Recounting the Past A Student Journal of Historical Studies Department of History At Illinois State University Number 17 • Spring 2016 Recounting the Past A Student Journal of Historical Studies Department of History At Illinois State University Number 17 • Spring 20152016 Editors Issam Nassar Richard Soderlund Graduate Assistant Lacey Brown Editorial Board Kyle Ciani Alan Lessoff Sudipa Topdar Christine Varga-Harris Amy Wood Recounting the Past highlights scholarship from graduate and undergraduate students in the core courses for the History program. These courses teach students how to find, access and critically assess primary sources as well as how to integrate the scholarship of experts in the field into their research. The papers in this issue highlight important theoretical insights and thematic streams in the discipline of history. Recounting the Past A Student Journal of Historical Studies TABLE OF CONTENTS Nora Dunne 1 Fighting for Their Reproductive Rights: Latina Women and Forced Sterilization in the 1970s Meghan Hawkins 15 Conquest, Colonialism and the Creation of the Irish Other Kayla Iammarino 37 “Colonization of the Mind” in Knowledge, Race, and Nationalism Taylor Long 45 What Killed Greenwich Village?: The Dilemma That Comes From Pronouncing Any Creative Center “Dead” Lucas Mays 60 The Delaware Whipping Post: Ancient Punishments in an Enlightened Age Chris Moberg 73 A Vision of Peace: The International Congress of Women at The Hague Chris Roberts 92 Real Victims and Bad Memories: The Sabra & Shatila Massacre and Modern Israeli Memory Zohra Saulat 108 Subjects of the Empire and Subject to the Empire: Gender, Power, and The Inconceivable “Victims” of the British Raj (1858-1947) Greg Staggs 117 Edward Coles and the Fight to Defeat Slavery in Illinois Fighting For Their Reproductive Rights: Latina Women and Forced Sterilization in the 1970s By Nora Dunne Dolores Madrigal gave birth on October 12, 1973. While she was in labor, doctors convinced her to consent to a procedure preventing her from becoming pregnant too soon after giving birth. A tubal ligation was performed on Madrigal, with no doctors explaining what the procedure would be or its effects.1 In 1976, Madrigal, along with nine other Latina women, would face their doctors and stand up for their right to have control over their own reproductive health. Forced, unconsented, and misrepresented sterilization in minority women became an issue for activist groups in the 1970s. The Committee to End Sterilization Abuse (CESA) and the Chicago Women’s Liberation Union (CWLU) were two organizations working to highlight the problems involved with sterilization and to improve reproductive rights of all women in the 1970s. This paper will focus on the efforts of CESA and the CWLU as they applied to Latina women during the Women’s Health Movement. This paper will look at the cases of Buck v. Bell and Madrigal v. Quilligan to understand the legalization of forced sterilization. It will also look at CESA’s statement of purpose and two documents from the CWLU titled “The Politics of Sterilization” and “Medical Crimes Against Women.” These documents will demonstrate how women worked to bring attention to this issue and how activist strategies resulted in passing legislation. Forced sterilization was legalized in the United States in the era following World War I due to the U.S. Supreme Court case Buck v. Bell. Decided on May 2, 1927, the case involved plaintiff Carrie Buck and J.H. Bell who had sterilized her without her consent after she gave birth to a child. Bell won this case. According to the opinion of Justice Holmes, Carrie Buck was feeble minded. Buck was eighteen at the time of this procedure. The document also states that her daughter was illegitimate and would be feeble minded as well. The decision states that feeble- minded women should be sterilized, because they will be producing more feeble- minded children. Holmes states that sterilizing these women will benefit society. It also states that this procedure will not affect her health. Holmes argues that sterilization will prevent feeble-minded individuals from reproducing. In the end, he argues, this will prevent them from either starving to death or ending up in jail.2 Holmes argued that taking reproductive rights away from Carrie Buck and other women would lead to a better society, with fewer feeble-minded individuals. Many women lost their reproductive freedom because of this decision. 