“For U.F.W.A. Convention: Segregation or Sexual Sterilization?” in The United Farmers of Alberta, January 16, 1928

January 16, 1928. An article titled “For U.F.W.A. Convention: Segregation or Sexual Sterilization?” was published by The United Farmers of Alberta. The article reports a resolution of the Camrose United Farm Women of Alberta who were opposed to the Sexual Sterilization Act and, instead, supported efforts of segregation. The Camrose U.F.W.A.’s reasons for opposing the Act included the number of foreign patients in mental hospitals, the possibility for mentally deficient individuals to become self-serving and, most notably, the fact that sterilization would not take away sexual desire and that sterilization is an invasion of human rights.

This article can be found online in the Peel Collection here.

-Laura Shaw

  • For U.F.W.A. Convention: Segregation or Sexual Sterilization? (1928, January 16). The United Farmers of Alberta, 4–5.

“For U.F.W.A. Convention: Segregation or Sexual Sterilization?” in The United Farmers of Alberta, January 16, 1928

January 16, 1928. An article titled “For U.F.W.A. Convention: Segregation or Sexual Sterilization?” was published by The United Farmers of Alberta. The article reports a resolution of the Camrose United Farm Women of Alberta who were opposed to the Sexual Sterilization Act and, instead, supported efforts of segregation. The Camrose U.F.W.A.’s reasons for opposing the Act included the number of foreign patients in mental hospitals, the possibility for mentally deficient individuals to become self-serving and, most notably, the fact that sterilization would not take away sexual desire and that sterilization is an invasion of human rights.

This article can be found online in the Peel Collection here.

-Laura Shaw

  • For U.F.W.A. Convention: Segregation or Sexual Sterilization? (1928, January 16). The United Farmers of Alberta, 4–5.