I was reading this article today. I am still not clear if it even has anything to do with adoption. It concerns an adoptee. They even published his natural parents' names. Again what was the point of it? It doesn't make sense to me.
The author discusses Steve Jobs, Apple's Chief Executive Officer. Okay I understand he is big in the music, film and computer industries. That makes him important enough to write about. I get that. So what again about him being an adoptee has to do with anything? They discuss his life at home, previous marriage, and then his history with the Apple company.
They throw in this for the article:
"Jobs has led a complex life. He was given up by his birth mother, a "young, unwed college student", for adoption by a university-educated couple - except that Paul and Clara Jobs weren't graduates, a fact that almost derailed the adoption. Jobs senior was a machinist for a laser manufacturer. "
Its this part that blows me away completely:
"Born 24 February 1955.
Family Joanne Carole Schieble and Abdulfattah Jandali, of Syria - students. Adopted by Paul and Clara Jobs.
Education Reed College in Portland, Oregon, for one term but dropped out - but attended some classes, including calligraphy which he later said was key to Macintosh's use of typefaces.
Career 1970-1 worked after high school at Hewlett-Packard, meeting Steve Wozniak with whom he founded Apple in 1976. Founded NeXT Computer after being ejected from Apple in boardroom row in 1985. NeXT bought by Apple in 1997 and Jobs returned as interim and then full-time CEO.
Health Jobs had operation to remove neuroendocrine tumours from pancreas in 2004. Took two months off."
Why does it matter if he was adopted? This article sounds like it is a total jab at a man who is taking time for an illness. His private life is really no one's business. His adoption is really no one's business. If this were a business article, adoption definitely has no purpose in it. The portion about the family should have been about his current family situation. It should not have been about his birth status. Is the purpose of this article to humiliate him in some fashion because of his adoption status/position? If that is the case, it failed horribly. It looks bad on the author himself.
1 comment:
Exactly. Such bullsh*t.
Quite a few years ago I remember reading the very sad story of a teen-aged girl in our area who was killed in an accident by a drunk driver. The article was beatiful, talked about her family etc. etc.
Some time afterward someone told me the girl was a Korean adoptee. By then I'd lost the trail of the article, but I wish I'd been able to go back to it's author to commend them for NOT bringing adoption into it.
Post a Comment