49. See Joseph P. Shapiro, No Pity: People with Disabilities Forging a New Civil Rights Movement (New York: Three Rivers Press, 1993); and Paul K. Longmore and Lauri Umansky, eds., The New Disability History: American Perspectives (New York: New York University Press, 2001).
50. Betty Friedan, The Feminine Mystique (1963; reprint, New York: W. W. Norton, 1983).
51. Ibid.
52. See Jane Gerhard, Desiring Revolution: Second-Wave Feminism and the Rewriting of American Sexual Thought, 1920 to 1982 (New York: Columbia University Press, 2001), chap. 3.
53. Popenoe, “Marriage Counseling,” n.d., Papers of Paul Bowman Popenoe (PBP), American Heritage Center (AHC), University of Wyoming (UW). Since I conducted my research at the American Heritage Center, the Popenoe papers have been recatalogued. Working with the new finding aid, I have been able to deduce the location of some of my sources; when that was not possible with accuracy, I have omitted unverifiable information, such as the box or folder title or number. Between my reconstructed citations and the new finding aid, which is organized chronologically and thematically, researchers should be able to locate all of my references.
54. Stephanie Coontz, The Way We Never Were: American Families and the Nostalgia Trap (New York: Basic Books, 1992), 24; Elaine Tyler May, Homeward Bound: American Families in the Cold War Era (New York: Basic Books, 1988), 6, 136–37.
55. For an excellent analysis of the rise of Freudian psychoanalysis vis-à-vis middle-class women and the female body in midcentury America, see Gerhard, Desiring Revolution.
56. Untitled Review, n.d., PBP, AHC, UW.
57. Susan Brownmiller, In Our Time (New York: Dial Press, 1999), 86. They also demanded a cessation of the columns by Bruno Bettelheim and Theodore Rubin.
58. Karla Jay, Tales of the Lavender Menace: A Memoir of Liberation (New York: Basic Books, 1999), 114. On this action also see Alice Echols, Daring to Be Bad: Radical Feminism in America, 1967–1975 (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1989).
59. Gina, “Written in Anger,” It Ain’t Me Babe 1, no. 6 (1970): 6.
60. Anne Koedt, “The Myth of the Vaginal Orgasm,” in Notes from the Second Year (New York: Radical Feminists, 1970), 38. I thank Carol Karlsen for sharing her collection of women’s liberation pamphlets with me.
61. See Gerhard, Desiring Revolution.
62. See Ruth Hubbard, Mary Sue Henifin, and Barbara Fried, eds., Biological Woman—The Convenient Myth (Cambridge, Mass.: Schenkman, 1982).
63. Naomi Weisstein, “Kinder, Küche, Kirche as Scientific Law: Psychology Constructs the Female,” motive: on the liberation of women 29, nos. 6–7 (1969): 83.
64. Ibid., 80.
65. See Boston Women’s Health Collective, Our Bodies, Ourselves: A Book by and for Women (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1973).
66. See Sheryl Burt Ruzek, The Women’s Health Movement: Feminist Alternatives to Medical Control (New York: Praeger, 1978); and Sandra Morgen, Into Our Own Hands: The Women’s Health Movement in the United States, 1969–1990 (New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 2002).
67. Gerhard, Desiring Revolution, 85.
68. Roswell H. Johnson, “Homosexuality” (probably late 1940s), Box 123, PBP, AHC, UW.
69. On the cross-fertilization of psychoanalytic and genetic theories, see Nancy Ordover, American Eugenics: Race, Queer Anatomy, and the Science of Nationalism (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2003).
70. Ibid.
71. Paul Popenoe (PP) to Barry Tanner, July 27, 1972, probably Box 123, PBP, AHC, UW.
72. See “The Life of a Homosexual,” Family Life 22, no. 11 (1962): 3; “Again, Homosexuality,” Family Life 27, no. 7 (July 1967): 2; and “Quality of Family Life,” New Year’s Edition, 1972, loose op-ed piece from unidentifiable newspaper, p. B13, probably Box 123, PBP, AHC, UW.
