From feminism to eugenics: the case of the Uruguayan doctor Paulina Luisi

Angelo Tenfen NICOLADELI

Abstract:

The article explores the career of Paulina Luisi (1875-1950), Uruguay’s first female doctor, who was also a feminist, educator, and eugenicist. Luisi was a pivotal figure in defending women’s rights and promoting sex education in Uruguay, while simultaneously engaging with the eugenics movement, advocating for practices such as eugenic abortion and preferential male sterilization. This study argues that eugenics was not merely a utilitarian tool in her feminist ideology but a fundamental element in her vision of a healthier and morally disciplined society. Luisi believed that eugenics when combined with sex education, could enhance population quality and prevent the transmission of diseases like syphilis, tuberculosis, and alcoholism, which she referred to as the ‘species-destroying triumvirate’. Her early support for coercive eugenics, aimed at eliminating ‘degenerates’, evolved into a more preventive approach focused on social reforms and education. The article delves into the nuances of her trajectory, emphasizing the contradictions between her progressive public image and her involvement with coercive eugenic practices. It challenges historiographical interpretations that downplay this aspect of her work, demonstrating that eugenics was central to her feminist vision. The article suggests that Paulina Luisi’s ideas offer a paradigmatic example of the intersections between feminism, eugenics, and sex education in early 20th-century Latin America.

Keywords: eugenic feminism, sex education, history of medicine, social hygiene, suffragism

1. Introduction

Historians such as Mark Adams have highlighted that, by contemporary standards, eugenics was one of the least sexist fields of its time in many countries^[1]. This context helps explain why women’s participation in the eugenics movement took various forms, from leading studies on family heredity to organizing “fittest families” competitions. While some women gained social recognition through campaigns addressing issues like alcoholism, prostitution, and pornography, others suffered under coercive eugenic policies, including sterilization and restrictive family planning^[2] measures^[3]. As Bland and Hall^[4] observe, many women were seen as the ideal educators of “responsible motherhood,” reinforcing traditional roles. Yet, the role of women within eugenics varied, sparking debate among historians. Some see eugenics as inherently anti-feminist and conservative, as it sought to control female sexuality and restrict women to motherhood and reproduction. Others argue that the focus on maternal and child health, sexual hygiene, and sex education aligned eugenics with reformist, even proto-feminist, agendas, especially in politically progressive circles. Klausen and Bashford^[5] add that historiography reflects two interpretations: one views feminist engagement in eugenics as a strategy for emancipation, while the other argues that eugenics was integral to feminist theory and practice.

In the Río de la Plata region, including Uruguay, women doctors explored the intersections between eugenics and social hygiene as tools for social reform. They advocated for birth control and treatments for venereal diseases, often reflecting the racial and class divisions of their society. Middle-class women leveraged their privilege to influence these policies, finding a space for their voices in eugenic societies, particularly in medicine and public health^[6]. However, while these women found opportunities for autonomy and increased political participation in the realm of social medicine, eugenic practices also reinforced their confinement to maternal roles^[7] .

One such prominent figure was Paulina Luisi (1875-1950), Uruguay’s first female doctor and a pioneering advocate for women’s rights and sex education. Her career was marked by significant contributions to medicine and feminism, alongside a complex association with the eugenics movement. While celebrated for her commitment to public health and social reform, Luisi’s alignment with eugenics often remains underexplored. She exerted influence both in Uruguay and internationally, receiving honors and engaging with organizations like the League of Nations. Her work, spanning a period of profound social and political transformation in Uruguay, demands a critical reassessment of her impact and the contradictions in her career.

The intersection of feminism, eugenics, and sex education is central to Luisi’s intellectual legacy. While she fervently advocated for women’s equal rights, she also held motherhood as vital for racial perpetuation, framing social hygiene and eugenics as pillars of her feminist views. I argue that eugenics was not merely a strategic element for Luisi but a foundational aspect of her feminism. Her writings and participation in international congresses reflect this commitment. For Luisi, motherhood represented a crucial role deserving of state protection and support as a pillar of economic and social progress. Contrary to the views of traditional historiography, which suggests a later distancing from eugenics, I contend that Luisi maintained her support for eugenic ideals until her death in 1950. This article seeks to unravel the nuanced intersections in Luisi’s life, exploring how her feminist advocacy intertwined with eugenics to shape her vision of social reform and women’s roles in society.

2. Uruguay’s Historical and Intellectual Context

At the end of the 19th century, Uruguay faced an identity crisis marked by civil wars and internal disputes between the Blanco and Colorado parties, which hampered the country’s economic development, mainly due to the destruction of the countryside and political instability. As well as suffering external pressures as a ‘buffer state’ between Brazil and Argentina, Uruguay also faced social challenges with the arrival of immigrants. The dictatorship of Lorenzo Latorre (1875) and those that followed, such as those of Máximo Santos and Máximo Tajes, helped to pacify internal conflicts, allowing for political reorganisation^[8].

At the beginning of the 20th century, Uruguay found José Batlle y Ordóñez, the reformist leader of the Colorado Party, as a decisive figure in breaking with the instability inherited from the 19th century. During his two presidential terms, between 1903-1907 and 1911-1915, Batlle, as Souza^[9] points out, was responsible for a series of reforms that transformed the country’s political, partisan and ideological landscape. He promoted significant improvements, such as the expansion of basic sanitation, the creation of schools, the creation of jobs and the introduction of labour legislation^[10] . However, the centralisation of power in the executive and his efforts to remain in charge generated controversy and was a point of criticism of his government.

Battlismo was marked by an era of modernisation and social reforms, especially between 1903 and 1915. During this period, Batlle promoted the nationalisation of banks, passed labour legislation and carried out educational reforms, which positioned Uruguay as an example of progress in Latin America. The first phase of Battlismo came to an end with the coup of 1933, which established a dictatorship and halted the reforms. The ‘second battlismo’ (1942-1958) tried to resume the reformist project but faced new economic and political challenges, culminating in the defeat of the Colorado Party in 1958. So, although the two phases of Battlismo stood out for their pursuit of modernisation, they were also marked by significant controversies and limitations^[11].

The cultural revolution that Uruguay experienced between 1876 and 1915 was profound, especially concerning education. Increased access to education and improvements in its quality played key roles. In 1870, the illiteracy rate in Uruguay, calculated among the population over the age of five, was approximately 80 per cent. By 1900, this rate had fallen to 46.5 per cent, and by 1908, to around 40 per cent^[12]. In Latin America, only Argentina had similar results in the fight against illiteracy. In this context, at the beginning of the 20th century, Uruguay experienced a clear correlation between the expansion of written culture and the process of urbanisation^[13].

This scenario of modernisation and social reforms also had a profound influence on other fields, such as medicine. Uruguayan historian Juan Pedro Barrán^[14] points out that until the 20th century, medicine was poorly developed and knowledge was dispersed. From this period onwards, the medicalisation of society became a central feature, reflecting the growing cultural power of the medical profession. From 1900 onwards, new hospitals and public health policies emerged, such as the creation of the Ministério de la Salud Pública (Ministry of Public Health) in 1933, consolidating the prestige of the medical profession. The medical profession, now seen as an authority and a model of respect, dominated public health and everyday life, promoting a view of health and the body as supreme values and influencing behaviour and social practices.

The country was the first in the Americas to implement new methods against syphilis, as well as the first nation to extinguish smallpox in the region. In the view of Argentinian doctor Emilio Coni, Uruguay was at the forefront of the fight against tuberculosis, alcoholism and venereal infections^[15]. In Barrán’s interpretation^[16], Uruguay was also a pioneer in ensuring, through its legislation, the monopoly of doctors in the practice of healing. As part of this process, even the healers and pharmacists themselves became medicalised and began to prescribe medicines.

