What do you think?
Rate this book
Birth Strike: The Hidden Fight over Women’s Work
When House Speaker Paul Ryan urged U.S. women to have more children, and Ross Douthat requested "More babies, please," they openly expressed what U.S. policymakers have been discussing for decades with greater discretion. Using technical language like "age structure," "dependency ratio," and "entitlement crisis," establishment think tanks are raising the if U.S. women don't have more children, we'll face an aging workforce, slack consumer demand, and a stagnant economy.
Feminists generally believe that a prudish religious bloc is responsible for the fight over reproductive freedom in the U.S., but hidden behind this conventional explanation is a dramatic fight over women's reproductive labor. On one side, elite policymakers want an expanding workforce reared with a minimum of employer spending and a maximum of unpaid women's work. On the other side, women are refusing to produce children at levels desired by economic planners. With little access to childcare, family leave, health care, and with insufficient male participation, U.S. women are conducting a spontaneous birth strike.
In other countries, panic over low birth rates has led governments to underwrite childbearing with generous universal programs, but in the U.S., women have not yet realized the potential of our bargaining position. When we do, it will lead to new strategies for winning full access to abortion and birth control, and for improving the difficult working conditions U.S. parents now face when raising children.
Feminists generally believe that a prudish religious bloc is responsible for the fight over reproductive freedom in the U.S., but hidden behind this conventional explanation is a dramatic fight over women's reproductive labor. On one side, elite policymakers want an expanding workforce reared with a minimum of employer spending and a maximum of unpaid women's work. On the other side, women are refusing to produce children at levels desired by economic planners. With little access to childcare, family leave, health care, and with insufficient male participation, U.S. women are conducting a spontaneous birth strike.
In other countries, panic over low birth rates has led governments to underwrite childbearing with generous universal programs, but in the U.S., women have not yet realized the potential of our bargaining position. When we do, it will lead to new strategies for winning full access to abortion and birth control, and for improving the difficult working conditions U.S. parents now face when raising children.
240 pages, Paperback
Published April 1, 2019
59 people are currently reading
2021 people want to read
About the author
Jenny Brown
2 books41 followersJenny Brown first studied the radical history of the Women’s Liberation Movement with Gainesville (Florida) Women’s Liberation and then with Redstockings, where she developed materials for the Redstockings Women’s Liberation Archives for Action. She was a leader in the grassroots campaign to win morning-after pill contraception over-the-counter in the United States, and a plaintiff in the winning lawsuit. For ten years she co-chaired the Alachua County Labor Party, organizing for national health insurance, the right to a job at a living wage, free higher education and a working person’s political party under the Labor Party slogan, “The corporations have two parties, we need one of our own.” More recently she worked as a staff writer and editor for Labor Notes magazine, covering labor struggles in hotels, restaurants, retail, farmwork, airlines, telecommunications and the building trades, and co-authored, with other Labor Notes staff, How to Jump-Start Your Union: Lessons from the Chicago Teachers (2014). She is author of Birth Strike: The Hidden Fight Over Women’s Work (PM Press, 2019). She writes, teaches, and organizes with the dues-funded feminist group National Women’s Liberation (womensliberation.org).
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 51 reviews
September 22, 2023
Why are educated women increasingly prolonging motherhood or opting out of it? So much so that the staggering decline of Western birth rates is putting the economy in danger—we lack people who will replace the old workers, pay taxes, and buy the things we produce.
The author’s take on it is straightforward: women are on a birth strike. Fed up with the invisible and unpaid labour, they no longer choose to participate in it. In the United States, where the author lives, women do not even receive paid motherhood leave—which only creates stressful experiences for many new mothers.
There are other issues, too—a mother’s participation in society is not only unpaid, but also looked down upon, even ridiculed by many (think of the jokes of stay-at-home moms doing nothing). Yet when more and more women step back and actually do nothing, the world starts to crumble.
Mothers are the silent backbone of society, and I hope women will push the state and humankind to start treating them as such. At least, I will.
Highly recommend.
The author’s take on it is straightforward: women are on a birth strike. Fed up with the invisible and unpaid labour, they no longer choose to participate in it. In the United States, where the author lives, women do not even receive paid motherhood leave—which only creates stressful experiences for many new mothers.
There are other issues, too—a mother’s participation in society is not only unpaid, but also looked down upon, even ridiculed by many (think of the jokes of stay-at-home moms doing nothing). Yet when more and more women step back and actually do nothing, the world starts to crumble.
Mothers are the silent backbone of society, and I hope women will push the state and humankind to start treating them as such. At least, I will.
Highly recommend.
April 29, 2019
I didn’t think this book was for me when a friend recommended the Kickstarter. I’m 41. I didn’t have kids. This book is for everyone. It explains so much about so many things.
February 20, 2019
Politicians and pundits of all kinds are in agreement that the current birth rate in most industrialised countries is below replacement level, the number required to maintain the population. Accounting for mishaps and variations such as child mortality, this level is generally considered in Western societies to be only slightly higher than the number of males plus the number of females, or about 2.1 children per woman.
