PDF Controlling Reproduction: An American History (The Worlds of Women Series; No. 2) by From Brand: Scholarly Resources in History

Review

5 of 5 people found the following review helpful. A new take on old debatesBy Robin OrlowskiAssistant Professor of History at Georgia Tech Institute; Andrea Tome's recent work is a compilation of primary and secondary source documents from the ongoing reproductive rights battle. Although neither the research area nor the format is new; the methodology and delivery method is altogether new and refreshing.Whereas such collections (being the mainstays of prudent public schools who want to balance their social issues collection in an attempt to ward off the censors) would normally strike me as being overly sanitized and academically useless in the post-secondary environment; this effort epitomized a well researched and conscientious work designed to get scholars and general public alike thinking AND talking with each other. The ultimate purpose of the compilation was to truly give the readers as much information as possible instead of intentionally/unintentionally censoring their natural information thirst.In addition to already standard information on reproductive rights (primary source documents from landmark court cases and secondary articles from established researchers such as Petchesky); Tome includes interesting information which will be undoubtedly bizarre to many people who had previously considered themselves relatively educated on the issues.Because I had only previously heard the term `Lysol douche' in reference to illegal abortion; and knew (for example) wire coat hanger manufacturers did not encourage alternate uses of their product in open advertisement; I was completely dumfounded to discover the Lysol company formally encouraged women to apply the substance upon their `delicate membranes' until the 1960's. I have not personally met anybody who admits to this procedure; and am not sure I would really like to either.Contraceptive advertising restrictions only allowed companies to address such issues in terms of `feminine hygiene' and the company (smelling desperation and fear) exploited the climate; and American society's imminent trust in science. After all; if a `prominent' European female physician was enthusiastic about the substance herself; you knew it had to be good stuff.Ironically later research by others proved the people in such copy were merely actors hawking the company's products and there was no concentration which the disinfectant was considered safe for intimate cleansing. Douching also paradoxically increased conception chances by washing the sperm into places where it could fertilize the egg and/or drastically alter the body's natural Ph balance.Like the aforementioned advertisement; any perspective of reproductive history (reflecting the issue itself) is fraught with double meanings and dubious contexts. Because it forces consciousness the American ideals of freedom and democracy have not always accepted women (and some would argue continue to do so) the historical evidence is often hotly contested---especially by those classified as anti-abortion.Another distinguishing feature of Tome's volume includes the voices of those opposed to reproductive rights. Innately easier for both sides to only include those perspective with which they only agree; the inclusion is a serious step in expanding policy arguments. Still despising what they stand for; I am now able to dissect their own words and place the arguments more firmly in tandem with a specified time.Conversely because even `progressive' voices are as much a product of their time as more conventional voices in an issue debate; it is dangerously absurd to presume the arguments for either side are timeless. Unlike the 19th century feminists who campaigned against abortion; medical surgery is now antiseptic in America and the infections which do arise are proactively treated with antibiotics. Were these same women alive today; they could just as easily be taking up the banner (as did Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger who originally campaigned against abortion from her experiences treating illegally-induced complications) and revering their courses.2 of 2 people found the following review helpful. A new take on old debatesBy Robin OrlowskiAssistant Professor of History at Georgia Tech Institute; Andrea Tome's recent work is a compilation of primary and secondary source documents from the ongoing reproductive rights battle. Although neither the research area nor the format is new; the methodology and delivery method is altogether new and refreshing.Whereas such collections (being the mainstays of prudent public schools who want to balance their social issues collection in an attempt to ward off the censors) would normally strike me as being overly sanitized and academically useless in the post-secondary environment; this effort epitomized a well researched and conscientious work designed to get scholars and general public alike thinking AND talking with each other. The ultimate purpose of the compilation was to truly give the readers as much information as possible instead of intentionally/unintentionally censoring their natural information thirst.In addition to already standard information on reproductive rights (primary source documents from landmark court cases and secondary articles from established researchers such as Petchesky); Tome includes interesting information which will be undoubtedly bizarre to many people who had previously considered themselves relatively educated on the issues.Because I had only previously heard the term `Lysol douche' in reference to illegal abortion; and knew (for example) wire coat hanger manufacturers did not encourage alternate uses of their product in open advertisement; I was completely dumfounded to discover the Lysol company formally encouraged women to apply the substance upon their `delicate membranes' until the 1960's. I have not personally met anybody who admits to this procedure; and am not sure I would really like to either.Contraceptive advertising restrictions only allowed companies to address such issues in terms of `feminine hygiene' and the company (smelling desperation and fear) exploited the climate; and American society's imminent trust in science. After all; if a `prominent' European female physician was enthusiastic about the substance herself; you knew it had to be good stuff.Ironically later research by others proved the people in such copy were merely actors hawking the company's products and there was no concentration which the disinfectant was considered safe for intimate cleansing. Douching also paradoxically increased conception chances by washing the sperm into places where it could fertilize the egg and/or drastically alter the body's natural Ph balance.Like the aforementioned advertisement; any perspective of reproductive history (reflecting the issue itself) is fraught with double meanings and dubious contexts. Because it forces consciousness the American ideals of freedom and democracy have not always accepted women (and some would argue continue to do so) the historical evidence is often hotly contested---especially by those classified as anti-abortion.Another distinguishing feature of Tome's volume includes the voices of those opposed to reproductive rights. Innately easier for both sides to only include those perspective with which they only agree; the inclusion is a serious step in expanding policy arguments. Still despising what they stand for; I am now able to dissect their own words and place the arguments more firmly in tandem with a specified time.Conversely because even `progressive' voices are as much a product of their time as more conventional voices in an issue debate; it is dangerously absurd to presume the arguments for either side are timeless. Unlike the 19th century feminists who campaigned against abortion; medical surgery is now antiseptic in America and the infections which do arise are proactively treated with antibiotics. Were these same women alive today; they could just as easily be taking up the banner (as did Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger who originally campaigned against abortion from her experiences treating illegally-induced complications) and revering their courses.0 of 0 people found the following review helpful. Five StarsBy CustomerI buy it for my mother. She will not use anything else!