In this context of growing medicalisation, eugenics in Uruguay developed as an extension of health and social hygiene practices. American historian Nancy Stepan^[17] highlights the Latin approach to eugenics presented by the Uruguayan delegate at the Second Pan-American Conference on Eugenics and Homiculture, held in Cuba in 1934. Stepan notes that Uruguay adopted eugenic practices that included social welfare measures, such as helping large families and protecting abandoned minors, differing from Anglo-Saxon approaches, which did not include such initiatives. The Uruguayan spokesman, Roberto Berro, advocated that eugenics be applied through counselling and education, without impositions, and not just limited to heredity, reflecting a broader and more social view of eugenics^[18] .

At this conference, Uruguay stood out by presenting its new social legislation, the Código del Niño (Child Code), which exemplified its vision of eugenics. This code reflected an approach geared towards public health and social welfare, with a focus on children and the promotion of preventative measures, without mandatory impositions. Although the code mentioned aspects related to genetics, its conceptual basis was based on the idea that not all human traits were inherited, distancing itself from the strictly hereditary conceptions of other countries. Furthermore, many conference participants, including Uruguayans, rejected compulsory sterilisation, considering it a practice with no scientific or moral basis. Pedro Barrán reinforces this analysis, pointing out that the Código del Niño, enacted during Gabriel Terra’s government, enshrined Uruguay’s main eugenicist measure, which included persuasive propaganda to encourage future spouses to attend Prenuptial Medical Clinics, under the supervision of the Ministry of Public Health.

Barrán highlights two characteristics of Uruguayan eugenics: the first is the preference for using the term human ‘species’ instead of the national ‘race’; the second is the obsession with the effects of the triunvirato destruidor de la especie (triumvirate destroyer of the species), made up of tuberculosis, syphilis and alcoholism, three conditions that, according to Paulina Luisi^[19], competed for the position of greatest degenerator of the human species. Based on these concerns, eugenics in Uruguay developed its main strategy of action, focused on controlling procreation, to ensure that only healthy individuals would contribute to future generations, while those who were ill would be banned from marrying or subjected to sterilisation^[20]. In this context, the Argentinian doctor Emilio Coni is considered one of the forerunners of eugenics in Río de la Plata. Even before Victor Delfino attended the International Congress of Eugenics in London in 1910, Coni had already addressed the need for prenuptial certificates to prevent racial degeneration at the Pan-American Congress in Chile in 1907, discussing birth control and eugenic measures to protect the health of the nation. Coni, who was also a socialist, shared political and professional affinities with Paulina Luisi^[21]. In Uruguay, Mateo Legnani, a Batllist politician and active eugenicist, stood out as a critic of clericalism and an advocate of a ‘religion’ of health, promoting hygiene as a substitute for religious faith. In his work ‘Catecismo de Higiene’ (Catechism of Hygiene) (1917), Legnani argued that a focus on health and the discipline of impulses, especially sexuality, was essential to combat social and racial decadence^[22]. Another relevant Uruguayan doctor in this intellectual context was Augusto Turenne, also a Batllista, who expressed concern about the racist use of eugenics by fascist regimes, although he continued to classify certain groups, such as natives and people with disabilities, as degenerates. Turenne played an important role in the institutionalisation of eugenics in Uruguay, overseeing the development of prenuptial clinics and eugenics commissions, as well as participating in the implementation of legislation such as the Penal Code and the Children’s Code, both approved in 1934^[23] .

In the first half of the 20th century, Uruguay had an image of a predominantly white country, an idea that was widely disseminated in the educational system, the press and school textbooks. This conception reinforced the idea that Uruguay, unlike other American nations, did not face the ‘Indian problem’, since the indigenous population had not contributed to national formation. Augusto Turenne, at a eugenics conference in Buenos Aires, reiterated this view by stating that the country had no racial issues involving indigenous people or blacks. Roberto Berro, who chaired the Uruguayan delegation at the same event, also shared racist positions, advocating the prior selection of immigrants based on racial criteria, similar to other Latin American eugenicists, such as the Cuban Ramos^[24].

In the context of the eugenics project in Uruguay, sex education was seen as an important strategy to protect marriage and guarantee healthy offspring, generating controversies similar to those caused by pre-nuptial medical examinations. Paulina Luisi, in favour of compulsory sex education from childhood, argued that this training was essential to contain sexual impulses and discipline the will through healthy practices and the use of reason. Her critics considered her anarchist and revolutionary, but Luisi believed that sex education should include topics such as respect for women, responsibility towards offspring and combating pornography, to civilise sexual instincts and promote public health^[25].

The broader social and cultural changes of the early 20th century, shaped by both eugenic discourse and political reform, also had an impact on the development of feminism in Uruguay. Inés Cuadro Cawen^[26] points out that the rise of democracy and the influence of battlismo was fundamental to the evolution of the movement, which embraced different currents, such as anarchists, Catholics and liberals. Although the term ‘feminism’ faced resistance, it also served to redefine the role of women in society. Paulina Luisi was a key actriss, integrating the fight for female emancipation with the valorisation of motherhood and eugenics. Uruguayan feminism was characterised by a plurality of approaches, reflecting the complex political and cultural tensions of the time.

From the outset, feminism in Uruguay faced resistance and was associated with negative connotations, such as the stigma of the ‘modern woman’. According to Cawen^[27], this modern woman did not seek to completely break with traditional roles, but rather to redefine them. She wanted to be a worthy companion to men, demonstrating intelligence and freedom, without abandoning her family responsibilities. This vision of feminism reconciled modernity with traditional values, valuing the role of women in raising children and shaping a more advanced society. Feminism at the time therefore sought to integrate social progress with the preservation of cultural expectations about the female role.

For many critics, feminism represented a threat to the traditional structure of the family and to the role of motherhood, which was seen as a woman’s main social function. Women’s participation in politics was seen as a distortion of their ‘natural’ role in the home, taking them away from their family responsibilities^[28]. This fear was clear at the Primer Congreso Feminino Internacional, held in Buenos Aires in 1910, where the organisers preferred to use the term ‘feminine’ instead of ‘feminism’ to avoid negative associations^[29] . In addition, it was common to link feminism to pejorative terms such as ‘marimachismo’ and ‘third sex’, which referred to deviations from traditional models of masculinity and femininity^[30] .

In the second decade of the 20th century, feminism in Río de la Plata came to be seen not just as an emancipation movement, but as an ideology that reflected on the role of women and relations between the sexes. In 1910, Alicia Moreau emphasised that feminism was a way of thinking, not a passing trend. Paulina Luisi, in 1917, also stated that feminism aimed to show that women had a broader role, going beyond serving men and looking after the home, emphasising their ability to be more than just a mother and housewife^{[31] [32]}. Cawen interprets Paulina Luisi as a figure who exemplifies the ambiguities of liberal feminism. On the one hand, Luisi defended equal rights for men and women, while on the other, she emphasised motherhood as an essential feature of women. For her, the ‘new woman’ should be aware of her role in the future of the race, emphasising the importance of social hygiene and eugenics within her feminist vision^[33].

Before the First World War, anti-feminist criticism centred on the supposed intellectual inferiority of women, but from 1917 onwards, it began to focus on biological differences, arguing that each sex had a social role predetermined by biology^[34]. In this context, ‘compensatory feminism’ proposed that women could take on new roles in society, without giving up their traditional functions as mothers and carers. In line with this vision, the Battlist state implemented labour and social policies to support women, such as the law on divorce by the sole will of the woman, passed in 1913, reflecting this compensation^[35]. However, this relationship was ambivalent, because although Batllism promoted laws that expanded women’s rights, these policies were still embedded in a patriarchal context that perpetuated male privilege, based on the idea of sexual dimorphism^[36].

