she would break the adoptive parents’ hearts if she took back her child and eventually made her WRITE AN APOLOGY TO THE ADOPTIVE PARENTS before they would give her back her child (psychological warfare, anyone?)…. no way to get support from father, no way to stop discriminatory hiring practices, a laughable amount of support from the government, basically any way to economically support yourself and your child cut off from you… can we really call it a “choice”?
as for those who claim to support the babybox in support of the babies, first of all because of the special adoption laws which are in place to protect children, these children are not eligible for adoption because they have no birth registration. even when children are adopted, you have no idea what happens to children once they are adopted. do you know the research on the rate of physical abuse, sexual abuse and assault, addiction, deportation, depression and suicide that adoptees face? no matter how “good” our adoptive parents are or no matter how “successful” our reunions are, adoption is not a ‘natural’ phenomenon - adoption is borne out of trauma. people tend to forget that in the rosy picture that’s painted of adoption in western media. for adoption to have been necessary, a family trauma had to have happened. that is the legacy that adoptees carry and it is even more haunting because we often don’t know the details of that trauma. the babybox exacerbates this problem.
yes, women should have the right to choose adoption for their children. however, it is not a ‘human right’ to abandon a child. and no one, including parents, have the right to take away their child’s right to know their birth information. that is a universal human right, guaranteed by the UN rights of the child. without it, the child becomes much more vulnerable to child trafficking.
finally i will share my own story: because my adoption records were fabricated, i had to appear on a audition program in order to try to find my mother. it is angering that adoptees must submit ourselves to these humiliating public displays in order to find our families. if holt and other adoption agencies practiced ethical adoptions, we would not have to degrade ourselves to becoming some kind of morbid entertainment.
what i learned from meeting my mother is that she was 20 years old when she gave birth to us, twin daughters. she tried to raise us with our father until we were a little over one year old. however, after a period of time, she could no longer take my father’s philandering and physically abusive ways so she left him and took us with her to my maternal grandmother’s house. she raised us at my grandmother’s house until we were just past two. my grandmother, unable to watch my 22 year old single mom struggle to raise twin girls, took us without my mother’s permission to holt. then she returned and refused to tell my mom where she had taken us. instead she told her that she would bear all of the sin for her act and that my mother should try to forget about us and try to live a good life. my mother said it didn’t matter how many times she asked, our grandmother would not tell her where she had taken us. let me make clear that i’m telling you that my grandmother sent us for adoption without my mother’s consent, not because i am condemning my grandmother’s actions (this was the “norm” at the time for poor families in korea), but rather i’m condemning adoption agencies that allowed relinquishment without the express consent of the child’s parents.
some years later when my mom married, she asked my grandmother once more where we were, since she was now married and her husband knew about us, she hoped to raise us together. it was then that she learned the truth from my grandmother. according to my mother, my grandmother told her then that it was too late, because we had been adopted abroad but that my mom shouldn’t worry because my grandmother had insisted that we be adopted together.
this is how i know holt fabricated my adoption records. at the time of our adoption and TO THIS DAY, my sister and i remain on my mother’s family registry as jung hana and jung doona. my mother left our names on her registry, even though it essentially “outs” her as a mother who lost her children to adoption, in the hopes that we would be able to find her that way. the reason we could not was because in order to “legally” send us for adoption, holt had to find some way to sever our identities from that family record. at the time, the US did not easily give adoption visas to children who were not actually orphans, so in order to “legally” be able to send us for adoption, holt had to turn us into orphans. how does one turn a child who is not an orphan into a legal orphan? they lie and say that the child was found ‘abandoned’ in front of some random place and then they promptly make an ‘orphan family registry’ for you, neatly cutting off all of your family ties in one foul swoop.
holt falsified my records in order to legally separate me from my mother, in order to make a profit from my adoptive parents. everyone except holt is a victim in this story. this is why i oppose the babybox. there is no way to verify that the mother herself gave up the child, leaving the possibility of someone else giving up the child without the mother’s consent. holt has a history of human rights abuses and has shown that it is not interested in checking whether or children are actually orphans or not. holt should be held accountable and unwed mothers have a right to raise their children.
if you are TRULY interested in supporting both the mothers and children in these vulnerable situations in korea, please support the Korean Unwed Mothers’ Families Association (KUMFA) 한국미혼모가족협회, a group of unwed mothers involved in activist work to improve the rights of mothers and children in korea. more info on KUMFA here.
BUILD FAMILIES NOT BOXES!! REBLOG PLEASE!!!
Stop the blind support of the babybox. While I’m sure the intent is good, in the end, it does more to exacerbate the social problems that essentially force single moms in Korea to give up their children. The answer is NOT to make it “easier” for women to abandon their children, but to give them a TRUE choice to raise them. (More info on the babybox here and stats proving that the babybox does NOT prevent infanticide here).
We believe that every person has the right to family, and that we have a responsibility to help preserve families that are targeted by economic and social injustices. Moreover, we are distraught by the media’s celebration of the Baby Box as a humanitarian effort, while the fight for family preservation led by unwed mothers and adult adoptees has been overlooked. We’re raising the question: How do you define family? Share your story at #BuildFamiliesNotBoxes. KoRoot invites you to participate in our #BuildFamiliesNotBoxes social media takeover on Wednesday, January 22, Seoul, South Korea.How can you help?1. Update your Facebook profile photo with the attached image. 2. Update your Facebook status with #BuildFamiliesNotBoxes. 3. REBLOG, Tweet, Retweet, Reply to Tweets, and Favorite Tweets with #BuildFamiliesNotBoxes.
"importantpugge replied to your post:for whatever reason, this gives me alternative... alternate universe: not having a nega-booty" haha exactly
for whatever reason, this gives me alternative universe hank hill vibes.