{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01484375, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.693333333333333, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 1, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Reproducing Race in an Era of Reckoning

People have all sorts of reasons for caring about the race of their future child when they're in a position to choose. Certain features of racial selection are troubling, deeply so. Structural injustices explain the social construction of race, and its power to shape how society thinks about its role in picking embryos or donors. But scholars have erred to single out the role of race in the sale of genetic materials by sperm banks and egg vendors. It's a mistake to assume that people who need help to have a biological child are looking for anything other than the intimacy and family life that people have always looked for in sexual procreation or foster care. Condemning racial preferences in assisted reproduction alone perpetuates the exclusion of people who form their families in less traditional ways. And it does nothing to address the ways in which the norms governing sex and reproduction can stigmatize and demean black and brown people too. In whatever ways would-be parents should be sensitive to color or blind to it, that ideal shouldn’t be selectively imposed on same-sex couples and single or infertile people. It calls for similar questions about the racial dynamics of dating, adoption, and family life writ large.