3. Paulina Luisi: Feminist Activism and the Role of Eugenics

Paulina Luisi was one of the women of the early 20th century who integrated and mixed eugenics, feminism and sex education. She was a Uruguayan educator, doctor, feminist, socialist and eugenicist, the daughter of an Italian father, trained in law and a pedagogue, and a Polish mother, a teacher and polyglot^[37]. The eldest of eight siblings, six women and two men, she was born in 1875 in the city of Colon, located in the province of Corrientes, Argentina^[38] , but in 1878, when she was just a few years old, she moved with her family to Uruguay, to the city of Paysandú, at the time a prosperous city that was home to several groups of Italian and Spanish immigrants. While Paulina’s mother set up a school based on the latest pedagogical principles, her father became involved in local political life and frequented Masonic circles. Paulina and her siblings grew up in a liberal family, concerned with the social and political problems of their time^[39].

Luisi first trained in gynaecology and then, in 1923, specialised in dermatology and venereal diseases in Paris. She was one of the founders of the Partido Socialista del Uruguay (Socialist Party of Uruguay) in 1910 and an important figure in the establishment of the feminist movement in that country, fighting throughout her life for women’s health, civil, political and educational rights. Paulina Luisi was also a professor of Social Hygiene and Prophylactic Education at the Escuela Normal, and the creator and director of the periodical Acción Feminina (Women’s Action)(1917-1919)^[40].

In a 2021 video from the National Library of Uruguay^[41], philosopher and journalist Facundo Ponce de León presents Paulina Luisi as a special figure, one of the “hermanas Luisi” (Luisi’s sisters), highlighting her pioneering role as the first woman to graduate from university and the first Uruguayan doctor. León describes her as someone who fought for the rights of sex workers and sex education in Uruguay, then known as “social hygiene”. He also highlights her active role in Freemasonry and the Spanish Civil War. Although the video serves as an introduction to the Paulina Luisi Archive, located in the Library, it is remarkable how the narrative constructs an image of Luisi as a pioneering heroine, concerned above all with the health of women and children, without mentioning her contradictions and involvement with the eugenics movement. As historian Christine Ehrick states, research on Paulina Luisi has tended to ignore or minimize her eugenic affiliations^[42].

She died in 1950, on the same day that Uruguay beat Brazil in the World Cup. That same year, Argentinian feminist and socialist Josefina Marpons published a pamphlet entitled “Paulina Luisi: Una Personalidad Brillante y Singular”^[43]. In this text, which is quite sentimental and most likely immersed in the context of the author’s death, Marpons^[44] describes Luisi as a

A woman of letters, of books, of study, of university, of culture, of socialism, of ideals, she put all her intellectual formation, all her moral greatness and all her feelings of goodness, at the service of an ardent vocation for justice. ^[45]

Other qualities of Paulina Luisi highlighted in the text include her performance as a “complete feminist”, “triumphant”, “nationally admired”, “controversial”, “archetype of the modern woman” and “true woman from Rio de Janeiro”. She was a figure respected by renowned authors such as Turenne, Morquio and Vaz Ferreira^[46]. For Marpons^[47], Paulina Luisi’s address – Paraguay 1286 – became the epicentre of Uruguayan feminism. Throughout her life, Luisi achieved many of the goals for which she fought tirelessly. In addition, she stood out for her resistance to fascism^[48] and for her influence on the country’s party politics, especially by supporting the Socialist Party. In short, Paulina Luisi is described as a “brilliant and singular” character.

Some newspaper clippings from the Uruguayan press help to further illustrate Luisi’s fame in that Society:

Image 1: Full audience for a lecture by Paulina Luisi: “Those who wanted to pray to Dr. Paulina Luisi”

Source: “Los que querian or a la Doctora Paulina Luisi”, Newspaper clippings, Paulina Luisi Archive, National Library of Uruguay. September 12, 1923, in El Diario.

Image 2: Conference by Paulina Luisi at the Artigas Theater: “The conference of Dr. Paulina Luisi was held last night with great success in the Artigas Theatre”

 

Source: “La Conferencia de la Doctora paulina Luisi se realizo anoche con todo Exito en el Teatro Artigas”, Newspaper clippings, Paulina Luisi Archive, National Library of Uruguay. 18 September 1923 in La Democracia.

To some extent, Uruguayan historiography reproduces the myth of Paulina Luisi as a brilliant and singular woman, overvaluing her virtues and minimising her contrasts and contradictions. In my analysis, Uruguayan historian Graciela Sapriza also argues that Luisi strategically used eugenics as a tool to achieve the social reforms she deemed necessary, rather than as an end in itself. Sapriza’s description^[49] reflects this interpretation:

Paulina Luisi, a socialist, interpreted eugenics flexibly as a tool to promote the social reforms she considered necessary. But – and this personality makes it even clearer – Paulina Luisi didn’t limit herself to eugenics. How many nuances and personal ‘mediations’ she conducted are evident in her proposal on motherhood and matriarchy, a personal elaboration of eugenics that other eugenicists certainly didn’t accept. Because she spoke of the different filters that represented her training and her practice: the struggles for suffrage, feminism, and the fight against trafficking in women and children. Her critical stance towards the excessive protection of women’s labour at the Open Door meeting, which could cause employers not to hire them, while almost the entire international feminist movement supported the policies of the ‘Welfare State’, clearly shows the autonomy of her thinking.

In Cawen’s interpretation^[50], Paulina Luisi is a character who highlights the philosophical ambiguities that characterise the liberal feminist movement. On the one hand, it emphasises women as individuals capable of having the same rights as men, and on the other, it appeals to the biological particularity par excellence of women: motherhood. For Luisi, one of the attributes of this ‘new woman’ is the realisation that she holds the future of the race^[51], thus demonstrating the importance of social hygiene and eugenics for her feminist theory.

This dual emphasis on women’s rights and reproductive responsibility aligns with broader trends in eugenic feminism between the late 19th and early 20th centuries. As Richardson^[52] explains, „the central goal of eugenic feminists was the construction of civic motherhood, which sought political recognition for reproductive labour.” These feminists argued that, with new biological knowledge, women’s contributions to the nation could be expanded through their responsibility for „the rational selection of reproductive partners”^[53]. For Luisi, this rational selection of partners, in line with eugenic ideals, would help ensure the health of future generations.

The role of women in this framework was deeply shaped by biological determinism, an idea increasingly accepted throughout the 19th century. As Richardson points out, „over the course of the nineteenth century, the sexes were increasingly differentiated along biological lines”^[54]. In this view, sexual differentiation became a marker of evolutionary progress, where the roles of men and women were seen as natural extensions of their biological makeup^[55]. This differentiation reinforced the idea that women’s central function was reproductive, and any deviation from this, such as feminist demands for equality, was seen by some as a violation of the natural order.

However, eugenic feminists like Luisi attempted to reconcile these tensions by arguing that feminism could work in harmony with nature rather than against it. As Richardson notes, these feminists believed that „feminism might work with rather than against nature, intervening in the process of biological evolution to alter biological destiny”^[56]. This approach is evident in Luisi’s advocacy for social hygiene, reproductive health, and sex education as tools to empower women within a eugenic framework.

In her texts ‘Nuestro Programa’^[57] (Our Programme) and ‘Feminismo’^[58] (Feminism), published in the journal Acción Femenina in 1917, the doctor outlined a comprehensive and progressive vision of what she meant by feminism. Luisi highlights a wide range of issues that deserve women’s attention, going beyond the fight for the right to vote. She addresses topics such as hygiene, tuberculosis prevention, healthy affordable housing, social assistance for mothers and children, legal protection, social security, improving working conditions, combating alcoholism and the question of moral unity. This approach reflects Luisi’s understanding that feminism should not be limited only to the political sphere, but should encompass all areas that affect women’s lives^[59].

When addressing the term ‘feminism’, Luisi recognises the criticisms and stigmas associated with it. However, she clarifies that feminism is not the source of the evils attributed to it, but rather a just and natural quest to recognise women as complete human beings^[60]. Feminism, for her, aims to challenge the traditional view of women as mere servants of men, claiming a more significant role in society.

