What do you think?
Rate this book
Reproductive Wrongs: A Short History of Bad Ideas About Women
A bracing feminist chronicle of the history of the West told through seven texts, exposing where our most virulent ideas about women came from.
The dangerous belief that granting women reproductive freedom poses a threat to “traditional” values is a myth that has long prospered in American politics, playing an especially vicious role in the development of totalitarianism in the West. How did such damaging ideas arise?
In Reproductive Wrongs, acclaimed translator and cultural historian Sarah Ruden exposes how ideologies that oppress women and families in the service of power took hold. Ruden traces a sweeping history through her trenchant analysis of seven pieces of literature that, she argues, marked key inflection points across two thousand years. From propagandistic poetry written by Ovid in the early Roman Empire to the biography of an evangelical American “abortion survivor,” Ruden lays bare how doctrines of control over women were invented and propagated.
Scathing and vital, Reproductive Wrongs unearths the evolution of a right–wing radicalism that endures to this day, when half of the US population is losing access to basic human rights.
The dangerous belief that granting women reproductive freedom poses a threat to “traditional” values is a myth that has long prospered in American politics, playing an especially vicious role in the development of totalitarianism in the West. How did such damaging ideas arise?
In Reproductive Wrongs, acclaimed translator and cultural historian Sarah Ruden exposes how ideologies that oppress women and families in the service of power took hold. Ruden traces a sweeping history through her trenchant analysis of seven pieces of literature that, she argues, marked key inflection points across two thousand years. From propagandistic poetry written by Ovid in the early Roman Empire to the biography of an evangelical American “abortion survivor,” Ruden lays bare how doctrines of control over women were invented and propagated.
Scathing and vital, Reproductive Wrongs unearths the evolution of a right–wing radicalism that endures to this day, when half of the US population is losing access to basic human rights.
240 pages, Hardcover
First published March 3, 2026
About the author
Sarah Ruden
25 books122 followersSarah Elizabeth Ruden is an American writer of poetry, essays, translations of Classic literature, and popularizations of Biblical philology, religious criticism and interpretation.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 150 reviews
April 23, 2026
This book is an examination of the ways movements throughout history have sought to limit women’s bodily autonomy. Some parts were definitely more interesting to me than others. I found my eyes glazing over a bit during the lengthy amount of time focused on antiquity, but I was absolutely RIVETED by the examinations of the claims of a purported “abortion survivor.” If you, like me, have mixed levels of interest in history, this might be a good one to get from the library so you can skip around to the most compelling parts. But if the Roman Empire is your Roman Empire, I think you’ll enjoy the whole book!
March 28, 2026
Ruden is a classicist, and this is an area I know little about, so if she's gonna tell me Ovid wrote some of the first anti-abortion screeds and that St. Augustine was a nasty little freak, I'm inclined to believe her. It's when we jump forward to Dickens that there starts to be a problem: Ruden doesn't know what the fuck she's talking about. Or, worse: she's deliberately reading Dickens' work in bad faith, in order to push an argument that...isn't even very coherent?
Ruden is claiming that Dickens used his fiction as a way to convince Victorians to have large families, especially poor Victorians who he considered inferior (what?), as a way of controlling women and promoting capitalism (?). Now, I'm no Dickens stan, and there's plenty to be critiqued in his work, including his portrayal of women, and even how he allowed the culture and morals of his time to influence his work. But this feels like a major reach, especially when Ruden straight up admits she's using one of his most minor and inconsequential works as the basis for this.
Her lack of academic rigor in this chapter makes me distrust the rest of what Ruden says -- and this is compounded when, in the next chapter, she goes: yeah, Margaret Sanger worked with the Klan, but she wasn't a racist.
Sure, Jan.
Anyway: this is condescendingly written and I don't trust its scholarship. As there are far better books covering most aspects of this topic, would not recommend.
Ruden is claiming that Dickens used his fiction as a way to convince Victorians to have large families, especially poor Victorians who he considered inferior (what?), as a way of controlling women and promoting capitalism (?). Now, I'm no Dickens stan, and there's plenty to be critiqued in his work, including his portrayal of women, and even how he allowed the culture and morals of his time to influence his work. But this feels like a major reach, especially when Ruden straight up admits she's using one of his most minor and inconsequential works as the basis for this.
Her lack of academic rigor in this chapter makes me distrust the rest of what Ruden says -- and this is compounded when, in the next chapter, she goes: yeah, Margaret Sanger worked with the Klan, but she wasn't a racist.
Sure, Jan.
Anyway: this is condescendingly written and I don't trust its scholarship. As there are far better books covering most aspects of this topic, would not recommend.
Read
April 15, 2026Pozostawiam bez oceny, bo przyznaję, że przez to, że słuchałam audiobooka po angielsku to na pewno wszystkiego nie wyłapałam. Książki chyba nie polecam - całość składa się z rodziałów, które przedstawiają poglądy jakiejś konkretnej znanej osoby (np. Dickensa czy Marie Stopes) na sprawy aborcji, ciąży, roli kobiet itd., czy są to poglądy jakoś udokumentowane - tego nie wiem, bo w audio nie ma bibliografii. Czy sam zamysł na książkę jest interesujący? Wg mnie - nie.
February 21, 2026
Thanks to NetGalley for the eARC of this book.
I really wanted to love this book. Indeed, I loved a tremendous number of individual ideas, anecdotes, and histories imparted by the author throughout each of the seven chapters. I was indeed adequately horrified, stunned, and scoffing in turn at each direct quote from a man or woman in the past, who the author posits as being the central figures in creating the backwards and harmful ideas about women in their roles in child rearing, autonomy, and their relation to men.
What was most frightening of all was the fact that these ideas ranging from thousands of years ago to only decades ago are still with us. They are in my own religious upbringing, in the minds of people I still know, and perpetuated in ways big and small, particularly in the legal policies of modern America.
Overall, the book unfortunately suffered from a convolution of writing style that had me rereading sentences or paragraphs five or six times just to understand the main thing I was supposed to get out of it, as well as a bit of “ when all you have as a hammer, everything seems like a nail” syndrome. I know this book was laser focused on harmful ideas from the past that still resonate strongly today, but each of the attributions could still feel like a bit of a stretch at times.
Overall, very much worth reading in order to gain clarity about some of the most contentious topics of our time and their historical roots.
I really wanted to love this book. Indeed, I loved a tremendous number of individual ideas, anecdotes, and histories imparted by the author throughout each of the seven chapters. I was indeed adequately horrified, stunned, and scoffing in turn at each direct quote from a man or woman in the past, who the author posits as being the central figures in creating the backwards and harmful ideas about women in their roles in child rearing, autonomy, and their relation to men.
What was most frightening of all was the fact that these ideas ranging from thousands of years ago to only decades ago are still with us. They are in my own religious upbringing, in the minds of people I still know, and perpetuated in ways big and small, particularly in the legal policies of modern America.
Overall, the book unfortunately suffered from a convolution of writing style that had me rereading sentences or paragraphs five or six times just to understand the main thing I was supposed to get out of it, as well as a bit of “ when all you have as a hammer, everything seems like a nail” syndrome. I know this book was laser focused on harmful ideas from the past that still resonate strongly today, but each of the attributions could still feel like a bit of a stretch at times.
Overall, very much worth reading in order to gain clarity about some of the most contentious topics of our time and their historical roots.
March 22, 2026
Read this for the bookmark but it was toughhh. Good content and informative but it often was spinning circles around old philosophers that I lost the plot
May 11, 2026
Bizarre revisionist history with a condescending, white-feminist tone. The ideas are presented without nuance and often stretched to fit the author's argument.
I just don’t think it’s the feminist argument you think it is when one set of women’s “freedoms” existed on the backs of slave labor:
“Motherhood in traditional pagan society was not designed to be a burden… a typical matron was not oppressed by housework or childcare, as even modest households kept slaves to tend babies… In contrast, a Christian mother… labored more than a pagan wife of the same class.” Ruden completely sanitizes ancient Roman culture in this chapter, ignoring the issues of poor or enslaved women just to prove her point about how Roman women had it better than early Christian women.
Then there was this strange, condescending passage concerning what she refers to as“the huge American popularity of stranger adoption” which she credits to Dickens, then gives some of her own commentary:
“[The Bible’s] infertility dramas… would be meaningless if children had been thought able to fall perfectly into place in strange homes through the operations of the divine will; that is, if children were interchangeable.” The wording felt mean-spirited towards adoption as a whole, and was also off-topic and unnecessary. Most of the book felt like this; a lot of prattering on about a philosopher or a writer or a famous person, with some loosely related commentary tacked on at the end.
But she really lost me when she argued that Margaret Sanger’s “miracles of tact and pragmatism” are what allowed her to cooperate with the Ku Klux Klan…while also insisting that Sanger couldn’t have been a racist. Hmm, okay.
I just don’t think it’s the feminist argument you think it is when one set of women’s “freedoms” existed on the backs of slave labor:
“Motherhood in traditional pagan society was not designed to be a burden… a typical matron was not oppressed by housework or childcare, as even modest households kept slaves to tend babies… In contrast, a Christian mother… labored more than a pagan wife of the same class.” Ruden completely sanitizes ancient Roman culture in this chapter, ignoring the issues of poor or enslaved women just to prove her point about how Roman women had it better than early Christian women.
Then there was this strange, condescending passage concerning what she refers to as“the huge American popularity of stranger adoption” which she credits to Dickens, then gives some of her own commentary:
“[The Bible’s] infertility dramas… would be meaningless if children had been thought able to fall perfectly into place in strange homes through the operations of the divine will; that is, if children were interchangeable.” The wording felt mean-spirited towards adoption as a whole, and was also off-topic and unnecessary. Most of the book felt like this; a lot of prattering on about a philosopher or a writer or a famous person, with some loosely related commentary tacked on at the end.
But she really lost me when she argued that Margaret Sanger’s “miracles of tact and pragmatism” are what allowed her to cooperate with the Ku Klux Klan…while also insisting that Sanger couldn’t have been a racist. Hmm, okay.
March 3, 2026
Absurd and bewildering. Truly, the propaganda it takes to keep women down is incredible. How is it that we're still having to fight the same fights over and over again, have the same goddamn conversations? I am sick and tired of the patriarchy. All those "advancements" and we're still all fucking miserable.
March 20, 2026
2.5 stars, rounded up
This book had some interesting takes, and I was appreciative of its exploration of early Christianity. However, the author acknowledges early on that her focus is on the western world, but I found this to be a thinly veiled excuse for white feminism. The author is a classicist, so I understand the early focus on Europe. It’s the more contemporary look at history where “women” lacks any intersectionality, typically meaning “white women.” She looks at eugenics but the focus is somehow on wealthy white women. Meanwhile, she regularly uses The Handmaid’s Tale as a comparison to the plight of white women, but she never acknowledges that it was the actual reality of enslaved black women. Again, some interesting points but I noticed quite a few times that people were being excluded from the conversation.
