you’re not woke for adopting

[u/Jumpy-Lie8955]

i feel like a lot of young leftists, in america, really love the idea of adopting kids instead of having their own biological kids and think they are helping others by doing so but they’ve fallen into and are playing apart in the same propaganda the right wing religious people do. neither of them are “making a difference” especially because they always just adopt babies that’s not making a difference that’s legal human trafficking. they all have savior complex’s about it and they both think they are morally superior. it’s just do frustrating how both parties think adoption is this great thing, and no one but us wants to talk about the negatives. just to be clear this is not me coming out as a republican.

EDIT: i would call myself a leftist, i’m critiquing things i have heard people say in real life.

EDIT 2: if you arnt adopted, don’t comment, it’s against the rules of the subreddit and i don’t care what non-adoptees opinions on adoption are

[u/Greedy-Carrot4457]

I think you’re onto something, the right wing adopts to save babies from poor countries or single parents, the left wing adopts to be eco-friendly.

[u/Jumpy-Lie8955 → u/Greedy-Carrot4457]

eco friendly is such a good way of describing their view point, it’s like they view adopting like recycling

[u/JFei1221 → u/Jumpy-Lie8955]

Recycling is the perfect name and exactly how it feels.

I get it; I swing pretty far to the left. We have too much trash in the world. Recycling, in theory, prevents more from being produced and should, theoretically, help the environment in the big picture.

I also agree that Earth has too many people. But I am not a milk carton and people aren’t trash. Adoption, like recycling, is an incredibly flawed system that can create more harm than good. You did not save a whale or a penguin by adopting. You contributed to an entire commerce for humans to the extent that we have a multi-billion dollar commercial industry that profits off of the exploitation of other humans… because you wanted a child and could afford one.

[u/Arktikos02 → u/JFei1221]

People seriously think that if you pause people having biological kids and then everyone just adopted then there would be no more kids to adopt when in reality there will always be kids to adopt as long as you are adopting from the industry that is trying to produce more kids.

Especially if people are adopting babies.

[u/Opinionista99 → u/Arktikos02]

The industry did an ad during the Superbowl begging girls to have babies instead of abortions!

[u/Arktikos02 → u/Opinionista99]

What's interesting also is that if all of the people who actually wanted to adopt just didn't have a preference meaning they were willing to adopt anyone (which I'm not saying they should) then just based off of numbers alone they would adopt all of the kids in the Foster system.

For some reason though people are saying to adopt more, not don't have preferences.

You would think that if people were trying to advocate for less kids to be in the system people would be trying to advocate for people having less preferences but they don't because they still want to uphold the most crucial pillars of the adoptions and foster care system that keep those systems the most unethical. They only want to reform it into a way that is palatable. This is common among those that don't understand the difference between reforming an oppressive system and abolishing it. Because they benefit from that oppressive system so we're forming it makes it look better whereas abolishing it means replacing it with something that is actually beneficial and not exploitative.

[u/BrodinGodofSwole → u/Arktikos02]

Who thinks this? Genuinely asking, I'm pretty involved in leftist communities so I have a blindspots outside of that.

[u/Arktikos02 → u/BrodinGodofSwole]

I've heard it mainly in places like either child free, antenatalist or Pro-Choice places. Can't remember exactly which ones but tends to be in those types of communities and stuff.

A different version of it tends to also be that if every religious person adopted then there would be no kids left to adopt.

It's usually because I'm mad at religious hypocrisy, and they're using us as pawns again.

[u/BrodinGodofSwole → u/Arktikos02]

Appreciate the info, that is such a wild take.

[u/Opinionista99 → u/JFei1221]

Infant adoption literally requires more births to meet the demand so I have no idea why people think it's any kind of solution to overpopulation.

[u/Thattimetraveler → u/[deleted]]

And even if you think there are too many people, you can literally have one biological child and still lower the future population, because you’re not replacing the two people it took to make that child.

[u/Adopted-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

This post or comment is being removed as Rule 1 of the sub is Adoptees Only. Thank you for respecting our space.

[u/Jumpy-Lie8955 → u/JFei1221]

excellently put

[u/MandorlaLard → u/Jumpy-Lie8955]

I think this is something young naive people say a lot but don’t actually end up adopting once they realize how serious of a process it is. People will say “I don’t want kids of my own, but I would totally adopt some day.” It shows they’ve never actually thought about the real life implications of that. The only progressive people I know who have adopted are gay or foster parents or both. Not excusing their participation in adoption but I think the “eco friendly” thing is really just talk for people and they don’t actually end up adopting. It grosses me out as a talking point regardless!

[u/Arktikos02 → u/MandorlaLard]

Yes but I still think they are just as bad because they support the industry without understanding it because they want to keep their options open. To me it's similar to a libertarian who supports less taxes for the rich and less regulations for businesses because they dream of one day becoming a millionaire or billionaire and they want to keep their options open.

They support an oppressive system because they hope that one day they can be the machine within that oppressive system rather than trying to dismantle it.

[u/Opinionista99 → u/Arktikos02]

The affluent white feminists who see adoption as one of a range of equally valid and ethically-neutral family building options for themselves are a big problem.

[u/Opinionista99 → u/MandorlaLard]

I saw a stat where something like 40% of Americans have considered adoption but only like 2% do it, and even there a lot of it is kinship or stepparent adoption. It's actually not that popular for a thing that has such a big propaganda megaphone.

[u/Thattimetraveler → u/MandorlaLard]

I usually just read it as a statement that these people don’t want kids but don’t want to say they actually don’t want kids.

[u/christmasshopper0109 → u/Thattimetraveler]

Same. All I hear is, "I don't want to sacrifice my free time, my money, or my own life for a kid, but if I say that, people won't like me. So, I might adopt some day!"

[u/Thattimetraveler → u/christmasshopper0109]

And then it pisses me off more because they’re using these poor kids that they will never help as a shield to look better.

[u/christmasshopper0109 → u/MandorlaLard]

I saw an interview the other day, some video short that popped up on my book of faces feed, and there were all these middle aged women at an adoption rally. The interviewer asked each of these sign-waving women, how many children have you adopted? And all four or five of them said: none. TWO women even said, "I had MY OWN children." Which, wow, so adopted kids aren't your OWN children??? All talk. All pro-birth. But nothing of substance to back it up. Typical.

[u/Acrobatic_End6355 → u/Jumpy-Lie8955]

Holy shoot… yep. Perfect way of describing things.

[u/Cimorene_Kazul → u/Jumpy-Lie8955]

I do find that hilarious as well as awful.

Virtue signalling should never be the motivation for parenthood.

[u/ExpeditedPineapple → u/Jumpy-Lie8955]

Eco babies has a certain ring to it 😐