Things
I have to admit: I'm plaigarizing again. I love this post, not because it's about adoption, though I do think posts about adoption are intesting. Nope, I love this post because it addresses something I think most of us struggle with: allowing ourselves to be offended.
My friend Lia (well, not really my friend, just my cyberfriend) is not LDS. She struggles with a lot of stuff. She's very honest (almost blunt). But I love her closing statement. If she can see the need to "drop all charges", then shouldn't I, a member of the Church who professes to believe in the Savior and follow him, also be able to do that? Food for thought.
Everything that follows is from Lia. Enjoy.
Thunderbolt.
Posted on May 28, 2011
So, I was watching a commercial for ancestry.com, thinking about how Before I would never have thought twice about said commercial, and After I’m like, man, it would suck to be in a closed adoption and see these commercials, they are so insensitive.
And then, literally like a thunderbolt, I realized: that’s stupid.
Not because we should all be meaner to each other, of course; when given the choice, it’s good to be nice. But look. Do I think the people at ancestry.com were intentionally being malicious to adoptees? No. Do I think they probably did not even think about adoptees when designing both their website and said innocuous commercial? Yes. But honestly, that’s totally cool.
I mean, come on. I happen to be a rich white girl and I still manage to get offended when people accidentally or unknowingly speak offhand about anything I consider part of my identity. Be it about being a birthmother, or drug addict, NYU student, Philly native, brunette – it doesn’t matter. I find a way to get offended by people who mean no offense, and just have no conception of being a birthmother, drug addict, what have you. Just like I’m sure I offend people when I speculate/have any sort of conversation about anything I haven’t lived (infertile, teetotaler, Columbia student, LA native, blonde).
So we should all stop talking about things we haven’t lived, right?
Holy mother of pearl can you imagine what a boring world this would be if you could only have conversations about things you’ve experienced firsthand? I’d never be allowed to talk about Thailand, or 18th-century France, or how awful it must be to be Pete Best (although personally, I think he probably thinks he dodged a bullet).
Now that doesn’t mean I get to go around being like THAILAND SUCKS! 18TH-CENTURY FRENCH DRAMA IS TERRIBLE! PETE BEST FOREVER, RINGO NEVER! because 1. I bet it’s gorgeous, 2. their drama IS terrible and 3. I’ve never heard him drum. Don’t be mean for the sake of being mean.
But does that mean when somebody says, “Wow, I bet now that it’s over, you’re really happy with the way this whole adoption thing turned out,” that the proper response is to get offended and then angrily educate them about how HARD it is and how TUMULTUOUS I feel and how they should NEVER EVER EVER speculate about adoption because THEY DON’T KNOW?
No! I don’t! I’m just realizing this! That’s what the thunderbolt meant: I don’t have to get offended by anything. I don’t have to be angry just because people don’t know what it’s like to place a child/be addicted to drugs/absolutely hate NYU – I hope they never do know. And as long as they’re not shouting “HEARTLESS IMMORAL MOTHER” at me, then I have the choice to either get into a long, thoughtful discussion about the ups-and-downs of adoption (which is, after all, the point of conversing – if I were talking about Thailand to somebody and they were like, oh, I’m part Thai, I used to live there [which happened with my old roommate] I would [and did] say, “NO WAY TELL ME EVERYTHING” and that was the beginning of a long friendship) or just say, “It’s more complicated than that, but thanks for your concern,” or if I really don’t want to get into it, say, “Sure,” or, “Not really.” I honestly never realized I have no obligation to be offended, and that taking offense to innocent conversating/speculating (as opposed to the malicious kind) is sort of pointless.
Everybody has Things. Things to get offended over. Being a minority or having a mental illness or being adopted or relinquishing or growing up in a certain place or having acne or IBS or being really, really sweaty – whatever. Every single person has some different combination of Things that range in severity. There is nobody out there – nobody – living a perfect life, free of Things to feel bad about or wish weren’t true. I don’t know anything about Things other than my own, but I need to remember I’m not the only one who has any (and that I’m quite a bit better off than 90% of the world, most like). I never purposely mean to offend, but if I offend somebody else’s Thing by accident, I hope that it’s taken for what it is: an accident. Ancestry.com can’t be thinking about everybody’s Things all the time – nobody can. No matter what anybody says ever, it will offend somebody, somehow. But, in the absence of intent, from here on out I gotta vote for an acquittal and subsequent dropping of all charges.