What is far from agreed is whether Western population decline is good or bad, in a global context of continuing population growth; and if this decline is considered problematic, what the causes and remedies might be. Jenny Brown tackles the question from the point of view of a feminist labour organiser working in the United States of America, in the particular context of a free market economy with minimal state support for new parents and an influential anti-abortion lobby.
Brown's key point is that the debate over women's reproductive rights is fundamentally economic, rather than religious or ethical. Birth rates must be sustained to provide workers and soldiers, in order to maintain economic power, while ensuring that wages are kept down. This point might explain why a president who apparently becomes emotional when talking about innocent babies is more than willing to launch a missile strike against a civilian area in some other country.
The origin of current anti-abortion legislation in the United States is traced to the Comstock bill in 1873, when a nation depleted by a vicious civil war could not grow quickly enough, for some, without larger families. Not only abortifacient drugs, but contraceptives and literature on how to use them were made illegal. Brown makes the link between population growth and economic growth straightforward, but also points out that the USA's tried-and-tested solution of mass economic immigration is now problematic for politicians pandering to a fearful base.
The book skips over, rather too quickly, the links between eugenic movements of the early 20th century, birth control campaigners, and white supremacists. A difficulty with recruiting historical personalities for a particular standpoint, in our time of highly polarised debate, is the selective use of evidence. We routinely ignore uncomfortable facts to claim a hero or heroine for our point of view, who must be entirely good and without blemish.
However, it is a matter of record that Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger was an avowed eugenicist, who could not be recognised as a feminist today, except perhaps in an alt-right caricature of feminism as authoritarian ideology. For instance, Sanger advocated in the April 1932 edition of the publication 'Birth Control Review' that men and women refusing sterilisation should be forced to work in segregated agricultural labour camps. Not only the disabled, but sex workers, drug users and anyone else deemed 'unfit' had no reproductive rights, in Sanger's view. They could be compelled to work through the chaos of the Great Depression, though.
That Sanger was comfortable enough with the Klu Klux Klan to appear on the platform at Klan rallies on at least one occasion is also a matter of record, as described in the first edition of Sanger's autobiography of 1938. It would be helpful for Brown to dig further into the origins of the birth control movement, and acknowledge the mistrust of affluent white 'do-gooders' in low-income and black communities which persists today. Brown does cover the subject of racism in birth control, and the testing of the contraceptive implant Norplant and Depo-Provera injections on poor black women in the United States.
A compelling feature of the book, especially for the reader outside the Americas, is how limited government support for pregnant women and parents is within the world's richest country. In the United States, giving birth in a hospital costs money, so that a 'bundle of joy' might come with a bundle of receipts. This brings into sharp focus the economic pressures on women's reproductive choices for readers who may be accustomed to government support in their own countries such as universal free healthcare, paid parental leave or subsidised childcare.
Brown's argument is that women in the United States are, consciously or unconsciously, participating in the titular 'birth strike' against poor working conditions in both paid and unpaid domains. Many American women effectively work a double day shift in the factory and the home. This strike, so the argument goes, has brought the United States birth rate of 1.8 children per woman below that of countries with positive governmental support for pregnant women and mothers, citing France (birth rate 2.0) and Sweden (birth rate 1.9) as examples.
This argument is challenged by the book's simultaneous demand for easier access to abortion in the United States, which might have a negative effect on birth rate of an equivalent but opposite degree. Brown does not draw a comparison with England, which has de-facto abortion on demand, healthcare for women free at the point of use, and paid parental leave for both sexes. The birth rate in England is about the same as in the United States, at 1.8 births per woman.
The English comparison suggests that the gains from any birth strike over conditions for women in industrial societies, if they exist, have a net neutral effect once greater abortion access is taken into account. If the outcome of the book's demands are neutral, it is difficult to imagine the collective bargaining power that women have in a birth strike, or what returning to work at the end of a birth strike would represent.
Not covering broadly-similar economies in any detail makes comparison with the situation of women in other countries the weakest part of the book. It would be better to read this work as an account of the domestic situation in the United States, and leave any meaningful comparison with other countries and cultures for another volume. A deep dive into the statistics might be required to tease out evidence for an effect of government support on women's choices, given the vast number of other possible variables.
The idea that non-immigrant population growth is a prerequisite for economic growth may well be the case, at least in the minds of politicians and think-tank lobbyists unwilling to countenance a non-white America. Brown's book does not attempt to tackle the future of work, the implications of globalisation for industrialised nations, or what a post-growth economy might look like. This is understandable, given the focus of the book, but it does raise the question of whether reproductive concessions extracted from the sustained economic growth of the United States are desirable or even possible, given the limits of the natural world.
Brown's book is an activist's polemic, not an even-handed research document. Nevertheless, the detailed references in the book make a useful starting point for any reader interested in the collision between economics, population and reproductive rights. The book is short enough to digest easily, and very readable in style, without the obscurantism of much contemporary academic work.
There is currently a Kickstarter campaign running to support the book launch, which should interest both women and men confronting the issue of parenting, or not parenting, in an uncertain economy and a resource-constrained world. If the women of the United States aren't on a birth strike, perhaps they should be.
