In 2009, I witnessed a woman die after sustaining several blood clots to her brain. She was a mother of three. The blood clots formed after she started taking a daily birth control regimen. At the time, I was a registered nurse working in a trauma level 1 neuro ICU. This is a unit that receives complex brain and spinal cord presentations.
The young woman I watched die was just one of many cases involving deep vein thrombosis (DVTs) that traveled to the brain, lungs, or heart in women who used oral contraception. A clot that lodges in the vessels leading into any one of these organs can completely cut off the blood supply. Within minutes, a woman can pass away.
The War On Women Starts With A Pill
Since 1960, tens of thousands of women have died from complications directly related to oral contraception. Other non-oral birth control measures such as NuvaRing are also backed by terrifying statistics on morbidity and mortality linked to their use. A silent epidemic has emerged among contraception’s most avid consumers, white women, since it was first released to the markets.
Birth control has been linked to a number of adverse health conditions. These include cardiovascular arterial disease, heart disease and stroke, breast and other gynecological cancers, shrinking brain tissue and structural anomalies, the growth of rare brain tumors, and diabetes.
This is far from an exhaustive list of long-term health conditions that could result from taking the pill. And yet, 98% of women in the United States will, at some point in their lives, take it to prevent pregnancy. Oral contraception is also wildly popular in Europe. In 1990, a commission from the National Academy of the Sciences called for the United States to “catch up” to Europe in its use of birth control. At that time, European fertility rates had fallen to the lowest level in history, with some Eurozone states posting rates of 1.1 children per woman. It is well-known that such rates of reproduction are unsustainable and will create a “demographic winter,” which is a phenomenon that is already taking effect in many European nations, the U.S., and Canada.
Birth Control: Feminist Eugenics Have Killed More People Than Hitlerian Eugenics
There is reason to believe that modern feminism, supported by eugenicist Margaret Sanger, is more dangerous than Hitler ever was. Modern feminism has normalized and brought eugenics into the mainstream under the banner of women’s liberation. And it has boiled down its poison into a pill, that is, contraception.
Adolf Hitler has been promoted as the most evil eugenicist in world history. However, there are numerous civilizations throughout history that have practiced or carried out ethnic, racial, or class “cleansing” genocide, and such genocidal tendencies are more common when cultures are forced to become multicultural.
Eugenics under Hitler was based on the Germanic concept of master race, or the Ubermensch, and the ascent to the pinnacle of human achievement. Hitler killed approximately 70,000 people under Action T4, a program that euthanized those perceived as evolutionary underachievers.
Comparatively, the more subtle eugenics program carried out by modern feminism in the United States and Europe has killed significantly more people than Hitler’s Action T4. Where the feminist movement had started primarily as a fight for social and economic standing and religious equality led by reformers like Elizabeth Cady-Stanton in the late 19th century, the tide began shifting as women achieved suffrage and joined the workforce. This is where feminism’s most prominent eugenicist, Margaret Sanger, seized control of the entire movement.
Her plan was concocted in 1955. According to National Geographic:
“In 1955, birth control advocate Margaret Sanger bragged that an American scientist had nearly designed the first contraceptive pill. According to author Jonathan Eig, Sanger claimed that the pill would be ‘an inexpensive, all natural, oral contraceptive that could be eaten like candy’.”
Oral contraception has been around since the 1960s when Enovid was first released to the markets. Enovid was marketed to white women as a tool of achieving revolutionary sexual freedom. And white women jumped at the opportunity. The little pill would be an escape from the dire consequences of a pregnancy, something that was associated with a loose woman, a woman without moral values common to the surrounding culture at the time, a Jezebel. Enovid meant freedom from those labels.
Sanger’s plan for enacting her genocidal regimen was perfect. Market Enovid as a product with vague terminology, a pill to help women with “menstruation.” The truth, though, is that “the pill” was developed with sinister motivations. According to numerous reports, Sanger and the team developing Enovid knew the product was meant to enact temporary sterilization of the womb.
Rewrite History So Truth Can’t Be Known
Revisionist history is easy to carry out and most will simply accept the revision as truth. This has happened to numerous portions of U.S. history, notably slavery as well as European colonization. Almost never are facts about slavery or colonization offered earnestly. Instead, emotions have replaced facts.
Modern feminism doesn’t want you to know that many of its founders and leaders were and are currently eugenicists, as this is an inconvenient truth that can’t be scrubbed from history. Facts have tragically been cast aside, and in place of them feminists proclaim the intellectually dishonest mantra of, “my body, my choice.”
Sanger’s eugenics program is very much alive and well in Europe, in America, in Canada, and in Australia, the countries that comprise “the West.” While Hitler’s regimen ended in 1945, feminism’s regimen continues as a pill swallowed by millions of women everyday. Sanger mourned the fact that society refused to promote “infanticide, exposure of infants, the abandonment of children,” and abortion. Instead of these “primitive” eugenic methods, Sanger sought to control the very place of conception using science.
Here is Margaret Sanger stating her eugenic polemic publicly:
“In the second place, it is not only inevitable, but it is right to control the size of the family for by this control and adjustment we can raise the level and the standards of the human race. While Nature’s way of reducing her numbers is controlled by disease, famine and war, primitive man has achieved the same results by infanticide, exposure of infants, the abandonment of children, and by abortion. But such ways of controlling population is no longer possible for us. We have attained high standards of life, and along the lines of science must we conduct such control. We must begin farther back and control the beginnings of life. We must control conception. This is a better method, it is a more civilized method, for it involves not only greater forethought for others, but finally a higher sanction for the value of life itself.
Society is divided into three groups. Those intelligent and wealthy members of the upper classes who have obtained knowledge of Birth Control and exercise it in regulating the size of their families. They have already benefited by this knowledge, and are today considered the most respectable and moral members of the community. They have only children when they desire, and all society points to them as types that should perpetuate their kind.
The second group is equally intelligent and responsible. They desire to control the size of their families, but are unable to obtain knowledge or to put such available knowledge into practice.
The third are those irresponsible and reckless ones having little regard for the consequence of their acts, or whose religious scruples prevent their exercising control over their numbers. Many of this group are diseased, feeble-minded, and are of the pauper element dependent entirely upon the normal and fit members of society for their support. There is no doubt in the minds of all thinking people that the procreation of this group should be stopped. For if they are not able to support and care for themselves, they should certainly not be allowed to bring offspring into this world for others to look after. We do not believe that filling the earth with misery, poverty and disease is moral. And it is our desire and intention to carry on our crusade until the perpetuation of such conditions has ceased.”