The Pivot of Civilization

by Margaret Sanger

Arguably her most important and influential book, this controversial work, first published in 1922 by pioneering birth-control advocate Margaret Sanger, attempted to broaden the still-radical idea of birth control beyond its socialist and feminist roots. Moving away from a single-minded focus on women's reproductive rights to the larger issue of the general health and economic prosperity of the whole human race, Sanger argued that birth control was pivotal to a rational approach toward dealing with the threat of overpopulation and its ruinous consequences in poverty and disease. Through this book Sanger hoped to persuade the medical establishment to assume control over contraceptive distribution, and thereby to lessen the religious, legal, and moral opposition that continued to restrict access to contraceptive information.

However important this book is to the history of women's rights, it remains a very problematic work from our more scientifically informed perspective today. In arguing for population control Sanger made frequent reference to the then fashionable "science" of eugenics. She also adopted its rhetoric, using such callous phrases as "the feeble-minded" and the "unfit" and advocating birth control as a means of limiting the breeding of "defectives, delinquents and dependents." Although she incorporated views and terminology commonly held in respectable medical and scientific circles of the day, Sanger's writings on eugenics, and this book in particular, have become fodder for her critics both on the left and the right, who seek to diminish her achievements and obscure what is ultimately a powerful feminist when women gain greater control over their fertility, they will improve the human race.

This unusual and historically significant book is complemented by a thoughtful and informative introduction by Peter C. Engelman, assistant editor of The Margaret Sanger Papers Project, who provides much insight by placing this work in the context of the age and Sanger's life.

Genres: Feminism, Nonfiction, Politics, History, Philosophy, Science, Sociology

312 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1922

About the author

Margaret Higgins Sanger Slee was an American birth control activist and the founder of the American Birth Control League (which eventually became Planned Parenthood). Although she initially met with opposition, Sanger gradually won some support for getting women access to contraception. In her drive to promote contraception and negative eugenics, Sanger remains a controversial figure.

Reviews

[Ned · Rating 1 out of 5]

In the spirit of "know thy enemy" I read this unpleasant book. Sanger comes from an anti-humanist, neo-Malthusian perspective, favorably referring to Malthus throughout the book. Of course, she would no-doubt bristle at being called anti-humanist, she merely wants the "right kinds" of humans, in sufficiently small quantities so as not to inconvenience those fine few of "good stock" with the pestilence of the common rabble. Sanger typifies the cold, psychopathic intellectual who provides foundational premises and intellectual cover for the necessary monsters who will actually carry out the business-end of her evil ideology. She often laments the fact that technology and civilization "prevents" the outworkings of natural Darwinian selection. Meaning that, through technology and human sympathy millions of "unfit" are permitted to infect global society by continued being. Technology and altruism artificially props up the weak you see, who would, and should, otherwise die out by the attrition of disease, starvation, and, if necessary, forced sterilization. She proposes that "each class must be divided into what are termed Gifted, Bright, Average, Dull, Normal, and Defective." This woman was truly soul-sick, and it is to its eternal shame that the political Left in America revere her. Sanger's book is also a cautionary tale of the consequences of scientism run amok, unbridaled by pesky "traditional" moral conventions which the left is always to eager to overturn. Good and evil are inverted and "shame" becomes society's new "sin."

I turn now to the interesting but shameful implication of liberal so-called "Christian" theologians who became complicit in Sanger's evil ideology, even citing biblical support of her eugenics program by contorted "interpretation."

Quote: "Dean Inge believes Birth Control is an essential part of Eugenics, and an essential part of Christian morality. On this point he asserts: "We do wish to remind our orthodox and conservative friends that the Sermon on the Mount contains some admirably clear and unmistakable eugenic precepts. `Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? A corrupt tree cannot bring forth good fruit, neither can a good tree bring forth evil fruit. Every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.' We wish to apply these words not only to the actions of individuals, which spring from their characters, but to the character of individuals, which spring from their inherited qualities. This extension of the scope of the maxim seems to me quite legitimate."

Have you no shame, sir? At long last, have you no shame?

[Wally]

Wow. Realllllly interesting read, especially in the era of Obama/Trump presidencies. I have no idea how to assign this book a certain number of stars, so I'm declining.

Sanger, having been reduced to a one dimensional abortion machine by conservative Facebook posts, turns out to have a fascinating and complex perspective, equally horrifying and prescient.

First of all, I have seen so many anti-abortion memes about Sanger, I always assumed she was an advocate of abortion. She has nothing, however, to say about abortion, but is discussing birth control. This was honestly, I'm embarrassed to say, news to me.

It's also clear that those conservative memes about her advocating for eugenics are in no way an exaggeration. She is really profoundly offensive and disturbing, advocating for weeding out and eliminating the "unfit", the "feeble minded", and the lower classes. I don't know anything about the history of eugenics and what led it to be such an apparently-popular idea, but this was clearly something she was unapologetically advocating.

(uhhhhh....I wish it was unnecessary, but it may be appropriate at this time to suggest a quick google search of "genetic fallacy", just for review, given how frequently and vehemently it is used on social media in re: Planned Parenthood)

One of the most interesting aspects of reading this work almost a hundred years later is the familiarity of tone. There is an attitude that advocating for the elimination of the "unfit" classes requires a certain moral bravery that is unafraid to speak hard truths. In the current political climate, this carries the same tone as contemporary conservatives speaking with a creepy moral superiority about Muslims, and their attitude of "telling unpopular truths" to enact various prejudicial laws and policies. It's a tone that is arresting in its familiarity when Sanger uses it.

It's also interesting to realize that Sanger would actually be quite popular with the same social conservatives who detest her, in her attitude toward social programs. Reading certain sections is not entirely unlike reading conservative criticism of "Obamacare" in how she belittles efforts to reach out to the struggling classes and improve their lot. Conservatives would find a kindred spirit in her exasperation with people who simply don't understand that the struggling classes simply need to fend for themselves or weed themselves out of the gene pool.

And yet, all that being said, certain sections read like cutting edge progressive feminism. One of the most ironic elements of her ideas is that brith control is hard to implement because people are so damnably uncomfortable talking about sex. She argues we need to go beyond viewing sex as either a lustful release or a narrowly procreative behavior, and find in sex a spiritual expression - but we can't even begin discussing this until we get less squeamish about the whole thing. I mean, honestly, have we really progressed much? I suppose we've moved on some, but dang.....this is in many ways still a pretty valid criticism.

She also lays out a really interesting critique of Marxism (another idea that was apparently all the rage 100 years ago but is now mostly in disrepair), noting that this - and all other - economic theories are focused on the interests and activities of men. Until economic theories incorporate the lives of women, including childbearing, they are incomplete and irresponsible. Wow. Again, I hope we've all made progress in this area over the past century, but again...this is still a pretty relevant concern in 2017.

She pulls no punches in stating women need to say "Help us make the world a fit place for children. When you have done this, we will bear you children"..."the new morality will express this power and responsibility on the part of women". Given the contemporary debates about health insurance, the profoundly disturbing gender dynamics that emerged during the Hillary Clinton/Donald Trump presidential race, and cutting of public services, Sanger's voice rings out as....well, prophetic (!?).

Her critique of the church is focused on Catholic restrictions on birth control, quoting Wm. Blake's poem "priests in black gowns walking their rounds, binding with briars my joy and desires". Modern opposition to family planning is more likely to take the form of the hipster protestant who has arbitrarily decided that birth control is now A-OK but that life has - again arbitrarily - begun at conception. This takes some of the punch out of her critique of religion's hostility to her ideas, but there remains a rich critique in the refusal of religious leaders to meaningfully address sex as it exists in people's lives.

Overall, an absolutely fascinating read, being astride bitingly contemporary criticism and frighteningly outdated cruelty.

[Loralie · Rating 5 out of 5]

it was recommended to me to read this book as research on the current planned parenthood debate. I would recommend that more people read this document written by the founder of planned parenthood. Ms. Sanger did not promote abortion. she promotes birth control and women's health. she was a huge proponent for women's health and independence. she was a supporter of children being able to have every opportunity. she was not for having several pregnancies and not being properly cared for by parents who had no option of birth control. she felt it was wrong to have such a high infant mortality rate because of malnutrition and lack of parental care. all in all, a very interesting and enlightening read.

[John Ellis · Rating 1 out of 5]

Written by one of the most horrible human beings to have ever walked this planet. Don't believe me? Read this book.

[Jon · Rating 2 out of 5]

This was pretty poor over all and I don't say that lightly because I've read Marx. Mathusian crack pot of the first degree. Sanger certainly has some valid criticisms, but of course history has shown how wrong she was about the 'problem' of overpopulation. Not only is the worlds population something like 6 times the size it was when she was writing, but people are almost universally better off today, again by several multiples. These bare facts stand in stark contrast to the world Sanger imagines she inhabits. As far as solutions go, Sanger is quick to repeat that she believes birth control should be voluntary. However, she completely evades the question of what to if individuals don't accept her 'solution.' More problematic is her constantly claiming to have the insight of science backing her even though she spends the latter part of the book discussing all the scientific research that NEEDS to be done that would actually demonstrate her beliefs. This is deductive reasoning, not inductive, and not science. Worst is her belief in the forced sterilization of the 'unfit.' Who gets to decide who is unfit?? A liberal fascist, Sanger,I imagine, would have fit right in with the ruling elite of the Nazi party had she been German. Nonetheless, a most instructive insight into the the thought processes behind the statist drives of the progressive golden era. Fascinating and thought provoking despite being completely wrong on nearly every major every point.

[Bee☕ · Rating 1 out of 5]

Project Guttenberg, you are my friend. I wouldn't have purchased this book anyway.

Lots of thoughts but my take away was this: This woman is not a role model. She is evil personified, pivotal in founding the largest smoke screen with "the right" of birth control while in her words, "assist the race toward the elimination of the unfit." through negative eugenics. Unfit like disabled, blacks, poor, God-fearing, or mentally ill?

"...the most urgent problem to-day is how to limit and discourage the over-fertility of the mentally and physically defective. Possibly drastic and Spartan methods may be forced upon American society if it continues complacently to encourage the chance and chaotic breeding that has resulted from our stupid, cruel sentimentalism."

What. the. hell.

[Mark · Rating 1 out of 5]

The only redeemable thing about this document is its historical significance and the preface by H. G. Wells, which excellently fleshes out the then-dichotomy of premodernism vs modernism (now a trichotomy in premodernism, modernism, and postmodernism). The statistics Sanger utilizes are deadly outdated and, like all statistics, almost invariably point to different causes than the statistician claims. The fact that people today still don't know better (and that correlation =/= causation) should be surprising, but isn't.

Other than some lines of thought and phrases which modern eugenicists (birth control/abortion advocates) use, such as "my body my choice", "birth control as imperative to women's rights/independence", and "unwanted children are worth less than wanted children", the book offers little of prescient value.

Her ultimate thesis of eugenics being a necessary philosophy for the modern age was not only utterly invalidated in the genocide of the 20th century, but also was eradicated a mere 30 years after her book was published by adequate child nutrition and a stable sociocultural base that solidified during in the 1950s. Regardless of what you think about women's rights at that time, it proved that all the statistics she throws around in here were irrelevant, as no eugenics program was in place by that time, but birth defects and educational levels both improved radically. This can easily be attributed to increased nutrition and medicines, including vaccines.

Despite what the postmodern progressive might hope, Sanger isn't the tolerant champion for equality that they would want. She's openly ableist, anti-socialist, anti-Marxist, anti-Christian, and blindly pro-science, ultimately believing it will bring us to the utopia. I wonder what she thought in the wake of the second world war, which she lived through; it would be curious to know if she held to her thinly veiled disdain for the "ever-widening margin of biological waste", as she so kindly refers to those unwanted "burdens" on society. Her anger against these subgroups she hates (of which she wisely doesn't mention minority races, which she did detest) is often veiled, and one must see what she is implying to understand the full extent of her ideology.

"It encourages the healthier and more normal sections of the world to shoulder the burden of unthinking and indiscriminate fecundity of others; which brings with it, as I think the reader must agree, a dead weight of human waste. Instead of decreasing and aiming to eliminate the stocks that are most detrimental to the future of the race and the world, it tends to render them to a menacing degree dominant."

She most often uses a form of doublespeak/doublethink which ideologues excel at. She makes the common enough modernist blunder of claiming she's using exclusively "reason" and "science" when her views are so driven by a disgust mechanism that she's really at bottom no better than the emotional theists she is rebelling against. She proclaims "No more fear! No more hatred!" ...except fear of the malformed and hatred of the unwanted...

Sanger also makes use of a theologically inept theologian who agrees with her, and this was perhaps the most laughable part of the entire book:

"Dean Inge believes Birth Control is an essential part of Eugenics, and an essential part of Christian morality. On this point he asserts: "We do wish to remind our orthodox and conservative friends that the Sermon on the Mount contains some admirably clear and unmistakable eugenic precepts. `Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? A corrupt tree cannot bring forth good fruit, neither can a good tree bring forth evil fruit. Every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.' We wish to apply these words not only to the actions of individuals, which spring from their characters, but to the character of individuals, which spring from their inherited qualities. This extension of the scope of the maxim seems to me quite legitimate. Men do not gather grapes of thorns. As our proverb says, you cannot make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. If we believe this, and do not act upon it by trying to move public opinion towards giving social reform, education and religion a better material to work upon, we are sinning against the light, and not doing our best to bring in the Kingdom of God upon earth.""

At a few points she literally uses the same pest language as Hitler (we have commissions on controlling pests, why not controlling eugenics?). Thank god for WWII, because it invalidated explicit eugenics for the forseeable future. It showed how the constant howling of "slippery slopes" from the conservatives and religious was, at least in this case, no fallacy, but a deadly possibility, one that was much more likely than anyone could have dreamed, because it did happen and culminated in the largest single loss of life in history of the world. Anyone who still seriously flirts with eugenics, "right to death", or any other nihilistic aberration should be laughed out of the room. If we allow those ideas to flourish after everything the human race has been through in the past century, the very concept of ethics, on as shaky of ground as it currently stands, will all but disappear, and the legalization of suicide and the culture of death will ultimately lead us to question the wrongness of murder, war, and genocide. Those hard lessons we only finally learned after the 20th century will be naught, and when Futurama's suicide booths become commonplace, don't complain that I didn't warn you.

[Brittany Petruzzi]

Terrifying.

[Mary · Rating 1 out of 5]

all i can say is.... yikes

[Nancy · Rating 3 out of 5]

Mrs. Sanger's book is not about feminism or even birth control. It is about eugenics and the role she feels birth control should have in it. She makes the same mistake that socialism (a very popular economic theory at the time) makes. Socialism is based on the idea that if everyone was equal economically, then there would be paradise on earth because everyone would give to their fullest extent and ability and take only according to their need. Obviously, this didn't happen and never will. The same is correct for Mrs. Sanger's ideas. She believed that if population growth could be controlled, especially among the deviant, dependent and delinquent classes, paradise on earth could be achieved because if people could indulge their desire for sex without the possible consequence of pregnancy then women would have power equal to that of men and mothers, motherhood and children would be cherished and not cheapened. She didn't account for human nature which generally seeks gratification of the self without regard to others or the world at large. Her ideas were naive and idealistic about how the better classes would act without the burden of the lesser classes and she lacked the moral grounding that illuminated the evilness of her thoughts toward the poor and uneducated. What makes this book so relevant 97 years after it was published is that the argument has not gone away. Medical "ethicists" still advocate killing those of the population who don't contribute and/or don't have "quality of life." Countries like Denmark and Iceland are proud of the fact that they have a nearly 100% abortion rate for those babies who tested positive for Down's syndrome in the uterus. France banned commercials portraying smiling children with Down's syndrome so that women who had aborted their Down's syndrome babies would be made to feel sad or guilty. The scariest thing of all is that Sanger and these ethicists is that they share a common view with none other than Adolf Hitler. This is an important book to read because this is what started Planned Parenthood and what its true purpose is.