Feminism, according to Luisi, seeks to show that women possess elevated feelings, clear intelligence and capacities beyond motherhood and domestic management. She argues that women should be considered co-operators and associates of men, not their subordinates. Feminism aspires to open up widely all activities of labour and spirit, including the arts, industries, sciences and letters, seeking full equality of opportunity^[61].

The reference to women as the ‘eternal guardians of the destinies of the race’^[62] – in the sense that women are responsible not only for the education and upbringing of the child but also for generating new life and thus the future of the race and the nation – emphasises Luisi’s view that women play an essential role not only in the private sphere but also as fundamental agents in the perpetuation of the human species. In short, Paulina Luisi, through her reflections, outlines a comprehensive feminism, emphasising the importance of addressing social, political and moral issues to guarantee the full equality of women in society.

In 1919, Luisi published the text ‘Maternidad’^[63] (Maternity) in Acción Feminina. The doctor argues that the belief that ‘greater population results in greater wealth’ is based on the idea that more people means more production and therefore more wealth. For this theory to be realised, a long process of preparation is needed, from fertilisation to the development of individuals who are fit for work. Women play a crucial role in this process, being responsible for pregnancy, childbirth and raising children, increasing the labour force and, consequently, wealth^[64] .

Despite the importance of this role, Luisi emphasises that the work associated with motherhood is not adequately recognised in terms of social contribution. She argues that the task of bearing and raising a child demands significant physical energy and generates wear and tear, similar to the work of a labourer or thinker. However, maternal labour is not valued as a social performance, and mothers face a disproportionately high burden^[65]. To prevent women from rebelling against their reproductive role, Luisi insists it is crucial to ease their economic burdens and reduce their workload as their maternal responsibilities increase.

Luisi argues that women’s production, including motherhood, should be valued as collective capital, deserving protection and economic support. In his view, motherhood should be treated as a state function, emphasising defence and economic and moral protection^[66] . This aligns with broader trends in eugenic feminism, where „women began to base their claim to citizenship on their role as bearers and educators of future citizens”^[67].

4. Reproductive Control and Eugenics: Paulina Luisi’s Controversial Legacy

The text ‘Algunas ideas sobre eugenia’^[68]  (Some ideas about eugenics) was presented by Luisi in 1916 at the first edition of the ‘Congreso Americano del Niño’ (American Child Congress), held in Buenos Aires. According to Rodríguez^[69], it is the first documented reference to a Uruguayan person explicitly addressing the issue of eugenics as a problem. At the beginning of her speech, the author herself argued that the issue needed to be debated more intensively at the event.

In this text, Paulina Luisi discusses the state of eugenic science at the time, with a particular focus on how to prevent the birth of those considered degenerate. Among her arguments was the defence of eugenic abortion over the practice of castration or sterilisation, because, according to her, it would give women more security^[70]. She argued that abortion should not only be a woman’s private right but also her duty when it comes to the birth of a tubercular, syphilis-carrying or alcoholic child. One point in her text that is worth emphasising is precisely the issue of eugenic abortion. The defence of this practice by suffragette feminists of the first wave of feminism is unusual. According to Vázquez^[71]: ‘according to theories about the ‘waves’ of feminism, abortion would be a topic of interest to feminists of the second wave, mainly, and not so much of the first’.

In 1916, Luisi wrote: ‘[…] from weak parents you only get weak and sickly children’^[72], highlighting the danger of ‘racial poisons’ such as syphilis, alcoholism and tuberculosis, which, in her view, could degenerate the offspring and transmit these deleterious characteristics to the human species. For the doctor, certain people should procreate while others should not, separating the population into two groups: those who were healthy and eugenic, and those who were sick and dysgenic. The doctor argued that it was better to prevent the birth of these individuals, whom she classified as inferior and degenerate than to remedy the consequences. Luisi even argued that the spread of venereal infections should be treated as a criminal offence, the so-called crime of contagion^[73].

After discussing a series of eugenic practices and mechanisms, such as the crime of contagion, the prenuptial certificate, sterilisation and abortion, Luisi compares the effectiveness and applicability of the latter two. In her analysis, she notes that eugenic sterilisation did not present the same risks for both sexes^[74]. While the operation was relatively safe for men, the procedure was more delicate and risky for women. Based on this argument, and considering that a man can have multiple children simultaneously, while women have one pregnancy at a time, Luisi argued that, if sterilisation were to be adopted, it should preferably be applied to men. As Richardson notes, „degeneration was a masculine narrative, while regeneration, which reversed its plot, was feminine”^[75]. This distinction highlights how eugenic policies often placed the burden of societal „regeneration” on women, reinforcing gendered roles in the reproductive process.

The author continues her argument by raising the question: what if no contraceptive method is effective? What should be done in the event of an unwanted pregnancy? Luisi asks: “Is it convenient to allow them to develop, condemning them to all the unhappiness to which their living conditions destine them?”^[76]. She is in favour of terminating the pregnancy, arguing that the embryo, being the germ of a new life, should be destroyed in such circumstances. Luisi states: “Faced with the possibility of such fruits, it is better to destroy the embryos”^[77]. Quoting the French author Alfredo Naquet, she argues that abortion should not only be a woman’s right, but a duty in theses cases^[78].

The Uruguayan doctor was an intellectual who was very present in socialist and medical circles in Buenos Aires. Diego Armus^[79] states that she defended the so-called ‘negative procedures’ or ‘negative eugenics’, as she advocated sterilisation, abortion and contraceptive practices, such as prenuptial examinations. This text by Paulina Luisi (1916) circulated in Brazilian periodicals on at least two occasions. In 1916, the Rio de Janeiro newspaper O Paiz^[80] published a text on eugenics entitled ‘Teoria e Prática da Eugenia’ (Theory and Practice of Eugenics), in which the author Otto Prazeres cites Paulina Luisi as a notable scientist. Her work was recognised for its comprehensive synthesis of the concepts of Darwin, Galton and Lamarck, shedding light on this emerging discipline. In 1939, Floriano de Lemes wrote in Correio da Manhã^[81] that “perhaps no work has ever been published in the medical world that summarises so well what eugenics is as that of Dr Paulina Luisi”^[82].

The text entitled ‘Eugenismo’^[83] (Eugenicism) presents a vision of eugenic doctrines and proposes a series of measures to achieve practical results in terms of social health, education, legislation and sociology. About social hygiene, the author advocates restricting the right to have offspring to individuals with hereditary disorders, to prevent the spread of degenerate characteristics^[84]. Concerning education, she emphasises the importance of sexual and prophylactic instruction at all educational levels, starting with primary school. She emphasises the need to provide comprehensive scientific information to combat social diseases, aligning herself with the view that education plays a crucial role in promoting eugenics^[85]. In the field of legislation and sociology, she proposes the complete sexual emancipation of women and the unification of legislative and social criteria for men and women based on a single morality. She advocates the institution of motherhood as a state function, with the obligation to defend and protect women in their natural roles^[86]. In the economic sphere, she proposes the creation of a department within the Public Administration, with substantial financial resources, to meet the needs related to motherhood^[87].

Also in 1919, Luisi published the text ‘Para una mejor descendencia’^[88] (For better offspring). In it, the doctor conceptualises eugenics as follows:

The science that studies the phenomena related to birth, to good birth, that is to say, to the production of healthy and improved specimens of our species […]. It synthesises in its name the transcendence of the problems it studies for the future of the race.^[89]

For the author, no one should be indifferent to eugenic concerns, as these issues affect everyone. For Luisi, eugenics was a new science, recently developed, which resulted from the synthesis between the psychic and natural sciences^[90]. She believed that this applied science was deeply concerned with the future of human offspring.

For Luisi, social inequalities are altering the natural conditions of life instead of benefiting the fittest, strongest, most intelligent and healthiest. Instead, these inequalities favour those privileged by fortune, those who are richer or have a higher social position. In this way, the author criticises the idea that social conditions reflect true aptitude or merit, suggesting that the system unfairly favours those who are already in a privileged position^[91].