What is far from agreed is whether Western population decline is good or bad, in a global context of continuing population growth; and if this decline is considered problematic, what the causes and remedies might be. Jenny Brown tackles the question from the point of view of a feminist labour organiser working in the United States of America, in the particular context of a free market economy with minimal state support for new parents and an influential anti-abortion lobby.
Brown's key point is that the debate over women's reproductive rights is fundamentally economic, rather than religious or ethical. Birth rates must be sustained to provide workers and soldiers, in order to maintain economic power, while ensuring that wages are kept down. This point might explain why a president who apparently becomes emotional when talking about innocent babies is more than willing to launch a missile strike against a civilian area in some other country.
The origin of current anti-abortion legislation in the United States is traced to the Comstock bill in 1873, when a nation depleted by a vicious civil war could not grow quickly enough, for some, without larger families. Not only abortifacient drugs, but contraceptives and literature on how to use them were made illegal. Brown makes the link between population growth and economic growth straightforward, but also points out that the USA's tried-and-tested solution of mass economic immigration is now problematic for politicians pandering to a fearful base.
The book skips over, rather too quickly, the links between eugenic movements of the early 20th century, birth control campaigners, and white supremacists. A difficulty with recruiting historical personalities for a particular standpoint, in our time of highly polarised debate, is the selective use of evidence. We routinely ignore uncomfortable facts to claim a hero or heroine for our point of view, who must be entirely good and without blemish.
However, it is a matter of record that Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger was an avowed eugenicist, who could not be recognised as a feminist today, except perhaps in an alt-right caricature of feminism as authoritarian ideology. For instance, Sanger advocated in the April 1932 edition of the publication 'Birth Control Review' that men and women refusing sterilisation should be forced to work in segregated agricultural labour camps. Not only the disabled, but sex workers, drug users and anyone else deemed 'unfit' had no reproductive rights, in Sanger's view. They could be compelled to work through the chaos of the Great Depression, though.
That Sanger was comfortable enough with the Klu Klux Klan to appear on the platform at Klan rallies on at least one occasion is also a matter of record, as described in the first edition of Sanger's autobiography of 1938. It would be helpful for Brown to dig further into the origins of the birth control movement, and acknowledge the mistrust of affluent white 'do-gooders' in low-income and black communities which persists today. Brown does cover the subject of racism in birth control, and the testing of the contraceptive implant Norplant and Depo-Provera injections on poor black women in the United States.
A compelling feature of the book, especially for the reader outside the Americas, is how limited government support for pregnant women and parents is within the world's richest country. In the United States, giving birth in a hospital costs money, so that a 'bundle of joy' might come with a bundle of receipts. This brings into sharp focus the economic pressures on women's reproductive choices for readers who may be accustomed to government support in their own countries such as universal free healthcare, paid parental leave or subsidised childcare.
Brown's argument is that women in the United States are, consciously or unconsciously, participating in the titular 'birth strike' against poor working conditions in both paid and unpaid domains. Many American women effectively work a double day shift in the factory and the home. This strike, so the argument goes, has brought the United States birth rate of 1.8 children per woman below that of countries with positive governmental support for pregnant women and mothers, citing France (birth rate 2.0) and Sweden (birth rate 1.9) as examples.
This argument is challenged by the book's simultaneous demand for easier access to abortion in the United States, which might have a negative effect on birth rate of an equivalent but opposite degree. Brown does not draw a comparison with England, which has de-facto abortion on demand, healthcare for women free at the point of use, and paid parental leave for both sexes. The birth rate in England is about the same as in the United States, at 1.8 births per woman.
The English comparison suggests that the gains from any birth strike over conditions for women in industrial societies, if they exist, have a net neutral effect once greater abortion access is taken into account. If the outcome of the book's demands are neutral, it is difficult to imagine the collective bargaining power that women have in a birth strike, or what returning to work at the end of a birth strike would represent.
Not covering broadly-similar economies in any detail makes comparison with the situation of women in other countries the weakest part of the book. It would be better to read this work as an account of the domestic situation in the United States, and leave any meaningful comparison with other countries and cultures for another volume. A deep dive into the statistics might be required to tease out evidence for an effect of government support on women's choices, given the vast number of other possible variables.
The idea that non-immigrant population growth is a prerequisite for economic growth may well be the case, at least in the minds of politicians and think-tank lobbyists unwilling to countenance a non-white America. Brown's book does not attempt to tackle the future of work, the implications of globalisation for industrialised nations, or what a post-growth economy might look like. This is understandable, given the focus of the book, but it does raise the question of whether reproductive concessions extracted from the sustained economic growth of the United States are desirable or even possible, given the limits of the natural world.
Brown's book is an activist's polemic, not an even-handed research document. Nevertheless, the detailed references in the book make a useful starting point for any reader interested in the collision between economics, population and reproductive rights. The book is short enough to digest easily, and very readable in style, without the obscurantism of much contemporary academic work.
