Madonna, Africa, adoption, and the white man’s burden

by Carmen Van Kerckhove

Before I get started with this post, a few clarifications. First, I don’t think that Madonna is the evil, attention-hungry, Angelina-copycat that others are making her out to be. I’m sure she was guided by the best of intentions when it came to this adoption. But that doesn’t mean she doesn’t buy into essentialist notions about blacks, whether she realizes it or not.

Second, we have no way of knowing exactly what transpired during this process. Was she really led to believe that David’s father’s whereabouts were unknown? Is it true that his father never visited David at the orphanage? Was David’s father misled into believing this was not a permanent adoption? We’ll just never know, and it’s best not to make assumptions about any of the facts.

Third, I do not oppose international adoption and no, I wouldn’t prefer to leave the orphans to die. But are those ever really the only two options?

Okay, with that out of the way…

I was struck by how many times Madonna used the phrases “I will give him a life” or “he didn’t have a life” when referring to her adopted Malawian child, David, during her interview with Oprah on Wednesday.

And I think this gets at one of the main problems I have with the way international adoption is discussed in this country. There’s always this unspoken, underlying assumption that:

  • keeping the child in the home country = no life or a bad life
  • bringing the child to “the West” = a good life

The situation in Malawi is dire, yes. But discussions about international adoption always make it seem as if every single child who doesn’t get adopted by an American family — no matter what country the child is in — is going to die. Like, right now. But that’s just not always the case.

Also, we really need to question the assumption that the benefits of international adoption will always outweigh the negative repercussions. I encourage you to read this post of Ji In’s at Twice the Rice, in which she writes that “there is irreparable pain and there are primal wounds inherent in adoption that no privileged upbringing can erase.”

Can a better standard of living, healthcare, education and loving adoptive parents ever make up for what is lost when a child is removed from his or her country and culture? Shouldn’t every effort be made to try and keep families together? Shouldn’t adoption be a final resort? I don’t pretend to have the answers to those questions, but I’m disappointed that the questions are rarely, if ever, even asked.

If a country is experiencing such extreme poverty that it cannot adequately care for its children or orphans, is international adoption the best solution? Or the only solution? If, like Madonna was, you are so moved by a country’s troubles that you feel compelled to do something to help, are there other things you can do? Things that could actually help solve some of the underlying, fundamental problems that have led to this dire situation in the first place? Those questions are never asked either.

I was surprised that Madonna so willingly and unquestioningly accepted the orphanage’s claim that no family member — not even the father — had ever visited David since his arrival at 2 weeks old. Not only did she fully believe it, but she immediately assumed that it meant that “no one was looking after David’s welfare.”And during the entire interview, she didn’t once acknowledge the fact that David’s father might have kept custody of his son, had he had the resources. Her focus was on his apparent gratitude to her: “Thank you for giving my son a life.”

This lack of acknowledgement of a father’s loss reminded me of the old slavery-era essentialist notions about blacks that were created to justify oppression. Black people were characterized as subhuman and bestial. That meant that the notions of democracy and freedom this country was founded on didn’t really apply to them. Black men were said to not love their wives and children the way white men did, therefore it was perfectly okay to split up families and sell them off to different plantations.

Could a similar essentialist/white supremacist notion be at play here? Does Madonna believe that David’s father couldn’t possibly love David the way she can? That the affection and parental relationship she can offer is inherently superior to his?

I also wonder whether there are essentialist ideas at play in the way the Madonna, Oprah, and really everyone else in the media constantly talks about “Africa” as if it were one big country, with people who all share a culture, language and political system. Africa is an enormous continent, with countries that are vastly different from one another. And yet all we’re told about it is that there are children dying, there are wars, there are a lot of people with AIDS, and everyone is really poor. And anytime a movie is made about Africa, the focus is on the white people in the story, so we learn nothing there either.

We never really hear about how or why things got to this point in the specific country. What historical events led up to this situation? What responsibility should former colonizers bear? What geopolitical interests want to keep the status quo? What roles have large corporations played in contributing to this mess?

When those questions are never addressed, we’re left with the general sense that it’s the Africans’ own fault. That they suffer from some kind of fundamental, self-destructive pathology, and that they need white people to step in and save them from themselves. Basically, it’s a white man’s burden thing. No wonder people don’t think it’s racist to suggest that African-Americans were better off because of slavery — at least they didn’t have to stay in Africa!

