The question assumes that those being polled have some knowledge of just who was Dr. J. Marion Sims. Hopefully, all polled did some research before adding their two cents.Dr. J. Marion Sims Jan. 25, 1813 - Nov. 13, 1883.
In viewing the above dates it should immediately strike the reader that we are dealing with someone from outside our current time and place. Dr. Sims was born over 195 years ago. Quite close to 200 years ago. He died just over 125 years ago. Keep this in mind when evaluating Dr. Sims.
J. Marion Sims is famous for pioneering a treatment for vesicovaginal fistula A vesicovaginal fistula can be caused by injury to the urinary tract, which can occur accidentally during surgery to the pelvic area, such as a hysterectomy. It can also be caused by a tumor in the vesicovaginal area or by reduced blood supply due to tissue death (necrosis) caused by radiation therapy or prolonged labor during childbirth.
The most common symptom is constant urine leakage from the vagina. The patient may also experience irritation in the area of the vulva, and frequent urinary tract infections." (Penn State Health & Diseases Topics A-Z)
It seems that Dr. Sims learned, tweaked and homed his treatment for vesicovaginal fistula by working on his own patients and on African Slaves women and children. Dr. Sims has been accused of treating the African Slave women without the use of any anesthetic during the procedure (operation). Although he did administer an opiate after the procedure to alleviate the pain. Some have also accuse Dr. Sims of deliverately trying to addict these women to the opiate. Due to all his pioneering work, Dr. Sims is known as the "Father of Gynecology". His treatment has allowed thousands of women to lead normal lives. Since his time treatments built upon his pioneering work have helped eve more women.
Dr. Sims did in fact try and improve his treatment for vesicovaginal fistula whenever he came across it in his line of work. This included white and African Slave women. The difference was that Dr. Sims did not administer an anesthetic to the African Slave women. Still his actual knowledge was garnered by both white and African Slaves. So that the procedure itself was not a mutilation of slave women and a correct procedure for white women. Secondly, after perfecting his treatment, he applied it equally to all women. And all women benefit to this day.
It seems that the main contention really is that Dr. Sims did not administer an anesthetic to the African slave women. This write acknowledges that was indeed unfortunate and not what I would wish on the worlds worst people. It was unfortunate because those women suffered great great pain. Some of them were repeatedly operated on by Dr. Sims to correct the problem, some to the tune of over 30 times. It is unimaginable the pain these particular women went through.
Repeated operations more than suggest two things, one that Dr. Sims was seeking (exploring) a way to correct this medical problem, hence the repeated attempts, and two that he was determined to try until he found the correct procedure. He could have tried any procedure once or twice, failed, and given up thereby dooming thousands of women to suffer. But he persisted till he figured out how to help these women, all women.
Call for the Removal of the Statue
But some are calling for the removal of Dr. Sims' statue under the accusation that he was "racists" and that he "tortured" slave women. A statue that has been in its present and only location since 1894. Just how fair is that call for the statue's removal?
Let's look at the facts:
Dr. Sims did in fact work out his procedure on women the majority of which were slaves.
Dr. Sims did in fact not anesthetize slave patients choosing instead to give then opiates after the procedure. It is possible that Dr. Sims did not think the slave women to be human beings at all. A not uncommon way of thinking back then, hence the civil war. All of the above does not bode well for the Dr. Sims as more Doctor than monster.
What can mitigate against seeing Dr. Sims as a monster or torturer? First it must be remembered that Dr. Sims operated at a time when anesthesia was just beginning to be used with medical confidence (1846). Not all surgeons had access to anesthesia let alone used it initially. It took time for anesthesia to known, distributed and used properly. Dr. Sims did use it on his white females patients, but not on his African Slave patients as he may not have thought them as fully human. Again a belief common to that time. He did think enough of them to give them an opiate (pain killer) to relive post operative pain. So he was not totally without concern or empathy for these women.
What current day activists are trying to do is punish Dr. Sims for not being like us. He is being punished for not thinking like a 20th-21st Century activist. Much like poor Christopher Columbus, Dr. Sims is the victim tremendously displaced hindsight. Activists are holding past historical figures "guilty" of something they could not possibly possess, which is Current Day Thinking. Basically they are trying impose current day social morality on a 19th century man. The man not having benefited from the last 150 years of knowledge in areas of medicine, and moral discourse. But is still held accountable for it.(for what he does not have) It's like blaming cavemen for not using acrylics to do their cave paintings.
The danger of using present thinking to judge historical figures is that the same will be done to us. It is nothing but unfair to anyone it is thrust upon. Imagine 100 years from now when abortion is illegal (due to respect for life). Some writer decides that the statues of all who supported abortion should be brought down, no matter how much "social justice" they did in our current time. Would it be fair to be judged on just one thing? No matter how much good you did?
Or lets say that vegetarians have their way an impose no meat eating upon society. And they decide that all who ate meat should be erased from history. Would you want to be judged in the future on something you barely give a second thought to now?
What this writer is saying is that we must remember the historical context that others had to live in and respect that they did the best with what they knew. They did not have the benefit of our way of thinking. This does not excuse bad behavior or ways of thinking. We can say that Columbus did not treat the American Indians well (sorry I'm too educated to be PC minded), but also realize that way of thinking was not an uncommon way for Europeans to think back then.
But we can still say that Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Che, Castro, Sandinistas, and others of their ilk were indeed evil people (results of atheism, the biggest killer of people ever). But they all lived in a time when they should have known better by virtue of all the human rights, natural rights and theology around during the turn of the century (1900).
The same can not be said of Dr. Sims. He never heard the great men like Martin Luther King, or Supreme Court Justice Thomas. He never went through the civil rights era and learned from that. He never had the benefit of our current thinking. But he did find a procedure to help all women, white, black, asian, etc.. who had a vesicovaginal fistula. He did not use this correct procedure only on white women, but on all women who came to him for help. And as use of his procedure spread among all surgeons even more women were helped regardless of color, ethnicity, or language.
What do do?
It seems Dr. Sims did some good along with some bad. But even the bad that he did, he did in an effort to find a corrective procedure for vesicovaginal fistula. His intention was not to mutilate or disfigure his patients. His intention was to find a way to makes things right, by finding a corrective procedure for vesicovaginal fistula. What do we do with that knowledge of all the good he did? Do we dismiss all the good he did? He was no Dr. Josef Mengele. He was trying to help his patients.
Lastly, a generation of citizens decided to honor Dr. Sims' life by erecting a statue of him. He received honors from Belgium, France Italy, Spain and Portugal. It seems presumptuous and elitist of us to undo their judgment and honoring of Dr. Sims. We are telling that generation and those countries that we know better than they who lived in that very time.
Whatever you decide please remember that you will be judged as you judge and that future generations judge your judgment. Using the same criteria that is being used against Dr. Sims, it could be argued that most of our U.S. and Puerto Rican artist could be called on the rug and taken from history for all of their faults. Dr. Sims at least helped people by virtue of being a doctor, found a procedure to correct vesicovaginal fistula, among all the good medicine he practiced. But how will all our cultural and musical heroes (all the druggie and alcoholic artists) defend themselves having only their art and money received from it (self interest) to show for their faults? How would you like a 25th Century activist judge you and this whole generation based on something we have not even experienced in our time?
Dr. Sim's status should remain right where it is. It would seem sad and petty to yank that statue out of its current location. And for those who whole heartedly believe his statue should go, the question is this: How does the statue's removal correct anything? What does it accomplish? To what end is this act directed? It does not punish Dr. Sims, he is part of eternity now. Is the statue removal effort, an attempt, to scratch a "social justice" itch? Do activists not have bigger and live fish to fry? Or will they continue to pick on those who can not defend themselves because they have died - the easy targets?
Lastly, remember, none of us are totally good. Unlike Dr. Sims, we do not have hundreds or thousands of patients to show how we spent our lives. Most of us have more good intentions than good works done to show for our lives. And yet we dare judge a man who did mostly good, for women no less. It does seem ungrateful.
It goes to show is that hindsight does not a good judge make. - JBR
They choose to protest in front of the Army Recruiting Center. In the great tradition of all East Harlem protests, this one was peaceful. The protesters main contentions were that the war was illegal and not justified and that our military personnel were being needlessly killed. In fact one of their chants was about putting youth in danger.
East Harlem.com was begun when Mr. Rivera failed to get a community newspaper off the ground. "The costs were too high", said Mr. Rivera. "And when the web presented itself I saw it for what it was, an opportunity to publish with a lot lower costs. I did take one chance however, that people would even use the web. The web was young and only academics and nerds knew of and use it."
The men's salon, called BBRAXTON, located on 1400 Fifth Avenue along West 116th Street, was the result of an idea by Brenda Braxton and her husband Anthony Van Putten, co-owners of the facility. According to Braxton, who is also a Tony-nominated Broadway actress currently performing in the musical Chicago, the idea was based on a discussion she had with her husband about men who wanted grooming services like pedicures and facials in an environment where they felt comfortable. Our Latino and African-American men want a place where they can be pampered without having to go to a salon that caters mostly to a female clientele, she said. Braxton explained that the few salons that exclusively serve men, such as John Allan's Club and Truman's Gentlemen's Groomers, are not located in Northern Manhattan and may not be used to handling ethnic grooming issues related to Latino and African-American men such as maintaining dreads and handling problems of ingrown hair. "It"s something that our Latino and African-American gentlemen need and it's right here in the middle of Spanish Harlem," Braxton said about her East Harlem-based business.
For the last five years, however, Bell and Lawson have also shared something in common with a growing number of tenants in Mitchell-Lama housing throughout New York City: the constant fear of being forced out of their homes if their landlords decide to leave the Mitchell-Lama program. "[If Lakeview leaves the Mitchell-Lama program], my rent is going to double. That I'm sure of," Lawson said about how her home may not be so affordable any more. 'Do I think I can afford it? Absolutely not." Thirty-six year old Bell, who has been a resident of Lakeview since age six, also expressed her desire to stay at the complex. "This is my home," she said. "This is something that I don't want to readily leave." Statements like these are not new to elected officials like Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer. The concerns from his constituents about this issue have become so great that Stringer co-hosted a conference in March 2007 to address the declining stock of affordable housing in New York City as more landlords choose to leave the Mitchell-Lama program.
Attendees stood in silence and reverence as members of the New York City Police Department's color guard (the department's ceremonial escort) opened the ceremony carrying the U.S. and New York City flags under the blare of the national anthem.
When asked to reflect on how 9-11 impacted on their lives, members of law enforcement who attended the ceremony shared their stories with this reporter. Trooper E. J. Herrera of the New York State Police described how his fellow troopers felt the loss of local police officers at the World Trade Center. "In law enforcement, we're one big family so whenever there's any loss, it hurts all of us," he said. "Everyone was down, not just as [members of] law enforcement, but as Americans." Sergeant Miriam Luciano, an auxiliary police officer of the New York Police Department's 26th Precinct, recalled how the tragedy affected the public. "A lot of people were sad "you can see it on their faces," A/Sgt. Luciano said.
Community Commitment
Editors Note: East Harlem, October 22, 2007. Mr. Johnny C. Rivera was unsuccessful in his attempt to become the Democratic District Leader in Part "A" of the 68th district. But he put up a great fight, and has forged many new relationships which can only help foster a better East Harlem. East Harlem.com looks forward to Mr. Rivera's next race. He will eventually succeed.
Owner Brian Ghaw choose the current East Harlem location after a friend of his made him aware of the community. Mr. Ghaw said he was "looking for growing community" What he found was "the last neighborhood in Manhattan". Meaning, he was looking for a place with a sense of community.
All of the baked goods at the Savoy Bakery are made with butter and no trans fats. So they contain less cholesterol than you may expect from baked goods. Can this get any better? Well yes, prices are very reasonable! (see photo).
Carmen Villegas led the parishioners through the service, which the group were careful not to call a mass. Ms. Villegas spoke of having faith and about the group's belief that with faith the doors of the church would open again. She also mentioned her belief that they were being persecuted by a very uncaring bishop of the church. And they exalted in their persecution.
After the end of the "service", Ms. Carmen Villegas, introduced the other four ladies who had been arrested on February 12, 2007. She also introduced a lawyer who will help the group with their fight to keep the church open. The group plans to form a 501(C)3 in an effort to take over management of the church.
The Cardinal has decided to close the church due to its "shrinking enrollment". But many disagree with the closings and with his methods. One resident who asked not to be identified fumed "Why doesn't he come and move us out himself?, He has to have the police do his dirty work. He is Cardinal enough to close the church, but not man enough to come and do it himself." It is true that the Cardinal has been accuse of being distant/detached from parishioners during the closing process.
Most Democrats advocate pulling out of the war. They site many reasons. For instance they say we were duped into the war with lies. And now they say that lives are being wasted each and every day. That "the cost is too high"
Julia de Burgos, was an internationally known poet, whose heart longed for freedom for her homeland, for independence from the United States. But she died young and broken on Fifth Avenue in 1953.