First let me congratulate you, Michelle, on writing an excellent and important book. One reason it is important is that it is written by a young woman for a new generation that needs to know this history so that it can continue the slow progression toward greater justice for women in this world.

For me, much of the book was living history, but for those who are younger or were not directly involved in expanding the principles of reproductive self-determination in the U.S. and globally--whether the rationale du jour was population, women's health, or women's rights/feminism--you've documented critical events in the trajectory toward greater justice for women.

That the trajectory has not always gone in a straight line, nor has it gone smoothly from one point to another is simply a reflection of the fact that changing the gender power balance is so profound, it inevitably generates vicious backlash. The backlash comes from fear of change, and anger that the change means or will mean a diminishing of power for the dominant group. In that sense, their fear and anger make sense because in fact we are changing the world. For the better, we think. Power is not a finite pie or a zero sum game, we think. Gender equality is better for men as well as women, we think. But those who feel their place at the top of the hill getting shaky don't agree, and they fight back.

I never believed, nor do I believe now, that there is necessarily a conflict between the various motivations for wanting women to have access to birth control and safe, legal abortion.

My direct experience with many of the population control advocates you describe (quite accurately by the way) is that by and large they were men of the era in which men were uncomfortable with talking about sex, childbirth, or much of anything else warm and wet. But they could talk comfortably about demographics. And they had the power and money at their disposal to get access to family planning to women.

Ed. note: This post was originally a comment, posted here.