73. Ronald Bayer, Homosexuality and American Psychiatry: The Politics of Diagnosis (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1987).
74. On the Kinsey spectrum, see Jennifer Terry, “Anxious Slippage between ‘Us’ and ‘Them’: A Brief History of the Scientific Search for Homosexual Bodies,” in Deviant Bodies: Critical Perspectives on Difference in Science and Popular Culture, ed. Jennifer Terry and Jacqueline Urla (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1995), 129–69.
75. AIFR, “One Minute and 48 Sections on Homosexuality,” and Don Page, “KABC Special on Homosexuality,” Nov. 14, 1971, probably Box 123, PBP, AHC, UW.
76. Craig Alfred Hanson to PP, Nov. 20, 1971, probably Box 123, PBP, AHC, UW.
77. See Jennifer Terry, An American Obsession: Science, Medicine, and Homosexuality in Modern Society (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999); and Bayer, Homosexuality and American Psychiatry.
78. Art Torres to Edmund G. Brown Jr., Sept. 7, 1979, Legislative History, Assembly Bill 1204, Microfilm 3:3 (57), California State Archives (CSA).
79. “Enrolled Bill Report,” Aug. 31, 1979, Legislative History, Assembly Bill 1204, Microfilm 3:3 (57), CSA. Also see Lisa M. Matocq, ed., California’s Compulsory Sterilization Policies, 1909–1979, July 16, 2003, Informational Hearing, California legislative report of the Senate Select Committee on Genetics, Genetic Technologies, and Public Policy, Dec. 2003.
80. Interview of Art Torres by the author, Nov. 17, 2003, San Francisco, California.
81. See Johanna Schoen, Choice and Coercion: Birth Control, Sterilization, and Abortion in Public Health and Welfare (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2005), chaps. 2 and 3; and Leslie J. Reagan, When Abortion Was a Crime: Women, Medicine, and Law in the United States, 1867–1973 (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1997).
82. See Elena R. Gutiérrez, “Policing ‘Pregnant Pilgrims’: Situating the Sterilization Abuse of Mexican-Origin Women in Los Angeles County,” in Women, Health, and Nation: Canada and the United States since 1945, ed. Georgina Feldberg, Molly Ladd-Taylor, Alison Li, and Kathryn McPherson (Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2003), 381.
83. See Thomas M. Shapiro, Population Control Politics: Women, Sterilization, and Reproductive Choice (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1985), 87.
84. Ibid., 113.
85. Gutiérrez, “Policing ‘Pregnant Pilgrims,’ ” 381.
86. Shapiro, Population Control Politics, 115.
87. See Simone M. Caron, “Birth Control and the Black Community in the 1960s: Genocide or Power Politics,” Journal of Social History 31, no. 3 (1998): 545–69.
88. See Linda Gordon, Woman’s Body, Woman’s Right: Birth Control in America, rev. ed. (New York: Penguin Books, 1990).
89. On abortion and mainstream feminism, see Ruth Rosen, The World Split Open: How the Modern Women’s Movement Changed America (New York: Viking, 2000).
90. See Gordon, Woman’s Body, Woman’s Right.
91. See Angela Y. Davis, Women, Race, and Class (New York: Vintage Books, 1981), chap. 12; Jack Slater, “Sterilization: Newest Threat to the Poor,” Ebony (Oct. 1973): 150–56.
92. Shapiro, Population Control Politics; Ordover, American Eugenics.
93. Quoted in Shapiro, Population Control Politics, 5.
94. Ibid.
95. Helen Rodrigues-Triaz, “Sterilization Abuse,” in Biological Woman, ed. Hubbard, Henifin, and Fried, 149.
96. Sally J. Torpy, “Native American Women and Coerced Sterilization: On the Trail of Tears in the 1970s,” American Indian Culture and Research Journal 24, no. 2 (2000): 5.
