Trans-racial parenting

Pic - Getty Images

I have written quite about this in this blog before - so I was interested to read a satirical article recently on the site "Parent 24" by Sipho Yanana, entitled "My white son", where the author (black) contemplates adopting a white child - and how that child would be brought up. The article itself is really good - but the comments, or some of them at least, are fairly indicative of the state of intellectual play about this issue.

However, an interesting aside. Our childminder came home today, after a weekend of Zionist church services (which involves, she tells us, singing, praying, dancing and tea drinking - tea without milk or sugar - which is described as the "Tea of life"). She got a lift with a fellow Zionist, who is apparently also working for two white gay men who have adopted children. Except, in this case, the children which have been adopted were imported from Europe, and are white.

I remember having pause for thought, many years back, while I was living in the UK, when I heard that social services there would not allow adoptions trans racially. I wondered, for a moment, whether this might be racist. But thinking about it, I came to realise that, it probably is not. We do not, after all, live in a perfect world. And the needs of the child, of course, need to be paramount. I discovered, when we were going through our own adoption process, that even here in South Africa, social welfare will try, as much as possible to pair like with like. So, for instance, if there is a black child, black parents will be preferred. If there is an Indian child, a coloured child - these would be matched, as far as possible with their racial equivalents.

Of course, it isn't always possible - and then the default position is to match a child with loving, willing and able parents, rather than let the child languish in a home. And I think also, though it was never said, that if a child can be placed in a heterosexual home, that would be preferred to a same-sexed arrangement.

And the reason would be this - that it is just easier! It is much easier not to stick out like a sore thumb in public. It is much easier not to have to explain why you are a different colour from your parents. It is much easier to be in a "normal" environment, than one which is uncommon. That is why it would be preferred.

What do I think about that? I think it is probably correct. Does that mean that we should put an end to trans-racial adoptions, or adoptions by homosexuals - not at all! But I don't think we should be so naive as to ignore the problems, both potential and real.

The link to the article is

http://www.parent24.com/Content/Getting_pregnant/adoption/2151/2ee5d683100f4ac6b86695187a065fdf/31-08-2009%2011-08/My_white_son_

Football, Art and Religion

I attended the opening of an exhibition by Port Elizabeth artist, Duncan Stewart, at the Ron Belling art gallery, in the city. The exhibition was entitled “Football: a dialogue for Hope”.

From the invite, it was a bit difficult to know what to expect. On arrival, as I fought my way through the crowds to get in, I saw the Organising Committee’s Danny Jordaan and his wife, Roxanne, whom I knew from many years ago, as a theologian. It was really good to see her again. I remember the level of awe in which we all held her in the 1980s. Women theologians were, then, a rarity. Black women theologians were even rarer. Black women theologians who actually spoke to white theologians and didn’t have a rather large carrot up their rear ends, were probably singular – so I was pleased to see her again. And glad that she remembered me.

To my surprise, she was called upon to open the proceedings with a prayer. I listened closely to her careful choice of words. No “Lord”; no “father God”. Everything she said was deeply generic and inclusive.

Not so with the artist. The artist was clearly a vocal Christian of some description, who did not hesitate to tell us that he was, in some detail. He explained that this was the basis of his art and his exhibition. That is why he had entitled the exhibition “Dialogue for Hope”. He had a very strong feeling that “the Lord would be using the 2010 event to do wonderful things for South Africa”.

I raised the matter with Roxanne Jordaan. I said isn’t it a bit of a problem when there is such a heavy infusion of Christianity into an event such as this? She agreed. She explained that for that reason she had been careful to use as much inclusive language as possible in her prayer. She said that, of course, that is the place where this particular artist, whom she seemed to know fairly well, happens to be – so one should see it as that.

Now, I do wonder about this. Recently, I had the experience of a sponsor – a very large FIFA partner (which for the sake of momentary charity on my part will remain nameless) stood up on the state at a Public Viewing Area and asked the audience to please bow their heads. I thought I had heard wrong. But no, he ploughed on relentlessly. “Father God”, he continued, “We would just like to thank you for bringing us to this place, Lord, and blessing us so mightily”. At this point I was frantically calling the event organiser to shut him up and get him forcibly removed from the stage. But no, he continued – “And Jesus, I just wanna ask you to bless each and every person here tonight and to pour your Holy Spirit into their lives”. And so it continued and continued. He ended with the flourish of telling the assembled people of Plettenberg Bay that he loved each and every one of them and he prayed God would bless them powerfully. By the time I had reached the stage to physically drag him off it, if need be, he was gone.