There is currently a Kickstarter campaign running to support the book launch, which should interest both women and men confronting the issue of parenting, or not parenting, in an uncertain economy and a resource-constrained world. If the women of the United States aren't on a birth strike, perhaps they should be.
March 3, 2021
I don't read a lot of political books, and very few where the author is basically engaged in advancing an argument throughout the text to bring the reader around to their point of view. The argument in this one is so straightforward, comprehensive, and clear; I could feel it clicking into place with every new connection the author made. I went in curious but a little skeptical, and she absolutely brought me around to seeing this country's declining birth rate as a (not exactly organized) labor strike for better conditions, and the undermining of our reproductive freedoms as a national project by the ruling class to avoid having to fund those better conditions. (Even just seeing the list of the absurd costs of becoming a parent in the U.S. laid out all together is enraging...)
I did think the discussion of race was somewhat rushed (especially in terms of how white feminists' ideas of reproductive and labor rights haven't always aligned with those of women of color), and it was surprising to see almost no mention of queer and trans folks (surely there is some intersection with conservative moral panic over ""nontraditional families""). Sometimes the emphasis on a class and labor analysis of the issues was a little too narrow; other times it was refreshingly clear and focused.
I did think the discussion of race was somewhat rushed (especially in terms of how white feminists' ideas of reproductive and labor rights haven't always aligned with those of women of color), and it was surprising to see almost no mention of queer and trans folks (surely there is some intersection with conservative moral panic over ""nontraditional families""). Sometimes the emphasis on a class and labor analysis of the issues was a little too narrow; other times it was refreshingly clear and focused.
December 12, 2022
Must read. The book creates a super important link between capitalism and the struggle over reproductive justice—it’s not (primarily) cultural, it’s material.
My biggest issue with the book is its heteronormativity and lack of attention to queer struggle. It assumes throughout that “women” are people with uteruses and does not address that some people who can have babies are not women, while some women do not have uteruses and cannot have babies. I don’t necessarily think this needed to be a huge part of the book, but it definitely should have been dealt with more clearly and in a more inclusive way, especially because trans, nonbinary, and queer people face heightened attacks against their reproductive rights.
A smaller concern is Brown’s need to absolve Margaret Sanger of the charge of being a white supremacist and eugenicist. Eugenics is always white supremacist, period. We can acknowledge that Sanger was racist and eugenicist without ignoring the good she did for access to birth control.
My biggest issue with the book is its heteronormativity and lack of attention to queer struggle. It assumes throughout that “women” are people with uteruses and does not address that some people who can have babies are not women, while some women do not have uteruses and cannot have babies. I don’t necessarily think this needed to be a huge part of the book, but it definitely should have been dealt with more clearly and in a more inclusive way, especially because trans, nonbinary, and queer people face heightened attacks against their reproductive rights.
A smaller concern is Brown’s need to absolve Margaret Sanger of the charge of being a white supremacist and eugenicist. Eugenics is always white supremacist, period. We can acknowledge that Sanger was racist and eugenicist without ignoring the good she did for access to birth control.
October 15, 2021
Segueixo FARTÍSSIMA dels EUA. No sé per què tots els putus tigres de paper han de ser d'autors americans parlant de com de malament tenen muntat el seu put0 país dels nassos. No sé tiu, no és el meu problema. Una mica pot ser interessant, però també m'agradaria enterar-me de com estan les coses aquí a casa meva i no de lleis random d'algun estat de rednecks.
A part d'això, el llibre en sí està bé, es llegeix bastant bé (tot i haver trigat 3 mesos en llegir-lo, lol) i parla molt més d'economia del que em pensava. Però bueno hem après alguna coseta i d'això es tracta, no? 🥴
A part d'això, el llibre en sí està bé, es llegeix bastant bé (tot i haver trigat 3 mesos en llegir-lo, lol) i parla molt més d'economia del que em pensava. Però bueno hem après alguna coseta i d'això es tracta, no? 🥴
September 10, 2023
Pensava que se'm faria molta més bola al ser assaig politic-social però m'ha sorprès!! La forma de desenvolupar els temes era fàcil de seguir i cada punt reforçava la idea anterior, cosa que deu ser difícil en un tema on hi ha tantes contradiccions. Tops: la criança com a quelcom comunitari i formes practiques de fer conscienciació
Bottoms: en alguns moments s'ha sentit bastant meme de mmmm engrunes sobretot perquè partíem del sistema deeuu i qualsevol cosa millor era el bare minimum
Dit això puta eeuu
Bottoms: en alguns moments s'ha sentit bastant meme de mmmm engrunes sobretot perquè partíem del sistema deeuu i qualsevol cosa millor era el bare minimum
Dit això puta eeuu
October 16, 2025
4.5/5 🌟
May 10, 2020
This book is essential if you want to understand the real reason why our reproductive rights are constantly under attack in the U.S. "The effort to block birth control and abortion is neither fundamentally about religion nor about politicians pandering to a right-wing base... it is about the labor of rearing children: who will do it and who will pay for it." Though it is rarely discussed openly, politicians are very aware of and concerned about birth rates because the new generation will serve as future workers and consumers to support capitalism's profit-oriented growth. In other countries, panic over low birth rates led governments to provide parental leave, free childcare, sick leave, subsidies for housing, and more. But in the u.s., the labor and cost of bearing children is pushed onto families. The corporate elite benefits from dodging these costs, but profits from the cheap reproduction of the next generation. The easiest way for them to achieve this goal is to restrict access to abortion and birth control, a long with a minimum of public spending and a maximum of women's unpaid work. I highly recommend we all read this book to make serious demands to improve our quality of life.
February 23, 2020
Well-researched and easy to understand analysis of the economic and labor forces behind restrictive birth control and abortion policies. A different perspective on how reproductive justice can be attained.
January 30, 2023
This book should be required reading for every American. Enlightening and enraging and so so good. I read it for a feminist book club and we all appreciated the thought provoking questions in the back.
December 13, 2024
I appreciate Brown's attention to the different modes that feminist action can take. Declining birth rates reflect many women's rejection of the hierarchical structure of gender, family, politics/economics, and other modes of control. I most enjoyed her critique of family incentives that governments love to put forth as a shining example of their appreciation for women's unpaid labour - oh look you had a baby, here's a 200$ tax credit.
October 16, 2025
I read like half of this book in 2023. decided to start from the beginning and finish it this week. it's a little outdated since it was written pre Dobbs but still a lot of good arguments.
I had some issues with the beginning portion going over the history but I think it would be a great book for consciousness raising groups.
I had some issues with the beginning portion going over the history but I think it would be a great book for consciousness raising groups.
April 27, 2019
This book is well researched and well written. As such, despite the disheartening and disgusting situations it has to explore through the historical precedents, economic impacts, societal opinions and expectations as well as the political legislature, it was hard to put down. It covers a lot and despite the author's clear bias, had riveting information and eye opening connections.
August 26, 2023
Jenny Brown creates a powerful read with Birth Strike. She unapologetically shines a like light on the fight for representation for women’s (and other caregivers) unpaid labor raising children. Brown heavily focuses on the demands of motherhood, employment, and systematic poverty.
She calls out both United States political parties for making birth control and abortion such a hot topic- while also allowing states to strip proper sex education from their schools.
Brown goes into detail about the plummeting birth rate in developed countries- and why the United States is seeing a drastic drop right now.
She discusses the fears government officials have about these declines. A capitalist society cannot sustain itself if the population doesn’t grow according to Brown.
At times you can feel her anger and fear. What obstacles will stand in our daughters ways? When will we as a society see the “obvious” solutions and actually put them to use? When will the catch-22 end for women? Must we constantly decide between our well being and having children? And if we are to be caught up in the mix… shouldn’t we have proper access to tools so we can have control over our own bodies?
September 25, 2021
While I feel like Brown is confused about what's actually the central point of her own book, she still manages to provide some incredible, accessible analysis on a topic that doesn't get enough attention. She opens the introduction with the thesis statement that opposition to birth control and abortion in the US is in fact "about the labor of bearing and rearing children: who will do it and who will pay for it." However, her book is far less focused on the ongoing struggle for reproductive rights than it is on how the interests of corporate America influence policy, including but by no means limited to reproductive rights and the welfare state, in the quest for cheap and plentiful labor.
Brown makes repeated statements regarding the corporate elites interest in the birth-rate, and the theory that the goal of anti-birth control and abortion policy is to keep women "producing children" as opposed to the kind of religious, prudish motives or transparent political pandering that are usually attributed. However, she never quite persuades with this argument, even undermining it when Brown herself points out that any increases in the birth-rate won't result in increases to the labor force until those children mature into adults; an 18-year process that may benefit corporate America in the long-term, but does little to help them in the short-term.
However, Brown is extremely persuasive in arguing that "employers oppose public assistance programs on principal, even when they're not paying for them through taxes" since public assistance makes the workforce inherently less vulnerable and therefore harder to control and exploit. Her discussion of the labor force is some of the best analysis I've ever read on how a robust welfare state inherently increases workers bargaining power with employers, and is therefore a threat to the corporate elite. Additionally, Brown makes the insightful argument that many of the 20th century advances in birth-control and abortion access may have been achieved in part due to corporate interests in making women more available to participate in the labor force during a time of rapid growth.
If anything, this book is a call to action for our society to appreciate the value of women's labor both in the workforce and in procreation, and demand the structural change necessary to support the realities of parenthood. I would recommend to anyone who is interested in politics, has a uterus or cares about people with uterus's.
Brown makes repeated statements regarding the corporate elites interest in the birth-rate, and the theory that the goal of anti-birth control and abortion policy is to keep women "producing children" as opposed to the kind of religious, prudish motives or transparent political pandering that are usually attributed. However, she never quite persuades with this argument, even undermining it when Brown herself points out that any increases in the birth-rate won't result in increases to the labor force until those children mature into adults; an 18-year process that may benefit corporate America in the long-term, but does little to help them in the short-term.