I sincerely hope that all the criticism surrounding Madonna’s adoption will cause people to rethink the simplistic ways in which international adoption is framed. For more on this topic, check out the adoption roundtable discussion I hosted with Jae Ran and Ji In on episode 41 of Addicted to Race.

Trackbacks & Pings

  1. SABERTOOTHTIGER.ORG » Madonna? Adoption? What? on 28 Oct 2006 at 2:04 am

    […] This is all new to me. I just recently read and responded to a post regarding the race issues surrounding this media ordeal. I have pasted the exact response here: […]

  2. The Props Post « Possumstew’s Weblog on 28 Jun 2008 at 6:25 pm

    […] in particular to Carmen Van Kerckhove; please read her article about Madonna and adoption, she covered it better than I did, and […]

Comments

  1. t-hype wrote:

    Great post. I couldn’t agree more.

  2. Stefanie wrote:

    Thanks for this article and for posing all the questions about this event that I felt inside but couldn’t articulate very well. These are the questions that should be asked but seldom are.

  3. jb wrote:

    Yes, thank you Carmen! This is the first intelligent article I’ve read on this whole matter since it exploded on the scene. You raise very important questions and have me thinking about real issues…..

  4. ben pham wrote:

    Hello.

    I was directed to your post from a dear friend who felt that you articulated her views on the Madonna/adoption/Africa issue very well. This post is the most I’ve ever heard of the situation since I have not been keeping up with my celebrity news as of late. With that in mind, I apologize if my presumptions about what Madonna has or has not done or said about the situation in the following response is lacking in accuracy.

    I would like to start off by responding to the obvious disapproval of Madonna’s use of the phrases “I will give him a life” and “he didn’t have a life” during her interview with Oprah. I think it is a bit harsh to jump to the conclusion that those statements are essentially laden with a “West is greater than East” sentiment. It seems to me what she means by saying “I will give him a life” and that “he didn’t have a life” is a defense of her capability to provide. Madonna is filthy rich and any person she adopts will be “given a life,” so to speak, whether it be David from Lilongwe, Malawi or little Craig Schuster from Spokane Washington.

    In response to Ji In’s heartfelt statement that “there is irreparable pain and there are primal wounds inherent in adoption that no privileged upbringing can erase,” I would have to say that this is a very serious concern. However being an adoptee does not give her the authority to speak for every adoptee. Although this is an issue that affects many adopted people, there is a proportionate number of those where this is not a concern. I am sorry for any emotional turbulence her situation has brought and would not wish it upon anyone but to assume that every adopted child is marked for pain is a bit of a conjecture.

    Can a better standard of living, healthcare, education and loving adoptive parents ever make up for what is lost when a child is removed from his or her country and culture? I guess that all depends on a multitude of elements. It all depends on what you believe to be more of value for a child. In my opinion, a better standard of living, healthcare, education and loving adoptive parents to a newborn child far outweigh that infant’s country and culture because at that age the child has no country and culture aside from the one he/she will be instilled by those loving parents. It is definitely a different story if the child were say 8 years old.

    Shouldn’t every effort be made to try and keep families together? Shouldn’t adoption be a final resort? I agree with you that it is sad that these questions are rarely asked but I think the primary responsibility should be in the hands of the biological parents who have given the child up for adoption and the society they live in as opposed to the people who wish to adopt.

    If, like Madonna was, you are so moved by a country’s troubles that you feel compelled to do something to help, are there other things you can do? Things that could actually help solve some of the underlying, fundamental problems that have led to this dire situation in the first place? Could Madonna easily make an eight-figure donation to help the people of Malawi and still be able to keep her current lifestyle? Yes. Should she be expected to do so? No. There are things many of us can do, but at the same time we cannot be blamed for not doing them. This brings me to the notion that maybe helping the people of Malawi was not Madonna’s primary motivation for adopting this child. It would be safe to assume that her primary motivation is the desire to have another child and that helping the people of Malawi is a secondary benefit.

    Could a similar essentialist/white supremacist notion be at play here? Maybe, but isn’t it a bit essentialist to assume that all actions of whites with regard to non-whites are essentially motivated by their conception of supremacy?

    From here you delve into a critique of the African outlook which I agree with for the most part. All that stuff about Africa as a whole as opposed to a continent rich in diversity… I’m right with you on that and will have to end here because I am so hungry and have not had a bite to eat in about seven hours. I will post this up on my new blog as well so you can respond if you feel the need to.

