Well, that screws the eugenics movement, doesn\’t it?

J K Rowling, the creator of the Harry Potter novels and one of Britain’s most famous lone parents, has discovered she comes from a long line of single mothers while taking part in the BBC genealogy series Who Do You Think You Are?.

Recall that what actually happened with eugenics was that those birds who dropped their knickers outside marriage ended up being sterilised.

5 thoughts on “Well, that screws the eugenics movement, doesn\’t it?”

  1. @ JuliaM. Meeiow! Rowling wrote well enough to become a very rich lady from her own efforts. If you assess good writing to be the ability to communicate effectively, rowling’s done that in spades. Hopefully, your turn will come.

  2. Never having read any of her books – though I have to say they do make compelling stories on the hands of film-makers – one could never find fault with Jo Murray’s business skills.

  3. So Much For Subtlety

    The assumption seems to be that if one person produces a bunch of derivative works of fairly mediocre standard, this somehow off sets all the other damage that the millions of single mothers inflict, literally single handedly, on Britain.

    I don’t see it myself. I don’t accept genetics as an argument for much, but if anything surely she is proving the point – bad, stupid, self destructive behaviour runs in families. If her grandmother (and all the other single Mothers of the time) had been sterilized, we would be better off. As immoral as that policy would have been.

    Tim adds: “(and all the other single Mothers of the time) had been sterilized, we would be better off.”

    As a descendant of at least one Victorian era “single mother”, one who shagged and birthed outside marriage, I’d suggest, from the host of this site to you, that you can fuck right off matey.

    This is, of course, only on this specific point. Do come back again and talk about other things, but on this one no, fuck right off.

  4. Since you have commented on Eugenics, you might be interested to know that the Society for the Study of Social Biology “is in the process of renaming itself to the Society of Biodemography and Social Biology (SBSB)” according to its current website http://www.usc.edu/dept/gero/sssb/.

    There is a new Board of Directors – the first to be publicly announced since 1999; the journal has been renamed Biodemography and Social Biology.

    There are no population controllers on the new Board. However the Population Council has issued a defiant statement by John Bongaarts, former Board member, to the effect that it plans to continue its de-population activities in Africa and elsewhere.

    The change reflects an attempt by the American eugenics society to grapple with the situation of low, low fertility which now exists in all the most powerful countries in the world (Germany, Russia, Japan, China, South Korea, France, Italy, Spain) except the US which has low fertility.

    The change is based on a new version of eugenics called biodemography which proposes to replace the post-Nazi version of eugenics that has prevailed since the end of World War II. Biodemography’s intellectual center is the Max Planck Institute of Demographic Research in Rostock, Germany. But it was founded in the United States by a series of grants from the Behavioral and Social Research division of the National Institute of Aging and NIH. This is the first time since the Nazi era that a government has openly sponsored a version of eugenics. The NIH grants funded an initial research project in 1987, the Medfly Project, and then workshops and books which initially discussed the Medfly Project. These discussions expanded in theme and significance throughout the Nineties. After 1999 biodemography ceased to be an internal reform and became a power struggle. For ten years the Society elected no new officers or directors. In 2007 the Society journal ceased publication. When normal activity resumed the journal was called Biodemography and Social Biology and the Society was renaming itself Society of Biodemography and Social Biology. I think we know who won. And it behooves us to understand the winners, to understand biodemography.

    The founder of biodemography and of the Max Planck Institute of Demographic Research is Professor James Vaupel of Duke University, the co-founder of the Medfly Project, whose influence can be symbolized by the fact that he was invited to the 2011 Bilderburg Conference. The most important book of the Nineties for biodemography was Between Zeus and the Salmon and the preface to this book is an excellent introduction to the goals and methods of biodemography. It is online at the National Academy Press website. The goals of Vaupel’s German institute were set forth by Professor Kenneth Wachter in 2003 when Wachter gave the keynote speech on the occasion of the opening of the newest headquarters of the Max Planck Institute of Demographic Research (MPIDR). This is online at the MPIDR website http://www.demographic-research.org/Volumes/Vol9/4/9-4.pdf. The chief intellectual tool of the biodemographers is an attempt to prove the influence of genetics on behavior by uniting genome wide analysis with social surveys. Their goals and methods are set forth in the preface to Cells and Surveys which is online at the National Academy Press. Some of their “results” in this enterprise are online in the abstracts of the two Integrating Genetics and Social Surveys Conferences which were held at the University of Colorado in May of 2010 and 2011. http://www.colorado.edu/ibs/CUPC/conferences/IGSS_2011/ ; http://www.colorado.edu/ibs/CUPC/conferences/IGSS_2010/.
    Apparently there is a liberal gene and a conservative gene, a fundraising gene, and a getting-mugged-twice-gene – to mention only a few.

    The Eugenics Watch

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *