I always thought this was a stupid question. (There are no stupid questions? I beg to differ.)

Would it have been easier for you to relinquish if she had been a boy?

Before I had my boys, this question was still stupid. I would look at the person asking the question and think, “Do we love girls more than boys? Are we supposed to? That’s stupid.” Relinquishment is relinquishment, no matter the gender.

Of course, I am now asked the same question but the underlying meaning is different. What they mean now is:

Since you only had boys to parent, would you feel less guilty/grief-stricken/etc if you had also placed a boy and therefore not “missed out” on parenting a girl.

Whereas I thought the previous group of askers were just a few bricks shy of a load, these people rile me up. Thank you for pointing out in your not-so-subtle way that I “missed out” on parenting a girl. But despite the lack of the color pink in my life, had the Munchkin been a boy, I would still be grieving the loss of that child in our daily life.

It’s not about gender. It’s about the missing presence of a child. It’s about missing the laughter as that is a language that doesn’t respond to gender barriers. It’s about missing the hugs, kisses and I Love You’s. (Boys do these things. Trust me.) It’s about missing moments of my children together.

And, maybe, sometimes it’s about missing a girl in general. But that’s a different topic entirely. You can miss a girl and still have missed a boy the same amount. Why is this concept hard to understand?

It’s too nice out to dwell!