“性教育的多面性”:纽约市进步改革组织中的优生学与性教育

IF 0.4 3区 历史学 Q1 HISTORY
Julia B. Haager
{"title":"“性教育的多面性”:纽约市进步改革组织中的优生学与性教育","authors":"Julia B. Haager","doi":"10.1017/S1537781421000670","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article argues that reformers’ racial nativism, belief in the power of eugenics to improve society, and desire to restrict US citizenship to certain racial groups contributed to reproductive and eugenic curriculum used by early public-school sex education programs. It utilizes newspaper accounts and archival records from the headquarters of the American Social Hygiene Association, Committee of Fourteen, United Neighborhood Houses, and Child Study Association in New York City to answer several crucial questions: What dangers did each organization attribute to adolescent sexuality and reproduction? How did each envision its role in societal improvement and in the sex education movement? What did these reform organizations consider as the ideal relationship between the home, school, and society? While the existing scholarship explains how each of these organizations fit into the larger historical context of progressive reform, examining them separately downplays the degree to which ideas about race, reproduction, immigration, and US citizenship circulated among reformers, especially as leaders of these groups worked across organizational lines to promote sex education.","PeriodicalId":43534,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era","volume":"21 1","pages":"74 - 92"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"“Sex Education’s Many Sides”: Eugenics and Sex Education in New York City’s Progressive Reform Organizations\",\"authors\":\"Julia B. Haager\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S1537781421000670\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract This article argues that reformers’ racial nativism, belief in the power of eugenics to improve society, and desire to restrict US citizenship to certain racial groups contributed to reproductive and eugenic curriculum used by early public-school sex education programs. It utilizes newspaper accounts and archival records from the headquarters of the American Social Hygiene Association, Committee of Fourteen, United Neighborhood Houses, and Child Study Association in New York City to answer several crucial questions: What dangers did each organization attribute to adolescent sexuality and reproduction? How did each envision its role in societal improvement and in the sex education movement? What did these reform organizations consider as the ideal relationship between the home, school, and society? While the existing scholarship explains how each of these organizations fit into the larger historical context of progressive reform, examining them separately downplays the degree to which ideas about race, reproduction, immigration, and US citizenship circulated among reformers, especially as leaders of these groups worked across organizational lines to promote sex education.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43534,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era\",\"volume\":\"21 1\",\"pages\":\"74 - 92\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537781421000670\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537781421000670","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要本文认为,改革者的种族本土主义、对优生学改善社会的力量的信念,以及将美国公民身份限制在某些种族群体的愿望,促成了早期公立学校性教育项目使用的生殖和优生学课程。它利用美国社会卫生协会总部、十四人委员会、联合邻里协会和纽约市儿童研究协会的报纸报道和档案记录来回答几个关键问题:每个组织都将青少年性行为和生殖归因于哪些危险?每个人是如何看待自己在社会进步和性教育运动中的作用的?这些改革组织认为家庭、学校和社会之间的理想关系是什么?虽然现有的学术研究解释了这些组织中的每一个是如何融入进步改革的更大历史背景的,但对它们的单独研究淡化了关于种族、生殖、移民和美国公民身份的思想在改革者中传播的程度,尤其是当这些团体的领导人跨越组织界限推动性教育时。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
“Sex Education’s Many Sides”: Eugenics and Sex Education in New York City’s Progressive Reform Organizations
Abstract This article argues that reformers’ racial nativism, belief in the power of eugenics to improve society, and desire to restrict US citizenship to certain racial groups contributed to reproductive and eugenic curriculum used by early public-school sex education programs. It utilizes newspaper accounts and archival records from the headquarters of the American Social Hygiene Association, Committee of Fourteen, United Neighborhood Houses, and Child Study Association in New York City to answer several crucial questions: What dangers did each organization attribute to adolescent sexuality and reproduction? How did each envision its role in societal improvement and in the sex education movement? What did these reform organizations consider as the ideal relationship between the home, school, and society? While the existing scholarship explains how each of these organizations fit into the larger historical context of progressive reform, examining them separately downplays the degree to which ideas about race, reproduction, immigration, and US citizenship circulated among reformers, especially as leaders of these groups worked across organizational lines to promote sex education.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
51
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信