Jump to content

Talk:Margaret Sanger

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good articleMargaret Sanger was one of the Social sciences and society good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 17, 2011Good article nomineeListed
August 21, 2015Good article reassessmentDelisted
On this day...Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on October 16, 2011, October 16, 2016, and October 16, 2024.
Current status: Delisted good article

Racist

[edit]

Ironic you editors dont mention she is a white supremacist 12.186.215.34 (talk) 17:23, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not ironic, we stick with facts.[1] – Muboshgu (talk) 17:35, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Muboshgu nice way to whitewash her utter disgust and racist white supremacist views against the black community. you realize that she once stated, "we don't want word to go out that we want to exterminate the negro population!" if that isn't completely racist than I don't know what will convince you. obviously, anyone who is a far-left asshole, in your opinion and who can be comfortable around a hate-group such as the KKK created by racist Democrats just simply cannot be racist, huh? it must suck to have your head constantly up your ass most of the time to be so out-of-touch and in your neoliberal bubble. 97.117.92.5 (talk) 06:32, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, good to see how you blatantly ignore the facts to promote your own view. The Banner talk 08:27, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
ignore eugenics as a founder she was absolutely a racist and inspired Hitler--what a liberal motivated great revision of history to disinfom people on planned parenthoods real roots. 2600:6C58:4AF0:7280:90A2:192B:6055:26C5 (talk) 19:55, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Do you have any verfication from reliable sources to back up your allegations? Otherwise you are violating WP:FORUM. Peaceray (talk) 14:05, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You, as well as others, seem to derive the notion that Sanger was racist from her "Letter from Margaret Sanger to Dr. C.J. Gamble". December 10, 1939.. In this letter she states We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members. This statement can be read one of two ways. In a negative reading, it would be and attempt to deceive African-Americans. In a positive reading, it would be in the "please don't let me be misunderstood" vein; that the benefit of offering birth control to the African-American community should be not be construed as an attempt to reduce their numbers any more than any other American. Given the fact that W. E. B. Du Bois & both Coretta & Martin Luther King Jr. supported her, I believe the latter is the correct reading. I would suggest that you carefully read the Work with the African-American community section. I believe that to promulgate the view that Sanger was racist without supporting citations is plainly original research or guilt by association. Peaceray (talk) 13:48, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There and a few others quotes from herself:
1939 In The Negro Project Proposal, she wrote: "The massive negros particularly in the south still breed carelessly and disastrously, with the result that the increase among Negroes, even more than among Whites, is from that portion of the population least intelligent and fit."
A few more quotes below:
"'to create a race of thoroughbreds' by encouraging 'more children from the fit and less from the unfit.'" -- The pivot of civilization 1922
"I personally believe in the sterilization of the feeble-minded, the insane and the syphilitic. " -- Birth Control and Racial Betterment, Feb 1919
"The most urgent problem today is how to limit and discourage the over-fertility of the mentally and physically defective." -- The Eugenic Value of Birth control Propaganda, Oct 1921
Sanger's racist motives: "It means the release and cultivation of the better racial elements in our society, and the gradual suppression, elimination and eventual extirpation (destruction) of defective stocks -- those human weeds which threaten the blooming of the finest flowers of American civilization." -- New York Times, April 8th 1923
"Eugenics without birth control seems to us a house built upon the sands. It is at the mercy of the rising streams of the unfit." Freebyunderstanding (talk) 15:34, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
All of those leaders you mentioned were not supported in black communities. My GrandMother marched with Dr King as well as organized with his party——and those were two totally different schools of thought. King was a puppet up to a certain point, slept with a Margaret Sanger look alike and finally when he wanted to fight for his people and our land, they murdered him for breaking from the script. Seeing how you hold Mrs Sanger in such a wonderful light, you would not truly be open to learning the truth. You would not even be open to researching an idea with an open mind from the answers I have read that have been stated. It would hurt your soul for your facts that can be seen two ways (that is much closer to an opinion LOL) evidently. That comment can be interpreted two ways by only two types of people. One, those who are real eyes seeing (realizing) melanated people make up the majority of abortions and two: those who are happy Melanated people make up the majority of abortions. You make your position obvious by your defense alone. Prayerfully you will be more balanced when editing pages from here on out.
And that’s only one racist quote, she made enough to get where she was coming from. I believe in GOD MOST HIGH, so, I pray that people who knowingly do evil, may they endure what they laid as a snare for others. And may the honest in heart, may the learn the truth in a peaceful manner. FiyaTiger (talk) 14:09, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have evidence? The Banner talk 14:48, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@FiyaTiger: By evidence, I believe The Banner means verification from reliable sources. Otherwise what you present seems to be a biased commentary based on original research. Peaceray (talk) 18:19, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article has lost its neutrality on this historical figure. Under the cover that influential thinkers at her time were somehow sympathetic to eugenics, a few edits to state that she supports eugenics were reverted. Yet her organization has influenced people like Adolf. I wouldn't just see her as simply sympatetic. She was the pioneer in her age, not just showing sympathetic but promoted her believes and had impactful actions.
Please do not ignore these facts and please keep wikipedia a neutral place. Otherwise, I start to doubt the influencers in this article, their motivations. Freebyunderstanding (talk) 15:26, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. Freebyunderstanding (talk) 15:27, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well, first of all, the Negro Project Proposal quote is "the mass of negroes", not "the massive negroes", and it's actually a quote from W.E.B DuBois that Sanger later used. That link I provided there is a good read, as it talks about how Sanger is being quoted out of context for the specific purpose of discrediting her. How's your approach "neutral"? – Muboshgu (talk) 15:39, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Muboshgu Thanks for the correction! So you are aware of her above statement, and to the fact that she was quoting someone else. Then does it make a difference in understanding her stand?
Also I read through the article briefly, the quote on the fact that she quoted from Du Bois is broken as of this reply is published:
"But what anti-choicers either don’t know or willfully obscure is that Sanger borrowed this quote directly from W. E. B. Du Bois." Freebyunderstanding (talk) 16:13, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Also interesting to read is this quote from the article Negro Project: While the original plan for the Negro Project included educational outreach into black communities as well as the establishment of black-operated clinical resources, the project that was implemented deviated from this original design and was ultimately unsuccessful.[1][2] So what became the Negro Project, was not conform Sangers wishes. The Banner talk 16:17, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The quote from Du Bois was used in the proposal (https://web.archive.org/web/20180327064100/https://trustblackwomen.org/2011-05-10-03-28-12/publications-a-articles/african-americans-and-abortion-articles/26-margaret-sanger-and-the-african-american-community-) and is seen in the quote above: the proposal is not the same as the actual project). The Banner talk 16:26, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Cite error: The named reference :02 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  2. ^ "The Negro Project – Making Democracy Real". Retrieved 2019-10-04.

Source request

[edit]

One editor is asking for independent sources that Sanger founded Planned Parenthood. A fair request, but as far I know, Sanger founded one of the predecessors of PP. Do we really need the independent source? The Banner talk 16:03, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The sequence of events seems to be that she founded the American Birth Control League in 1921, which was the parent organization of the Birth Control Federation of America that became the Planned Parenthood Federation of America in 1942. She also was the first president of the International Planned Parenthood Federation in 1953.
Peaceray (talk) 17:39, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Member of the Nazi party and the KKK

[edit]

She was both a member of the NAZI party and the KKK. They had to remove her from the leadership position she held in 1942 because the Nazis declared war on America on December 11. She still made statements of Nazi support after the declaration of war. 2600:1015:A027:EEB6:9EDA:C257:318D:C030 (talk) 19:06, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is not true. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:13, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yes, we'll just ignore WP:Verifiability and WP:BLP and just put those extreme things right in with no sources just because you said it. North8000 (talk) 19:20, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Of all the things that never happened, this one never happened the most. Gamaliel (talk) 23:50, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted edit

[edit]

@Peaceray The sentence says that the commonality of "unsafe abortions" was "because" abortion was illegal, while this is disputed, so I removed the phrase which causes this claim to be made. It's also a strange claim to just throw out there in the lead of the Margaret Sanger article. Anotherperson123 (talk) 04:38, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are you disputing that abortion was illegal at the time? I think that there is sufficient coverage in the article that one of Sanger's intents was to promote birth control so that the only appropriate use for abortion would be therapeutic. She clearly was frustrated by women who did not want a child then seeking abortions that were clearly a danger to those very women. The very reason that there was such danger to these abortions was due to their ubiquitous illegibility, which prevented trained medical personnel from legally performing them.
What language do you propose to capture this nuance? Peaceray (talk) 05:20, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Who is disputing the issue? Do you have sources for that? The Banner talk 16:22, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Changing quotations

[edit]

Changing quotations is a clear nono, like here]. In this case, it changes the meaning of quotation. This sounds like subtle pov-pushing. The Banner talk 21:26, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My bad, I did not see the quotation marks. Anotherperson123 (talk) 21:14, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Another reverted edit

[edit]

@The Banner There is no "POV pushing" in modifying the language to be more encyclopedic. "Thought" is the encyclopedic equivalent of "felt", attributing claims is the correct way of wording Wikipedia articles, etc. Please explain your reasoning for these reverts. Anotherperson123 (talk) 21:42, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@The Banner Anotherperson123 (talk) 02:24, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I did see it. And if you want an explanation, I give you the same as in the summary: subtle POV-pushing. Minor edits that just change the meaning of the text to be a bit more negative. The Banner talk 03:02, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I guess I just fail to see how changing "felt" to "thought" and attributing a claim could be seen as making an article negative in tone. "Felt" is informal language. A claim is a claim. Claims are attributed. These are standard corrections. Anotherperson123 (talk) 04:03, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Margaret_Sanger&oldid=1260328420"