[Xenophon Hendrix · Rating 3 out of 5]

I have noticed that certain words have become enders of intelligent discussion. Among these words are racist, fascist, Nazi, and eugenicist. Once they are wielded, intelligent discussion ends and the hurling of invective begins. Such words are so potent that they even are capable of ending intelligent thought. They have the power of taboo.

Margaret Sanger broke taboos, and her writing has always been found shocking by various sectors of our society. For instance, she was staunchly opposed by the Roman Catholic Church. In addition, she began her life's work well before the establishment of our modern taboos. Today, those most under their burden will find her writing shocking in ways completely different from Sanger's contemporaries.

Was Margaret Sanger a eugenicist? Yes, she was. The Pivot of Civilization proves it beyond all reasonable doubt. She took pride in it.

Does this imply that she was a fascist or a Nazi? No, it does not. She was neither of those things. In her day, she was most closely aligned with the Progressive Movement. Whereas it's true that progressives and fascists have some things in common, they aren't actually the same thing.

How about a racist? In 1922, the copyright of the book, most persons were somewhat racist by our standards. I detect no more racism than the average of her day.

The Pivot of Civilization is an interesting, sometimes heartrending, historical document. Its readers can learn a lot about the United States of roughly one hundred years ago. The author makes clear that even as late as 1922 the "good old days" were still rotten. Child labor was common. Hard labor and malnutrition in early childhood resulted in permanently stunted adults, as was shown by the World War One draft. Sixth grade was the average level of education. Infant mortality was high. Even while having large families, many women worked outside the home in factory jobs.

Worse, we are still fighting some of the same battles from circa a century ago: sex education, tracking by ability in school, treating education as a magic solution to social problems, illiteracy, the contribution of heredity to behavior, standards of education, sexually transmitted infections, the care of the insane, social welfare programs, and so on. Fortunately, Ms. Sanger could never be mistaken for a writer of today. She was too blunt, unapologetic, and vigorous.

Margaret Sanger's life's work was the promotion of birth control – not just contraception, but also family planning and "social hygiene." She endeavored to teach women how to have fewer but healthier children, to control the population, to stop the birth of unwanted children, and, yes, to promote eugenics, including negative eugenics.

Therefore, I'm reasonably sure that The Pivot of Civilization will horrify a large percentage of modern persons who read it. Margaret Sanger, the hero of Planned Parenthood, is therein promoting the sterilization of those she forthrightly terms "defectives." "O my God!" the modern reader exclaims, "She was an inspiration to the Nazis!"

Eh, maybe, but so was Franklin Delano Roosevelt. If you don't believe me, look it up for yourself. I suggest those interested in the 1920s, the history of the Progressive Movement, of eugenics, the Women's Movement, Planned Parenthood, sexuality, birth control, and related subjects read it anyway. If you aren't already an expert, you will learn something. If nothing else, it will give you a look at the early twentieth century from the inside.

Please do beware of the author's medical pronouncements. They are, of course, out of date. For instance, she declares that insanity is primarily hereditary. In her day, a large amount of insanity was caused by syphilis. In our day, the jury is still out on the primary causes of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, the two most severe mental illnesses. Other flaws of the book are that it is often polemical and repetitive. It could have been advantageously cut.

Note that the copyright of this book has expired, so it's easily found online.

[geoffrey Paugher-Storree · Rating 3 out of 5]

Ignore all the kneejerk reactions and consider that this book is primarily promoting birth control NOT abortion. Margaret Sanger was largely against abortion, except in the case of emergencies. She also had some harsh words in this book about many of the functions of modern-day Planned Parenthood.

