Crafty Rooskies!

After something on the order of nineteen deaths and one returned product, it seems yet another US AP has changed her mind about raising Russian children. After she lied and cheated her way to twins, too!

Unspeakably vile American woman ditches infants on cold St. Petersburg street

I’m posting this for two reasons. The first is to bring attention to the comments. Reading the first few of these, you’ll note that no American has ever done anything wrong, while decades without a cold war has only made those Rooskies worse than ever! Sitting over there all hatin’ on us, waiting to ditch their defective children on any rich American without revealing they’re monsters!

“Russians love anti-American news,” says one commentor. “Of course we are not hearing what the adoptive mother’s position is regarding this story,” points out another. No, we aren’t, are we, because she ditched two infants in the freezing cold and RAN, every bit as cowardly as Torry Hansen but at least more prompt about it. I wonder what pretty story that commentor thinks she could tell that would make what she did all right? I simply can’t think of one–but I guess my imagination is hampered by my fury this morning.

“American parents need to [be] educated” about FAS and RAD, offers another commentor. Yes, and purchasers of dogs need to know about rabies shots. Buy a dog without knowing about rabies shots and I will have exactly as much sympathy for you as I have for a cheating, lying woman who apparently purchased two babies without knowing about RAD and FAS: ZERO. Not knowing what FAS is is no excuse. Not educating yourself about a human being you plan to take into your family is irresponsible, stupid and cruel.

And of course, there’s always, always, always at least one American commentor who can’t think about anyone but American PAPs: “If this is a true story coming out of Russia, it is very sad causing good Americans who want to adopt will face more problems that are in place before this incident, if a child can be adopted at all in the future.”

Fry in Hell, “Judy.” And go learn how to compose a sentence before you touch a keyboard again.

Secondly, I wanted to point out a tendency on the part of The Daily Mail (and, it seems, every newspaper ever in cases like this) to side with the AP as far as is humanly possible.

Am I crazy? Surely nobody could side with the woman…except that wacko-ass commentor I quoted. Nope. As always seems to be the case, The Mail is very careful to avoid calling what this woman did cruel. I don’t mean they went the “hedging our bets and saying ‘allegedly’ because nothing’s proven yet” route. I mean they won’t say what she did was bad–because, apparently, there’s nothing inherently cruel about dumping two fifteen-month-olds on the street in the cold; we need more information first. It’s only those nasty ol’ Rooskies saying so, so we’ll put quotes around “cruel” throughout the article, implying there’s a perfectly good, non-cruelty-type reason for such behavior.

After all, American woman don’t just ditch children they’ve changed their minds about, let alone be so cowardly as to not do so in person, but to leave a note. No, this never has and never will happen; it is unthinkable*. So, just to leave a little wiggle room, we’ll put quotes around other things this woman couldn’t really be too, like the perpetrator of an “immoral and illegal act.” As long as the unfairness is in the favor of the white, Western person, it’s good.

Damn, but that shit makes me want to spit rivets.

*which is why all fifty US states now have baby dump safe haven laws, obviously



Filed under Colonialism ROCKS!, Stop Saying That, Those Wacky PAPs, WTF?!, You're going to Hell for this.

5 responses to “Crafty Rooskies!

  1. Lauri Lee

    It gets me all this talk about FAS and RAD, they are like the ultimate parental cop-out. I have read a lot of commentary on other sites regarding Torry Hansen which pours on the sympathy for her regarding getting a “damaged” kid and how hard that must have been on her. Well, a couple of years down the track and this is the “damaged” kid who the Russian authorities “lied” about his mental state:

    Not sounding like the psychopath Torry Hansen would like the world believe she had on her hands.

    • They really are cop-outs. Find the right alphabet soup acronym, and you can ditch a troublesome child and walk away with the sympathy of the world–as long as the kid’s adopted. Outside of adoption, given the same troublesome child, you’re responsible forever–even if the child can’t live in your home, you’re financially responsible. So color me tickled Hellish red that Torry Hansen is going to have to pony up the child support. Forever means forever, Jerkface.

      And I’m *so* glad Artem’s in a foster home. The last I heard, he was in a group home, and Americans were using that as proof he’s “unadoptable.”

      It’s just more evidence that adoptees–more so than children in general–are not quite human to many American grown-ups. Give birth to your own, and any problems that appear later are just things that happened and must be dealt with. Adopt, and you get a lifetime warranty, and the child’s failure to be what you wanted invalidates it.

      I read an article in a British paper not long ago that said about twenty per cent of adoptions done there are disrupted. With this consumer mentality, and the usual demand that an adoptee resemble the APs own child in every way possible, I can’t see that number going anywhere but up in the future.

      • Lauri Lee

        Artem is in a SOS Children’s Village, which depending on how you want to swing the definition you could call it a group home or orphanage, but they are set up in family units in family homes that are most commonly headed by an employed foster mother, foster fathers tend to be rarer. The organisation puts resources behind training the foster mothers how to parent traumatised children, which is one step up from the average AP. I think it is propaganda of the US media (or whoever else) to speak of this as a group home if the audience does not understand the family unit nature of an SOS village as opposed to the preconceived notions about what a group home is like.

        I was a little surprised at the talk of adoption by the foster mother because I understood that SOS Children’s Villages did not focus on adoption as some of the children may return to their parents in the future. They are certainly NOT a holding ground for PAPs to tour and pick up a needy “orphan” as many orphanages are.

        I have heard adoption disruption is extremely high as well, although this was speculation on US statistics rather than British. I say speculation because one of the articles further said it is not something that hard data is collected on which enrages me because people who work in various child services know the numbers are high but obviously someone else has an agenda for that information not to get out – might discourage relinquishing mothers or put doubts in the minds of adopters of the “as if born to…” concept perhaps…

  2. I read the comments yesterday and was spitting nails. Blaming the adoptees for being “damaged”? Well, how about blaming the agency or even the lame-ass excuse for a MOTHER first? Why always blame the adoptees? Oh, yeah, it’s *always* our fault. We’re so difficult and just hard to live with, *so* hard to live with, even as infants and toddlers, that it’s justified to leave us on the streets, I guess. What fucking idiots self-righteous APs and PAPs are. Ugh. It’s frightening.

  3. Pingback: No More Russians | Adopto-Snark

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s