    I appreciate your opinions and concerns and the fact that you have made it available for others who share the same view (and those who don’t) to be able to come here and read your thoughts. Take care and have a super awesome day!

    -Ben Pham

    P.S. “Cherish” is the word I use to remind me of… your love.

  5. merq wrote:

    ben pham,

    “Maybe, but isn’t it a bit essentialist to assume that all actions of whites with regard to non-whites are essentially motivated by their conception of supremacy? “

    That’s one of the most common contemporary responses to allegations of racism: the old blame-flip. Someone backs her assertion with some form of proof, and is called a racist herself for doing so.

  6. merq wrote:

    By the way, Carmen, it’s official:

    I love you, you brilliant-minded, honey-voiced, critically-thinking writer, you.

    Uhh, yeah. Good post.

  7. makethelogobigger wrote:

    Did I miss the email where we ran out of poor children in this country to adopt?

  8. Ben Pham wrote:

    Oh, that’s pretty convenient. So once you call someone a racist, it grants you immunity. That’s awesome.

  9. Meg wrote:

    It’s interesting to read the articles on the topic of celebrity adoptions so to steal a quote from cnn:
    “In simple terms, Madonna’s action may save the life of a child otherwise trapped in a society ravaged by AIDS and malnutrition…….(on the other hand) “I’m afraid only two words spring to mind: vanity project,” wrote Hannah Pool, herself adopted from an Eritrean orphanage as a child….”No doubt she thinks she’s doing the child a favor — but, really, this is all about her. The money she will have spent on the adoption and will spend on the child could have gone to help many more children in Malawi. But then she wouldn’t have a cute black child to show off.”

    you don’t have to be a member of kkk to have the white is better mentality to help poor africans who don’t know how to manage their own affairs. The effects of colonisation are real and far too complex to dismiss by a simple poor african kid + america = saviour. Adoption should go ahead if there are kids in dire need but when you have the resources of madonna/brangelina (who i think should franchise the brangedonna adoption agency where races can be accessorised) real change could be effected and they could dictate a deeper, more complex discussion of the realities of why there are so many kids in need of adoption. The other thing is when ppl adopt internationally/transracially there are efforts made (to my knowledge) to join with support groups, etc to learn from others (including adults who had been adopted). I find it hard to imagine a celebrity going into a situation like that and admitting that there’s just some things money can’t be a substitute for. I’m reminded of the tom cruise quote on his son’s race - “but he’s my son, he’s my son”. Good on you, but even being tom cruise’s son won’t protect against racism and identity issues.

  10. IkoIko wrote:

    “Proof” never equals “facts”. I can get you proof, but that doesn’t mean I have facts necessarily upon which to draw upon. Even if I have facts, that doesn’t necessarily mean I’ve drawn the most accurate conclusions from what’s in front me– they might be right, I might be crazy, both might be true, who knows?

    Adoption– important, sensitve matter regardless of the parties involved with the child’s interests first and foremost– not the communities from which they come.

    Question: Is such a standard ever imposed anywhere else in the world?

    If so, I’m forseeing adoption rates dwindling rapidly as the costs go down, because it really will become a matter and obligation of class and affordability– regardless of race.

    All social policy hell will break loose globally if the thrust is basically that families with the means and resources *must* support every impoverished village into which single parent/parentless children are born abroad. That’s the extension of where you’re this argument’s headed.

    None of us were on the ground in Malawi to say what transpired. Why even assume (a) there are actual clear cut “sides” to this so-called “debate”, (b) that any of them have any, equal, or lesser amounts of validity than the other, and (c) that we have a direct stake in an outcome or resolution.

    However obnoxiously it may be handled, wasn’t this a private matter/process– or did the rules suddlenly change?

    I counted at least four planes of individual biases– none of which are acknowledged– being casually tossed around in the original post alone, allowed to operate as “given truths” without “proof”, which makes them assumptions at best: the so-called “evil Westerner”, the “noble African” (by that meaning “black”– even though, again, Africa– big continent, lots of diversity, etc.), the fallacy of the “rich” (because they are so, their motives are automatically suspect), and the fallacy of the “poor” (because they are so, they are incapable of having motives, or must have limited capacity for motives at best).

    Cheap reductionist logic, true, but that’s what it boils down to.

