<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: I&#8217;m serious, I will cut that bitch.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://antimeria.com/blog/politics/im-serious-i-will-cut-that-bitch/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://antimeria.com/blog/politics/im-serious-i-will-cut-that-bitch</link>
	<description>a complete impediment to understanding</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Oct 2011 20:36:29 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: ed</title>
		<link>http://antimeria.com/blog/politics/im-serious-i-will-cut-that-bitch/comment-page-1#comment-1085</link>
		<dc:creator>ed</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Feb 2010 03:49:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://antimeria.com/blog/?p=1698#comment-1085</guid>
		<description>i&#039;m pretty sure everything is terrible these days.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i&#8217;m pretty sure everything is terrible these days.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scott</title>
		<link>http://antimeria.com/blog/politics/im-serious-i-will-cut-that-bitch/comment-page-1#comment-1083</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 18:13:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://antimeria.com/blog/?p=1698#comment-1083</guid>
		<description>Ick. Ick ick ick. It would be worse if it wasn&#039;t the fucking National Review, and if her argument was any more substantial than &quot;this is what people think, so it must be right.&quot; But then again preservation of the status quo is really what conservativism is all about, isn&#039;t it?

What scares me is how the &#039;birth parents first&#039; attitude wraps around the political spectrum. I see it quite a bit in feminist circles (i&#039;ve been thinking about &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.feministing.com/archives/019822.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;this in particular&lt;/a&gt; recently), either in terms of the effect on birth mothers or, for international adoptees, cultural issues. You hear quite a few people in womens&#039; rights tout the strength of the maternal bond between biological parent and child, which isn&#039;t &lt;i&gt;any&lt;/i&gt; different from what MacDonald proposes. Ever since lifers started promoting adoption as the alternative to abortion, i&#039;ve seen those on the pro-choice side tear into adoption for the sake of opposition. In terms of culture, saying an adoptee is better off with their &#039;racial&#039; culture, whatever the hell that means, is pretty much identical to &#039;stick with your own kind&#039; arguments.

In any case, i&#039;d argue that arguments from either the right or left have no personal quarrel with adoption. It&#039;s just that adoption just so happens to interfere with a political agenda, whether it&#039;s gay marriage or anti-imperialism or whatever. Adoptees get thrown under the bus just so any idiot with a soapbox can make a point. That&#039;s what i think&#039;s the worst: we&#039;re just collateral damage. We don&#039;t fucking matter to them.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ick. Ick ick ick. It would be worse if it wasn&#8217;t the fucking National Review, and if her argument was any more substantial than &#8220;this is what people think, so it must be right.&#8221; But then again preservation of the status quo is really what conservativism is all about, isn&#8217;t it?</p>
<p>What scares me is how the &#8216;birth parents first&#8217; attitude wraps around the political spectrum. I see it quite a bit in feminist circles (i&#8217;ve been thinking about <a href="http://www.feministing.com/archives/019822.html" rel="nofollow">this in particular</a> recently), either in terms of the effect on birth mothers or, for international adoptees, cultural issues. You hear quite a few people in womens&#8217; rights tout the strength of the maternal bond between biological parent and child, which isn&#8217;t <i>any</i> different from what MacDonald proposes. Ever since lifers started promoting adoption as the alternative to abortion, i&#8217;ve seen those on the pro-choice side tear into adoption for the sake of opposition. In terms of culture, saying an adoptee is better off with their &#8216;racial&#8217; culture, whatever the hell that means, is pretty much identical to &#8216;stick with your own kind&#8217; arguments.</p>
<p>In any case, i&#8217;d argue that arguments from either the right or left have no personal quarrel with adoption. It&#8217;s just that adoption just so happens to interfere with a political agenda, whether it&#8217;s gay marriage or anti-imperialism or whatever. Adoptees get thrown under the bus just so any idiot with a soapbox can make a point. That&#8217;s what i think&#8217;s the worst: we&#8217;re just collateral damage. We don&#8217;t fucking matter to them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