The sheer arrogance of the man was astonishing. This was, after all, a government event. We are, thank God, a secular state. Nevertheless, he thought it appropriate to impose his peculiar form of Christian belief on the crowd, simply because he was in the kind of position of power that gave him access to the microphone.

Now I am not suggesting the same for Duncan Stewart, who seemed to me to be entirely sincere in what he was doing and entirely within his rights. The only point I am making, is that in these kinds of public spaces, there is a level of appropriateness which becomes extraordinarily difficult when a fairly overtly, and singular, religious position is brandished.

Stewart's work is fairly subtle in this regard. There are hints and flashes of Christian themes all over the place. For instance, the charcoal drawing he gave to Danny Jordaan as a gift was an aerial view of the Port Elizabeth stadium – but with a large plastic fork in the middle of it, making it look very much like an aluminium airline dinner server. The title of that work is “Feeding the Multitudes”.

Generally, Stewart’s art was not my taste. I find this kind of slightly sentimental, hidden allusion stuff, rather irritating. But there was one piece which, I have to say, blew me away. In the crush, I almost tripped over it – it was a bronze piece, lying in a corner of the staircase. No title. A street child, lying on a piece of cardboard. A discarded KFC box (I think it should have been MacDonalds, as a FIFA sponsor) and a crushed Coke can lying nearby. The child is asleep, and clutching a football. It is a brilliant piece. It is evocative. It is touching. It speaks to the very heart of the matter.

The rest, with titles like “Bafana Bafana 2040” were really, to my mind anyway, just a bit too sentimental and just a bit too obvious. But that one piece, will live with me forever. That is real art, to my mind. That is the essence of religion.

Poor, set-upon white boy gets asylum in Canada

At the same time that the End Conscription Campaign is celebrating its 25th anniversary, a South African man has been granted refugee status by Canada's immigration and refugee board, which apparently found "clear and convincing proof" he was persecuted for being white.

The Board’s panel chair, William Davis said in the decision that Brandon Huntley (31), "would stand out like a 'sore thumb' due to his colour in any part of the country". Davis found Huntley "was a victim because of his race rather than a victim of criminality". Davis said he found Huntley a credible witness as his story was consistent and "plausible". Lara Kaplan – another White South African (and the sister of his lawyer) whom he used as a witness, apparently enhanced and supported his claims that "persecution of white South Africans by African South Africans (is) a common event today in South Africa". Apparently Huntley also said he had been able to find employment only because of family connections. He was otherwise prohibited from finding work by the country's affirmative action policies.

Huntley, who grew up in Mowbray, said he had been attacked seven times and stabbed four times "by African South Africans" between 1991 and 2003. Huntley told the tribunal he had been called "a white dog" and "a settler" when attacked. He had not bothered to report any of the attacks to the police because "the majority of them are South Africans and he did not trust them".

I have to tell you, I find this exceedingly difficult to believe. Mowbray is hardly the Wild West. Mowbray is a fairly sedate, fairly quiet little middle class suburb, not 10 minutes from where I live. To get himself attacked by “African South Africans” seven times and stabbed 4 times, he must either have been utterly provocative, extraordinarily stupid, or he dealt in drugs. There can be no other explanation for it. Because I have lived 52 years in this country and never – not once – have I ever been attacked, assaulted, or called racist terms by any “African South African” – aka black. Furthermore, I have been working in a GOVERNMENT job, as a white South African, for the past 11 years. And in my present job, I am surrounded by white South Africans - far too many of them proportionately - who are also working in a government job.

Oh, there could be another possibility, of course. Brandon Huntley, (31) formerly of Mowbray, could also be a disgusting, self-serving liar. That is also a possibility. And, I want to say, a much stronger possibility than his being a poor little set-upon white boy, whom horrible racist blacks want to tear limb from limb and persecute.

I do sincerely hope that this opens the gates for other “non African, South Africans” (is that what they are calling themselves?) - aka white people, like Huntley to pack their bags and leave. Personally, I am deeply ashamed to be even vaguely racially associated with his ilk. He certainly does not speak for me. It’s just a crying pity that he speaks for so many other deluded, ungrateful, revolting leeches like himself. Canada is very welcome to have him. I hope he never returns here, for any reason. I hope he is never allowed to – but I know that won’t happen.

But the really disturbing thing about the whole matter is not that we have racist whites in South Africa - because that is the basis for all of this. What is really disturbing is the Canadians! What the hell are they thinking? And who are the idiots who sit on this board? And what does the Canadian government have to say about this complete and utter nonsense?