I think you misunderstood my point there. ;)
I was speaking to your comment that it was incorrectly labeled a LGBTQ issue because of adoption. I did not mean to suggest no one is against surrogacy or that they are not promoting adoption as an alternative. I was indicating that to my knowledge those organizations are not telling non-LGBTQ people that the laws are not of interest to them because they can adopt. Looking at their sites, they seem to want all people (LGBTQ and non-LGBTQ) to see it as related to their lives and rights.
Again, I am not commenting here on if organizations should engage, just pointing out that regardless of someone’s stance on the issue or this action, the issue remains one of relevance to LGBTQ rights (and others) and WMIL labeling it as a LGBTQ rights issue was accurate. :)
-greg
_______________ Sent from my iPhone - a more detailed response may be sent later.
On Jul 21, 2018, at 3:25 AM, Mario Gómez mariogomwiki@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 2:56 AM, Gregory Varnum gregory.varnum@gmail.com wrote:
As far as it being an alternative, that is usually true, but it is also true for non-LGBTQ families and I am not aware of viable political movements successfully suggesting non-LGBTQ families should not worry about surrogacy laws as adoptions are an alternative option for them.
Well, so you just met someone who suggests exactly that for non-LGBTQ families and who actively participates in campaigns against legalization of surrogacy in his country.
This is actually a position held by many organizations, just to name a few: the "National Network Against Wombs for Rent" and the "We are not Pots" campaign in Spain or the "Mexican Feminists Against Wombs for Rent" in Mexico.
These positions are also held by some feminist authors such as Kajsa Ekis Ekman, Sylviane Agacinski or Silvia Federici.
My point is not trying to convince you of my position. I do not think this is the right forum to debate politics beyond WMF mission. My point is that if the WMF or its affiliates take such positions beyond its mission, it will be extremely damaging to the community, since this is just alienating to all members of the community whose political positions do not match exactly WMF's framework (heavily influenced by US narrow ideological spectrum).
I'm not asking for the WMF or its affiliates to be against surrogacy, just the same way I don't ask for them to condemn apartheid policies against Muslims in Israel or the genocide in Gaza. I'm just asking the WMF and its affiliates to acknowledge that we are a global and diverse community united for a mission, and that entering into political advocacy beyond its mission is detrimental to this global perspective and diversity.
Best,
Mario _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe