https://padlet.com/professordianapaulin/ud8uq5iwuxuveb5i Choose one claim/idea/belief that was represented in the film (a single story). Does the film complicate or reinforce it? Explain how or why. (For example, what does the film teach us about the label "feebleminded"?) en-us 2021-09-29 22:52:03 UTC 2021-10-14 16:01:38 UTC hello@padlet.com daniellenois https://padlet.com/professordianapaulin/ud8uq5iwuxuveb5i/wish/1814572324 The film complicates the constitutionality of the Lynchburg colony by providing the legal basis of the establishment and how that foundation is faulty. With the popularity of eugenics in the twentieth century, the legal case Buck v. Bell (1926) made it constitutional to sterilize children if their offspring had a chance of being “feebleminded” or having hereditary defects. This focused on the disabled, drug abusers, sexual assault victims, and other marginalized groups. Oliver Holms Jr, a Supreme Court Justice at the time, upheld that it is in society’s best interest to lessen the burden of the feebleminded through sterilization. The basis of this case is that Viviane Dodd, a child condemned to Lynchburg, was feebleminded. However, Viviane was an honor roll student at her school, proving that being “feebleminded” isn’t hereditary. This faulty foundation for the Lynchburg colony allowed for the non-consensual sterilization of teenagers, servitude, brutality, and even death. This complexity of the film allows for the audience to understand the thought process of the eugenicists at Lynchburg and be disgusted by how flawed and bigoted their thinking was.]]> 2021-10-13 16:43:01 UTC https://padlet.com/professordianapaulin/ud8uq5iwuxuveb5i/wish/1814572324 gracesullivan8 https://padlet.com/professordianapaulin/ud8uq5iwuxuveb5i/wish/1815008351 The film reinforces the idea that Social Engineering by sterilization was an incredibly widespread and established custom in the Unites States from the 1910’s into the 1970’s. Although it might seem impossible to us now, the concept of Eugenics was accepted and practiced in many states and communities in the U.S.- not just in Lynchburg. Producing “fit families” was the concern of many thanks to the widespread ideas of Charles Darwin and his “survival of the fittest” slogan. States competed to see who could have the highest mass-sterilization count. In addition to vegetable and livestock competitions, local fairs held “fit” family competitions. Eugenics was an accepted social construct and was deemed constitutional to enforce by sterilizations. Social Engineering via the sterilization of “unfit” people is an American tragedy. However, it is all too easy to villainize historical characters. The widespread acceptance of eugenics raises the question: Did people think eugenics was really in the best interest for society? Did people think they were looking out for the best interest of America’s future when they decided to forcibly prevent “subpar” humans from reproducing? Perhaps this is so, and what would cause them to believe that such an extreme practice- on that was considered invasive even by contemporaries- was necessary?]]> 2021-10-13 19:40:56 UTC https://padlet.com/professordianapaulin/ud8uq5iwuxuveb5i/wish/1815008351 hattiewags https://padlet.com/professordianapaulin/ud8uq5iwuxuveb5i/wish/1815019915 The Lynchburg Story represents the single story that women who have children out of wedlock are morally inferior and are unfit to take care of kids. This is exemplified by the part of the film that discusses the Supreme Court case Buck v. Bell. In this case, Harry Laughlin, a prominent Eugenicist, gave expert testimony stating that Carrie Buck, a teen who got pregnant and had a child due to rape, was "socially inadequate" and "delinquent." Though Buck's rape and consequent childbirth were completely out of her control and unrelated to her personality, Laughlin completely wrote her off and reinforced this single story. He did this to further his agenda of establishing feeblemindedness as hereditary in order to allow sexual sterilization. While this idea was prevalent at the time of the Lynchburg colony, it is still widespread today. Many teen mothers who are unmarried still face judgment and have their moral characters questioned. Though many young mothers are extremely capable, this single story prevails. ]]> 2021-10-13 19:47:09 UTC https://padlet.com/professordianapaulin/ud8uq5iwuxuveb5i/wish/1815019915 adunster1 https://padlet.com/professordianapaulin/ud8uq5iwuxuveb5i/wish/1815381618 The film about The Lynchburg Story tells the single story of the poor, uneducated, white families in Virginia from the 20’s to the 70’s. These families were targeted by the state of Virginia to uphold the state’s popular views of eugenics; they wanted to create an honorable state and eliminate those who were seen to be “feebleminded”. An inhumane thought to today’s society, eugenics was once praised and fully enforced. Virginia officials in the 20’s-70’s followed Charles Darwin’s concept of natural selection in order to pick and choose the “fittest” of those who resided in the state. In order to rid the state of the “feebleminded”, those who were seen to be mentally unfit to sustain a well-respected life, people were sent to Lynchburg to be evaluated and eventually be sexually sterilized. But how is it that they can deem someone to be “feebleminded”? For the state of Virginia, they simply went off of one’s socioeconomic status. This is exemplified when the daughter of Carrie Buck, Vivian Dodd’s grade books were examined after her death at age 8. To no surprise, she was a bright student who even made the honor roll. In Vivian’s case, although she was never sent to Lynchburg, she was seen to be “feebleminded” solely because her mother and grandmother were seen as unfit. All they needed was a nurse to consider her to be a “peculiar” 6-month old to make a grand statement that there were cases of a three generational heritage of mental instability that was then used to justify forced sterilizations. This reveals that our nation, amongst other nations, are willing to jump to conclusions regarding the mental capacity of those in the lower socioeconomic classes and take charge against their health. This is done not to benefit communities as a whole, but solely to create a stronger popularity and strength over others.]]> 2021-10-13 23:54:03 UTC https://padlet.com/professordianapaulin/ud8uq5iwuxuveb5i/wish/1815381618 SamiyaMehammed https://padlet.com/professordianapaulin/ud8uq5iwuxuveb5i/wish/1815674553 The single stories that the film about The Lynchburg story talks about are of the poor people, who are referred as "paupers",people with physical disabilities(blind, deaf) and those with intellectual disability who are referred as "feebleminded". These people were being sent to The Lynchburg colony and had to undergo a compulsory sterilisation without knowing what they were actually doing. For-example; those with low financial status were committed to The Lynchburg colony just because they were thought to have children who were considered  "socially inadequate" by the court. One example is Carrie who came from a poor family and was raped and got pregnant by a nephew of her foster parent and this lead her to being sent to The Lynchburg.  I found it very surprising how this rule was applied at some point in the past and people's right on their own bodies were unapologetically taken, which has most probably caused a lifetime scars. 

]]> 2021-10-14 02:04:42 UTC https://padlet.com/professordianapaulin/ud8uq5iwuxuveb5i/wish/1815674553 theresastrouse https://padlet.com/professordianapaulin/ud8uq5iwuxuveb5i/wish/1815744647 The Lynchburg Story represents and reinforces the single story of those, whether through free will or persuasion of others, who believed that the actions taken during the eugenics movement benefited America. The film reinforced this as it talked about how widespread this view became. It is easy now to look back on the events and wonder how anyone could possibly justify it but the fact remains that not just a handful but most justified these acts. Eugenics was once praised globally as it attempted to cleanse an entire population of people. How could something that seems so cruel now, not even 100 years ago be so widely accepted? By praying on women in lower social economic settings and young girls placed in awful situations with no way out supporters of eugenics came out as the hero. They were ridding the world of druggies and future "feebleminded" people the rest of society would inevitably have to care for. A simple twist of the story and it became easy to convince people across America and throughout the world of the saving grace that would be eugenics. In a short matter of time the movement came to full speed, forcefully sterilizing hundreds of young women while simultaneously being applauded and praised by our nations highest court. It wasn't until we saw people we viewed our enemies, armies depicted as immoral using the same tactics to cleanse an entire race that many could understand the horror at hand. ]]> 2021-10-14 02:32:56 UTC https://padlet.com/professordianapaulin/ud8uq5iwuxuveb5i/wish/1815744647 rhillenbrand13 https://padlet.com/professordianapaulin/ud8uq5iwuxuveb5i/wish/1815893278 The Lynchburg Story narrates the story of the forceful sterilization of young teenagers and children between the 1920s and 1970s in Virginia. This inhumane practice aimed to eradicate those considered “feebleminded” and generate a state filled with only the most suitable people. At the time, this practice was widely praised for developing a better future but is now widely regarded as morally and ethically incorrect. In the story, Lynchburg evaluated and determined whether or not a person was seen as sound enough to bring a child into this world. If deemed unfit, this patient was subject to being sterilized, ridding Lynchburg of any respect, and eliminating any patient self-advocacy. Eugenics as a whole was a the time seen as something that would benefit the whole city, and maybe even eventually country; however, in reality, it turned people against each other and placed a stigma around those with physical and mental disabilities. ]]> 2021-10-14 03:39:02 UTC https://padlet.com/professordianapaulin/ud8uq5iwuxuveb5i/wish/1815893278 rileymorgan4 https://padlet.com/professordianapaulin/ud8uq5iwuxuveb5i/wish/1815896972 The Lynchburg Story represents the single idea that a person has to be an ideal candidate to reproduce, rather than just willing and have the desire to reproduce. It represents the idea that the human race has to be modified and controlled with the intent of having a problem free society. While the film heavily discourages this idea and shows the negative impact that it had on thousands of people, the contents within the film tell us how prominent sterilization was in the US while lynchburg was still in operation and while sterilization was still deemed fit under the Constitution. The film even draws the similarities to the sterilization that the Nazi's performed under Hitler's rule to over 225,000 people. Just as Virginia's government was trying to limit the number of "feeble minded" or mentally incapable people in our society, Hitler was trying to create a human race that only consisted of white, generically attractive people. The scientists working with the film distinguish how this single story damaged the lives of so many people, and added to my overall perception of why having a single perspective on any topic or idea is damaging not only to me but to other people as well.]]> 2021-10-14 03:40:47 UTC https://padlet.com/professordianapaulin/ud8uq5iwuxuveb5i/wish/1815896972 jennicacam https://padlet.com/professordianapaulin/ud8uq5iwuxuveb5i/wish/1816015636 The film complicates the constitutionality and legality of the Lynchburg colony. At this time, eugenicists were determined to overcome all opposition to sterilization. Coupled with the popularity of eugenics and their determination, the case Buck v. Bell (1924) made it constitutional to sterilize people who were deemed “feebleminded” without their permission. They sexually sterilize children out of fear that they were likely to have children that were socially inadequate. Because this practice was protected under rule of law and often done without the victims’ knowledge, it was hard to contest or prove what they were doing was wrong. Even though we know nowadays that it is not morally correct for people to make decisions for others about their future and offspring, it was widely accepted at the time. A settlement case was brought against Lynchburg, but they knew that it was unlikely that the judge was going to deem something unconstitutional that the Supreme Court previously said was constitutional. It was not until 1985, that the case was ultimately settled with the Commonwealth agreeing to launch a media campaign to inform victims of their sterilization and to provide counseling services for victims. However, they did not pay for reversal operations. ]]> 2021-10-14 04:45:42 UTC https://padlet.com/professordianapaulin/ud8uq5iwuxuveb5i/wish/1816015636 paulinarivera3 https://padlet.com/professordianapaulin/ud8uq5iwuxuveb5i/wish/1816077712 The Lynchburg Story is a documentary that covers the lives of those who came from nothing or were perceived as less of a person due to their economic status, education, or social background, and how these circumstances impacted their lifestyle. The film takes place in Virginia, particularly Lynchburg, between the late 1920s and the early 1970s. Eugenics is a contentious issue, and in its most generic definition, it is the process by which the government and those in power determine and regulate who has the right to reproduce based on what would be considered "socially acceptable". The film complicates the topic of Eugenics in the sense that it was legal at the time yet it was viewed negatively upon those who were directly affected. In most cases, those who were in power reinforced Eugenics with the belief that it was for the "betterment" of Virginia. It wasn't until about the mid/late 1980's in which Eugenics was overturned and called off because it was finally seen as inhumane and the proposition that nobody can determine what other's do with their own lives was etched. ]]> 2021-10-14 05:20:52 UTC https://padlet.com/professordianapaulin/ud8uq5iwuxuveb5i/wish/1816077712 lucasteinert2 https://padlet.com/professordianapaulin/ud8uq5iwuxuveb5i/wish/1816176208 The Lynchburg Story depicts the unfortunate establishment of the eugenics ideology in the United States right around the early 1900's. It tells the single story of the Lynchburg Colony and the state of Virginia's attack on its people. States began to pass eugenic sterilization laws, allowing the state to sterilize those who they deemed unfit for reproduction. Though, those targetted had something in common. They were usually uneducated and financially struggling, and/or had physical or intellectual disabilities. The state, now having the power, began to forcefully sterilize the 'feebleminded' (those with intellectual disabilities) as well as the poor and uneducated as they were not deemed fit for reproduction as they are not considered to be socially adequate. Quite astonishing to learn about considering how far society has come since. The narrative back then in the 1950's was the pursuit of 'fit families'. These being families who did not report any physical or intellectual disabilities and were not financially challenged. The social engineering phenomenon that is the Lynchburg Story is a terrible tragedy to the world as it foreshadowed and fostered some terrible ideology via the Hitler regime. The criticism of Dr. Laughlin is not to be mistaken, but what also must be looked at is the fact that his idea was adopted and implemented all across the United States, as well as the world, and it must be asked: How did the majority of the United States support this? How could the majority of the United States support this? It is clear the negative ramifications that this caused as the film was able to show the damage it caused.]]> 2021-10-14 06:21:53 UTC https://padlet.com/professordianapaulin/ud8uq5iwuxuveb5i/wish/1816176208