An interesting point in this text is that she argued that the ‘secret of inheritance’ was yet to be discovered, which affected the real scientific and practical value of eugenics. In other words, the science of genetics was still in its infancy, or at least not yet as influential in Uruguay^[92].

In this 1919 text, compared to the 1916 text, there is more focus on sex education and eugenics. Luisi doesn’t touch on the subjects of abortion and sterilisation. Now, Luisi emphasises the role of eugenics as a civiliser of sexual instincts, as a way to prevent the birth of degenerates by raising awareness of one’s responsibility towards the future of society^[93]. Luisi writes the following^[94]:

A little education of the senses, a little mastery over natural desires, enlightened by their simple knowledge of certain causes which inevitably affect generation, would be sufficient to prevent many births of beings called to life in disastrous physiological conditions, which have a leger effect on the whole of existence.^[95]

She continues^[96]:

Physical fatigue, mental fatigue, moral concerns, transitory intoxications such as illness or convalescence, chronic intoxications such as tuberculosis or syphilis, as well as intoxications caused by the abuse of poisons such as alcohol or tobacco, or occupational intoxications such as lead and others, inevitably affect the offspring by lowering or degrading their units.^[97]

The text is structured in four parts: the first offers an introduction to the topic, while the following three parts provide a detailed analysis of the consequences of syphilis, tuberculosis and alcoholism for the offspring. The offspring of alcoholics are described as ‘weak, rickety and in poor condition to resist the advance of other diseases’^[98]. The children of alcoholics are the best victims of tuberculosis. For Luisi, “[…] from the point of view of the future of the race, alcoholism is a danger to humanity”^[99].

About syphilis, Luisi describes it as the great enemy of the species, the great destroyer of its vitality and strength. For the doctor, hereditary syphilitic families are characterised by having people^[100]:

stunted or idiotic, individuals with various monstrosities, retarded children, children who, at the age of ten or fifteen, are unaware of their youth and commit acts of degeneration, of which swallowing their own excrement is one of the mildest.^[101]

Lastly, tuberculosis. Although for the doctor this is a non-hereditary disease, the tubercle bacillus is easily transmitted and easily causes the death of young children. For Luisi, the influence of tuberculosis on offspring is indirect, but of paramount importance. Together with syphilis and alcoholism, they form the triumvirate that destroys the species^[102].

To avoid the degeneration caused by these three conditions, Luisi proposes eugenic sex education as an essential tool, as well as building collective responsibility for the future of the human species. In her concluding remarks, she emphasises that the Socialist Party’s electoral platform has courageously addressed these issues and sought viable solutions to tackle them^[103]. In the author’s words^[104]:

The electoral platform presented to the people by the socialist party in the last elections has courageously addressed many of these problems with the stature and knowledge of cause worthy of the high purpose of its efforts, nobly directed towards the attainment of the broadest welfare and greatest happiness of our species. ^[105]

According to Ehrick^[106], Paulina Luisi initially defended more negative eugenics, with a focus on sterilisations and abortions to control the reproduction of those considered degenerate, and throughout the 1910s she softened her eugenic defence, moving closer to a more positive and environmentalist approach, as she turned towards socialist politics. After 1919, her eugenic advocacy centred on discussing sex education, improving the health and living conditions of the working class and what she came to call the species-destroying triumvirate: alcoholism, syphilis and tuberculosis.

Furthermore, Sapriza^[107] also argues that this context would help to explain the disengagement of some doctors from the eugenics movement, such as Paulina Luisi. However, I disagree with this claim and will present my arguments below. Firstly,  there is no clear evidence that eugenics began to be widely regarded as pseudoscience in the 1930s. The creation of the Argentine Society of Integral Eugenics in 1945 exemplifies how these ideals continued to influence the field of public and social health until at least the 1970s^[108].

Eugenics certainly became more criticised in the post-World War II period, but this doesn’t mean that it lost its scientific status in all countries; great eugenicists continued to work around the world on their societal and scientific projects. Furthermore, Miranda^[109] describes ‘late eugenics’ as a phenomenon that reflects the developments and adaptation of eugenic ideals in social and political contexts after 1945, highlighting how these ideals were adapted and continued to impact health policies and social practices in Argentina over the decades, a country that shares a direct border with Uruguay. Secondly, Sapriza claims that Luisi would have disassociated herself from the eugenicist current, but the doctor herself writes the opposite in the foreword to her last book published in 1950^[110]. Luisi wrote the following^[111]:

The present work is partly a compilation and partly an extension of other works published on ‘Sex Education and Eugenics’ from 1910 to the present day, and of several that have not yet seen the light of day […] From another point of view, this publication also remains current because it expresses my doctrine and my convictions, far from having changed, which have been affirmed with greater vigour […] [M]y convictions have changed. From another point of view, this publication also remains current because it expresses my doctrine and my convictions, which, far from having changed, have been affirmed with greater vigour […] [M]y convictions, as set out here, have not, I repeat, undergone the slightest change, nor have I had to modify in any way the psycho-pedagogical doctrine that I have developed.^[112]

Paulina Luisi also wrote a letter to the Brazilian eugenicist Renato Kehl in 1941^[113]. In the letter, found in the Renato Kehl fund at the Casa de Oswaldo Cruz, Luisi refers to Kehl as a great colleague and friend, thanking him for his book ‘Conducta’. Luisi mentions that Kehl’s thoughts were increasingly urgent due to the savagery and brutality brought on by the war and that Kehl’s books were a necessary spiritual encouragement for youth threatened by the world’s moral crisis. She ended the letter by saying that she was distanced from discussions on eugenics due to her active political struggle in the Second World War. This letter demonstrates the close relationship between the two doctors and the similarity of their eugenic thinking. In 1930, a text by Paulina Luisi had already been translated from Spanish into Portuguese, most likely by Renato Kehl, in which she discusses her concept of eugenic sex education^[114].

Sapriza’s interpretation is not supported by the sources. If Luisi maintained her convictions about eugenic sex education, she could not have completely disassociated herself from eugenics. However, as suggested by Ehrick^[115], Luisi revised her defences and understanding of eugenic best practices, a process of change that still needs to be better understood. Another argument that strengthens my thesis is the international recognition he received from societies and organisations such as the following: Honorary member of the Chilean League of Social Hygiene (1921), member of the Advisory Board of the Argentine League of Social Prophylaxis (1935-1948), Corresponding member of the Société Française de Prophylaxis Sanitaire et Morale de Paris (1923), member of the Société Française d’Eugénique de Paris (1923) and Honorary member of the Sociedad Argentina de Eugenesia (1949).

Finally, I would like to highlight an important point raised by Cedrani and Zemaitis^[116]. The authors argue that the eugenics defended by Paulina Luisi in her texts and her work at the Chair of Social Hygiene was an explicitly coercive form of eugenics, aimed at disciplining behaviour and regulating marriages. Cedrani and Zemaitis^[117] use the classification proposed by Miranda^[118] and Vallejo and Miranda^[119], which distinguishes between explicit coercive eugenics and covert coercive eugenics. The first, more direct and easily recognisable, involves openly declared eugenicist policies and practices, such as the compulsory sterilisation laws implemented in several countries in the 20th century, including the United States and Nazi Germany. The second, more subtle and indirect, occurs when eugenicist policies are not explicitly stated but are introduced through other practices that ultimately promote eugenicist selection. Examples include programmes that offer financial incentives for small families or restrict access to contraceptive methods for certain groups. This classification, as presented by Miranda^[120] and Vallejo and Miranda^[121], offers a more precise approach to describing the nuances of eugenics, compared to other qualifiers such as positive or negative, soft or hard, environmentalist or geneticist, preventive or selective eugenics.