However, Brown is extremely persuasive in arguing that "employers oppose public assistance programs on principal, even when they're not paying for them through taxes" since public assistance makes the workforce inherently less vulnerable and therefore harder to control and exploit. Her discussion of the labor force is some of the best analysis I've ever read on how a robust welfare state inherently increases workers bargaining power with employers, and is therefore a threat to the corporate elite. Additionally, Brown makes the insightful argument that many of the 20th century advances in birth-control and abortion access may have been achieved in part due to corporate interests in making women more available to participate in the labor force during a time of rapid growth.
If anything, this book is a call to action for our society to appreciate the value of women's labor both in the workforce and in procreation, and demand the structural change necessary to support the realities of parenthood. I would recommend to anyone who is interested in politics, has a uterus or cares about people with uterus's.
December 27, 2022
I learned a lot from this book.
Because sterilization was the only birth control available, and because it was pushed relentlessly by the authorities, by 1968, one third of Puerto Rican women had undergone sterilization operations, the highest percentage in the world. (42)
[The invention of the birth control pill] was officially available only to married women, and initially marketed in 1957 to “regulate periods,” but in 1960 it was approved as a contraceptive, and widely available by 1965. (43)
Doctors all over the country sterilized black women, Latinas, and white welfare recipients without their knowledge or consent when they went to hospitals to deliver babies. (57)
While women on public assistance, and in particular black women, were being targeted for sterilization, non-poor women who wanted to be sterilized faced something called the “120 rule,” instituted by most hospitals in the 1950s. Hospital administrators multiplied your age by the number of children you had. If you were thirty and had four children, or forty and already had three children, the operation might be permitted. But if the total were lower than 120, the hospital board would refuse the operation. Some hospitals used a 150 rule or a 175 rule. (57)
If any woman can be denied control, our collective power is weakened. “We must subject every proposal for change and every tactic to the clearest feminist scrutiny," cautioned abortion rights leader Lucinda Cisler in 1970 as new abortion laws were being written, and "demand only what is good for all women, and not let some of us be bought off at the expense of the rest.” (76)
Because sterilization was the only birth control available, and because it was pushed relentlessly by the authorities, by 1968, one third of Puerto Rican women had undergone sterilization operations, the highest percentage in the world. (42)
[The invention of the birth control pill] was officially available only to married women, and initially marketed in 1957 to “regulate periods,” but in 1960 it was approved as a contraceptive, and widely available by 1965. (43)
Doctors all over the country sterilized black women, Latinas, and white welfare recipients without their knowledge or consent when they went to hospitals to deliver babies. (57)
While women on public assistance, and in particular black women, were being targeted for sterilization, non-poor women who wanted to be sterilized faced something called the “120 rule,” instituted by most hospitals in the 1950s. Hospital administrators multiplied your age by the number of children you had. If you were thirty and had four children, or forty and already had three children, the operation might be permitted. But if the total were lower than 120, the hospital board would refuse the operation. Some hospitals used a 150 rule or a 175 rule. (57)
If any woman can be denied control, our collective power is weakened. “We must subject every proposal for change and every tactic to the clearest feminist scrutiny," cautioned abortion rights leader Lucinda Cisler in 1970 as new abortion laws were being written, and "demand only what is good for all women, and not let some of us be bought off at the expense of the rest.” (76)
March 22, 2019
This book completely changed the way I think about the fight for reproductive rights in America. This is necessary feminist reading for 2019.
June 10, 2019
Forthright, honest and well-researched, this book connects the personal and political in a way that is relevant to everyone. It moves quickly over vast historical ground to acquaint the reader with a set of facts, inferences and possibilities you can’t find anywhere else. When I finished reading this book, I wanted to find a copy for everyone I know.
February 6, 2022
This book does an excellent job covering an under addressed area of Reproductive Rights and Justice - the unpaid labor of women during pregnancy and childrearing in the US. The author also places this in the larger context of immigration and racial justice as well. It changed my perspective in a substantial way and well worth the read.
January 10, 2020
An extremely powerful, thought provoking book. I am completely reevaluating the reproductive labor or women especially in capitalist societies. I'll be recommending this to all my friends.
February 11, 2022
Required reading for all Marxist men that have left the production of the proletariat (reproductive and nurturing labor!) out of their analysis of productive labor.
June 28, 2023
Thought provoking exploration of reproductive rights as a labor issue. Would be curious to read an updated edition that takes into account the Dobbs decision.
August 9, 2022
The forty-second #book I finished in 2022: at the beginning of the 20th century, socialists and anarchists discussed the idea of a "birth strike." Could working-class women use birth control as a political weapon, refusing to create new workers until their demands were met? The idea never caught on. (See pages 88-91 of my book Revolutionary Berlin for a description of how the birth strike debate went down in Berlin in 1913, with Rosa Luxemburg and Clara Zetkin opposing.) Jenny Brown's book from 2019 offers a somewhat different take: Women in the United States are *already* engaged in a birth strike, refusing to have children because of intolerable conditions. They just need to become conscious of what they are doing, and formulate their demands.
