I do apologize for coming off as argumentative. That's probably a sign of how good a writer you are, that you're able to make readers feel deeply about your words.

But the point I was trying to make (however poorly) wasn't that one experience was good and one was bad. The point was, so long as experiences *are* different -- which you state is the case -- using a title which implies otherwise is misleading. Had you included a clarification early in the article (not first thing, obviously, but once you switched from your personal story to a broader narrative...certainly sooner than the closing paragraphs), that's understandable attention-getting title shorthand. But from reading the article, I had the impression that you felt ALL adoptees were traumatized. And that anyone who said otherwise was, at best, misguided, and at worst, actively gaslighting. Which, you know, if that's your viewpoint, that's your viewpoint. It was the attempt to back off from that viewpoint and present a "balanced" perspective at the end that rubbed the wrong way, because it seemed to contradict the rest of what you'd said in your article.

That's why that's the part I quoted in my response.