Fannie Lou Hamer (1917-1977), American civil rights leader, fought in the 1960s for blacks to have the right to vote. She went on to help blacks get elected and to fight against poverty.
Famous phrase: I am sick and tired of being sick and tired.
In most southern states few blacks could vote – despite what the constitution said! In Hamer’s home state of Mississippi, for example, only 5% of blacks could vote. Whites kept most blacks from voting with poll taxes, literacy tests, arrest, violence and, as in the case of Medgar Evers, even murder.
Hamer’s parents were sharecroppers: they worked planting and picking cotton for a white man who, in return, allowed them to live on his land in an old, falling-apart house and paid them just enough to keep them alive but not enough to stop their hunger pains. His dog lived better than they did.
In 1923 at age six she started working. By age 12 her family had saved enough to buy a tractor and rent some land. But then a white neighbour poisoned their cows and they were worse off than before! On that day Hamer promised herself to “do something for the black man of the South if it would cost my life.”
She had done well in school but after six years of education she had to drop out to help support the family, working 12 to 14 hours a day.
She got married in 1944. Against her will a white doctor made it so she could not have children! She adopted two girls.
In 1962 she went to register to vote. They made her take a test and she failed. The white man her family sharecropped for found out and kicked her off his land, telling her never to come back. Later some white men shot at her.
She went to work for SNCC to get blacks to register to vote. She was a great speaker. Her words and actions gave people hope and courage.
She tried to register a second time and again she failed the test. But the third time, in 1963, she passed!
A few months later the police arrested her and had two black prisoners beat her up so badly she could not move her legs. They damaged a kidney and an eye for life. Martin Luther King found out and sent Andrew Young to get her out of jail.
The Democratic Party in Mississippi only allowed whites to run for office. SNCC set up the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party to run both blacks and whites. In 1964 it got more votes! But despite that it was not allowed in to the Democratic Convention that summer: the president was afraid it would lose him too many white votes in the South.
Hamer protested to the credentials committee. The television networks carried her testimony in full on the evening news. Her story shocked and shamed many whites. A year later Congress passed the Voting Rights Act, outlawing literacy tests, poll taxes and all the rest.
– Abagond, 2010.
See also:
- Martin Luther King Jr
- Medgar Evers
- Selma
- Voting Rights Act
- Jim Crow
- democracy
- eugenics – more on why she could not have children
She got married in 1944. Against her will a white doctor made it so she could not have children!
What?!?!?
I mean, it’s not that this is the only disturbing thing in the story, but that’s horrible!
LikeLike
she truly is an inspiration.
LikeLike
In the African centred approach to history, one of the many Black woman (I am choosing not to use the adjective ‘strong’ here) who was at the forefront of political struggle whether in the Americas or on the African continent.
On a different tact there are some scholars who also suggest that this is one the significant differences between ‘European Women’ and ‘African women’ and the subsequent issue of ‘feminism’
LikeLike
I am sick and tired of being sick and tired of black women who always put black men before themselves!
When will black women put their own needs first?
it’s always ‘for the black man’.
When will black women put black women first?
When will black women start caring for one another?
damnit.
reciprocity is key here.
LikeLike
abagond, you wrote:
“Against her will a white doctor made it so she could not have children!”
This claim is one of several in your post that require some proof.
The claim may be totally false. It might appear to be true because she never became pregnant. But given her lack of education, her understanding of other forces in her life might have caused her to cook up this story.
If she had had gonorrhea, it, as it often does, might have left her sterile. Thus, her story is questionable.
LikeLike
no_slappz,
I don’t know how old you are, but if you are married and over 50, you might ask your wife how many times an Ob-Gyn has prescribed surgery for the slightest of ills. Hysterectomies were the most unnecessary surgeries done to all women and during the early twentieth century sterilization for poor women was prevalent, especially minorities.
I think you are smart enough to Google to get specific info.
You should not be so quick to judge, because I think you might find some of the same horror stories within your own family. Would you assumed they were ignorant or immoral? Over the centuries, all women’s reproductive health has been severely misunderstood or abused.