This book offers a lot of detail about how capitalists in different eras have thought about the birth rate. In certain periods, they want lots of new workers and soldiers; in others, they want to reduced the population of oppressed groups, or to keep women from getting pregnant so they can be better exploited in factories. There are always tensions between these poles.
Brown's central thesis is that the U.S. movement against abortion and contraception is based on the capitalists' desire to increase the birth rate. She argues that reactionary ideologies are secondary to this material factor. I do not find her argument convincing at all. The U.S. ruling class is clearly deeply divided on this question — that's why its two parties have such radically different policies on abortion. While reactionary ideologies always have a material foundation, the relation between base and superstructure is never so direct. The Koch brothers, for example, would like open borders so they can exploit more cheap labor — but capitalists also need immigration controls to maintain the loyalty of racist petty bourgeois, which is essential for maintaining the rule of the bourgeoisie. I think something similar is going on with abortion — reducing the debate to a single factor doesn't help us understand it. #bookstagram
This book offers a lot of detail about how capitalists in different eras have thought about the birth rate. In certain periods, they want lots of new workers and soldiers; in others, they want to reduced the population of oppressed groups, or to keep women from getting pregnant so they can be better exploited in factories. There are always tensions between these poles.
Brown's central thesis is that the U.S. movement against abortion and contraception is based on the capitalists' desire to increase the birth rate. She argues that reactionary ideologies are secondary to this material factor. I do not find her argument convincing at all. The U.S. ruling class is clearly deeply divided on this question — that's why its two parties have such radically different policies on abortion. While reactionary ideologies always have a material foundation, the relation between base and superstructure is never so direct. The Koch brothers, for example, would like open borders so they can exploit more cheap labor — but capitalists also need immigration controls to maintain the loyalty of racist petty bourgeois, which is essential for maintaining the rule of the bourgeoisie. I think something similar is going on with abortion — reducing the debate to a single factor doesn't help us understand it. #bookstagram
January 22, 2021
I'm not sure what I expected when I picked up the book Birth Strike, but I was pleasantly surprised when I realized a big focus of the book is about how governments use population control as a lever for the economy. Women are expected to produce (or not produce) babies at the will of those who control the government, and as you know, the government in the USA is now partly controlled by corporate interests. It is to the advantage of corporations (aka employers of those future taxpayers that women give birth to), to keep the nation in a state of partial unemployment, in order to keep wages down, as people desperate for a job will take what they can get.
How does this relate to the current situation in the USA, where there is frequent talk of overturning the Roe v Wade ruling, which legalized abortion in 1973? Roe v Wade was possible in 1973 because in the wake of the baby boom, we had too many workers, according to the powers that be. In recent decades, however, millions of workers are not earning enough to support a family, and are delaying having children.
People of working/reproductive age in America today are stuck between a rock and a hard place. Many want to have children but can’t find a way to do so. The corporate backed governing powers want women to produce more future taxpayers, so that they can keep wages low, but are more often now refusing to own up to their own role in making it realistic for a woman to sustain a pregnancy and raise a child. Without things like universal early child care, flexible working hours, a living wage, health insurance benefits for all, and parental leave, many women are forced to remain childless. Trying to take away safe, legal abortion and birth control options in this situation is like pushing someone into the snow after taking away their clothes.
This is just my attempt to summarize what stuck with me most about this book, but I encourage you to read it, because the author has a lot more to say. She presents good arguments for why universal programs are more effective than “means-tested” or “qualification-based” programs, discusses reproduction issues as they relate to race, as well as the use of immigration as a way to bring in more workers and how the notion of a big family goes along with the notion of small government. She also surveys abortion laws throughout history, in a multitude of countries, talks about women having to produce soldiers for war, and presents interviews with a number of women and consciousness-raising questions. Good reading!
How does this relate to the current situation in the USA, where there is frequent talk of overturning the Roe v Wade ruling, which legalized abortion in 1973? Roe v Wade was possible in 1973 because in the wake of the baby boom, we had too many workers, according to the powers that be. In recent decades, however, millions of workers are not earning enough to support a family, and are delaying having children.
People of working/reproductive age in America today are stuck between a rock and a hard place. Many want to have children but can’t find a way to do so. The corporate backed governing powers want women to produce more future taxpayers, so that they can keep wages low, but are more often now refusing to own up to their own role in making it realistic for a woman to sustain a pregnancy and raise a child. Without things like universal early child care, flexible working hours, a living wage, health insurance benefits for all, and parental leave, many women are forced to remain childless. Trying to take away safe, legal abortion and birth control options in this situation is like pushing someone into the snow after taking away their clothes.
This is just my attempt to summarize what stuck with me most about this book, but I encourage you to read it, because the author has a lot more to say. She presents good arguments for why universal programs are more effective than “means-tested” or “qualification-based” programs, discusses reproduction issues as they relate to race, as well as the use of immigration as a way to bring in more workers and how the notion of a big family goes along with the notion of small government. She also surveys abortion laws throughout history, in a multitude of countries, talks about women having to produce soldiers for war, and presents interviews with a number of women and consciousness-raising questions. Good reading!
