Skip to main content

Reading David M. Kennedy, Birth Control in America


            David M. Kennedy’s first book, derived from an American Studies doctoral dissertation in the then newly established Yale interdisciplinary program, is an examination of the role of Margaret Sanger’s efforts to legalize access to contraception.  Chronologically, Kennedy restrains his study to the years from 1912 to World War II when Sanger was effectively the primary spokesperson for liberalizing laws that restricted the dissemination of information about contraception in the mails as well as restrained doctors from prescribing contraceptive devices.
            Kennedy’s study is not, however, a standard biography of Sanger, but instead a close and critical account of her transformation from social critic and radical in the 1910s to a spokesperson for increasing and widespread middle class values in the 1940s, including rational family planning.  In the 1900s and 1910s Sanger emerged from the radical movements of socialists and anarchists struggling in the press and in lyceums to articulate programs for improving the lives and conditions of the working poor.  Access and knowledge about contraceptive devices, discernible in lower birth rates, was clearly widely understood by the middle and upper classes.  Over the 1930s and 1940s, however, Sanger’s target audience shifted from advocacy for the working poor to an alliance with middle class social reformers who desired access to family planning options in their efforts to sustain their own class privileges while also regulating the poor.  Kennedy is justly critical of Sanger’s evolution from social radical to mainstream spokesperson, someone whose ideas would become endorsed by a bipartisan Truman/Eisenhower population reduction program in the late 1950s.
            The study traces Sanger’s early battles with the Comstock era bans on the distribution of obscene material which prevented mail ordering of contraceptive devices, prevented the mailing of medical advice, and restricted pharmacists from marketing contraceptive materials.  A series of public contests, in print and court, ultimately converged in the 1910s and 1920s with both the increased sexual activity of Americans in the Jazz Age as well as increased recognition in the late Progressive era for regulation of population growth.  Increasingly in the 1930s and 1940s doctors justified “child spacing” efforts to preserve the health of mothers.  In the same depression years, rational family planning to reduce generational poverty became uncontroversial while the empowerment of women in households devastated by male unemployment in the 1930s or absentee heads of household in the war years further eroded opposition to birth control.
            Kennedy’s work traces Sanger’s political struggle to create a free space for discussion of contraception, but parallel to Sanger’s public contest were genuine transformation in morality within Catholic and Protestant ministries, medical advances that ultimately sought to professionalize birth control, and changes in the law culminating in the 1965 Griswold v Connecticut Supreme Court case that asserted a “right to marital privacy” combined with doctor/patient confidentiality that removed all legal restrictions on disseminating information and/or materials for family planning.  These changes in morality, medicine, and law would provide the social context for the embrace by the middle class of birth control, ushering in the Sexual Revolution of the 1960s.
            Although Kennedy is right to be critical of Sanger’s support of eugenics and her increasing moderation, perhaps even conservative transformation, the book remains the best place to start understanding the decades-long struggle to secure access to birth control.  Thanks to the election success of the GOP last fall, dozens of states, in conjunction with the Congressional attack on Planned Parenthood, are proposing and passing legislation intended to restrict access by women to contraception.  Increasingly, the anti-abortion movement is moving toward opposition to any family planning as programs that are demonstrated to reduce abortions by reducing unplanned contraception fall to ideologically motivated budget cuts.  Kennedy’s study provides just the necessary reminder of the struggle that Sanger and other women (and a few male medical professionals and feminist men) waged to secure rights now at risk eroding.
Further works on birth control include Linda Gordon’s Woman’s Body, Woman’s Right: The History of Birth Control in America (1976, 1990), and her extended revision of that work, The Moral Property of Women: A History of Birth Control Politics in America (2002), Andrea Tone’s Devices and Desires (2002), and Elaine Tyler May’s America and The Pill: A History of Promise, Peril, and Liberation (2010).

David M. Kennedy, Birth Control in America (Yale, 1970)
Yale Publications in American Studies No. 18
Winner of the Bancroft Prize 1971

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Weekend Reading? Trump as Jackson Think Pieces Galore

14th Amendment

Today is the anniversary of the passage of the 14th Amendment in 1868 which guarantees birthright citizenship in the United States.


Passed in both houses of Congress by June 1866 it took more than two years to be ratified by the states.  Every former Confederate state opposed its ratification until Congress made it a condition for readmission to the Union and the seating of southern Congressmen.  Citizenship for freedmen and women in the South opened the possibility of African American men voting and holding office, something anticipated eagerly by the Republican party, depicted here on the cover of Harper's Weekly as the amendment gained support throughout 1867.

Not everyone, of course, welcomed African American votes, particularly California Democrats who would soon push for the closure of Asian immigration to the state out of fear that the 14th Amendment would make citizens of the children of immigrants.  Below is a typical anti-Republican cartoon trading on anxieties about the 1…

The Countess, Clara Bow, and Women Boxers of the 1920s

I've long admired the Depression era reporting of Joseph Mitchell, as well as his later essays for the New Yorker.  The book to read, I suppose, is his Up in the Old Hotel.  I have been working my way through a late 1930s collection of pieces entitled My Ears Are Bent which collects his various- probably many unprinted- reports on Prohibition era NYC's underworld.

In a section on sports, Mitchell's clear admiration and affection for the plucky 1920s women boxers is matched only perhaps by his discussion of the performance pushed into burlesque as vaudeville audiences declined during the depression.

In an endearing profile he describes the 1930s career of The Countess, Jeanne Vina La Marr, the first woman in America licensed to fight in New Jersey in the mid1920s.  Unable to fight contests without a license in NYC, she instead did exhibition in the city, often fighting other women and men, usually in some vaguely legal connection with the burlesque shows and speakeasies.