Evidently there was a time when adoption by gay couples was not controversial.
During this time, child placement became more than a professional issue for Taft. In 1921, through a social-work contact in New York, she and Robinson adopted a foster child, an eight-year-old boy named Everett, who was still in touch with his father. A year later they took in a five-year-old girl named Martha, who also had existing family connections. Eventually they adopted the children. “We feel very much like a family and some times wonder whether we are going to live through it,” she wrote in 1923. It was not uncommon then for lesbian couples, especially social workers, to adopt children.
According to this tit bit (a Britishism – you of the unclean minds), there was a time in America when the welfare of a child was considered more important than the sexual orientation of the parents. Obviously there is less social stigma for lesbians than for gay males in this area. At least until recently.
Comments
8 responses to “They Had Two Mommies – in 1923”
Great story. This reminds me of the time Elton John tried to adopt an HIV-positive orphan from a Romanian orphanage. They turned him down. Elton John had the money to give that child state of the art medical care, but apparently it was better for him to languish in a Romanian orphanage.
Let’s not over-interpret the pragmatic tolerance of our forebears in this regard. Many such adopters were in the closet, and many of the adoptions would not have gone through had they not been.
Brett,
It was not uncommon then for lesbian couples, especially social workers, to adopt children.
I don’t see how you hide your “family situation” from the courts.
It was easy to hide one’s family situation in a more frugal time when many households consisted of two or more straight men or two or more straight women (most landlords would not rent to unmarried straight couples). This circumstance provided excellent camouflage for homosexual couples.
There was no automatic presumption that same-sex roommates were romantic items.
And what proof do you have that Jessie Taft and Virginia Robinson were homosexuals? Judging by their academic accomplishments, could it be possible that they simply couldn’t find a man worthy of their interest, but none the less wanted to enjoy the company of someone to whom they could relate?
This looks like a vile and wicked smear upon the character of two women who are now unable to defend themselves. Till someone offers proof that they were homosexual, (During a time when you would got to PRISON or an ASYLUM) then I will simply regard this accusation as just another lie propagated by those who seek to normalize a particular sort of aberrant sexual behavior.
I have known spinster couples from approximately this same era, and they would be deeply hurt and offended if their memories were sullied by the accusation that they were homosexual.
Diogenes, before recent times, it’s quite difficult to prove the nature of any relationship, given the dire punishment for disclosure in those times. I’m not going to argue this particular case, because we don’t have the sex tape. But are you really saying that they couldn’t possibly have been lesbians? I know from feminist history, that romantic friendships between women were common, and some of those relationships were most definitely sexual. There’s even a name for it: Boston Marriage. If gays and lesbians had to be more discreet back in the day, that doesn’t mean they didn’t exist. As for discussing the possibility being a “vile and wicked smear,” how do you know if, were this couple still alive, they might find your comment vile and wicked?
But are you really saying that they couldn’t possibly have been lesbians? I know from feminist history, that romantic friendships between women were common, and some of those relationships were most definitely sexual. There’s even a name for it: Boston Marriage. If gays and lesbians had to be more discreet back in the day, that doesn’t mean they didn’t exist. As for discussing the possibility being a “vile and wicked smear,” how do you know if, were this couple still alive, they might find your comment vile and wicked?
Given that Homosexuals make up less than 2% of the overall population, the odds are contrary to your notion.
Diogenes, no one knows what percent of the population is homosexual. All the polls and studies contradict each other. Also, a person doesn’t have to be exclusively gay to be in a same sex relationship. I assume many women in Boston Marriages were bisexual, but being professional women, conventional straight marriage wasn’t available to them at that time, so they had same sex partners. BTW, I noticed from my sitemeter, that you have expressed concern elsewhere that I’m spreading an untrue story. Don’t worry about it, no one reads my blog.