1 Fighting For Their Reproductive Rights: Latina Women and Forced Sterilization in the 1970s This case allowed for sterilization without consent to be legalized in the United States in the case of people living in institutions. One issue with this case was that there was no definition given of what was considered “feeble minded.” Minorities were often viewed as incapable of taking birth control properly and abusive of welfare. Because of these generalizations, these women were often the victims of unconsented sterilization. Tubal sterilization, also known as a tubal ligation or having your tubes tied, is one form of sterilization used on women who had not given consent. This procedure entails blocking or cutting the fallopian tubes to prevent pregnancy as a form of birth control. This procedure stops eggs from travelling to the uterus and sperm from travelling to the eggs. This procedure can be done after childbirth or a C-section. Although it is possible to reverse this surgery, it is a major procedure and does not always work. According to the Mayo Clinic, this procedure is often done to prevent pregnancy or to decrease the risk of ovarian cancer. As with any major surgery, there are risks associated with a tubal litigation. Damage could be done to the bowel, bladder, or blood vessels during this procedure. There is a risk of the wound becoming infected or abdominal pain. This surgery is a serious procedure, and it is important that women who were undergoing this procedure fully understand what they were consenting to. Many women became victims of forced sterilization because they were not informed of the procedure that they would be undergoing. Historians often compare the sterilization that was legalized in the United States after Buck v. Bell to similar actions that occurred in Nazi Germany before and during the Holocaust. According to historians, forced sterilization in both the United States and in Germany was seen as a way to prevent the “feeble-minded” from having children. Doctors in both countries believed that preventing these women from having children would help rid society of negative traits.3 The women who underwent forced sterilization were often poor and minority women. Many doctors viewed these women as incapable of using contraceptives and should not be having children. Historians state that minority women were given false information on sterilization and were encouraged to have this procedure when white women were not. Historians also argue that this issue should be viewed in the broader context of women’s struggle to have control of their own fertility and health. Much like the issue of abortion, men had control over women’s fertility. Because of this control, many minority women were sterilized without their consent.4 Historian Joan Kelly wrote an article titled “Sterilization: Rights and Abuse of Rights” in 1977, stating the issue caused people to think about the horrors that occurred in Nazi Germany, however, Kelly argued that minority women also did not have control over their own bodies. Many women were convinced to have this procedure without truly understanding what it entails. Women often would believe that this procedure was reversible, and they could “untie” their tubes at a later date. 2 Fighting For Their Reproductive Rights: Latina Women and Forced Sterilization in the 1970s Kelly also writes that women often agreed to these procedures because they were threatened with losing welfare.5 This document was one of the earliest that defined forced sterilization as an issue for poor and minority women. While the decision to be sterilized is one that the author believes is valid, she also believes that many women are not truly being given the option, as they were being sterilized without consent. Kelly’s essay brought this issue to light and the article helped women who were not affected directly by this issue understand what was happening and helped women understand that the issue of forced sterilization was a major part of the struggle of women to maintain control over their own reproductive health. The author states that many middle-class women could not imagine this happening, but it was very real and occurring to many women who were in vulnerable positions. Women were being sterilized without consent, or sterilized due to misinformation. Minority women on welfare were often affected by this procedure. Doctors were making decisions about these patients, and they were not always providing women with all the necessary information to make informed decisions, taking away the right of women to make decisions regarding their bodies and healthcare. This information shows that there were serious problems occurring in Women’s Health during the 1970s. Kelly’s article was one that defined the issue of forced sterilization, and was a call to action during the era of Second Wave Feminism and the Women’s Health Movement. This period of time was an important era for activist groups. In the 1960s and 1970s, the Civil Rights Movement and Second Wave Feminism were occurring, along with the Women’s Health Movement. These issues are important in understanding the movement surrounding forced sterilization. The decision of Roe v. Wade in 1973 was a victory for women, but women of color saw their rights disappear with the Hyde Amendment in 1976. This amendment once again took away the right to have control over their own body for some women.6 The Hyde Amendment took away federal funding for abortions, but federal funding for sterilization remained.