97. Ibid.; Ordover, American Eugenics, 171–72.
98. See Laura Briggs, Reproducing Empire: Race, Sex, Science, and U.S. Imperialism in Puerto Rico (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2002); Iris Lopez, “Agency and Constraint: Sterilization and Reproductive Freedom among Puerto Rican Women in New York City,” Urban Anthropology 22, nos. 3–4 (1993): 299–323; and Rodrigues-Triaz, “Sterilization Abuse.”
99. Jennifer A. Nelson, “ ‘Abortions under Community Control’: Feminism, Nationalism, and the Politics of Reproduction among New York City’
s Young Lords,” Journal of Women’s History 13, no. 1 (2001): 157–80.
100. See Julius Paul, “The Return of Punitive Sterilization Proposals: Current Attacks on Illegitimacy and the AFDC Program,” Law and Society Review 3, no. 1 (1968): 88–92; and Katherine Castles, “Quiet Eugenics: Sterilization in North Carolina’s Institutions for the Mentally Retarded, 1945–1965,” Journal of Southern History 68, no. 4 (2002): 849–78.
101. See Philip R. Reilly, The Surgical Solution: A History of Involuntary Sterilization in the United States (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1991); Ordover, American Eugenics; and Shapiro, Population Control Politics.
102. See Ordover, American Eugenics; Paul, “Return of Punitive Sterilization”; and Rickie Solinger, Wake Up Little Susie: Single Pregnancy and Race before Roe v. Wade, 2nd ed. (New York: Routledge, 2002).
103. See Schoen, Choice and Coercion; and Slater, “Sterilization: Newest Threat to the Poor.”
104. See Paul, “Return of Punitive Sterilization.”
105. Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC), Genocide in Mississippi (Atlanta: SNCC, 1964).
106. Paul, “Return of Punitive Sterilization,” 91.
107. See Dorothy Roberts, Killing the Black Body: Race, Reproduction, and the Meaning of Liberty (New York: Vintage Books, 1997); Paul, “Return of Punitive Sterilization.”
108. Health Research Group, A Health Research Group Study on Surgical Sterilization: Present Abuses and Proposed Regulations (Washington, D.C.: Health Research Group, 1973), 1.
109. Ibid., 2.
110. Ibid., 7.
111. Diane Ainsworth, “Mother No More,” Reader: Los Angeles’ Free Weekly 1, no. 13 (Jan. 26, 1979): 4.
112. See Virginia Espino, “ ‘Women Sterilized as Gives Birth’: Forced Sterilization and the Chicana Resistance in the 1970s,” in Las Obreras: Chicana Politics of Work and Family, ed. Vicki L. Ruiz and Chon Noriega (Los Angeles: UCLA Chicano Studies Research Center Publications, 2000), 65–82.
113. Committee to Stop Forced Sterilization, Stop Forced Sterilization Now! (Los Angeles: n.p., n.d.), 3. Also see Patti Garcia, “Forced Sterilization of Third World Women,” La Razón Mestiza (Summer 1975): no page number.