"But there is a special type of philanthropy or benevolence, now
widely advertised and advocated, both as a federal program and as
worthy of private endowment, which strikes me as being more
insidiously injurious than any other. This concerns itself directly
with the function of maternity, and aims to supply GRATIS medical and
nursing facilities to slum mothers. "

Sanger is very much a part of the Malthusian tradition. This work begins with the simple problem of overpopulation, and more importantly overpopulation among the lower classes. This problem, she says, is driven both by ignorance and economic incentive (as children are a cheap source of labor for families, especially in rural communities). The consequences are obviously negative in the immediate sense (starvation, abuse, neglect, crime, poverty), and multiplied in future generations as misery is passed on, one dysfunctional generation to the next. She really drives home the point that this is not about class hatred, but about a liberation. Given all the knowledge and resources available, the affluent choose smaller families on their own accord, with the intent to achieve better outcomes for their children. She believes, if given the choice, this trend will take hold among women of all classes as the veil of ignorance is lifted. Birth control is just the means for Sanger's revolution to take hold. She proposes humanity reassess attitudes on sexuality and women to unlock their full human potential, freed from the tyranny of biology and uncontrolled, successive pregnancy. Sanger wants to raise the status of child rearing, from the base, unthinking, animal process, to the discrimination of humanity's finest gift, rationality.

She supports her main thesis with three angles of attack. A criticism of philanthropy and charity, an attack on Marxist economics, and a support for negative eugenics (criticizing positive eugenics and overeager enthusiasts looking to make draconian eugenic laws).

In her eyes, philanthropy and charity enable and multiply this destructive feedback-loop. It's unsustainable if the ratio of dependent-to-able grows, which is inevitable without intervention. Philanthropy gives a false security and sense of action, but does not strike at the root causes.

She then moves to Marx, who has some interesting insights, but brushes off Malthus as simple class hatred and fails to criticize his ideas thoroughly. She believes Marx is a seductive prophet, but he fails to factor the sex drive into the equation of human motivation. This is the failure of a reductive economic lens of history. She points to his failed predictions as well as the insight that uncontrolled births, without regard to quality of upbringing, actually serve the capitalist masters in providing an abundant, easily controlled, lumpenized, labor class, instead of the speculated class-conscious, empowered working class. There's an irreconcilable contradiction between raising the living standards of the proletariat and having uncontrolled births in poor conditions, especially true for the Marxist who surely emphasizes the importance of material conditions over heredity.

She wraps up with her view of eugenics. She approaches with some caution, aware that over-eager implementation could doom the movement, which has certainly been the case. There is a conservative emphasis on environment in addition to the hereditarian factors. The poor, large families, are hostile conditions for human excellence to blossom, but of course she is also worried about which genes will go on to replicate long term. She warns with great eloquence the dangers of uniformity (something we might be wise to keep in mind in the age of embryo selection).

""We want statesmen and poets and musicians and
philosophers and strong men and delicate men and brave men. The
qualities of one would be the weaknesses of the other.'' We want,
most of all, genius. Proscription on Galtonian lines would tend to
eliminate many of the great geniuses of the world who were not only
``Bohemian,'' but actually and pathologically abnormal--men like
Rousseau, Dostoevsky, Chopin, Poe, Schumann, Nietzsche, Comte,
Guy de Maupassant"

There's so many great quotes in the work, oftentimes from somebody else Sanger is quoting. Her main antagonist is the Catholic church or Christian morality more generally. She quotes the bible and some liberal church ministers to disprove the "be fruitful and multiply" as meaning raw numbers without considering the cruelty of condemning souls to near certain misery.

I'll finish by mentioning my reservations. The premise of Malthusianism is still widely debated, technology has seemed to shatter limits we thought previously impossible. Technology may yet also unlock a new emancipation from the tyranny of bad genes and may render us all jobless dependents in a world run by a handful of technocrats or computer algorithms. The problem of uncontrolled fertility seems to have been solved (at least in the developed world). If anything, the problem of under-fertility haunts the affluent. Sanger's dream of women's liberation and human sexual liberation is still playing out with mixed consequence. Man and woman are still half-committed to the roles they previously had to rigidly adhere to, to the disappointment of all parties involved. The conquest of hunger has led to obesity. The satisfaction of libido has led to a new age of simultaneous inceldom and cheapening of the sexual act. The optimist sees new frontiers to overcome, Ozempic for the fat, VR Porn for the undersexed and unsatisfied, skin cell babies for the non-traditional relationships, maybe none of these solutions are adequate. The traditionalist will continue to retreat into disgust as the world leaves them behind. Although I sympathize more with Sanger and her eugenic mission, the traditionalists are rightly disgruntled, as Civilization continues it's confusing and scary PIVOT ;^) into something new.

