HR 1326

via

Hm.

talk on adoption

A few days ago in class we were discussing homosexuality and feminism. We talked about how lesbians how couldn't 'naturally' have a baby could just adopt. "Oh, they could just adopt, you know." Hm. I feel that my undergrad peers aren't as informed as they should be on the adoption. In a sense, adoption strikes a feminist (or queer, as in queer theory) dilemma: how can women in the global north satiate their desires through the oppression of women in the global south? Homosexual women can have children too, but another people's plight shouldn't be the basis for a capitalist's dream.

Anyway, I was recommended induction into the American Sociological Associations undergrad honor society (I forget the specific greek letters), and I think I can apply for funding for symposiums. So maybe I'll organize one on international adoption next year.

news: "Adapting to foreign adoptions"

via. [I'm kind of surprised something of this low quality would come out of Christian Science Monitor!]

Interesting. I'm not sure if adoption should indeed be made cheaper and easier. Even with safeguards in place that prevent adoption from being a for-profit industry, it's still..hmm. I guess it stems from my notion that people don't have the natural, intrinsic right to be parents; to reproduce, now that is certainly a "right," it is a biological necessity. However, I see little point in a women who is capable of reproduction being allowed to adopt; moreover, if a women is sterile, well, that shouldn't be a child's problem. Having bad genes simply means that you won't be contributing to the gene pool. Of course, that's most certainly a political nonreality, at least in America. I still favor what others have said - that a feminist agenda toward the welfare of mothers and children - especially baby girls - is the best approach (domestic adoption is plan B).

adoptee autobiographical print

1997. Seeds from a Silent Tree
1998. Park, Thomas Clement, The Unforgotten War
1999. Voices from Another Place
2000. Kim, Elizabeth, Ten Thousand Sorrows
2002. After the Morning Calm
2003. Robinson, Katy, A Single Square picture
2003. Vance, Jeannine Joy, Twins Found in a Box
2006. Trenka, Jane, Language of Blood
2006. Outsiders Within
2008. Once They Hear My Name
2009. Trenka, Jane, Fugitive Visions
2009. Sunee, Kim, Trail of Crumbs

other:

1999. I Wish for You a Beautiful Life
2002. Kori: The Beacon Anthology of Korean American Fiction
2007. Dobbs, Jennifer Kwon, Paper Pavillion
2007. Shin, Sun Yung, Skirt Full of Black

that thesis thing

Well for the past 6 months or so I had been 'developing' an undergrad thesis project. It was just mulling in my head. I did not suspect that it would be far too ambitious (although my senses had warned me about ambitiousness for other topics...). The bigger they are, the harder they fall.

The proposals are due this week. Of course, I haven't really done much serious thought on them. Well, I did put together a proposal for this other thing last week, and I was just going to use that as the thesis proposal, but that would be a serious affront to the professors that would have to read such dribble.

I was thinking about the thesis...not necessarily the thesis itself, but its psychological context. We all know what kind of double consciousness adoptees live in. I've written that I'm much more fortunate than, say, Jane Trenka because I grew up in a diverse community. Yet the concept still applies to me, and its manifested itself in my desire to write this...thingy. On the one hand, I've become more aware of the adoptee community and I want to contribute to it. Except I've only just realized that within the confines of undergraduateness, this is impossible. Perhaps I was just deluding myself? And then on the other hand, as a success-driven, over-achieving, the-only-thing-that-matters-is-that-I-achieve typical millennial (you like how I always link to wiki?), writing a thesis on something as niche and not-related-to-my-immediate-financial-future as the Korean adoptee community is decidedly stupid. How do I reconcile the two?

Well, I think writing a thesis is invaluable experience (I do plan to pursue a PhD in the foreseeable future), so I can whip up a proposal on other work I've been doing for a while. I see my undergrad academic life being split into two categories: first, there's education. I've done field work in schools, I'm a TA at an elementary school, I do an internship at a school-related thing - I've invested a lot of time in education. Second, there's the whole Korean adoptee thing, which is based a lot more on really abstract theory. It's interesting...but it's only a product of the nascent double consciousness thing. I've been trying to find a way to compromise - try to relate the adoptee thing to something pragmatic, concrete, real, but it's so hard. I just can't do it, I admit it. So I'll do a thesis on education somethingorother. What I had to come to terms to was that I couldn't do a thesis on something I invested so much in. It was really disappointing.

I think that's it.

sunny jo

She wrote a piece in Outsiders Within (if I recall she also wrote in after the morning calm?). She also wrote about internet and networking in the Guide to Korea edited by Eleana Kim, who is more or less the expert on Korean adoptees in American academia. I mention this because, coincidentally, I visited the 'korean adoptee' wikipedia page to see that sunny jo edits it. Small world---

why were so many Korean adoptees placed in Minnesota?

There has to be some logical explanation...

new book

found this new book on amazon. "The Dance of Identities: Racial Identity Journeys of Korean Adult Adoptees"


it's by a John D. Palmer. Found his CV too.

seems interesting, I might be able to use it in my thesis, maybe I could interview him too. I look forward to reading this book.

H.R. 3070 Families for Orphans Act of 2009

I was going to write a bit about this bill, but just read this instead.

jesus christ! (no, literally!)

god bless you all! (no, really!)