Reproductive Linketies
Feb. 21st, 2011 10:50 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
moominmuppetBrilliant Idea: Donate to Planned Parenthood, and Have Thank You Note Sent to Anti-Choice Congressman
Events Responding to House’s Attacks on Planned Parenthood
Georgia Legislator Wants To Investigate Miscarriages, Create Uterus Police
Life Imitates Art, and Not in a Good Way
Quoted: Planned Parenthood’s Possible Defunding and Black Women
Bill Would Require Kan. Babies To Undego Paternity Test
Why I Support Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger Notwithstanding
• Citizen Dreamer’s comment really encapsulates my feelings about Sanger and the use of her offensively-in-line-with-her-times attitudes: Funny that people always bring up Sanger's connections to eugenicists. We don't boycott Ford because of Henry's support of eugenics. We never mentioned that Prescott Bush's Wall Street partner funded the Eugenics Record Office in Cold Springs Harbor. I never hear discussion of Winston Churchill's proposal that the poor and "otherwise unfit" be sterilized.
But it is always the cudgel used against women's access to reproductive rights.
This conflation is politico-moral entrepreneurship at its most basic:
--there is a hot topic with historical conflict;
--media magnification of the division;
--there is a kernel of truth in the allegiances that Sanger made (surely, she could not have gotten support from the Catholic Church--she went where the support was: eugenicist foundations);
--politico-moral entrepreneurs (people who make their living off of this controversy);
--professional interest groups;
--the association of birth control with some "dangerous class" of people (for at least one interest group, that "dangerous class" would include women who want to control their reproductive lives);
--scapegoating Sanger and Planned Parenthood for a variety of social problems.
This attack on Sanger is a red herring.
Birth Control for Men? 3 Promising Advances -- No mention of the research into reversible vasectomies?
Will Draconian South Dakota Force Women to Visit Religious Pregnancy Centers Before Abortions?
Events Responding to House’s Attacks on Planned Parenthood
Georgia Legislator Wants To Investigate Miscarriages, Create Uterus Police
Life Imitates Art, and Not in a Good Way
Quoted: Planned Parenthood’s Possible Defunding and Black Women
Bill Would Require Kan. Babies To Undego Paternity Test
Why I Support Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger Notwithstanding
• Citizen Dreamer’s comment really encapsulates my feelings about Sanger and the use of her offensively-in-line-with-her-times attitudes: Funny that people always bring up Sanger's connections to eugenicists. We don't boycott Ford because of Henry's support of eugenics. We never mentioned that Prescott Bush's Wall Street partner funded the Eugenics Record Office in Cold Springs Harbor. I never hear discussion of Winston Churchill's proposal that the poor and "otherwise unfit" be sterilized.
But it is always the cudgel used against women's access to reproductive rights.
This conflation is politico-moral entrepreneurship at its most basic:
--there is a hot topic with historical conflict;
--media magnification of the division;
--there is a kernel of truth in the allegiances that Sanger made (surely, she could not have gotten support from the Catholic Church--she went where the support was: eugenicist foundations);
--politico-moral entrepreneurs (people who make their living off of this controversy);
--professional interest groups;
--the association of birth control with some "dangerous class" of people (for at least one interest group, that "dangerous class" would include women who want to control their reproductive lives);
--scapegoating Sanger and Planned Parenthood for a variety of social problems.
This attack on Sanger is a red herring.
Birth Control for Men? 3 Promising Advances -- No mention of the research into reversible vasectomies?
Will Draconian South Dakota Force Women to Visit Religious Pregnancy Centers Before Abortions?