[Rachel · Rating 3 out of 5]

I am pro-choice and pro-birth control, but do not like Margaret Sangers embodiment of the white supremacy. She is careful to use the term "feebleminded" so not to alert people of which specific groups she does not think should procreate, but it's clear it's minorities and immigrants whose birthrate and professions match the descriptions from the era. Sanger suggests Karl Marx is somehow unable to visually see outside of his time and place and understand the big picture. The irony, is she looks to Malthus, which predates Marx. Not to mention, she incorrectly attributes high birth rates to all of social ills rather than having the vision to see that the growth model from 3rd world to 1st world country follows this path. Rapid advancements in societal growth do not come without a fair amount of negative externalities. I was surprised to find I would agree with an observation here and there, but not the root or the prediction that arose from it. For women in the 1920s, she was well read and all that, but her research and conclusions are poor.

[Isabella · Rating 5 out of 5]

A book that exposes the harsh reality and conditions that both poor and middle-class women and children were subjected to at the time. Some of the topics it covers are the lack of maternity leave, infant mortality rates, lack of childcare forcing women into almost slavelike lives, lack of sexual education, lack of any education, and child labor. Some of these harsh realities and conditions have been addressed and improved since the book was published, but most of these problems still exist on some type of level. For example, literacy rates have gone up significantly since then but the US is still lagging behind other countries in education.

Overall I find this book to be a must-read since while the topic is grim, it does inspire hope for the future. Since if we were able to make so much progress since the book was written, we can continue to make the world a better place for everyone to live in.

[Angela Benton · Rating 5 out of 5]

An awakening into betrayal

The reader will find a new concept for what they thought they knew about Margaret Sanger. Her darker side she openly held in the public as armour will shock you.

[Aja · Rating 1 out of 5]

Rough. If you are looking for pc, this is most definitely not it. Glad I read it, but like I said, rough.

[Lauren · Rating 3 out of 5]

I had to read this for my women’s studies class. Other than the fact that Sanger was a blatant eugenist, it was an interesting read.

[Library_Dweller89]

Yikes.....

[Anna Leah]

read for history of medicine

[Brooke · Rating 1 out of 5]

Proves Sanger’s disgusting propagation of eugenics.

[Allen · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a very insightful read into the mind of Margaret Sanger. She states her errant philosophies cogently and with passion. And though I disagree vehemently with her now I understand the why of what she believed in. It is important to note that she came up during one of the lowest points and darkest points in American industrial history. Which is how many of her philosophies came into being. Though this is not a biography in and of itself the horror that she saw in the poorer classes impacted her greatly and cause this philosophy to develop.

When I read history and biographies I read them in the context of the time they lived. The Pivot of Civilization gives us the context for many of Sager's beliefs right for wrong. If you love history especially of the Industrial Revolution's early days this is a must read.

[Charles · Rating 1 out of 5]

This is an important book for anyone who cares about the dignity of human life. Sanger lays out her eugenic agenda for Planned Parenthood. It's not mistake that PP clinics abound in poor and black communities. These are the people that Sanger doesn't want to be born, along with anyone who has any sort of mental defect or comes from a poor family. But don't take my word for it, read the book. She'll tell you.

[Jeff Kukuk · Rating 2 out of 5]

A must read for anyone who wants to know about the person who founded Planned Parenthood. A chilling insight into the murderous organization of PP and the views of the founder. You only think you know about Planned Parenthood. I've given the book 2 stars only b/c of the vile contained within the pages. Still something I would recommend that people read only for awareness sake.

[Stacey]

still reading, wanted to learn more about Margaret Sanger and her thoughts! hmmmmm