Speaking to Italian magazine Panorama, fashion duo Dolce and Gabbana had this to say on the issue of same-sex adoption:
“We oppose gay adoptions. The only family is the traditional one. No chemical offsprings and rented uterus: life has a natural flow, there are things that should not be changed […] When you’re born you have a mother and father. Or at least it should be like this […] I call children of chemistry, synthetic children, rented uterus, semen chosen from a catalogue”.
The comments were rightfully met with ire by Elton John, who has two children through artificial means. Posting on Instagram, the legendary singer said:
“How dare you refer to my beautiful children as “synthetic”. And shame on you for wagging your judgemental little fingers at IVF – a miracle that has allowed legions of loving people, both straight and gay, to fulfil their dream of having children. Your archaic thinking is out of step with the times, just like your fashions. I shall never wear Dolce and Gabbana ever again. #BoycottDolceGabbana”
Victoria Beckham, Courtney Love, Martina Nvratalova, and Ricky Martin are just some of the celebrities who have joined Elton’s calls for a boycott. Gay rights campaigner Peter Thatchell has also boycotted the duo for similar reasons to Elton.
Putting aside the issue of whether this is “free speech” for a moment, isn’t it clear why D&G’s comments are so hurtful? In their eyes, IVF is not a scientific miracle that grants joy and ends heartbreak for both gay couples and infertile straight couples, it’s a way for shallow, vein, prissy people to destroy the traditional family and make a designer baby.
How cynical. How misanthropic. Having a baby is not the same as picking out a pair of hideous shoes from the D&G catalogue, especially given the effort, expense, and potential pitfalls involved in IVF. This is not a case of having a quickie behind the sofa and worrying about the results later – IVF is a process for people who’ve done the thinking.
IVF is a modern miracle which not only allows gay people to have children with a surrogate, but also allows infertile heterosexual couples to fulfil their desires for a child. Although it can be expensive, the science is sound, the methods are tried and tested, and there’s no evidence that parents of surrogate children are depraved or vain (no more so than other parents anyway).
Gay adoption is wrong but gang-rape is perfectly acceptable. Go figure.
How ironic, that a fashion duo who work in an industry filled with refining and designing people to be skinnier, prettier, more gaunt, taller, clearer in complexion, and more sculpted, have the gall to compare IVF babies to designer catalog babies.
‘People in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones’ is the phrase that springs to mind. But what more could we expect from a couple of tax-avoiding gang-rape apologists who appease the Chinese government?
Of course, you can always count on some people to flock to controversy, like flies flock to dung. Writing in a confused, grammatically-incorrect article for The Spectator, Melanie McDonagh decries the boycott of D&G on the basis that it’s just a “collective hissy intake of breathe” [sic] by a “lynch mob”. For McDonagh, Elton John is a spiteful “cheerleader for gay parenthood” who can’t take it when anybody disagrees with him.
I wonder how McDonagh would react if somebody targeted the way she had children. That aside, her only argument boils down to dey got free speeezsch and its a free cuntry!!!1!1!, the last defense of somebody who can’t present facts to back up their opinion. Indeed, half way through her article she states that D&G’s comments about IVF are correct, but fails to back up that claim with a single study, poll, exposé, or any other tangible form of evidence. She merely asserts that D&G are right (which, incidentally, doesn’t make them right).
She’s right about one thing though. D&G have the right to express their views in public, and we have the right to disagree with them. But I can’t help but wonder – does Melanie McDonagh feel the same way about white supremacy? Would she write a Spectator column sneering at the “lynch mob” if somebody said racial purity is threatened by interracial marriage? Is boycotting neo-Nazi groups akin to having a hissy intake of breath?
Of course, comparing criticism of gay adoption to white supremacy is a bit of a stretch, but it illustrates something McDonagh doesn’t seem to have considered – do even the most vile and hateful among us deserve to be free from a boycott? Would she be so vehemently critical of Elton John if he’d boycotted John Galliano? I doubt that very much.
All else aside, McDonagh’s comments aren’t surprising. When Elton John and David Furnish announced the birth of their first child, McDonagh wrote another Spectator article in which she argued that the child did not belong to Elton, that Elton has denied his child the right to know where he comes from, and that birth certificates have become a “liberal construct”. What an utter crack-pot.