Also tell you wife that you think Ms. Hamer was too ignorant to understand her own body, not the Black women here.
LikeLike
on Wed 27 Jan 2010 at 12:38:17 Mira
She got married in 1944. Against her will a white doctor made it so she could not have children!
What?!?!?
I mean, it’s not that this is the only disturbing thing in the story, but that’s horrible!
~~A lot of doctors during that time had a god complex. Hathor is correct, not only did they perform surgery on women they thought should have it, against their will, they also sterilized women without their consent. There is a lawsuit pending now against a doctor who is alleged to have done this recently. I don’t know if we can use links here. Please delete if not.
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/regional/view/20100106public_backlash_stuns_sterilized_mother_of_nine_woman_claims_procedure_performed_without_consent/
LikeLike
Links are fine, but if you have the wrong kind of link or too many of them, your comment might not show up right away because it will either get sent to moderation or wind up in the spam filter.
LikeLike
Ahh, ok. Thanks.
LikeLike
what a lady
LikeLike
A bit on Fannie Lou Hamer’s sterilization:
“Diagnosed with a small uterine tumor in 1961, Ms. Hamer checked into the Sunflower City Hospital to have it removed. Without her knowledge or consent, without any indication of medical necessity, the operating physician took the liberty of performing a complete hysterectomy.
Three years later, as a leader of the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party, Ms. Hamer spoke about her experience to an audience in Washington D.C. – telling them that she was one of many black women in her area that had been a victim of a “Mississippi appendectomy” (an unwanted, unrequested and unwarranted hysterectomy given to poor and unsuspecting Black women). According to her research, 60% of the black women in Sunflower County, Mississippi were subjected to postpartum sterilizations at Sunflower City Hospital without their permission. A number of physicians who examined these women after the procedure was performed confirm that the practice of sterilizing Southern Black women through trickery or deceit was widespread.”
Source: http://mississippiappendectomy.wordpress.com/2007/12/06/fannie-lou-hamer/
LikeLike
hathor, you wrote:
“Hysterectomies were the most unnecessary surgeries done to all women and during the early twentieth century sterilization for poor women was prevalent, especially minorities.”
There are several problems with your claim. First, according to the storyline, Hamer married her husband in 1944, when she was 27. Even though it was true that unnecessary hysterectomies were performed routinely, they were NOT performed on newly married women who had not had children.
But abagond wrote: “Against her will a white doctor made it so she could not have children.”
In other words, the preceding statement means the doctor and her husband subjected her, at age 27 or 28, to sterilizing surgery by force for no apparent reason.
Second, the claim does not state she had a hysterectomy. There is no mention other medical conditions. However, in those days plenty of people contracted gonorrhea, but penicillin was a new drug.
Anti-biotics were new in those days and supplies were limited. Moreover, one of the chief after-effects of gonorrhea in women is sterility. Is there any reason to think a woman with a 6th-grade education would speak honestly or with full understanding about her inability to have children?
Meanwhile, if she had an actual surgical procedure, it very well might have been an attempt to stop the advance of something that was expected to otherwise become worse.
You wrote:
“You should not be so quick to judge, because I think you might find some of the same horror stories within your own family.”
My great-grandfather died of syphilis. How’s that?
Meanwhile, several family members — living and dead — were doctors. Among the living is a 90-year-old urologist. From him and other doctors I know about the practice of performing hysterectomies on women entering menopause. Not newly married childless women.
You wrote:
“Would you assumed they were ignorant or immoral?”
The morality is irrelevant. People contract STDs because they are careless and/or ignorant. But at the time Hamer was a young woman, syphilis and gonorrhea were much more dangerous to human health than they were a few years later, after the arrival of penicillin.
But it appears you would rather believe a story about an unlikely possibility rather than a story that seems to fit the situation.
By the way, there is the possibility that she was never able to have children and the reasons were never discovered. Maybe she had endometriosis and her fallopian tubes were clogged? Who knows?
Meanwhile, if she had been forced to undergo sterilization, then her husband had to have agreed to the procedure. That suggests he did not want children. But they adopted two kids, which is powerful evidence he, in fact, wanted kids. Thus, I do not believe the story about a forced sterilization.
You wrote:
“Over the centuries, all women’s reproductive health has been severely misunderstood or abused.”
Over the Centuries? Medicine was laughably primitive until the 20th century. And in many parts of the world, there was no such thing as medicine. With respect to today, even though the medical community has learned a lot, billions of people still believe in medical fantasies and myths.
LikeLike
L said:
“I am sick and tired of being sick and tired of black women who always put black men before themselves!
When will black women put their own needs first?
it’s always ‘for the black man’.
When will black women put black women first?
When will black women start caring for one another?
damnit.
reciprocity is key here.”
Issues much, woman! Gosh, you sound like you’ve got a chip on your shoulder!
LikeLike
abagond, you wrote:
““Diagnosed with a small uterine tumor in 1961, Ms. Hamer checked into the Sunflower City Hospital to have it removed. Without her knowledge or consent, without any indication of medical necessity, the operating physician took the liberty of performing a complete hysterectomy.”
The story is suddenly changing.
It was first stated:
“She got married in 1944. Against her will a white doctor made it so she could not have children.”
The two sentences suggest she was sterilized shortly after her marriage in 1944. But the statement above says she had a uterine tumor removed in 1961 — after 17 years of marriage.
Meanwhile, she died in 1977 at the age of 60. What killed her?
But getting back to the surgery, a hysterectomy is the removal of the uterus. It was stated she had a uterine tumor. The ability of medical science, in 1961, to catch a tumor at an early stage was limited.
As you might know, when it comes to stopping cancer, the standard procedure was to remove a lot of tissue, especially then, when we knew a lot less. The thinking has always been to say Better Safe than Sorry.
Thus, to conclude — today — that performing a hysterectomy to stop the spread of a uterine tumor was wrong, well, that’s just an attempt to create an issue. Especially since this surgery was performed after 17 years of marriage AND because she subsequently died at age 60.
Her early death suggests she might have died of a cancer related to her uterine tumor.
LikeLike
Se had breast cancer and diabetes slappz not uterine cancer
as for the children issue you describe i find that info in only one website
here’s my question: why does this matter?
LikeLike
no_slappz,
I was speaking of one of your female family members having a hysterectomy for questionable reasons.
I was not speaking of the extent of the knowledge of the medical profession, but the unscientific nature of diagnosing disease when it came to women. Many times women’s diseases were seen as psychological dysfunction.
I guess you really couldn’t care less about the facts of that, since you aren’t effected.
LikeLike
I’ve heard about Fannie Lou Hamer before and remember hearing her speak about the Black prisoners who almost beat her to death after being ordered to do so by racist cops.
Makes you shudder to know what Blacks had to go through in this “land of the free” just to get their basic human rights.
Oh well — President Obama will be speaking tonight and the fact that a Black man is the President of these United States shows how long African Americans have come. And yes, I know that there are miles to go.
LikeLike
hathor, you wrote:
“I was speaking of one of your female family members having a hysterectomy for questionable reasons.”
That may have been your question. But it seems you do not understand that the illogic of the direction of your questioning.
Women in my family have had hysterectomies. But their experiences have no connection to Hamer. You are attempting to imply that if ONE woman had a medically unnecessary hysterectomy, then ALL hysterectomies are unnecessary.
However, obviously many hysterectomies are medically necessary, especially in Hamer’s case. She had a uterine tumor that needed removal — when she was 44 — clearly at the end of her potential child-bearing years.
She died at the young age of 60. Was it cancer?
You wrote:
“I was not speaking of the extent of the knowledge of the medical profession, but the unscientific nature of diagnosing disease when it came to women.”
In retrospect, we can say that many 20th-century diagnostic and treatment practices were of questionable merit.
Do you think the day will arrive when we can answer ALL medical questions and know with certainty that a plan of action is beyond challenge?
We will always be in the dark about things at the leading edge of medical treatments. With respect to hysterectomies in menopausal women, are all of them mistakes? Or has the procedure improved some lives?
You wrote:
“Many times women’s diseases were seen as psychological dysfunction.”
In fact, some female problems manifest in psychological ways. Hormone Replacement Therapy is probably the new hysterectomy for menopausal women. But, critics remind women that the Hormone Therapy may cause cancer. No treatment is beyond criticism. Moreover, people willingly seek medical treatments for psychological problems. It is tough to judge the merits.
You wrote:
“I guess you really couldn’t care less about the facts of that, since you aren’t effected.”
I can second-guess doctors all day and all night. But that does not mean The Facts of their decisions are understood by me — or you.
Meanwhile, there are plenty of crazy people in my family. Too many, frankly. One of the craziest died a couple of months ago. My aunt, who suffered from something like schizophrenia, but it wasn’t schizophrenia, and therefore, was never conclusively diagnosed. But eventually she responded to anti-psychotic drugs. She had three husbands and three kids, and now there are worries about the impact of her genes on her grandchildren.
However, before getting the right anti-psychotic drugs she was a terror, and we believe she pushed her wheelchair-bound mother down a staircase, killing her. If a hysterectomy could have altered her behavior for the better, it would have been welcomed.
What’s to be done?
LikeLike
Sorry I’m a lurker on this site but I enjoy the generally informative and thought provoking discussions on this page.
What this case has really made me realize, in looking up Fannie Lou’s info on wiki and a discussion that ensued on the topic there, is that people often refuse to admit that racism exists, black people (minorities in general) are often mistreated in our society-even when given striking proof, even through no fault of their own .
Perhaps the explicit details of Fannie Lou’s case have been incorrectly noted in the wiki entry or this one, but it doesn’t deny the fact that:
1) black patients received substandard medical care in the 60s (and even now; you can read one article Disparities in Cardiac Care J of American College of Cardiology 2004 for more info, but there are so many articles in various fields that show the same thing);
2) minority women (Native Americans and blacks) were forcibly sterilized even into the 70s;
3) not all uterine tumors are cancerous, many are benign and just require removal of the nodule, something they knew back then;
4) black women are at higher risk for these benign endometrial tumors;
5) MDs in the 60s often did things to black patients without their (or their families) consent or knowledge, i.e. one major example the Tuskegee trials.
So it is entirely possible that this or something similar happened to Fannie Lou at some point in her life.
Why is it so hard to just accept that even if it didn’t happen exactly as noted here to Fannie, it probably happened to so many other black/minority women and that is unacceptable? Why must people try to chip away at the minutia when the point is racism/prejudice have done and continue to inflict major damage on minorities in this country. I just get so tired of giving people the proof they ask for about numerous topics but they ignore it because they dont want to admit racism is a problem.
There was a similar discussion on a recent Wash Post article that showed black applicants who have their race indicated on job applications get significantly lower responses than the exact same application from a “white applicant”. Then some person stated “AfAm were always complaining, ‘pull yourselves up by you boot straps’ argument.” How are people supposed to “pull themselves up” when they do everything right, ie these were people with masters degrees etc from prestigious business schools, when despite all of their efforts and accomplishments, their race becomes a hindrance through no fault of their own. But even with facts thrown into their faces some people just dont want to see.
Sorry for the long comment but I had to get that off my chest because it was irritating me, particularly tonight, because of repeated ignorant statements.
LikeLike
Thank you. I completely agree with you.
Those who think the hysterectomy is unbelievable missed the point of the post: that blacks had almost no rights or protection under the law. It was why Hamer was willing to die in order to register to vote.
LikeLike
@B:
Hear! Hear! Very well said. Some people such as the one that shall not be named are dismissive of racism even when it’s plain to see as you mentioned. They just don’t get it and will never get it because they don’t want to get it.
LikeLike
no_slappz,
You say what you do because you have anonymity.
As I said, your attitude has no consequence here, I wonder if you have more empathy in real life?
LikeLike
I did not read all this post – so could be way of mark as perusual ha ha
Reading some of B’s piece reminded me of:
http://www.s193082824.onlinehome.us/
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Issues much, woman! Gosh, you sound like you’ve got a chip on your shoulder!”
Shame tactics lol
I see through you.
LikeLike
hathor, you wrote:
“You say what you do because you have anonymity.”
What? Anonymity? It’s unfortunate that you believe that. I am always willing to share my views — on the internet and in person.
You wrote:
“As I said, your attitude has no consequence here, I wonder if you have more empathy in real life?”
Attitude? Perhaps my “attitude” has no consequence here. But the FACTS, or the absence of them, do have consequences.
You, and others, seem willing to impute anything useful into Hamer’s story. But the FACTS, and the lack of them, get in the way of your narrative.
Again, Hamer died at 60. Did cancer kill her? Was her early death tied to a “female problem”?
LikeLike
b, you wrote:
“3) not all uterine tumors are cancerous, many are benign and just require removal of the nodule, something they knew back then;”
With respect to this post, we are interested in only ONE uterine tumor — Hamer’s. Was her tumor problematic in any way? She died at 60, so perhaps her uterine tumor indicated big trouble was on the way.
You wrote:
“4) black women are at higher risk for these benign endometrial tumors;”
So you are stating there are racial realities about some health risks. Thus, it is reasonable to ask if Hamer’s doctors did the right thing by removing her uterus when she was 44.
You wrote:
“5) MDs in the 60s often did things to black patients without their (or their families) consent or knowledge, i.e. one major example the Tuskegee trials.”
The patients in the Tuskegee trials contracted syphilis in the usual way. The doctors merely recorded its impact. That is far different than deliberately infecting unwitting humans with a disease to see what happens.
LikeLike
no_slappz,
Had you thought that dying at 60 would be due to a stroke or hearth attack, which was a major cause of death at that age. When I was younger, Ms. Hamer is the the same age as my Dad, that is what most black folk seem to die from. I would also say having a damaged kidney might have contributed to an early death.
You see I would draw those conclusions instead of the one you draw.
You are really pushing causal relationship for her death.
LikeLike
hathor, you wrote:
“Had you thought that dying at 60 would be due to a stroke or hearth attack, which was a major cause of death at that age.”
In all my comments about Hamer I asked the question: What killed her?
I got no answer and I have not researched her death. Thus, I do not know what killed her. But I know a stroke or heart attack could have been the cause.
You wrote:
“When I was younger, Ms. Hamer is the the same age as my Dad, that is what most black folk seem to die from.”
Leading causes of death for blacks AND whites include both heart attacks and strokes. Blacks may hold the lead for deaths in both categories, but both are well known to whites.
You wrote:
“I would also say having a damaged kidney might have contributed to an early death.”
Okay. A kidney problem. Maybe. Still, no one has posted about her ACTUAL cause of death. Is the cause of her death a secret? Not likely. The cause is written on her death certificate.
You wrote:
“You see I would draw those conclusions instead of the one you draw.”
Conclusions. That’s where you go wrong. You see a CONCLUSION where you should see several alternatives. The CAUSE of her death is on her death certificate. The FACT is out there, and probably accessible if one of us looks for it.
You wrote:
“You are really pushing causal relationship for her death.”
Oh. Is it a wild-eyed notion to suggest that a woman who had a uterine tumor in 1961 at age 44 subsequently died at age 60 of a related problem? It is an idea that needs checking.
LikeLike
Brilliant post. She seemed like such a strong, resilient person. She’s an inspiration. Just reading briefly about some of what she went through makes the struggles we/I face today seem a little more bareableM
Thanks Aba!
LikeLike
No_slappz:
You said:
“With respect to this post, we are interested in only ONE uterine tumor — Hamer’s. Was her tumor problematic in any way? She died at 60, so perhaps her uterine tumor indicated big trouble was on the way.”
Just cause you wont drop it: Fannie Lou died of Breast Cancer. There is no way that uterine cancer (even if she had it at the hysterectomy decades before, which she most likely did NOT) would have metastasized to the breast. And if I didnt make it clear enough before I’m suggesting that Fannie Lou had endometrial leiomyofibroma (fibroids)-the most likely cause of a uterine “tumor” in a black woman her age. They do not require hysterectomy, esp if small, which sources suggest it was. In any case she or her family should have been INFORMED of the possible complications and should have given consent for a hysterectomy! Anything less is UNETHICAL. But yes things like that were done to minority patients regularly, including forced sterilization! Dont you find that bothersome or have you no feeling!?
You said:
“The patients in the Tuskegee trials contracted syphilis in the usual way. The doctors merely recorded its impact. That is far different than deliberately infecting unwitting humans with a disease to see what happens.”
The issue with the Tuskegee trials was not that researchers infected black patients with syphilis, it is that they refused to TREAT them with penicillin, the standard therapy at that time, once it became available and accepted as the standard therapy in the 40s. This was 10 years after the experiment started and the study went into the 70s! The also refused to educate patients as to the fact their was a CURATIVE treatment available (i.e. that they had other inexpensive options) and prevented patients from accessing other forms of health care to get the treatment. I cant remember the name of one of the books on the trials, but they told people not to see other doctors (because they would “take care of all their medical treatment”), they told other doctors not to treat the enrolled patients. They essential watched people develop primary, secondary and finally tertiary syphilis, a debilitating and deadly disease, knowing there was a safe curative treatment widely available and hindered their ability to receive appropriate care. They also endangered the lives of people outside of the study group because they allowed untreated syphilis to go unchecked in these communities. And to top it all off by the 60-70s syphils was so rare in the US b/c it is easily treated and CURED with a couple of does of PCN, but here was this group of poor marginialized people still suffering its effects because no one they depended on for appropriate medical care would treat them! WTF!
Once again UNETHICAL, IMMORAL, a violation of the Hippocratic oath, and a violation of these people’s rights. If you dont find this objectionable then I have to ask again: have you no feeling?
LikeLike
Hmmm!!…’The hypocritic Oath’…Oh parfon me ‘Hippocractic oath’
Slight keyboard troubles tehre
ha ha
LikeLike
hathor,
I did not suggest the Tuskegee experiment was ethical or acceptable in any way. Unfortunately, it is one of those episodes of which the facts have been distorted into something far far worse than the truth, which was bad enough.
As for Hamer, the story is a changing one. The original post states doctors sterilized her, and it implied the sterilization occurred at the time of her marriage, when she was 27.
As I noted, it appears she had a hysterectomy at age 44. But we have no idea if the procedure was necessary OR whether her husband thought it was a good idea.
The situation is murky. That’s about all you can say.
LikeLike
Thanks for this post. It’s great reading about black women like this 🙂
LikeLike
I love Fannie Lou Hamer. And she is my idol. I hope to be like her! 🙂
LikeLike
I’ve read Fannie Lou Hamer’s biography, and she did get sterilized by a white doctor against her will. Native American women got forcibly sterilized against their will up into the 1970s.
2 things that I love about Fannie Lou Hamer:
— that she had unimpeachable integrity, never any mishandling of funds raised, never choosing personal gain over the greater good
— that she was completely of her community, her appearance and background were completely relatable, she knew people and people trusted her, lawyers knew they could rely on her to pick the best witnesses for a case. All she had to do was drive out to a house and tell the people “We need you to testify for this case about our children’s education. It’s the right thing for our people” and the people would agree and go to court and not back down when white lawyers badgered them.
LikeLike
[…] Fannie Lou Hamer […]
LikeLike
Fannie Lou Hamer was born a hundred years ago today – October 6th 1917.
LikeLike
@ Abagond
Thanks for noting her birth date. F.L. Hamer doesn’t often get the notice she deserves.
LikeLike
Fannie Lou Hamer a true activist and warrior for black Americans. She endured brutality and oppression by law enforcement and she was put in jail for fighting for black Americans trying to obtain the right to vote. And today the Voting Rights Act has been gutted. I am thankful for activist like the Rev. Barber and his First Monday movement fighting to keep the privileges Fannie Lou Hamer fought for. My hope is that all the things Ms. Hamer fought for won’t be in vain.
LikeLike
What a courageous lady! I hate that African Americans had such hardships at the hands of white people. I am a white woman and I am ashamed of the atrocities against an entire race of people. I apologize for the the treatment these human beings suffered and are still suffering 😢
LikeLike