5. Final considerations

This article demonstrated  how Paulina Luisi intrinsically integrated feminism, sex education, and eugenics into her thinking and work. Based on a critical analysis of her writings and interventions, I argued that eugenics was a fundamental component of her feminist theory, particularly in her discussions on birth control, public health, and the role of motherhood. Luisi’s vision of female emancipation was always intertwined with her defence of eugenics, not merely as a utilitarian strategy, but as a way of disciplining bodies and behaviours to create a more socially stable and biologically healthy future. This aligns with the broader goals of eugenic feminists, who sought to construct a concept of civic motherhood that granted political recognition for reproductive labour^[122]. In this framework, women’s contribution to the nation could be expanded by assuming responsibility for the rational selection of reproductive partners, a key idea that Luisi embraced in her own work.

The historiographical review addressed here challenged interpretations that minimize or ignore Luisi’s involvement with the eugenics movement. Contrary to traditional views that emphasize only her contributions to women’s rights, this study highlighted the contradictions in her trajectory, including her defence of coercive practices such as eugenic abortion and preferential male sterilization, which stand in contrast to her progressive image. These ambiguities reflect the complex ideological landscape of the time, where morality became increasingly biologized. As Richardson explains, „as ideological discourses on the biomedical determinants of social relations grew, morality was biologized, altering its basis from ‘duty’ or mission to ‘instinct'”^[123]. In this context, eugenic feminists often saw female moral duty as a biological instinct, reinforcing the natural alignment between women’s reproductive roles and their contribution to societal health^[124].

Finally, this study reaffirms the need for more research exploring the intersections between eugenics, feminism and sex education in the Latin American context, especially about the role of women in reformist and eugenic movements. Paulina Luisi, with her complex and sometimes contradictory trajectory, remains a key figure in understanding the nuances of these interactions. Her ideas, far from being restricted to the past, offer important reflections for contemporary debates on gender, biopolitics and public health.

Bibliografie

ADAMS, Mark B. “Toward a Comparative History”. In ADAMS, Mark B.(ed). The Wellborn Science: Eugenics in Germany, France, Brazil, and Russia. New York: Oxford University Press, 1990. pp. 217-231.

ARMUS, Diego. Eugenesia en Buenos Aires: discursos, prácticas, historiografía. História, Ciências, Saúde-Manguinhos, v. 23, 2016, pp. 149-170. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-59702016000500009

BARRÁN, Juan Pedro. Biología, medicina y eugenesia en Uruguay. Asclepio, v. 51, n. 2, 1999, pp. 11-50. https://doi.org/10.3989/asclepio.1999.v51.i2.309

BARRÁN, Juan Pedro.. Medicina y sociedade en el Uruguay del Novecientos. 1 – El poder de curar. Montevidéu: Ediciones de la Banda Orientar, 1992.

BLAND, Lucy, HALL, Lesley. “Eugenics in Britain: The View from the Metropole”. In BASHFORD, Alison; LEVINE, Philippa (ed). The Oxford handbook of the history of eugenics. Oxford University Press, New York, 2010.  pp. 213-227.

CAWEN, I. C. Feminismos y política en el Uruguay del Novecientos (1906-1932): internacionalismo, culturas políticas e identidades de género. Montevideo: Ediciones de la Banda Oriental. Asociación Uruguaya de Historiadores, 2018.

CEDRANI, Fernanda Sosa; ZEMAITIS, Santiago. Educación sexual, eugenesia y moral en el pensamiento de Paulina Luisi. La experiencia de la cátedra de Higiene Social (Uruguay, 1926-1930). Mora (Buenos Aires), v. 27, n. 1, 2021, pp. 11-20.

EHRICK, Christine. Madrinas and missionaries: Uruguay and the Pan‐American women’s movement. Gender & history, [S.l.], v. 10, n. 3, 1998, pp. 406-424.

EHRICK, Christine. The shield of the weak: Feminism and the state in Uruguay, 1903-1933. University of New Mexico Press, 2005.

IBARBURU, Estela. La vida y obra de Paulina Luisi. Revista del Centro Nacional de Información y Documentación, Montevideo, v. 5, n. 5/6, 2014, pp. 143-157.

KEVLES, Daniel. In the name of eugenics: genetics and the uses of human heredity. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1985.

KLAUSEN, Susanne; BASHFORD, Alison. “Fertility control: Eugenics, neo-malthusianism, and feminism”. In BASHFORD, Alison; LEVINE, Philippa (ed). The Oxford handbook of the history of eugenics. Oxford University Press, New York, 2010. pp. 98-115.

LEMOS, F. Algumas ideias sobre Eugenia e as Leis „Humanas”. Correio da Manhã. Rio de Janeiro, 5 de fev. 1939. Disponível em https://memoria.bn.br/DocReader/DocReader.aspx?bib=089842_04&Pesq=%22Paulina%20Luisi%22&pagfis=50571 Acesso em 16 de janeiro de 2024.

LOS QUE QUERÍAN OÍR A DOCTORA PAULINA LUISI. El Diario, Biblioteca Nacional de Uruguay, Arquivo Paulina Luisi. 12 set. 1923. Recortes de jornal.

LUISI, Paulina. Algunas ideias sobre eugenia. Montevidéu: El Siglo Ilustrado, 1916. Disponível em: https://anaforas.fic.edu.uy/jspui/handle/123456789/64414.

LUISI, Paulina. Carta para Renato Kehl. Manuscrito. Casa de Oswaldo Cruz: Fundo Renato Kehl, Cartas Particulares, 1941.

LUISI, Paulina. Educação Sexual. Boletim de Eugenia. Rio de Janeiro, v. 2, n. 24, 1930, pp. 3-5.

LUISI, Paulina. Eugenismo. Acción Femenina. Montevidéu, v. 3, n. 23-24, 1919b, pp. 143-144. Disponível em: https://anaforas.fic.edu.uy/jspui/handle/123456789/65708.

LUISI, Paulina. Feminismo. Acción Femenina, v. 1, n. 2, 1917a, pp. 47-52. Disponível em: https://anaforas.fic.edu.uy/jspui/handle/123456789/64880;.

LUISI, Paulina. Feminismo. Acción Femenina. Montevidéu, v. 1, n. 2, 1917b, pp. 47-52. Disponível em: https://anaforas.fic.edu.uy/jspui/handle/123456789/64880.

LUISI, Paulina. Maternidad. Acción Femenina. Montevidéu, v. 3, n. 25-26, 1919c, pp. 179-184. Disponível em: https://anaforas.fic.edu.uy/jspui/handle/123456789/65711;.

LUISI, Paulina. Nuestro Programa. Acción Femenina. Montevidéu, v. 1, n. 1, 1917a, pp. 1-5. Disponível em: https://anaforas.fic.edu.uy/jspui/handle/123456789/31430.

LUISI, Paulina. Para una mejor descendencia. Casa Editora” Juan Perrotti, 1919a.

LUISI, Paulina. Pedagogía y Conducta Sexual. El Siglo Ilustrado: Montevidéu, 1950. Disponível em: https://anaforas.fic.edu.uy/jspui/handle/123456789/63802.

MARPONS, Josefina. Paulina Luisi: Una personalidad brillante y singular. Buenos Aires: Ediciones Populares Argentinos, 1950.

MIRANDA, Marisa A. La antorcha de Cupido: eugenesia, biotipología y eugamia en Argentina, 1930-1970. Asclepio, v. 55, n. 2, 2003, pp. 231-256. https://doi.org/10.3989/asclepio.2003.v55.i2.111

MIRANDA, Marisa A. La eugenesia tardía en Argentina y su estereotipo de familia, segunda mitad del siglo XX. História, Ciências, Saúde-Manguinhos, v. 25, n. suppl 1, 2018, pp.33-50. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-59702018000300003

NICOLADELI, Angelo Tenfen. Tradução comentada do artigo de Paulina Luisi publicado em 1916,“Algunas ideas sobre eugenia”. Revista Brasileira de História da Ciência, v. 15, n. 1, 2022, pp.233-248. https://doi.org/10.53727/rbhc.v15i1.709

PRAZES, O. Theoria e Pratica da Eugenia. O Paiz. Rio de Janeiro, 22 de nov. 1916. Disponível em https://memoria.bn.br/DocReader/DocReader.aspx?bib=178691_04&pesq=%22Paulina%20Luisi%22&pasta=ano%20191&pagfis=33546 Acesso em 16 de janeiro de 2024.

RICHARDSON, Angelique. Love and eugenics in the late nineteenth century: Rational reproduction and the new woman. Oxford University Press, 2003.

Recortes de Jornal. “La conferencia de la Doctora Paulina Luisi se realizó anoche con todo éxito en el Teatro Artigas.” La Democracia, Biblioteca Nacional de Uruguay, 18 set. 1923. Arquivo Paulina Luisi.

RODRÍGUEZ, Camilo Antúnez. A cien años del primer plan y métodos de enseñanza sexual en el Uruguay. Sus vinculaciones con el discurso eugenésico. Historia de la Educación, v. 20, n. 2, 2019, pp. 75-98. https://www.scielo.org.ar/scielo.php?pid=S2313-92772019000200005&script=sci_abstract&tlng=en

SAPRIZA, Graciela “Ciencia, política y reforma social: esperanzas y conflictos de la primera médica del Uruguay, Paulina Luisi (1875–1950)”. In JACINTO, Lizette; SCARZANELLA. Eugenia. Género y ciencia en América Latina: mujeres en la academia y en la clínica (siglos XIX–XXI), 2011. pp. 53-76.

SAPRIZA, Graciela. La “utopía eugenista”. Raza, sexo y género en las políticas de población en el Uruguay (1920-1945). Dissertação (Mestrado em Ciências Humanas). Universidad de la República, Montevidéu, Uruguai, 2001.

SOUZA, Marcos Alves de. Ideologia e política em José Enrique Rodó: liberalismo e jacobinismo no Uruguai (1895-1917). 242 f. Tese (Doutorado em em História). Faculdade de História, Direito e Serviço Social da Universidade Estadual Paulista, Franca, São Paulo, 2006.

STEPAN, Nancy Leys. „The hour of eugenics”: race, gender, and nation in Latin America. Nova York: Cornell University Press, 1991.

STEPAN, Nancy Leys. “A Hora da Eugenia”: Raça, Gênero e Nação na América Latina. Rio de Janeiro: Editora FioCruz, 2005.

STERN, Alexandra Minna. “Gender and sexuality: a global tour and compass”. In BASHFORD, Alison; LEVINE, Philippa (ed). The Oxford handbook of the history of eugenics. Oxford University Press, New York, 2010. pp. 173-191.

TURDA, Marius; GILLETTE, Aaron. Latin eugenics in comparative perspective. Bloomsbury Publishing, 2014.

VALLEJO, Gustavo; MIRANDA, Marisa. “Civilizar la libido”: estrategias ambientales de la eugenesia en la Argentina. Iberoamericana (2001-). v. 11, n. 41, 2011, pp.57-75. https://www.jstor.org/stable/41677304

VÁZQUEZ, María Laura Osta. Feminismo, Eugenia e Maternalismo nos discursos de duas feministas sufragistas uruguaia e brasileira. Fronteiras, Dourados, v. 14, n. 25, 2012, pp. 55-68.

Resurse electronice

Ponce de León, Facundo. Ciclo „Letra de mulher” – Paulina Luisi. Ministério de Educação Cultura Uruguay. 11 mar. 2021. [Vídeo]. Disponível em: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rJqbRPJxOQ. Acesso em: 13 ago. 2024.

^[1] Adams, M. B. Toward a Comparative History. In: Adams, M. B. (ed.). The Wellborn Science: Eugenics in Germany, France, Brazil, and Russia. New York: Oxford University Press; 1990. p. 210.

^[2] In the United States and England, eugenics campaigners were predominantly middle and upper-class, white, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant and educated women. In Britain, half of the members of the eugenics movement were women, while in the United States, their participation was more limited, and concentrated in local groups. In both countries, women were an important target group, as they were seen as responsible for generating the next generations

^[3] Stern, A. M. Gender and sexuality: a global tour and compass. In: Bashford, A., Levine, P. (eds.). The Oxford handbook of the history of eugenics. New York: Oxford University Press; 2010. p. 173-191; Kevles, D. In the name of eugenics: genetics and the uses of human heredity. New York: Alfred A. Knopf; 1985.

^[4] Bland, L., Hall, L. Eugenics in Britain: The View from the Metropole. In: Bashford, A., Levine, P. (eds.). The Oxford handbook of the history of eugenics. New York: Oxford University Press; 2010. p. 213-227.

^[5] Klausen, S., Bashford, A. Fertility control: Eugenics, neo-malthusianism, and feminism. In: Bashford, A., Levine, P. (eds.). The Oxford handbook of the history of eugenics. New York: Oxford University Press; 2010. p. 98-115.

^[6] Nancy Leys Stepan, „The hour of eugenics”: race, gender, and nation in Latin America, Cornell University Press, Nova York, 1991.

^[7] Graciela Sapriza, “Ciencia, política y reforma social: esperanzas y conflictos de la primera médica del Uruguay, Paulina Luisi (1875–1950)”, no Eugenia. Género y ciencia en América Latina: mujeres en la academia y en la clínica (siglos XIX–XXI), Lizette Jacinto, Eugenia Scarzanella (eds.), 2011, pp. 53-76.

^[8] Marcos Alves de Souza, Ideologia e política em José Enrique Rodó: liberalismo e jacobinismo no Uruguai (1895-1917), tese de doutorado em História, Faculdade de História, Direito e Serviço Social da Universidade Estadual Paulista, Franca, São Paulo, 2006, pp. 12-30.

^[9] Ibid., pp. 13.

^[10] Idem.

^[11] Ibid.

^[12] Ibid., pp. 50.

^[13] Ibid., pp. 51.

^[14] Juan Pedro Barrán, “Biología, medicina y eugenesia en Uruguay”, Asclepio, v. 51, n. 2, 1999, pp. 11-50.

^[15] Ibid., pp. 61.

^[16] Ibid., pp. 62.

^[17] Nancy Leys Stepan, „The hour of eugenics”: race, gender, and nation in Latin America, Cornell University Press, Nova York, 1991; idem, “A Hora da Eugenia”: Raça, Gênero e Nação na América Latina, Editora FioCruz, Rio de Janeiro, 2005.

^[18] Idem.

^[19] Paulina Luisi, Para una mejor descendencia, Casa Editora Juan Perrotti, 1919.

^[20] Juan Pedro Barrán, “Biología, medicina y eugenesia en Uruguay”, Asclepio, v. 51, n. 2, 1999, pp. 11-50.

^[21] Graciela Sapriza, La “utopía eugenista”. Raza, sexo y género en las políticas de población en el Uruguay (1920-1945), dissertação de mestrado em Ciências Humanas, Universidad de la República, Montevidéu, Uruguai, 2001.

^[22] Idem.

^[23] Idem.

^[24] Idem.

^[25] Idem.

^[26] Inés Cuadro Cawen, Feminismos y política en el Uruguay del Novecientos (1906-1932): internacionalismo, culturas políticas e identidades de género, Ediciones de la Banda Oriental. Asociación Uruguaya de Historiadores, Montevidéu, 2018.

^[27] Ibid., pp. 37.

^[28] Ibid., pp. 39.

^[29] Ibid., pp. 40-41.

^[30] Ibid., pp. 44.

^[31] Ibid., pp. 41-42.

^[32] Paulina Luisi, “Feminismo”, Acción Femenina, v. 1, n. 2, 1917, pp. 47-52. Disponível em: https://anaforas.fic.edu.uy/jspui/handle/123456789/64880.