November 18, 2023
The ruling class are paying careful attention to the birth rate. They want a reliable "replacement rate" which = economic growth and security. They want an ever-expanding workforce...but raised with the MINIMUM amount of public spending and the MAXIMUM amount of unpaid labor.
As a result, bearing and rearing children in the United States is regularly forced, almost always unpaid labor. Women are not paid for the production of reproduction. Conditions are horrible: No paid parental leave. No childcare. Bearing and rearing children has devastating economic costs and requires an enormous amount of time and energy -- time and energy the working class don't have. Even though there are no real supportive institutions or universal welfare programs, the birth rate is kept high by eliminating access to and an ability to pay for reproductive healthcare. 1 in 4 births in the United States are unintended as a result.
So people are going on a reproduction slowdown because conditions are bad. A birth strike. Jenny Brown argues that there is power in our reproductive capacity and it should be used as leverage against the ruling class to demand a new society: A society built around supportive institutions; a society where people are paid for the essential task of having and raising children.
As a result, bearing and rearing children in the United States is regularly forced, almost always unpaid labor. Women are not paid for the production of reproduction. Conditions are horrible: No paid parental leave. No childcare. Bearing and rearing children has devastating economic costs and requires an enormous amount of time and energy -- time and energy the working class don't have. Even though there are no real supportive institutions or universal welfare programs, the birth rate is kept high by eliminating access to and an ability to pay for reproductive healthcare. 1 in 4 births in the United States are unintended as a result.
So people are going on a reproduction slowdown because conditions are bad. A birth strike. Jenny Brown argues that there is power in our reproductive capacity and it should be used as leverage against the ruling class to demand a new society: A society built around supportive institutions; a society where people are paid for the essential task of having and raising children.
June 12, 2019
An excellent though enraging book, Zuckerberg confirms that the obvious driving force for the focus on women's reproductive rights is an economic one and greed rather than the benefit of the populace in general. Simplified, it boils down to slavery; more than just women, the production of reproduction and the free labor they provide, but it contains an undercurrent concerning class. The old adage 'keep them barefoot and pregnant' creates a class of self perpetuating poor that diminishes the power of the working class (male, female, white or black) for the oligarchy. What the books skips of course, is that there are religious factions that follow the 'doctrine of prosperity' that grants their dogma and blessing to the political oligarchs that use that dogma to keep many working class under thumb, working against their own best interests; faith directed subjugation. But all in all, the book is well researched and important reading for those wishing to understand the anti-choice crowd and the tools they use to further their goals, from lies about social security to supposed welfare queens.
May 22, 2023
Brown exposes a different reason why the powers are always so eager to control women's childbearing - the capitalist need to provide cheap labor. This rationale was not always so hidden, and figured prominently over recent history in the US (both Republican and Democrat) and many other countries. To maintain the birth rate so that workers don't become too limiting some countries offer ways to make having and raising a family easier (the carrot) and some, like the US, use the stick. When she reviews some of the proposed methods of supporting childbearing/rearing in the US, her perspective helps us see how laughable they are. Despite the importance of having children who will continue our society, having a child is generally viewed in the US as a person indulgence. Brown covers many topics including racism, social security, the family wage, and immigration. She also debunks several myths. This is a book that is definitely worth reading!
May 22, 2020
DNF at 80%. Skimmed the rest.
This definitely opened my eyes to population being a factor to reproductive fights. It succeeded there. I also learned some new facts and histories I wasn’t familiar with. I thought the part about social security was interesting, but I ended up being on the bored side for most of this. It stopped holding my attention about halfway through for one reason or another. I also kept finding little contradictions here and there; sometimes they were addressed, but I was just never as convinced as Brown wanted me to be. I think some of that also came from the order the chapters were in.
I think this is definitely worthy of picking up, but it ended up being just okay for me. If you are interested in feminist studies there is a lot of good stuff in here, so don’t let me deter you from reading.
This definitely opened my eyes to population being a factor to reproductive fights. It succeeded there. I also learned some new facts and histories I wasn’t familiar with. I thought the part about social security was interesting, but I ended up being on the bored side for most of this. It stopped holding my attention about halfway through for one reason or another. I also kept finding little contradictions here and there; sometimes they were addressed, but I was just never as convinced as Brown wanted me to be. I think some of that also came from the order the chapters were in.
I think this is definitely worthy of picking up, but it ended up being just okay for me. If you are interested in feminist studies there is a lot of good stuff in here, so don’t let me deter you from reading.
February 15, 2024
This was important, delving into politics, economics, feminism, the military etc. The American economy relies on a growing population (an able-bodied workforce, social security, the military). This book argues that the American war on abortion and contraception is largely due to a governmental fear of our plummetting birth rate. Rather than forcing pregnancy onto people, this book explores successful socialist programs already thriving in most European countries. A livable minimum wage, universal parental leave, child care, public college, and healthcare (including fertility treatments & contraception) would not only help parents who are currently struggling, but would also make childrearing a more appealing option for others. My favorite snarky quote, "Thou shalt preserve the fetus, for it's much better to kill them at eighteen, the age of conscription."
Displaying 1 - 30 of 51 reviews