March 5, 2010 at 9:36 pm · Posted by Tara · Filed under Adoption Blogs, Adoption Language, Birth/First parents, Guest Blog
We recently wrapped up our newest, and soon to be released, Adoption Dialogue on adoption language and it has (once again) brought the issue of adoption language to the forefront of my mind. I am reminded of this blog post by adoptive parent and Adoption Mosaic Guest Blogger Dawn Friedman who blogs at This Woman’s Work. She wrote this post last fall and it has stuck with me. (Read the full original post here>>) For those of you who aren’t familiar with Dawn’s family, Dawn is Madison’s adoptive mother, Pennie is Madison’s birth mother.
“It sounds like a very gloomy conversation but it wasn’t. She is very matter of fact about it all. I was just thinking about how she (Madison) says “real real mama” and how that’s supposedly “negative adoption language.” I guess in the mouth of the wrong person it could be but hearing it from my daughter, well, I know what she means.
So I wanted to write a little bit about hearing Madison use that term “real mother” or “real real mama” (emphasis hers!) and how it makes me feel. The locus for any sadness I have hearing that term is centered on her and on recognizing the challenges she has. What I told her is that everybody has a story and that if you’re adopted, your story is more complicated…”
“…In the positive adoption language paradigm, the opposite of ‘real’ mother is ‘artificial’ mother but I don’t know. I know what she means when she says ‘real real’ and I don’t think it impugns me. I’ve always said that Pennie is the noun mother and I’m the verb mother and I guess another way to say that is that Pennie is ‘real real’ because she IS the mother. I am mothering and the mothering (the act) is real but it is the act that creates the mothering. See, Pennie doesn’t have to create the mothering by doing because she IS the mother by virtue of being.
Does that make sense?
But if it’s the act of mothering that makes me mother than I don’t need to be threatened by her “real real” mother who IS mother. Because it’s not a contest; it just is. It’s what we are. There just aren’t enough words in the English language and so there are qualifiers. None of these are negative when they are said by my daughter who intimately understands the definitions of the people she loves.
Sometimes I’m amused that Madison — who hasn’t read adoption books or adoption blogs — hits on the language that adoptive parents most fear. Because when she says it, how can you deny the truth of it? She knows what she knows. She’s one smart cookie. And I’m proud to be her (legally defined) mother along with her real real mother. She is good stuff.”
Love the noun vs. verb Dawn! That is a great semantic ah-ha.
This kind of conversation, and the recording of it has had a huge impact on my adoption language consciousness. I was musing today, after posting my latest talk with Sam (last night) about his “first mommy” on how much easier, and deeper these conversations are as I remove my fear from it. As I try to put myself in his little heart/mind. The internet is first hand responsible for my trust, and ease here. You all, and Dawn, and others are to thank. It’s such important work.
[...] Addendum: After reading this post, another friend emailed me to say how hard this must be for me. I was very quick to reply to her that it isn’t hard, because I have known nothing else. I went on to explain that this is our relationship-all of it. It’s not as if this was sprung on me one day, that he had a birth mom. It’s not like finding out your partner is having an affair. We exist as a triad and beyond. Another friend applauded my not feeling “threatened”. Again I responded, threatened by what? No one is taking him away from me. The threat as I see it, is in the not talking about it. It is in that place that I stand to lose something-that something being the opportunity for my son to express and explore all layers of his emerging identity with help and support from me, instead of heaven forbid the alternative. Talking to a five year old, is much easier I can imagine than watching a fourteen year old hut me out because he is in so much pain with feelings he is afraid to share with me, or anyone else. For another great discussion of the topic check out Adoption Mosaic’s recent post on adoption language. [...]
Mei Ling wrote @ March 7th, 2010 at 10:49 am
Very touching…
[...] been checking at Adoption Mosaic for blog updates, usually from guest bloggers. There was one entry which caught my attention, and another entry which was ping-backed from [...]
“…In the positive adoption language paradigm, the opposite of ‘real’ mother is ‘artificial’ mother but I don’t know. I know what she means when she says ‘real real’ and I don’t think it impugns me. I’ve always said that Pennie is the noun mother and I’m the verb mother and I guess another way to say that is that Pennie is ‘real real’ because she IS the mother. I am mothering and the mothering (the act) is real but it is the act that creates the mothering. See, Pennie doesn’t have to create the mothering by doing because she IS the mother by virtue of being”
That is actually a really logical thing to say. I’m surprised I feel that way I’m really against using the term mother and father for anyone who does not have his or her own biological ofpring because its confusing. BUt if one title has to be given to two people, noun and verb are a really good way to describe it. I prefer the term “raising” to “mothering” because it eliminates the familial title. But anyway I was impressed.
michelle wrote @ March 9th, 2010 at 2:01 pm
I love it. “Real real” makes perfect sense to me. I went through a phase of using the more pc adoption language, and am finding myself going back to some of the terminology I origingally used.
Sara wrote @ March 10th, 2010 at 2:17 am
“I’m really against using the term mother and father for anyone who does not have his or her own biological ofpring because its confusing.”
How is it confusing? There are many kids out there who have more than one mom. I think we need more validation of the fact that a child can have more than one father and/or mother. Should the child call an adoptive parent or a stepparent “raiser”? Or should kids call them by their first name? Why should adopted children and adults not be able to use the same terms that non-adopted people do for the parents that raised them?
Shelise wrote @ March 11th, 2010 at 5:20 pm
What a great post. I really like the concept of noun v. verb.
I’m an adult adoptee and have recently adopted (forgive the pun) the term “everyday parents” when referring to my adoptive parents. When talking about birth and adoptive parents there inevitably has to be some kind of qualifiers and descriptors to keep them straight, but I kept feeling that adoptive parents wasn’t doing my everyday parents any justice. I like how “everyday” is casual, yet gives the sense of constancy, consistency and longevity.
Thoughts?
Livia wrote @ March 30th, 2010 at 1:46 am
I really think that adoptees should be allowed the freedom to explore what language is right for them at any given point in time, and that adoptees allow themselves to be flexible, too–what feels right today, may not tomorrow.
I’ve sometimes been surprised that allowing myself different language, did uncover some different emotions, too. For instance, when I started using the term “first mother,” it definitely brought up a different part of my feelings and experiences.
