In her chapter The Dark Side of Birth Control Dorothy Roberts discusses birth control’s ties to the Eugenics movement in the
Roberts, however, is also hesitant to condemn Sanger as a racist. She writes how Sanger wanted to avoid opposition from women’s and religious groups that focused on chastity, forcing her to seek support from the eugenicists. She also testifies that Sanger’s goals were about a woman’s choice, but the question remains throughout the article of what color woman should enjoy that choice and what color woman should not have a choice. This ambiguity allows the reader to decide for his/her own what Sanger’s purpose was in actuality.
Just like the reader, the black community decided for itself with mixed opinions. Some like DuBois believed that birth control signified opportunity for advancement whereas other black leaders like Francis or Garvey believed it was a new type of genocide or interfered with nature and god. Even today, black groups like www.blackgenocide.org believe that birth control and Planned Parenthood are tools to eradicate the black race. Take a look: http://www.blackgenocide.org/planned.html
Planned Parenthood, though it does not acknowledge its controversial roots on its website, does address the issue of race in its mission statement. It states, “Planned parenthood believes in the fundamental right of each individual, through the world, to manage his or her fertility, regardless of the individual’s income, marital status, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, age, national origin, or residence….we believe that reproductive self-determination must be voluntary and preserve the individual’s right to privacy…” Who are we to believe? If anything, we can take from this case the lesson that we are to question things we may even always accept as good. Here it is with the practice and implementation rather than the experimentation.
1 comment:
I'm glad you mentioned the ambiguity of this article-- I felt much the same way. I, however, was clearly more frustrated with this ambiguity than you were. In all honesty, I really can't imagine what the point of the ambiguity of the article was. In an informational article like this, I would hope that the history would be layed out clearly and that it wouldn't be left to the reader to try to place specific people involved in the movements on "sides." I thought the history behind this article was EXTREMELY interesting, and perhaps that is why I found myself so frustrated with trying to figue out exactly what each of the individuals beleived and which groups and causes they identified with.
Post a Comment