This book had some interesting takes, and I was appreciative of its exploration of early Christianity. However, the author acknowledges early on that her focus is on the western world, but I found this to be a thinly veiled excuse for white feminism. The author is a classicist, so I understand the early focus on Europe. It’s the more contemporary look at history where “women” lacks any intersectionality, typically meaning “white women.” She looks at eugenics but the focus is somehow on wealthy white women. Meanwhile, she regularly uses The Handmaid’s Tale as a comparison to the plight of white women, but she never acknowledges that it was the actual reality of enslaved black women. Again, some interesting points but I noticed quite a few times that people were being excluded from the conversation.
March 26, 2026
Very disappointed in this one, I think the synopsis was very misleading…There were a few stories and pieces of information that were interesting but for the most part it was nothing new. Most importantly though I felt like the writing style completely ruined any chance this book had of being good. The sentences were so long and convoluted by the time I got to the end of one I didn’t even know what was being said. I also feel like her tone throughout the entire book is so intense, angry, and dripping with sarcasm and hatred that it takes away from the content. Like I understand why but damn girl we get it! It felt almost performative. I was expecting shocking specific stories about beliefs people held about women through history….instead i feel like I got a bunch of long drawn out history lessons about different men from hundreds of years ago and their literature- with a vague, rushed explanation of how their thoughts about women were oppressive (like duh tell me something I don’t know)
Not at all what I was expecting :(
Not at all what I was expecting :(
March 3, 2026
Thank you Netgalley for the eARC.
This was a deeply necessary, if occasionally difficult, exploration of the historical roots of modern reproductive politics. The author sets out to trace the "DNA" of our current crisis back through centuries of religious and social thought, and for the most part, the results are as illuminating as they are infuriating.
The strength of this book lies in its anecdotes. Seeing direct quotes from historical figures—men and women who shaped the foundational "norms" of child-rearing and autonomy—is staggering. The author successfully demonstrates that these are not dead ideas; they are "zombie" concepts that have been rebranded for the 21st century. As someone who recognized these patterns from my own religious upbringing, the book felt incredibly validating and, at times, frighteningly relevant to modern American policy.
While the content is vital, the delivery was often a barrier. I frequently found myself trapped in a "convolution of style," needing to reread paragraphs multiple times to find the core thesis. The prose tends to get in its own way, making an already heavy subject feel even more dense.
Additionally, the book occasionally falls into the "hammer and nail" trap. In its laser-focus on how past harms influence the present, some of the historical attributions felt like a stretch—as if every historical event was being forced to fit a very specific modern narrative.
Despite the dense writing and a few reaching arguments, this is a book very much worth reading. It provides much-needed clarity on why our current "contentious topics" are so deeply entrenched. It’s a sobering reminder that we aren't just fighting new battles; we’re fighting ghosts that have been haunting us for millennia.
This was a deeply necessary, if occasionally difficult, exploration of the historical roots of modern reproductive politics. The author sets out to trace the "DNA" of our current crisis back through centuries of religious and social thought, and for the most part, the results are as illuminating as they are infuriating.
The strength of this book lies in its anecdotes. Seeing direct quotes from historical figures—men and women who shaped the foundational "norms" of child-rearing and autonomy—is staggering. The author successfully demonstrates that these are not dead ideas; they are "zombie" concepts that have been rebranded for the 21st century. As someone who recognized these patterns from my own religious upbringing, the book felt incredibly validating and, at times, frighteningly relevant to modern American policy.
While the content is vital, the delivery was often a barrier. I frequently found myself trapped in a "convolution of style," needing to reread paragraphs multiple times to find the core thesis. The prose tends to get in its own way, making an already heavy subject feel even more dense.
Additionally, the book occasionally falls into the "hammer and nail" trap. In its laser-focus on how past harms influence the present, some of the historical attributions felt like a stretch—as if every historical event was being forced to fit a very specific modern narrative.
Despite the dense writing and a few reaching arguments, this is a book very much worth reading. It provides much-needed clarity on why our current "contentious topics" are so deeply entrenched. It’s a sobering reminder that we aren't just fighting new battles; we’re fighting ghosts that have been haunting us for millennia.
March 29, 2026
Στο προηγούμενο ριβιού μου είπα οτι δεν έχω διαβάσει ακόμα κακό βιβλίο εφέτο αλλά είμαι γρουσούζα μάλλον.
2 αστέρια γιατί ναι οκ δίκιο έχει, αι γκες;;; Δηλαδή δεν είπε κάτι κακό ή λάθος ξέρωγω. Απλά ήταν white woman white womaning. Μιλούσε συνέχεια με επίκεντρο τους πόρους και τις δυνατότητες γυναικών ανωτέρας τάξης που οκ αν δεν μπορούσε να έχει πρόσβαση σε έκτρωση η γυναίκα του Αγρίππα ποιος θα είχε!! Βέβαια πολλάκις έγινε αναφορά στο Handmaid's Tale, οπότε έπρεπε να το μυριστώ εξαρχής. Καμία αναφορά σε χαμηλότερα κοινωνικά στρώματα, περίεργα apologetic για πράγματα που ένα τέτοιο βιβλίο δεν θα έπρεπε να θεωρεί καν ταμπού: το βιβλίο ξεκινά με preface όπου λέει πόσο καλούς φίλους έχει που να είναι καθολικοί, και μετά περνά 7 κεφάλαια όπου κρίνει (δικαίως) τον χριστιανισμό για όσα έχει διαπράξει εναντίον της αναπαραγωγικής αυτονομίας των γυναικών. Το ένιωσα κάπως λες και προσπαθούσε να κάνει το βιβλίο της πιο marketable/μη controversial, για ένα θέμα που ανέκαθεν ήταν αμφιλεγόμενο και μάλλον δεν θα σταματήσει να είναι. Λες κι έλεγε "δεν είναι ΟΛΟΙ οι χριστιανοί έτσι", που οκ, μας τα παν κι άλλοι. Παρόλα αυτά ένα μεγάλο θετικό ήταν πως απόλαυσα αρκετά το πρώτο κεφάλαιο για τον Οβίδιο, η συγγραφέας έχει εμφανώς πάθος για λατινική ποίηση:)
2 αστέρια γιατί ναι οκ δίκιο έχει, αι γκες;;; Δηλαδή δεν είπε κάτι κακό ή λάθος ξέρωγω. Απλά ήταν white woman white womaning. Μιλούσε συνέχεια με επίκεντρο τους πόρους και τις δυνατότητες γυναικών ανωτέρας τάξης που οκ αν δεν μπορούσε να έχει πρόσβαση σε έκτρωση η γυναίκα του Αγρίππα ποιος θα είχε!! Βέβαια πολλάκις έγινε αναφορά στο Handmaid's Tale, οπότε έπρεπε να το μυριστώ εξαρχής. Καμία αναφορά σε χαμηλότερα κοινωνικά στρώματα, περίεργα apologetic για πράγματα που ένα τέτοιο βιβλίο δεν θα έπρεπε να θεωρεί καν ταμπού: το βιβλίο ξεκινά με preface όπου λέει πόσο καλούς φίλους έχει που να είναι καθολικοί, και μετά περνά 7 κεφάλαια όπου κρίνει (δικαίως) τον χριστιανισμό για όσα έχει διαπράξει εναντίον της αναπαραγωγικής αυτονομίας των γυναικών. Το ένιωσα κάπως λες και προσπαθούσε να κάνει το βιβλίο της πιο marketable/μη controversial, για ένα θέμα που ανέκαθεν ήταν αμφιλεγόμενο και μάλλον δεν θα σταματήσει να είναι. Λες κι έλεγε "δεν είναι ΟΛΟΙ οι χριστιανοί έτσι", που οκ, μας τα παν κι άλλοι. Παρόλα αυτά ένα μεγάλο θετικό ήταν πως απόλαυσα αρκετά το πρώτο κεφάλαιο για τον Οβίδιο, η συγγραφέας έχει εμφανώς πάθος για λατινική ποίηση:)
March 26, 2026
I really wanted to go in this and find more reasons to hate men beyond the existing multitudes of reasons, but this book didn't do it for me :/
First, the language is so convoluted and dense which makes it hard to follow her point, I know my brain has rotted a little but surely it's not that bad. The overall ideas that I did get were interesting but seemed to only focus on a narrow slight of western and specifically wealth white feminism.
First, the language is so convoluted and dense which makes it hard to follow her point, I know my brain has rotted a little but surely it's not that bad. The overall ideas that I did get were interesting but seemed to only focus on a narrow slight of western and specifically wealth white feminism.
February 13, 2026
Thank you to NetGalley and the publisher for this ARC!
I found this was a really interesting look at a world in crisis about reproductive rights, although it was a short look in some ways and I would have loved to have more information and context. With that said, I am absolutely aware that could have been a whole other book and a whole other can of worms, so this is a really good introductory essay into women’s bodies, reproduction, and where we went wrong.
I found the chapters about the ancient world fascinating, but probably the most interesting to me was the examination of Dickens, his impact on the popular culture and zeitgeist, and the legacy of the Victorian era. It’s no secret that Queen Victoria had significant issues in having as many children as she did in the modern era, but I imagine at the time she would have been seen as the epitome of motherly grace. The way the ‘big family’ concept wormed into society and took over the norm was fascinating.
These kinds of texts are absolutely vital to us understanding the world we’re currently in and how we can make it a better place than what we’ve found in it. I love that it contained so many zingers of knowledge and ammunition for further discussion. I do feel like some of the content in the Marie Stopes chapter could have been edited a bit better, and I would have loved some more info all around, but as a whole? This is well worth the read to understand our modern age and where we need to go from here.
I found this was a really interesting look at a world in crisis about reproductive rights, although it was a short look in some ways and I would have loved to have more information and context. With that said, I am absolutely aware that could have been a whole other book and a whole other can of worms, so this is a really good introductory essay into women’s bodies, reproduction, and where we went wrong.
I found the chapters about the ancient world fascinating, but probably the most interesting to me was the examination of Dickens, his impact on the popular culture and zeitgeist, and the legacy of the Victorian era. It’s no secret that Queen Victoria had significant issues in having as many children as she did in the modern era, but I imagine at the time she would have been seen as the epitome of motherly grace. The way the ‘big family’ concept wormed into society and took over the norm was fascinating.
These kinds of texts are absolutely vital to us understanding the world we’re currently in and how we can make it a better place than what we’ve found in it. I love that it contained so many zingers of knowledge and ammunition for further discussion. I do feel like some of the content in the Marie Stopes chapter could have been edited a bit better, and I would have loved some more info all around, but as a whole? This is well worth the read to understand our modern age and where we need to go from here.
March 24, 2026
super quick audiobook seething with rage. a historical look at the thirst for power that targets those that have consistently been denied autonomy. covers a lot from the idealized large family, religious values, and the roots of birth control in eugenics. read this immediately after watching the louis theroux: Inside the manosphere and wow ladies, shit is not looking good
March 24, 2026
Not an easy book to read, but I feel like the whole point of the sporadically written style was to spark curiosity, whether or not it was successful.
March 10, 2026
3.5 stars rounded up.
Sarah Ruden is a classicist who was convinced to write about the history of how men talk about women, basically. She was confused by the suggestion of this task (as was I, initially), but it is a necessary examination in a time when reproductive rights are being constantly and consistently attacked. In Reproductive Wrongs, Ruden looks into historical writings related to abortion to examine how these writings impacted future views on reproductive rights. It's incredibly interesting, particularly when she puts these writings into context that many of us non-classical historians would not know. While this wasn't the most interesting piece of work, I think it will be incredibly useful to those working in this field.
I received this book through a GoodReads giveaway, thank you W.W. Norton and Company!
Sarah Ruden is a classicist who was convinced to write about the history of how men talk about women, basically. She was confused by the suggestion of this task (as was I, initially), but it is a necessary examination in a time when reproductive rights are being constantly and consistently attacked. In Reproductive Wrongs, Ruden looks into historical writings related to abortion to examine how these writings impacted future views on reproductive rights. It's incredibly interesting, particularly when she puts these writings into context that many of us non-classical historians would not know. While this wasn't the most interesting piece of work, I think it will be incredibly useful to those working in this field.
I received this book through a GoodReads giveaway, thank you W.W. Norton and Company!
March 4, 2026
Super interesting book, that makes you question the world (and men) even more. Didn’t think that was possible, but here we are.
March 25, 2026
Sarah Ruden’s Reproductive Wrongs really opened my eyes to how harmful ideas about women and reproduction have lasted for centuries. From ancient texts to modern times, women’s bodies have been controlled, blamed, and punished, often in the name of religion, morality, or science.
The book starts with Ovid and ancient myths, showing how women were seen as dangerous or manipulative, especially sexually. Early Christian thought, like Augustine’s, framed female sexuality as sinful and tied control over women’s bodies to God and morality. There is shocking hypocrisy in Greek mythology where men (and also women) could do horrible things to living children (like feeding them to their own fathers), but abortion was considered the ultimate crime.
Ruden also shows how ideas about love and romance were used to control women. Pagan and Christian beliefs treated romance as a distraction for men that kept them from higher goals, while today we celebrate love and marriage as something to enjoy with someone you like being around.
The witch hunts were horrible to read. Women were punished violently, often just for existing or knowing things about their bodies. Men’s impulses were blamed on women, not themselves. Because of course the fact that good Christian men couldn't control themselves around women must mean that they had enchanted them into thinking sinful thoughts.... Seriously?
Even famous figures like Charles Dickens could preach empathy but treat their own wives and children badly, showing that harmful ideas can exist even in supposedly good people.
The book also highlights how women’s bodies have been controlled in practical ways. Lying on your back to give birth is still the norm in many places, even though squatting or using a birthing chair is safer and easier, because it is more convenient for the doctor. Religion, especially Christianity, has been a big part of all this, used to justify laws against abortion and punishments for women. Pro-life often means protecting the fetus while completely ignoring the woman, and some women were even sentenced to death for having an abortion. Reading about the brutal ways abortions were done in history was grueling, and the fact that women still do not fully control their own bodies today is heartbreaking.
This book is frustrating, enraging, and eye-opening. It shows how deeply these ideas are built into society. As a young woman myself, it angers me to my very core that these stories are not fiction, but still a current truth. If only women had full control over what happens to their own bodies, the world would be a much better place.
The book starts with Ovid and ancient myths, showing how women were seen as dangerous or manipulative, especially sexually. Early Christian thought, like Augustine’s, framed female sexuality as sinful and tied control over women’s bodies to God and morality. There is shocking hypocrisy in Greek mythology where men (and also women) could do horrible things to living children (like feeding them to their own fathers), but abortion was considered the ultimate crime.
Ruden also shows how ideas about love and romance were used to control women. Pagan and Christian beliefs treated romance as a distraction for men that kept them from higher goals, while today we celebrate love and marriage as something to enjoy with someone you like being around.
The witch hunts were horrible to read. Women were punished violently, often just for existing or knowing things about their bodies. Men’s impulses were blamed on women, not themselves. Because of course the fact that good Christian men couldn't control themselves around women must mean that they had enchanted them into thinking sinful thoughts.... Seriously?
Even famous figures like Charles Dickens could preach empathy but treat their own wives and children badly, showing that harmful ideas can exist even in supposedly good people.
The book also highlights how women’s bodies have been controlled in practical ways. Lying on your back to give birth is still the norm in many places, even though squatting or using a birthing chair is safer and easier, because it is more convenient for the doctor. Religion, especially Christianity, has been a big part of all this, used to justify laws against abortion and punishments for women. Pro-life often means protecting the fetus while completely ignoring the woman, and some women were even sentenced to death for having an abortion. Reading about the brutal ways abortions were done in history was grueling, and the fact that women still do not fully control their own bodies today is heartbreaking.
This book is frustrating, enraging, and eye-opening. It shows how deeply these ideas are built into society. As a young woman myself, it angers me to my very core that these stories are not fiction, but still a current truth. If only women had full control over what happens to their own bodies, the world would be a much better place.
April 30, 2026
For someone who reads and knows a lot about reproductive health and justice, I was very impressed to learn a lot from this book. It’s well written, accessible, and (almost) most importantly: short.
March 21, 2026
Thanks to NetGalley for this ARC.
The research of this book is sound, but the convoluted writing style did a huge disservice. The fact that it only focuses on strictly Western ideas is also something that bothered me.
I would have found the book to be more fleshed out if it examined ideas on women & reproduction from across the globe.
The research of this book is sound, but the convoluted writing style did a huge disservice. The fact that it only focuses on strictly Western ideas is also something that bothered me.
I would have found the book to be more fleshed out if it examined ideas on women & reproduction from across the globe.
Review of advance copy received from Goodreads Giveaways
A brilliant and challenging book about horrific history.
April 1, 2026
Writing bad books won’t bring back Roe v Wade.
Sarah Ruden is a serious scholar, but this book is a polemic, not serious scholarship, complete with multiple obligatory Handmaid’s Tale references (although they weren’t as bad as the multiple times Heinrich Kramer was compared to Hitler). It promises a lot just from the title, but not only does it restrict itself to a select few western countries, but it is concerned largely with only abortion– other reproductive topics come up, but none excites her rage more than the fact that some people and countries aren’t pro-choice. Exactly why abortion should be seen as women’s most important right throughout history is never explained, and even when her geographical focus is someplace else, Ruden’s mind is always on America, hurting both the flow of the book and the historical contexts of the examined works. She somewhat justifies this by saying that the material (especially ancient material) she discusses had a profound influence on America, but Britain was also shaped by the classics and Christianity, yet their pro-abortion legislation grows more extreme by the day, despite polling indicating that vanishingly few people actually support this.
Ruden begins the book with the Roman poet Ovid, who wrote two poems where he strongly denounced abortion. She argues that Romans didn’t care about abortion until Augustus’ moral legislation and likens Ovid to a propagandist whose texts, its spot in this book implies, had long lasting consequences; despite saying in the very same chapter that Augustus’ laws didn’t work. Things do not improve from here, with the chapter on early modern witch hunts being the lowest point. Not only is Ruden a “Dark Ages” believer, but she makes the insane claim that anti-abortion sentiment was a large factor in witch hunts. No explanation is provided for why, in countries like Iceland and Normandy, accused witches were predominantly male. Ruden’s rage at convictions by testimony is anachronistic, since this was how early modern trials operated. The text at the center of the chapter is the infamous Hammer of Witches, but it was not the only witch treatise ever written, and some modern scholars have argued that its influence has been overblown. Ruden would have known this if she only looked at its Wikipedia page, which I know she did, because she cites it as a source for the Hammer of Witches’ popularity.
Despite being at the center of the book, Ruden's attitude to women is schizophrenic. Few women in the periods under review recorded their thoughts on abortion for posterity, and it might be a mistake to assume they had the same views as the author. Ruden criticizes Gianna Jessen’s biographer for portraying her birth mother as weak-willed and easily manipulated, but Ruden’s own comments indicate she views women seeking abortions as vulnerable victims; she is also strangely reluctant to believe that Jessen is sincerely against abortion. If early Christianity was as viciously misogynistic as she portrays it, you’d have to wonder why any women converted at all, but the words she has for Augustine’s mother Monica, whom he dearly loved, are strangely hostile. Ruden laments Ovid’s anti-abortion views, but herself says that abortion in antiquity benefitted men more than women. All of the authors’ profiled views are treated as anathema to women, with no acknowledgement of the scores of women you’ll see at anti-abortion marches.
But the worst thing about this book is that it actually made me feel sorry for Ruden’s opponents. She often decries “conservatives” without distinguishing between different strands of conservative thought or even quoting them, unless they’re the subject of the chapter. She criticizes their hyperbolic rhetoric, but never realizes that hers is just as unpleasant and exaggerated– one statement that had me reaching for my pearls was the implication that disabled people and people from abusive homes are better off not being born. Most of all, her dogma is that being against abortion is a pathology or social contagion– a term she uses rather cruelly to describe a support group for abortion survivors (i.e, people who survive an abortion attempt)-- and so she never considers that, instead of just being misogynists, abortion opponents genuinely consider abortion to be murder, an idea that the book doesn't bother to comprehensively refute. In fact, this is the only logical explanation I can find for their militancy. There are thus no theories offered on how people’s minds can be changed.
A fundamentally stupid book that will harm Ruden’s cause more than help it.
Sarah Ruden is a serious scholar, but this book is a polemic, not serious scholarship, complete with multiple obligatory Handmaid’s Tale references (although they weren’t as bad as the multiple times Heinrich Kramer was compared to Hitler). It promises a lot just from the title, but not only does it restrict itself to a select few western countries, but it is concerned largely with only abortion– other reproductive topics come up, but none excites her rage more than the fact that some people and countries aren’t pro-choice. Exactly why abortion should be seen as women’s most important right throughout history is never explained, and even when her geographical focus is someplace else, Ruden’s mind is always on America, hurting both the flow of the book and the historical contexts of the examined works. She somewhat justifies this by saying that the material (especially ancient material) she discusses had a profound influence on America, but Britain was also shaped by the classics and Christianity, yet their pro-abortion legislation grows more extreme by the day, despite polling indicating that vanishingly few people actually support this.