    One example tossed around the office earlier was (of course) the hypothetical Oprah adoption of an “African” child. Her PR savvy would certainly be better (she would raise a village, for example, and could lay cultural legacy claims), but shouldn’t her introduction of “Western” values be equally suspect. And there’s the ability of a “rich” person able to do what would take a middle class family years of red tape to do…

  11. cw wrote:

    Thanks, Ben Pham, for a thoughtful response.

  12. Lyonside wrote:

    >However obnoxiously it may be handled, wasn’t this a private matter/process– or did the rules suddlenly change?

    It should be, ideally, BUT… for better or worse, if a celebrity does things this publicly, it becomes fodder for public opinion. And when a country appears to bend its rules for a celebrity, it makes waves. I don’t particularly like this culture of real and faux celebrity (Ancient Rome inevitably comes to mind) we’ve got going in this nation, but those are the rules we’re living under.

    —-
    “The Romans had wine, women, and song. We changed it to sex, drugs, and rock and roll.” - anonymous (?)
    or:
    “You [USA citizens for the Nat’l Anthem] stand there, hand on the hearts… You and the Roman Empire are the only people who’ve ever done that, so be very careful! - Eddie Izzard

  13. Carla wrote:

    Being born and raised in the U.S., I wouldn’t wish this culture on anyone.

  14. gatamala wrote:

    My concern w/ Madonna is that she doesn’t seem to have performed any self-critical analysis regarding her fitness as a parent of a child from Malawi. Did she examine the various aspects (adoption, different race, different ethnicity, different culture, possible medical issues….on top of being a new celebrity) and on balance feel, “he’ll be rich!!!” ?
    To what extent does wealth offset problems that cannot be “solved” by $$$$. She may still come to the same conclusion, but at least THINK.

    I am annoyed with her talk about “life”. She can give him financial security and opportunity. It narrowly defines life and smacks of noblesse oblige. Sure, he WILL avoid poverty on a country estate - but he can also ended up on the floor of a London club in a coke-induced cardiac arrest. Her $$$$ is no guarantee he will have a life.

    I realize I am assuming that she didn’t think about the details, b/c she apparently didn’t articulate them on Oprah. As personal as this self-reflection normally is….Madonna left the world of privacy - in exchange for $$$- a loooooong time ago.

    “Does Madonna believe that David’s father couldn’t possibly love David the way she can? That the affection and parental relationship she can offer is inherently superior to his?”

    Good question. Only she knows the answer. It is quite possible she does believe this. I’ve checked enough posts on Harlow’s Monkey to know that too many adoptive parents truly believe that poor people don’t love/value their children as much as they do.

    [Carla - hon…you need to get off of Myspace, trl, 106 & park. I was born & raised here & have problems with various aspects of our culture too…but really]

  15. yori kim wrote:

    I totally agree meg, even though it may not seem like it, its another form of white supremacy, but i must ask one thing (in general) there ARE white kids in other countries ‘in need’, funny-why did she need to ADOPT from africa? she could have donated but (from the quoted quote,) she wouldn’t have any coloured kid to show off like an animal, i feel bad for this kid, he’s not gonna see his father, he won’t know where he comes from, ’cause madonna will probably lie 2 him ’bout it, and did you know she now wants to adopt ANOTHER kid, this time its a girl and i quote:

    ” Madonna will adopt a second Malawian baby, as soon as one-year-old David Banda has settled into her family.
    The singer and husband Guy Ritchie will return to the Lilongwe orphanage where they found David–and they have their heart set on adopting a girl next time around.

    Madonna even wants to take biological children Lourdes, 10, and six-year-old Rocco with her.

    She says, “I’m going to adopt another Malawian child very quickly. A baby girl this time, in order to redress the balance.

    “But first I would like to give Rocco and Lourdes a little time to get used to David.

    “The next time I go Africa to visit the orphanage, I am going to take the children with me. I want to open their minds to the rest of the world.”

    sorry, madonna but coloured children aren’t ANIMALS-so stop treating them like one…………..redress the BALANCE?! WTF?!
    there not ornaments! hopefully we’ll see an article on this soon. i might just post one,

    yori

  16. ashley wrote:

    i love reading and learning so when i herd this
    i was so interested in it. i also am madonnas
    biggest fan in baltimore so every website or
    magazine their is of her i am so into it.i love
    you madge your’e number 1 fan ashley…

  17. nicole wrote:

    you have to be intrested in it because it’s
    madonna you gotta love her .

