Do you identify with the "pink" label? Do you mind it?

Pink Adoptions

Johnnymcg wrote: »

There was an attempt some years ago by some people at www.angrypotato.net to set up a broad organisation that represented gay foster parents, guardians etc - they did not specifically focus on adoption and also they used the name "families like ours" - this meant that hackles were not raised by using "gay" or "pink" etc and it was a really good broad term that was inclusive

The OP might perhaps like to also register for www.angrypotato.net - they have private forums on parenting there (although they are not active regularly)

That is a very good suggestion.
For us it may be too broad, and result in some loss of focus. But will check out Angry Potato and Happy Tomato sites.

I feel that such groups are only needed as long as prejudice exist against people who are labels "pink".
If it was all down to us (the minority), we would not use any labels, and people would not need special support or information.

But it is a fact that LGBT people need specific support. Otherwise Pink Adoptions will just disappear in silence, and it will be well.
We all dream of a dream where being "pink" parents does not matter: parents can marry and have children, and no one will even notice.
But guess what: the first "gay" wedding will get more media attention than the divorce referendum!

Also there is the element of pride: why hide away from the label, when we have to fight the label? Is that not buying in to prejudice that we should hide?
As long as the label is used to oppress people, some people will feel they want to escape the label.
Others feel that they have to subvert it, and be proud: Pink is beautiful.

Would "families like ours" not be a bit too "politically correct".
It could be about any group of people protected by the anti-discrimination laws under the "9 grounds". We cannot save the whole world and fight everyone's battles...

Sometimes, if you are not "in your face" a bit, you are not seen, and you are forgotten.
I googled:
- "families like ours"
- "families like ours" ireland
- "families like ours" angrypotato
- "families like ours" angry potato

And there is no trace of them. Only a US site dealing with all sorts of "alternative families": to big a bite to chew for a small group of people :-D





On the other hand, the rainbow term is not going to fly because:
- It just does not flow in the mouth or a s a URL: Irish Rainbow Adoptions is too long, and see how it abbreviates too...
- It is actually more politically connotated than "Pink": it is raising and waiving the flag.

But I also know the IPA group will have that discussion every year at each AGM...

Annasopra

Do you not think though that focusing on adoptions specifically is too narrow? There are families that exist with LGBT parents already who are guardians, adopters, sharing parents (ie a gay male couple and a lesbian couple), foster parents - by focusing specifically and only on adoption you are actually losing out on all those personal stories, all the learning from those existing families and so your whole project loses out - also I think that I much prefer something completely neutral like "families like ours" - because it doesn't try to pigeonhole or raise hackles or cause rows and you can make it clear in a separate mission statement what it means

Pink Adoptions

Johnnymcg wrote: »

Do you not think though that focusing on adoptions specifically is too narrow? There are families that exist with LGBT parents already who are guardians, adopters, sharing parents (ie a gay male couple and a lesbian couple), foster parents - by focusing specifically and only on adoption you are actually losing out on all those personal stories, all the learning from those existing families and so your whole project loses out - also I think that I much prefer something completely neutral like "families like ours" - because it doesn't try to pigeonhole or raise hackles or cause rows and you can make it clear in a separate mission statement what it means

The goals include:
This site is more concerned with adoption per se, but it is also open to discuss and support fostering and kinship caring. Input from single parents, and other “alternative families” are welcome too.

And if it turns out that our members are more interested in one side or the other, then we will grow to deal with these.

When you start small, you have two options:
- Try to cover all angles
- Find a niche, and expend in a human manner

If others feel the need to join, it could turn into "Pink Families" at the next AGM.
Just like this forum could end-up being renamed to include the transexual/transgender(ed) that its charter includes.

For instance, some of our work is to document links and processes relevant to adoption.
It is done by volunteers who have a vested interest in it. They can maintain the information and stand by it.
If we claimed to also cover fostering, we would need to spend half our energy on it. If we have a number of member interested, we may endup doing it...
But for now we find it fairer to focus on what we can really provide.

We started as "Two Irish Fathers", and input from lesbian members led to "Same Gender Irish Parents", then we grew to include LGBT singles.

In our minds, fostering has it's information network, and we feel it is mostly appropriate for and inclusive of "pink" foster parents. We value their input but we cannot guaranty them our time unless they join us :-)
We do not have the resources to spare on areas for which we have no obvious demands.

In our minds, at present, adoptions is the area where the lack of information is the most obvious, and where inequalities for pink families are the most dreadful: we cannot adopt as a couple, and thus can hardly every adopt domestically (unless somehow already connected to the child).

It all boils down to pink label: we have to pick our fights.
I have too much personal experience with associations to know that there will always be members to insist we should cover all grounds... but who are not willing to cover any ground themselves.
If there is no one to do the work, we do not falsely "advertise" it.