I wanna talk a little about Margaret Sanger, because she’s such a deeply polarizing historical figure from both sides of the classic political aisle.

I think the general view of her is “the Plannet Parenthood lady” - if you like PP you like her, if you hate PP you hate her.

Sanger was a strong advocate for birth control (a term she coined!) and founded Planned Parenthood with the goal of ensuring that all women who want it have access to family planning. She is rightly credited as having a crucial role in the 20th-century women’s lib movement.

She believed women should be able to enjoy their sexuality without fear of pregnancy. She opposed Christian teachings that encouraged women to have as many kids as possible and was not opposed to homosexuality - a deeply groundbreaking view for straight people in her time.

But she held many views that are no longer compatible with most modern views on sexuality. She felt sex belonged in marriage or committed relationships, and she believed masturbation was a societal evil. She also strongly opposed abortion and felt that it was murder.

And as I discussed in my previous thread, she was a eugenicist. I don’t just mean she believed in the principles of eugenics - she practiced it, through Planned Parenthood. She placed clinics in poor areas with the goal of preventing poor people from reproducing.

She argued forcefully and successfully for laws mandating forced sterilization of the poor, disabled, and criminals.

In targeting the poor, she inevitably targeted Black women. She spoke at KKK rallies, and defended the KKK as “a good group”.

There’s no doubt that Sanger’s legacy re birth control was world-changing. But she held many views that modern people consider reprehensible, and even in her own times she was criticized for her views on race.

The reality is that Sanger is no longer politically useful. Those who support PP’s modern work come up against her views on abortion. Those who oppose PP’s views use her racism and eugenics to argue PP is an inherently bad org, even though it has separated itself from her views.

For me, the eugenics is intolerable. I get that it was a common and popular view at the time, but its moral wrongness is so deep and so hateful that I can’t support anyone who endorsed it. Disabled people are still fighting harms that stem from the legacy of eugenics.

It’s okay - good, even - to acknowledge both someone’s good traits and their harmful traits as well. I think it’s good for us to move away from a view of history as being made up of people on the right side and people on the wrong side. It’s almost never that simple.

If I worked for Planned Parenthood’s PR department, I’d be taking her name off everything I could reach, and rightfully so. Not because she needs to be “cancelled”, but because her legacy is too complex to celebrate without careful consideration. And that’s a good thing.