    GO MADGE LUVE YU , NICKIE

  18. B.G. wrote:

    Ben Pham, at no point did Ms. Kerckhove make a generalization about *all* white people. In this point, she is talking about a specific set of power dynamics, and provides an analysis based on historical and cultural context for this situation. I suggest you improve your reading comprehension skills and lay off on the knee-jerk defensiveness.

  19. B.G. wrote:

    Whoops, I meant “in this post”, not “in this point”.

  20. B.G. wrote:

    “In this post, she is talking about a specific set of power dynamics, and provides an analysis of this particular situation based on historical and cultural context.”

  21. Darla wrote:

    What makes the Westerners think we have the right to go anywhere and buy babies, because that is what this is about–people buying babies to get around the stricter or more time consuming adoption rules here. There is nothing about this situation that I like. And I especially hate the idea of the kid getting trotted out so people can show how “international” or “non-racist” or able to get what they want with impunity because everyone knows that the rules apply to others and they are entitled to have what they want at any cost. I don’t quibble with the idea of adoption per se or with interracial adoption because there are so many kids in the system that need good homes or any home to get out of the foster system. I have a problem with people who ignore these children in hopes of getting a tiny “perfect” child bought from wherever.

  22. Denise wrote:

    An excellent article, Carmen! Thank you so much for posting this. It hit really close to home and suddenly I don’t feel so alone anymore. :-)

  23. Indie wrote:

    I am reading this blog for the first time as I read the wonderful communication that Latoya had with Anna over at Jezebel, and I cannot believe how myopic and short sighted that both the owner and and the posters exhibit.
    Why is it that we are so good at complaining and bitching as opposed to taking action.

    Latoya was quite eloquent in her plea for people to be educated on issues only to get here to find out that most people posting here are passing judgments on what they really don’t know.
    It is easy for black people to criticize Angelina and Madonna, but what the heck are they doing themselves? I don’t care for Madonna and don’t know what her motives for adopting the little boy is, I will give her the benefit of the doubt that she fell in love with a little boy and wanted to give him a better life.

    I am an African living in America and it is rather arrogant to think that you can speak for the continent of Africa or Asia when you really do not know much about their culture and customs. It is very prevalent in some countries where parents send of their children to other families as maids and servants just because they cannot feed their children or educate them, those people are then treated like second class citizens because their parents get some money now and again. Now you tell me why it is better to subject a child to that life than to be adopted by an affluent woman who can not only provide for that child but give them love.

    How many of you making judgments here have tried to get out of your comfort zone and gone out to those countries and see for yourself.
    I don’t understand the hatred for Angelina Jolie on this blog, here is a privileged young woman who chose to get off her ass and educate herself about the world beyond her immediate environment and comfort zone. It is easier to be critical than it is to be active. She has always maintained that she has gained more from having her children than anything she could ever give them. She just does not adopt the children and take them away from their environment, she goes back and starts up foundation for the children as she has already done in Cambodia for her older son and built a new orphanage in Ethiopia and has said she will do the same thing in Ethiopia that she is doing in Cambodia.
    As for the flippant ain’t I funny comments about adopting African children being accessories are beyond stupid and probably written by someone that does not have children. As a mother of three, it is hard work to raise well adjusted, aware children.

    The posts and comments about Angelina doing A Mighty Heart would have been comical if it was not so serious.

    Seriously, people were having a cow because a woman with cherokee Indian blood was playing the role of a Cuban, Dutch , African and Chinese woman. So if Halle got the role, should the Cubans and the Chinese protest because they were not represented. When Mariane Pearls husband died I did not see black people reaching out to her as a sister that lost her husband. When her memoir was published, why did Oprah, Halle or any other black person not buy the rights?
    Angelina has more in common with Mariane than any of the black actresses mentioned. As an African, should I be offended then that most parts of Africans go to African Americans who fake an African accent, should I be offended that Forest Whitaker played Idi Amin where he had to darken himself up and speak in fake accent, where was the outrage for the African actors who are not being cast, most of parts of those that fought for freedom in South Africa are always given to African Americans, there are many fine African actors that the parts could have gone to, Djimon Honsou being one of them.

    Before we cast the stones, we need to make sure we are practicing what we preach.
    My heart goes out to anybody who will open their hearts and their homes to a child regardless of what race they might be.