Ruden begins the book with the Roman poet Ovid, who wrote two poems where he strongly denounced abortion. She argues that Romans didn’t care about abortion until Augustus’ moral legislation and likens Ovid to a propagandist whose texts, its spot in this book implies, had long lasting consequences; despite saying in the very same chapter that Augustus’ laws didn’t work. Things do not improve from here, with the chapter on early modern witch hunts being the lowest point. Not only is Ruden a “Dark Ages” believer, but she makes the insane claim that anti-abortion sentiment was a large factor in witch hunts. No explanation is provided for why, in countries like Iceland and Normandy, accused witches were predominantly male. Ruden’s rage at convictions by testimony is anachronistic, since this was how early modern trials operated. The text at the center of the chapter is the infamous Hammer of Witches, but it was not the only witch treatise ever written, and some modern scholars have argued that its influence has been overblown. Ruden would have known this if she only looked at its Wikipedia page, which I know she did, because she cites it as a source for the Hammer of Witches’ popularity.
Despite being at the center of the book, Ruden's attitude to women is schizophrenic. Few women in the periods under review recorded their thoughts on abortion for posterity, and it might be a mistake to assume they had the same views as the author. Ruden criticizes Gianna Jessen’s biographer for portraying her birth mother as weak-willed and easily manipulated, but Ruden’s own comments indicate she views women seeking abortions as vulnerable victims; she is also strangely reluctant to believe that Jessen is sincerely against abortion. If early Christianity was as viciously misogynistic as she portrays it, you’d have to wonder why any women converted at all, but the words she has for Augustine’s mother Monica, whom he dearly loved, are strangely hostile. Ruden laments Ovid’s anti-abortion views, but herself says that abortion in antiquity benefitted men more than women. All of the authors’ profiled views are treated as anathema to women, with no acknowledgement of the scores of women you’ll see at anti-abortion marches.
But the worst thing about this book is that it actually made me feel sorry for Ruden’s opponents. She often decries “conservatives” without distinguishing between different strands of conservative thought or even quoting them, unless they’re the subject of the chapter. She criticizes their hyperbolic rhetoric, but never realizes that hers is just as unpleasant and exaggerated– one statement that had me reaching for my pearls was the implication that disabled people and people from abusive homes are better off not being born. Most of all, her dogma is that being against abortion is a pathology or social contagion– a term she uses rather cruelly to describe a support group for abortion survivors (i.e, people who survive an abortion attempt)-- and so she never considers that, instead of just being misogynists, abortion opponents genuinely consider abortion to be murder, an idea that the book doesn't bother to comprehensively refute. In fact, this is the only logical explanation I can find for their militancy. There are thus no theories offered on how people’s minds can be changed.
A fundamentally stupid book that will harm Ruden’s cause more than help it.
March 26, 2026
I thought perhaps this could be a useful look into the arguments and logic of the other side of things politically, and give some actual insight and understanding. Alas, it was a nasty-toned and fear-mongering diatribe of the more radical views of the left, starting from the erroneous notion that anyone remotely conservative is simply evil and plotting against the future of humanity. I found the acknowledgement of the horrors of eugenics but the inability to admit Margaret Sanger's influence from that movement to be particularly enlightening into this author's very close-minded perspective. I came for some middle ground; I left sorely disappointed.
I started out making a list of just quick things that were said in the book that were easily disputed or discounted, but it became so clear that the author put basically no research into her work that it would be silly to go through it all; I would end up rewriting an entire book for her. It became especially apparent in the last chapter when she said that she could have done research and investigate the main character in her critique of the pro-life movement, but decided not to because it was pointless. Which, I suppose, was at least her being honest - it would indeed be pointless to get to know her subject better, since her mind was already made up and wouldn't be changed by something as trivial as facts and truth.
This was such a poorly worded and ill-researched book that it basically fights for the opposite side of things - to the point where I'm almost wondering if she is playing mind games with the left and offering up these terrible "arguments" as a way to make it easier for conservatives to debunk their opponents. If you are truly a left-leaning person, I only recommend this book as a "what-not-to-do" guide.
I started out making a list of just quick things that were said in the book that were easily disputed or discounted, but it became so clear that the author put basically no research into her work that it would be silly to go through it all; I would end up rewriting an entire book for her. It became especially apparent in the last chapter when she said that she could have done research and investigate the main character in her critique of the pro-life movement, but decided not to because it was pointless. Which, I suppose, was at least her being honest - it would indeed be pointless to get to know her subject better, since her mind was already made up and wouldn't be changed by something as trivial as facts and truth.
This was such a poorly worded and ill-researched book that it basically fights for the opposite side of things - to the point where I'm almost wondering if she is playing mind games with the left and offering up these terrible "arguments" as a way to make it easier for conservatives to debunk their opponents. If you are truly a left-leaning person, I only recommend this book as a "what-not-to-do" guide.
Read
March 31, 2026Je ne peux pas mettre de note.
On est sur un essai qui va s'intéresser à l'instrumentisation et au contrôle du corps des femmes en général, et en s'intéressant au cas de l'avortement. Depuis l'Antiquité Romaine en passant par Charles Dickens, l'autrice va nous présenter sa version.
Je n'ai pas du tout les compétences ou la formation pour avoir un regard critique sur ce qu'elle dit. Je trouve sa vision intéressante et pas dénué de bon sens mais je ne peux pas valider ou infirmer ses conclusions.
Il est toutefois glaçant de constater que de tout temps le corps des femmes a été contrôlé par les hommes pour différentes raisons. La question aussi de l'influence de certain(e)s et de leurs idées (moyennes au mieux) sans qu'ils n'en aient vraiment conscience.
C'est intéressant et quelque part sans jugement.
L'autrice essaye vraiment de rester objective dans ses écrits même si ce n'est pas toujours possible, elle essaye alors de ne pas se positionner de manière trop frontale.
Un texte glaçant et la dernière partie sur les "pro life" américain est inquiétante car les choses ne vont pas en s'arrangeant.
On est sur un essai qui va s'intéresser à l'instrumentisation et au contrôle du corps des femmes en général, et en s'intéressant au cas de l'avortement. Depuis l'Antiquité Romaine en passant par Charles Dickens, l'autrice va nous présenter sa version.
Je n'ai pas du tout les compétences ou la formation pour avoir un regard critique sur ce qu'elle dit. Je trouve sa vision intéressante et pas dénué de bon sens mais je ne peux pas valider ou infirmer ses conclusions.
Il est toutefois glaçant de constater que de tout temps le corps des femmes a été contrôlé par les hommes pour différentes raisons. La question aussi de l'influence de certain(e)s et de leurs idées (moyennes au mieux) sans qu'ils n'en aient vraiment conscience.
C'est intéressant et quelque part sans jugement.
L'autrice essaye vraiment de rester objective dans ses écrits même si ce n'est pas toujours possible, elle essaye alors de ne pas se positionner de manière trop frontale.
Un texte glaçant et la dernière partie sur les "pro life" américain est inquiétante car les choses ne vont pas en s'arrangeant.
April 22, 2026
3 stars
This book really keeps you thinking, I definitely did long after I finished it. This book re-examines several historical events and ideas that affect women's reproductive choices. It also looks at the people who played big roles and why they were relevant. I found reading this had extremely valuable information, it did seem to focus on very earlier times in history. I would have liked a bit more diversity in the information and sources that they were drawing from which is why I only gave this story a 3 stars. The chapters gave the real meat of data, while making it easy to follow and did a great job at not dumping too much information. It did get a repetitive feel to it. Overall it was an interesting read and really got a person thinking.
I received an advanced ebook, via Netgalley. This review is my own honest opinion.
This book really keeps you thinking, I definitely did long after I finished it. This book re-examines several historical events and ideas that affect women's reproductive choices. It also looks at the people who played big roles and why they were relevant. I found reading this had extremely valuable information, it did seem to focus on very earlier times in history. I would have liked a bit more diversity in the information and sources that they were drawing from which is why I only gave this story a 3 stars. The chapters gave the real meat of data, while making it easy to follow and did a great job at not dumping too much information. It did get a repetitive feel to it. Overall it was an interesting read and really got a person thinking.
I received an advanced ebook, via Netgalley. This review is my own honest opinion.
April 22, 2026
A very short history of strictly European/American views from history. Overall dry and vehemently liberal with an extremely critical tone against Christianity. I feel like there was some substance lacking. There could have been more. Left me feeling pretty meh, and didn’t change my pro-choice status. Definitely is not going to convince the pro-life people to change sides, if that was the intention.
April 10, 2026
An impassioned deep dive into the history of how women have had to fight against men trying to control their bodies. From ancient times to the present campaign to abolish abortion rights. This was informative and enraging and a quick read that is sure to inspire more women to stand up for their rights. Highly recommended for fans of books like It's not hysteria or All in her head.
Did Not Finish
April 10, 2026DNF @ 9% and I feel truly sorry for this. I feel like the overarching connections this author are making between the past and the modern day are a proper reach, but I could have tolerated that, it was the convoluted writing style that had me and my one brain cell in a stranglehold. I feel like the author wrote this book for herself and not for others.
May 6, 2026
The reproductive wrongs span ages and societies and while this book gave a good overview of several, I was expecting more of an in depth look and call to action. It also is very pro choice from the jump (not that I’m complaining) which I’m sure limits the audience that accepts its message or even reads past the first chapter. Again, great overview I just think I had higher hopes for the impact.
March 10, 2026
3.5 for me.
A fascinating and often unsettling look at the long history of suspicion and control directed at women and women’s bodies. What struck me most is how systemic the cruelty is, embedded across legal, medical, and religious structures for centuries and still visible today. It’s not just about abortion, but the wider reality of inequality, violence, and mistrust that women continue to live with. At times it genuinely reminded me of The Handmaid's Tale. I sometimes admired the argument more than I loved the writing, but it’s a thought-provoking and worthwhile read.
A fascinating and often unsettling look at the long history of suspicion and control directed at women and women’s bodies. What struck me most is how systemic the cruelty is, embedded across legal, medical, and religious structures for centuries and still visible today. It’s not just about abortion, but the wider reality of inequality, violence, and mistrust that women continue to live with. At times it genuinely reminded me of The Handmaid's Tale. I sometimes admired the argument more than I loved the writing, but it’s a thought-provoking and worthwhile read.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 150 reviews