Can rich, white ladies be effective feminists? In the court of public opinion these days, it seems the answer is […]
She probably doesn’t want my Progressive feminist sympathy, but I’m giving it to her anyway: Thoughts on the Republican Debate, Donald Trump, and Fox’s Megyn Kelly
Was it just me, or was Thursday night’s Republican debate deeply, deeply weird? The entire event seemed farcical, as though […]
Outlander: A Story for Historians
While heading out for a quick lunch last week, I found myself in the elevator with a colleague from my […]
Female Presidential Candidates Aren’t the Answer: Republicans and the Reframing of the War on Women in 2016
There seems to be some confusion about what the controversial term “the Republican war on women” actually means. Most became […]
A Short History of the Penis, Masculinity, and American Feminism
If you haven’t heard of Claire Wyckoff, the San Francisco woman who copywrites by day for a global advertising firm […]
“A singularly intricate situation has developed in Washington”: Some Historical Background on Hobby Lobby
By Lauren MacIvor Thompson
If Progressive Era birth control reformer Mary Ware Dennett hadn’t been cremated in 1947 immediately following her death, she’d be rolling over in her grave today. Yesterday’s Supreme Court decision in Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. (or Burwell as the decision was handed down) has abruptly called forward again the long legal story of the fight for reproductive rights. Other landmark cases along this path have included Griswold v. Connecticut (1965); Roe v. Wade (1973); Webster v. Reproductive Health Services (1989); Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992), and somewhat more recently, Gonzales v. Carhart (2007). What’s Dennett got to do with all of this and why does it matter? We have to go back eight-five years ago to examine Dennett’s activism and her legal case, to understand the political background for Hobby Lobby.