    By the way, New Orleans needs rebuilding. I don’t see a lot of our black celebrities putting their money where their mouth is. It is easy to make fun of Brangelina, but instead of just throwing money at the problem, they are actually doing something constructive that will help people get back into their homes as is Harry Connick Jnr. I don’t see the Will Smiths and the Jayz’s, just a food for thought for those of you that are so quick to criticize.

  24. Tiffany wrote:

    To Indie, Jay Z has worked with the UN to provide clean running water in various parts of Africa and has toured in Africa to raise money for more than one child. Will Smith and Jada have also contributed to the school that Oprah built in South Africa for girls, maybe you should do you research first about African americans before you critcize them for not doing anything. The difference between African Americans and White Americans is that white people always boast about the so called “good” they are doing in African contries so they can look like they are a “saviour” unlike African Americans’ theres no reason to boast they just go and do what need sto be done.

  25. Tiffany wrote:

    Tons of black celebrities are putting there money where its needed. Do your research..!!!!

  26. Tiffany wrote:

    Also Alicia Keys has a charity called keep a child alive http://www.keepachildalive.org/

    Beyoncé Knowles supports the following charities:

    46664
    Clothes Off Our Back
    Food Bank For New York City
    Love Our Children USA
    Oxfam

    Russell Simmons supports the following charities:

    Champions for Children
    Diamond Empowerment Fund
    Earth Day Network
    Hip-Hop Summit Action Network
    Lisa Lopes Foundation
    PETA
    (RED)
    Rush Philanthropic Arts Foundation
    US Doctors for Africa

    Will and Jada Smith Family Foundation

    Malcolm-Jamal Warner supports the following charities:

    Artists for a New South Africa
    Be-Do-Have Foundation
    Will and Jada Smith Family Foundation

    I’ve posted a list above with the charity’s that African American celebs donate or run charities both in Africa and USA

  27. onelove wrote:

    When I see Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt with their children (adopted and biological) I see so much affection. So much genuine emotion and sweetness.
    When I see Madonna with her adopted son, I see a more reserved parenting style, not a lot of kisses and hugs, not a lot of joy. Just lots of posing for the cameras and hauling the kids around town. Something seems tense or “not quite right” there.
    Maybe it’s a different personality style, or maybe the Jolie-Pitts are doing it for the right reason (love) and Madonna is doing it for the wrong reason (fame).
    Guess we’ll just have to wait and see.

  28. katie morosky wrote:

    I’m not a native speaker of the english language so I might make some mistakes here and there…
    Ok. First of all, I have very much respect for all those celebrities, for all those not famous uncredit people out there who had adopted a kid from a foreign (Third World) country or from their own country. Being adopted myself from an African country I know I would not have the same future if I remained there. Now, I’m an educated woman (I have a master in linguistics and literature) and chance would be rare if I could obtain the same goal in Africa. I don’t know much about my family there since I was very young when I came here, in the West.
    And sure, I know that many children in Africa do have a life, that they can enjoy themselves, that they can have a job and that some of them can get an education… But the truth is, in the Western countries people tend to have a higher standard of living, have a more democratic regime,… We might live in a rat race but we have so many luxuries surrounding us that we just take for granted, that we don’t even see … There are far more people here who can go to college than in the Third World (also, level of education is better).
    I don’t feel like they took me away from my natural culture because I cannot recall ever experience that culture because I was too young to remember. I’m very grateful to my biological mother and grandmother that they gave me away for adoption and I think my parents (adoptive parents) are fantastic for adopting a child far from their own country. It takes courage, you know. Now, I consider myself a European black person brought up in a white community. I don’t see anything wrong with that.
    And talkin’ ’bout Madge… I don’t know her so I can’t write anything meaningful about her adopting little David. All I can write is that Madonna had always, unlike other performers, brought black dancers, actors into her shows, videos. You gotta respect that. And I also know that Madonna wanted to have more than two children ( I read that after Rocco being born) but the risk was too high. So I think that’s why she adopted David. And it’s a good thing she did because mostly, even underprivileged, children in the Western World tend to have a better future than children in the Thirld World.

  29. katie morosky wrote:

    Sorry, I forgot one thing: in my country, and in many European countries, there are a lot of people who know that the Third World is being oppressed by Western Imperialism and New Imperialism for centuries. So we don’t think that the black men cannot take care of themselves. So we don’t see Madonna adopting David that way as you put it. It never even crossed my mind.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared.