Dana over at Mombian is running her fabulous queer family fun-fest for the third year in a row today. Go check out the list of contributed posts, which will be added to on a rolling basis throughout the day. A great many of the Lesbian Family-listed blogs have posted something on the occasion. Here’s mine, for fun. And Liza, LesbianFamily.org founder, posted this.

If you’ve listed your blog here, and would like readers to see your Blogging for LGBT Families Day post, do let us know in the comments below!

My Custom Story is a site where you can order totally customized photo board books. What a neat way to make sure our kids see positive images of their families from a very young age! It would be great if they had gay and lesbian families represented in their example books, but it looks like all of the examples come from the owner’s family, so I guess I can’t expect her to make up a lesbian auntie getting pregnant with donor sperm just to be inclusive!

Speaking of sperm (what a segue!), Sfrajett has a great post about buying sperm, contemplating parenthood, and figuring out definitions of family. It’s been up for a while, but I just read it and found it very thought-provoking. Good luck to you & GF as you venture down this wild and wacky path to parenthood, Sfrajett!

On to my rant of the day.

Smashing, bashing, and crashing… “the 3 important stages of boyhood?”

That’s what Tonka says in a multi-page ad in Parents. “From the way they talk to the way they play, boys are just built different! And Tonka (of course) has the blueprint for the fun they love. The TONKA [no product placement here, thank you] grows with your child so he can sort, walk, and ride to his heart’s content.”

Because girls don’t sort, walk, or ride? Let alone smash, bash or crash?

“Boys don’t just like to be active, they need to be.”

I am the mom to one very very active little boy. One little boy who seems to be determined to conform to every stereotype - whose head whips around when he sees a truck go by, who has never met a ball or a wheeled object he doesn’t like - but that doesn’t mean that the little girls I know don’t need to be active too.

“Enjoy all the wild, wonderful moments and remember, you’re part of a very special group of women - you’re the mom of a BOY!” Gag.

Playing to these stereotypes may sell toys - though not to me - but it also hurts kids. It hurts little girls who want to run and make noise. And it hurts little boys who don’t.

Shame on you, Tonka.

Note that I’m not even mentioning that aside from one possibly-Asian looking kid, there are absolutely NO children boys of color in the whole 8.5 page spread? Oh wait, I guess I did just mention that.

Remember back when Babytalk ran a survey on “Married vs Single Moms?” I got a little cranky about it, to put it mildly. And while Babytalk didn’t call me, they heard from enough lesbian moms that we’re certainly included in the article.

And apparently, there are a lot of us! Of their 14,000 “nationally representative” respondents, 8%, or approximately 1100 of us, answered YES to the question, “Do you have a same-sex partner who co-parents with you?”

Interestingly, “more than two-thirds” of us strongly agreed that we feel discrimination because we’re not married. I had a hard time with the wording of the question, and think I might have been in the other ~30%, although obviously I think lesbian moms face discrimination.

The surprising statistic for me was that only 57% of us agreed, “I wish I were married.” I wonder how many of you in the 43% answered the question are in a semi-legally-recognized marriage or otherwise got caught up in the wording of the question. And I’m also curious about how many of you are more old-school, anti-patriarchial-institution radical feminist moms.

Coolest bit? The sidebar titled “Hollywood wives…and moms” listed some famous celeb moms who are either divorced with children, unmarried with children, single adopters, or have same-sex partners. It isn’t in the online version, so you’ll have to pick up a copy to see the cute picture of Cynthia Nixon and her daughter.

Way to go, BabyTalk! Thanks for including lesbian moms in your article.

I’m back from BlogHer07 (by back, I mean in Milwaukee spending a week on vacation at Grandma and Grandpa’s) and I’m full of excitement and ideas for the blog. Also, the panel I was on was a smashing success! But FIRST, I want to welcome new visitors and point out a few things.

Welcome, BlogHers!

The blogrolls should be self-explanatory, over there in the righthand nav bar. If you’re looking for pregnant lesbian blogs, look under “expecting,” for lesbian foster parents, look under “foster,” etc.

If you would like to be listed as a Friend of the Family, please either leave a comment, or send an email to lesbianfamily (at) gmail (dot) com. The only thing we ask in return is that you put up a button on your blog (or a link in your blogroll if you don’t do buttons). Scroll down for the really cute Friend of the Family buttons.

If you’d like to be added to the Resource page, also either leave a comment or send an email. If you could add a short (1 sentence) description of your resource, that would be great. I may or may not leave it precisely intact, but it helps! I do anticipate reorganizing the resource page soon.

AND, feel free to join the LesbianFamily.org Flickr group. Pictures you send to the group will go into random rotation in the Family Album on the right. This is what a lesbian family looks like! (Please note, suggestive/erotic pictures will be removed. This is a family album.)

Look for more BlogHer posts both here and at LizaWasHere!

Are any LesbianFamily.org readers going to BlogHer?

I’ve been invited to step in as a speaker on the panel “The Politics of Inclusion & Exclusion in Online Communities,” and would love to have you join me and the rest of the very interesting women who will be there. It should be a great discussion.

Today, for what feels like the millionth time in the past 3 1/2 years, the Massachusetts legislature is voting on whether to send a referendum to the votes to let them decide whether same-gender marriage will continue to be legal.

More than eight thousand families in Massachusetts would have their current legal status endangered, and both marriage rights and civil unions would be off the table for the rest of us queers. If we can kill this bill today in the Constitutional Convention, it’s over - there are no more versions of the amendment in the pipeline. It feels like do or die today.

I am off to the State House in a bit with Roo and will write more later when we know the outcome. A vote is expected between 1 and 3 today, and it’s going to be breathtakingly close.

In the meantime, if you’re interested in obsessively refreshing for up-to-the-minute reports, Bay Windows is live-blogging the day. If you live in Massachusetts, or if you have family or friends here, please make a phone call before 1 pm today.

***

ETA: if you’re looking for a more personal perspective on what marriage means for LGBT families - both in Massachusetts and elsewhere - Dana just posted a great review of a book called The Brides of March.

***

4:04: Just got home. Someone is refusing to nap when it’s convenient for Mama (the nerve), so for now, I’ll just say: HELLS, YEAH!!!

Details to follow.

***

So what we will do with ourselves now? Since November 2004, when the state’s Supreme Judicial Court rules that nothing in the state constitution prohibited consenting adults to get married, regardless of gender, the state legislature has voted on marriage rights no fewer than 14 times.

In the meantime, thousands of couples have gotten married, and dozens of lawsuits - some successful - have been filed by out-of-state couples to get their Massachusetts marriage recognized at home. The impact has gone beyond Massachusetts and the surrounding states, though: as people have seen the sky not falling, and the poll numbers show that an ever-increasing number of people in Massachusetts do support same-gender marriage, a handful of states have established civil unions or domestic partnerships. This is progress, despite the national backlash.

And today was huge. The amendment, which needed 50 votes to turn into a 2008 ballot initiative, got just 44 votes. Some legislators changed their mind at the last second, including the state rep in my mother-in-law’s district (and this after she wrote him an angry letter declaring that she hoped none of his children would grow up to be gay. Fair enough.)

I can’t help but feel pissed at those 44 legislators for having the audacity to think they get to choose who gets to be a legal family and who doesn’t. But 151 legislators - including some republicans in conservative districts - voted with their conscience. Wow, do I love this Commonwealth.

Because of Murphy’s law of babies, Roo took the longest nap of his life this morning, so we were on the train on our way to the State House when NSG called with the news of how the vote went down. I couldn’t believe we missed it. But the State House was still a site to behold when we arrived: throngs of people cheering, hugging, crying, and screaming congratulations across the crowd. A woman grabbed Roo’s hands and yelled “hooray for your moms!”

Across the street were the protesters. Their signs ranged from typically offensive - “Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve” - to appalling - “Fags burn in hell, wedding ring or no.” An older man screamed at some Episcopal priests about how all we wanted to do was teach “buggery” in elementary school. And then there was the guy with the sign that said “Unitarians are Jew-haters.” (Maybe he was lost.)

When the pro-equality legislators emerged with their staff to greet the crowd, the scattered screams and songs turned into a more unified chant of “thank you, thank you, thank you.” Some of them were crying. All of them were beaming.

I felt so grateful to be there to experience this, and to have Roo there with me. I can’t wait to tell him about this day, so he can say he was there the day his state made history by making sure his family would stay legal.

(Pictures courtesy of The Boston Globe, since I can’t figure out how to get mine of my phone).

Like Trista, I had hoped that my return to LF would be with a much longer and interesting post than this one, but alas, it is not.

I did, however, want to share this tidbit from your neighbours to the North. A study, (commissioned back in 2003 when Canadians were embroiled in the same-sex marriage debate) recently came out that states:

the vast majority of studies show that children living with two mothers and children living with a mother and father have the same levels and qualities of social competence.

It bears noting that the author of the study had to request a copy of it through the Access to Information Act, as he believes the current Conservative government was stalling on its publication. The findings of the report contradict their political leanings on the subject, and they are now distancing themselves from it, stating that there is “very little reasearch in this area”.

Of course, “family” groups are refuting the findings, calling the study biased and wringing their hands, stating that the “natural family” no longer has special protection in Canada. They also want it noted that “women just don’t make good dads”.

Uhg. I sometimes want to get up in arms about this kind of baloney, but I rarely have the energy. I am teaching a course this summer on Motherhood and Mothering, and it just takes 10 minutes of reading to realize that the nuclear “natural” family is a modern invention, and yo, thanks to patriarchy, often men don’t make good dads.

So there you go. In case you were worried (which I know you all weren’t, but just in case), lesbian parents are just as good as straight parents.

Because I’m lazy, this post is, as usual, cross-posted over at Round is Funny. 

[Background: When you decide on an open domestic adoption, one of the things you have to do is put together a family album (or profile) that describes who you are, your life, your community, your family, your hopes for any future children, etc. Agencies show these profiles (or make them available electronically) to expectant moms making an adoption plan.]  

Yesterday, the National Center for Lesbian Rights won a case they took on on behalf of the Butlers, a gay couple who had been denied the right to post their profiles on two different adoption sites (read specifics about their lawsuit against Adoption.com and ParentProfiles.com).

NCLR wrote:

As a result of yesterday’s settlement, Adoption.com and ParentProfiles.com agreed that they must either make their services available to all qualified prospective adoptive parents in California - regardless of their sexual orientation or marital status - or stop profiting from California consumers.

***

Well, it’s about time.

When NSG and I started out on the process to adopt our son, we made the mistake of looking at agencies on-line. We’re children of the 80’s: why wouldn’t we start with the internet? Turns out that a queer couple doing internet research on adoption is like going to Google med school in the middle of the night to look up why your throat is itching - by the time the sun comes up, you’ve not only convinced you’re dying of untreatable throat cancer, but you’ve already contacted 6 internet lawyers about drawing up a new will.

The profiles we saw, with few exceptions, were of couples who seemed to be straight, white, wealthy, church-going, and rich - with lovely lawns and beautiful golden retrievers. We were… well, white. We panicked.

In this vein, we started sending inquiries out at random to agencies that had any profiles posted of families who varied even just a little from the norm. We didn’t find any postings with queer couples in them, or even single people. What we wanted to know was: how would they handle our profile? Since we were planning on an open adoption, we needed to know that an agency would support us - not just tolerate us.

Here is my favorite response (and yes, I saved the email):

Dear Round:

Thanks for your inquiry. Yes, we are a very liberal agency and would be happy to work with you and your partner.

It is our policy that we would have you post your profile as a single woman looking to adopt. If a birthmom were to choose you to parent her child, we would of course encourage you to be honest with her about your sexual orientation and partnership status.

As you know, honesty is extremely important in an open adoption.

Best of luck to you, and please let me know how else I can be of assistance.

Sincerely,

Agency Worker from Giant St*rb*cks-Like Adoption Agency

***

Where do I start? Naah, you can do it better. Have at it, gang.

Any New Hampsherites out there?

It’s a good day for you, and a good day for our queer family. As of January 1st, New Hampshire will officially offer rights and recognition to same-sex couples in the form of civil unions.

Marriage, it’s not, but it’s a big step forward.

Ok, I admit it, I’m a geek. My favorite kind of “music” is NPR.

In moments like this morning, I know why. This morning, Morning Edition ran a Story Corps segment that made me cry in my car. While I was driving.

The interview was between a 14 year old girl and her mother. The mother, Sue Hyde, told the story about how hard it was to grow up in rural Illinois in a large nuclear family, knowing that she liked girls. At 19, Sue came out to her own mother, whose first reaction was to ask “what did I do wrong?”

I’m sure many of us can relate.

Several years later, Sue’s mother became gravely ill. Sue and her partner sat up with her the night before she died, and during one of her last moments of being awake and aware, Sue’s mother told her and her partner that she wanted them to be happy. (Listen to the story. I am NOT doing it justice.)

By this time in the interview, Sue is crying and telling her own daughter, Jesse, that she doesn’t want Jesse to have to wait so long for her blessing. And Jesse, in turn, assures her mom that she knows, and she is.

It was one of those moments that are almost indescribable – it was the universal story of how much we want our parents to love and approve of us, and the joy and relief that comes with getting that love and approval after uncertainty or even denial. To listen to it being shared through yet another generation was so sweet. I wish I had enough money to give those StoryCorps geniuses a million dollars to keep up the amazing work.

Possibly the most surprising thing about this interview is the fact that the word “lesbian” is never even uttered – perhaps especially remarkable since Sue is a professional organizer in our community. But this story is all about being a human being, a daughter, and a mother. And yet, the fact that Sue is a lesbian is critical to her human struggle, and clear in the context of the interview.

Please listen. Don’t read the essay, or do, but don’t stop there. The written version doesn’t begin to convey the touching, difficult, love and loss in the interview.