My friend Lia (well, not really my friend, just my cyberfriend) is not LDS. She struggles with a lot of stuff. She's very honest (almost blunt). But I love her closing statement. If she can see the need to "drop all charges", then shouldn't I, a member of the Church who professes to believe in the Savior and follow him, also be able to do that? Food for thought.
Everything that follows is from Lia. Enjoy.
Thunderbolt.
Posted on May 28, 2011
So, I was watching a commercial for ancestry.com, thinking about how Before I would never have thought twice about said commercial, and After I’m like, man, it would suck to be in a closed adoption and see these commercials, they are so insensitive.
And then, literally like a thunderbolt, I realized: that’s stupid.
Not because we should all be meaner to each other, of course; when given the choice, it’s good to be nice. But look. Do I think the people at ancestry.com were intentionally being malicious to adoptees? No. Do I think they probably did not even think about adoptees when designing both their website and said innocuous commercial? Yes. But honestly, that’s totally cool.
I mean, come on. I happen to be a rich white girl and I still manage to get offended when people accidentally or unknowingly speak offhand about anything I consider part of my identity. Be it about being a birthmother, or drug addict, NYU student, Philly native, brunette – it doesn’t matter. I find a way to get offended by people who mean no offense, and just have no conception of being a birthmother, drug addict, what have you. Just like I’m sure I offend people when I speculate/have any sort of conversation about anything I haven’t lived (infertile, teetotaler, Columbia student, LA native, blonde).
So we should all stop talking about things we haven’t lived, right?
Holy mother of pearl can you imagine what a boring world this would be if you could only have conversations about things you’ve experienced firsthand? I’d never be allowed to talk about Thailand, or 18th-century France, or how awful it must be to be Pete Best (although personally, I think he probably thinks he dodged a bullet).
Now that doesn’t mean I get to go around being like THAILAND SUCKS! 18TH-CENTURY FRENCH DRAMA IS TERRIBLE! PETE BEST FOREVER, RINGO NEVER! because 1. I bet it’s gorgeous, 2. their drama IS terrible and 3. I’ve never heard him drum. Don’t be mean for the sake of being mean.
But does that mean when somebody says, “Wow, I bet now that it’s over, you’re really happy with the way this whole adoption thing turned out,” that the proper response is to get offended and then angrily educate them about how HARD it is and how TUMULTUOUS I feel and how they should NEVER EVER EVER speculate about adoption because THEY DON’T KNOW?
No! I don’t! I’m just realizing this! That’s what the thunderbolt meant: I don’t have to get offended by anything. I don’t have to be angry just because people don’t know what it’s like to place a child/be addicted to drugs/absolutely hate NYU – I hope they never do know. And as long as they’re not shouting “HEARTLESS IMMORAL MOTHER” at me, then I have the choice to either get into a long, thoughtful discussion about the ups-and-downs of adoption (which is, after all, the point of conversing – if I were talking about Thailand to somebody and they were like, oh, I’m part Thai, I used to live there [which happened with my old roommate] I would [and did] say, “NO WAY TELL ME EVERYTHING” and that was the beginning of a long friendship) or just say, “It’s more complicated than that, but thanks for your concern,” or if I really don’t want to get into it, say, “Sure,” or, “Not really.” I honestly never realized I have no obligation to be offended, and that taking offense to innocent conversating/speculating (as opposed to the malicious kind) is sort of pointless.
Everybody has Things. Things to get offended over. Being a minority or having a mental illness or being adopted or relinquishing or growing up in a certain place or having acne or IBS or being really, really sweaty – whatever. Every single person has some different combination of Things that range in severity. There is nobody out there – nobody – living a perfect life, free of Things to feel bad about or wish weren’t true. I don’t know anything about Things other than my own, but I need to remember I’m not the only one who has any (and that I’m quite a bit better off than 90% of the world, most like). I never purposely mean to offend, but if I offend somebody else’s Thing by accident, I hope that it’s taken for what it is: an accident. Ancestry.com can’t be thinking about everybody’s Things all the time – nobody can. No matter what anybody says ever, it will offend somebody, somehow. But, in the absence of intent, from here on out I gotta vote for an acquittal and subsequent dropping of all charges.
Comments
Post a Comment