114. For a penetrating analysis of Madrigal v. Quilligan, see Elena Rebéca Gutiérrez, “The Racial Politics of Reproduction: The Social Construction of Mexican-Origin Women’s Fertility” (Ph.D. diss.. University of Michigan, 1999), chap. 5; and Gutiérrez, “Policing ‘Pregnant Pilgrims.’ ” Also see Espino, “ ‘Women Sterilized as Gives Birth’ ”; Claudia Dreifus, “Sterilizing the Poor,” in Seizing Our Bodies: The Politics of Women’s Health, ed. Claudia Dreifus (New York: Vintage Books, 1977), 105–20; Adelaida R. Del Castillo, “Sterilization: An Overview,” and Carlos G. Vélez-Ibañez, “Se Me Acabó La Canción: An Ethnography of Non-consenting Sterilizations among Mexican American Women in Los Angeles,” in Mexican American Women in the United States: Struggles Past and Present, ed. Madgalena Mora and Adelaida R. Del Castillo, Occasional Paper no. 2 (Los Angeles: UCLA Chicano Studies Research Center Publications, 1980), 65–70, 71–94; and Antonia Hernandez, “Chicanas and the Issue of Involuntary Sterilization: Reforms Needed to Protect Informed Consent,” Chicano Law Review 3 (1976): 3–37. Primary materials and court transcripts related to the case can be found in Papers of Carlos G. Vélez-Ibañez (CGVI), Sterilization Archive (SA), Collection 5, Chicano Studies Research Library (CSL), University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA).
115. “Madrigral v. Quilligan,” no. CV 74–2057-JWC, Report’s Transcript of Proceedings, Tuesday, May 30, 1978, SA 230–240, CGVI, SA, 5, CSL, UCLA.
116. Ibid., 12.
117. Ibid., 19.
118. Ibid., 12.
119. Affidavit of DG, SA 110, CGVI, SA, 5, CSL, UCLA. For confidentiality reasons, I have protected the names of the women who offered supporting affidavits.
120. Affidavit of VA, SA 132, CGVI, SA, 5, CSL, UCLA.
121. Affidavit of MC, SA 135, CGVI, SA, 5, CSL, UCLA.
122. “Madrigral v. Quilligan,” no. CV 74–2057-JWC, Report’s Transcript of Proceedings, Tuesday, May 30, 1978, SA 230–240, CGVI, SA, 5, CSL, UCLA, p. 802.
123. Ibid., 797.
124. Gutiérrez, “Racial Politics of Reproduction”; Ordover, American Eugenics.
125. Quoted in “Plaintiffs Lose Suit over 10 Sterilizations,” Los Angeles Times, July 1, 1978, Part 2, SA 40, clipping in CGVI, SA, 5, CSL, UCLA; also quoted in Gutiérrez, “Racial Politics of Reproduction,” 212.
126. Quoted in Gutiérrez, “Racial Politics of Reproduction,” 213; quoted in Ainsworth, “Mother No More,” 5.
127. Ibid., 208.
128. “For Immediate Release” Los Angeles Center for Law and Justice, July 10, 1978, SA 80, CGVI, SA, CSL, UCLA.
129. See Gutiérrez, “Policing ‘Pregnant Pilgrims,’ ” for an excellent explanation of this.
130. Shapiro, Population Control Politics, 137; Chicago Committee to End Sterilization Abuse, Sterilization Abuse: A Task for the Women’s Movement (Jan. 1977). The Washington, D.C.–based Health Research Group (affiliated with Ralph Nader’s organization Public Citizen) conducted the studies that catalyzed much of the guidelines formulation process, producing a total of four reports. The last, published in 1981, asserted that many states and hospitals were not complying with HEW regulations. See Daniel W. Sigelman, Sterilization Abuse of the Nation’s Poor under Medicaid and Other Federal Programs (Washington, D.C.: Health Research Group, 1981).
131. CMG, press release, Mar. 21, 1935, Papers of Harry H. Laughlin, C-4–6, Special Collections, Truman State University.
132. In 1935, the less controversial Home Problems Section quietly absorbed the CCC Eugenics Section. Given the long tradition of debate at the CCC, it is likely that eugenicists such as Goethe, who were adamant about mass sterilization in California, began to be challenged by members more interested in a softer eugenics based on public hygiene, not invasive surgery.
133. See Peter Novick, The Holocaust in American Life (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1999). For an example of this, see Herbert Aptheker, “Sterilization, Experimentation and Imperialism,” Political Affairs 53 (1974): 37–48.
134. See Michelle Mitchell, Righteous Propagation: African Americans and the Politics of Racial Destiny after Reconstruction (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2004); and Gregory Michael Dorr, Segregation’s Science: Hereditarian Thought in Virginia, 1785 to the Present (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, in press).
EPILOGUE
1. See Carl Ingram, “State Issues Apology for Policy of Sterilization,” Los Angeles Times, Mar. 12, 2003.
2. See Aaron Zitner, “Davis’ Apology Sheds No Light on Sterilization,” Los Angeles Times, Mar. 16, 2003.
3. Emil Guillermo, “Sterilization Victim First to Break Silence,” Stockton Record, Aug. 5, 2003.
4. Ibid.
5. See Mike Anton, “Forced Sterilization Once Seen as a Path to a Better World,” Los Angeles Times, July 16, 2003; and Robert B. Edgerton, The Cloak of Competence, 2nd ed. (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1993).
6. “Against Their Will: North Carolina’s Sterilization Program,” Winston-Salem Journal, Dec. 8–12, 2002.
7. See Nancy Press and Carol H. Browner, “Why Women Say Yes to Prenatal Diagnosis,” Social Science and Medicine 45, no. 7 (1997): 979–89; and Barbara Katz Rothman, The Tentative Pregnancy: Prenatal Diagnosis and the Future of Motherhood (New York: Penguin, 1987).
8. C. H. Browner, H. Mabel Preloran, Maria Christina Casado, Harold N. Bass, and Ann P. Walker, “Genetic Counseling Gone Awry: Miscommunication between Prenatal Genetic Service Providers and Mexican-Origin Clients,” Social Science and Medicine 56 (2003): 1933–46.
9. See Jon Weil, “Psychosocial Genetic Counseling in the Post-Nondirective Era: A Point of View,” Journal of Genetic Counseling 12, no. 3 (2003): 199–211.
10. See Ilana Mittman, William R. Crombleholme, James R. Green, and Mitchell S. Gol
bus, “Reproductive Genetic Counseling to Asian-Pacific and Latin American Immigrants,” Journal of Genetic Counseling 7, no. 1 (1998): 49–70.
11. Bernadette Tansey, “Proposition 71: Stem Cell Initiative Aids State,” San Francisco Chronicle, Nov. 4, 2004.
12. Ibid.
13. Center for Genetics and Society, “Assessment of the California Stem Cell Research and Cures Act,” Sept. 15, 2004 (revised Sept. 22, 2004). Available at: http://www.genetics-and-society.org/policies/california/assessment.html.
14. Cynthia R. Daniels and Janet Golden, “Procreative Compounds: Popular Eugenics, Artificial Insemination and the Rise of the American Sperm Banking Industry,” Journal of Social History 38, no. 1 (2004): 26.
15. Ibid., 15–21.
16. See Barbara Katz Rothman, The Tentative Pregnancy: How Amniocentesis Changes the Experience of Motherhood (New York: W. W. Norton, 1993).
17. Erik Parens and Adrienne Asch, eds., Prenatal Testing and Disability Rights (Washington D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 2000).
18. See Rayna Rapp, Testing Women, Testing the Fetus: The Social Impact of Amniocentesis in America (New York: Routledge, 1999).
Bibliography
ARCHIVES
California
Institute Archives, California Institute of Technology
Papers of Ezra S. Gosney and the Human Betterment Foundation
California State Archives, Sacramento
Legislative Histories (microfilm)
University Archives, California State University, Sacramento
Papers of Charles M. Goethe
Papers of the Academic Senate
Commonwealth Club of California (private collection). Since acquired by the Hoover Institution, Stanford University
Special Collections, Occidental College
Papers of Paul Popenoe
Save-the-Redwoods League Archives, San Francisco
Special Collections, Stanford University
Papers of David Starr Jordan
Papers of Lewis M. Terman
Hoover Institution, Stanford University
Papers of David Starr Jordan
Eugenic Nation Page 40