^[33] Cawen, Feminismos y política en el Uruguay del Novecientos (1906-1932), pp. 42.

^[34] Ibid., pp. 52.

^[35] Ibid., pp. 57.

^[36] Sapriza, La “utopía eugenista”, pp. 58.

^[37] María Laura Osta Vázquez, “Feminismo, Eugenia e Maternalismo nos discursos de duas feministas sufragistas uruguaia e brasileira”, Fronteiras, Dourados, v. 14, n. 25, 2012, pp. 55-68

^[38] Sapriza, “Ciencia, política y reforma social: esperanzas y conflictos de la primera médica del Uruguay, Paulina Luisi (1875–1950)”, p. 54

^[39] Sapriza, “Ciencia, política y reforma social: esperanzas y conflictos de la primera médica del Uruguay, Paulina Luisi (1875–1950)”; Estela Ibarburu, “La vida y obra de Paulina Luisi”, Revista del Centro Nacional de Información y Documentación, Montevideo, v. 5, n. 5/6, 2014, pp. 143-157.

^[40] Idem.

^[41] Facundo Ponce de León, Ciclo „Letra de mujer” – Paulina Luisi, Ministério de Educação e Cultura Uruguay, 11 mar. 2021. [Vídeo]. Disponível em: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rJqbRPJxOQ. Acesso em: 13 ago. 2024.

^[42] Christine Ehrick, The shield of the weak: Feminism and the state in Uruguay, 1903-1933, University of New Mexico Press, 2005.

^[43] Josefina Marpons, Paulina Luisi: Una personalidad brillante y singular, Ediciones Populares Argentinos, Buenos Aires, 1950.

^[44] Ibid., pp. 5.

^[45] “Mujer de letras, de libros, de estudio, de universidad, de cultura, de socialismo, de ideales, puso toda su formación intelectual, toda su grandeza moral y todos sus sentimientos de bondad, al servicio de una ardiente vocación de justicia.”

^[46] Marpons, Paulina Luisi: Una personalidad brillante y singular, p. 13.

^[47] Ibid., pp. 14.

^[48] Ibid., pp. 16.

^[49] Sapriza, La “utopía eugenista”, p. 230, my trasnlation.

^[50] Cawen, Feminismos y política en el Uruguay del Novecientos (1906-1932), pp. 42.

^[51] Idem.

^[52] Angelique Richardson, Love and eugenics in the late nineteenth century: Rational reproduction and the new woman, Oxford University Press, 2003.

^[53] Richardson, Love and eugenics in the late nineteenth century, pp. 9.

^[54] Ibid., pp. 39.

^[55] Ibid., pp. 41-42.

^[56] Ibid.,  pp. 34-35.

^[57] Paulina Luisi, “Nuestro Programa”, Acción Femenina, Montevidéu, v. 1, n. 1, 1917a, pp. 1-5. Disponível em: https://anaforas.fic.edu.uy/jspui/handle/123456789/31430.

^[58] Idem., “Feminismo”, Acción Femenina, Montevidéu, v. 1, n. 2, 1917b, pp. 47-52. Disponível em: https://anaforas.fic.edu.uy/jspui/handle/123456789/64880.

^[59] Idem. “Nuestro Programa”, pp. 4.

^[60] Idem., “Feminismo”, pp. 48.

^[61] Idem.

^[62] Idem.,“Feminismo”, pp. 51.

^[63] Idem., “Maternidad”, Acción Femenina, Montevidéu, v. 3, n. 25-26, 1919c, pp. 179-184. Disponível em: https://anaforas.fic.edu.uy/jspui/handle/123456789/65711.

^[64] Idem.,, “Maternidad”, pp. 179.

^[65] Ibid., pp. 180.

^[66] Ibid., pp. 182.

^[67] Richardson, Love and eugenics in the late nineteenth century, pp. 69.

^[68] Paulina Luisi, Algunas ideas sobre eugenia, Montevidéu: El Siglo Ilustrado, 1916, pp. 3-26. Disponível em: https://anaforas.fic.edu.uy/jspui/handle/123456789/64414.

^[69] Richardson, Love and eugenics in the late nineteenth century, pp. 82.

^[70] Luisi, Algunas ideas sobre eugenia; Angelo Tenfen Nicoladeli, Tradução comentada do artigo de Paulina Luisi publicado em 1916, “Algunas ideas sobre eugenia”, Revista Brasileira de História da Ciência, v. 15, n. 1, 2022, pp. 233-248.

^[71] Vázquez, “Feminismo, Eugenia e Maternalismo nos discursos de duas feministas sufragistas uruguaia e brasileira”, p. 65.

^[72] „[…] porque de padres débiles sólo se ontiene niños débiles, enfermizos, destianos allavar una vida de pobreza física y de dolores, sujetos a todas las taras de la herencia, terrenos propicios a todas las enfermedades orgánicas y morales”. (LUISI, 1916, pp. 8, original).

^[73] Luisi, Algunas ideas sobre eugenia, pp. 11.

^[74] Ibid.., pp. 17.

^[75] Richardson, Love and eugenics in the late nineteenth century, pp. 52.

^[76] “Conviene permitirles desarrollarse, condenándolos a toda la infelicidad a que sus condicones de vida los destina?” (LUISI, 1916, pp. 19, original).

^[77] “Ante la poibilidad de tales frutos vale más destruir los embriones!” (LUISI, 1916, pp. 20, original).

^[78]  Luisi, Algunas ideas sobre eugenia, pp. 21.

^[79] Diego Armus, “Eugenesia en Buenos Aires: discursos, prácticas, historiografía”, História, Ciências, Saúde-Manguinhos, v. 23, 2016, pp. 149-170, pp. 160.

^[80] O. Prazeres, Theoria e Pratica da Eugenia, O Paiz, Rio de Janeiro, 22 de nov. 1916. Disponível em: https://memoria.bn.br/DocReader/DocReader.aspx?bib=178691_04&pesq=%22Paulina%20Luisi%22&pasta=ano%20191&pagfis=33546. Acesso em: 16 de janeiro de 2024.

^[81] F. Lemos, Algumas ideias sobre Eugenia e as Leis „Humanas”, Correio da Manhã, Rio de Janeiro, 5 de fev. 1939. Disponível em: https://memoria.bn.br/DocReader/DocReader.aspx?bib=089842_04&Pesq=%22Paulina%20Luisi%22&pagfis=50571. Acesso em: 16 de janeiro de 2024.

^[82] “[…] talvez nenhum trabalho já tenha sido publicado no mundo médico que resume tão bem o que é a eugenia como o da Dra. Paulina Luisi” (LEMOS, 1939)

^[83] Paulina Luisi, “Eugenismo”, Acción Femenina, Montevidéu, v. 3, n. 23-24, 1919b, pp. 143-144. Disponível em: https://anaforas.fic.edu.uy/jspui/handle/123456789/65708.

^[84] Ibid., pp. 144.

^[85] Ibid., pp. 145.

^[86] Idem.

^[87] Idem.

^[88] Paulina Luisi, Para una mejor descendencia, Casa Editora Juan Perrotti, 1919a.

^[89] “La ciencia que estudia los fenómenos relativos a la natalidad, a buena natalidad, esto es, a la producción de ejemplares sanos y mejorados de nuestra especie […]. Ella sintetiza en su nombre la trascendencia de los problemas que estudia para el devenir de la raza.” (LUISI, 1919a, pp. 3, original).

^[90] Luisi, Para una mejor descendencia, pp. 4.

^[91] Ibid., pp.7

^[92] Idem.

^[93] Idem.,  pp. 8.

^[94] Idem.

^[95] “Una ligera educación de los sentidos, una pequeña dosis de dominio sobre los deseos naturales, iluminados por su sencillo conocimiento de algunas causas que indefectiblemente repercuten sobre la generación, serían suficientes para evitar muchos nascimentos de seres llamados a la vida en desastrosas condiciones fisiológicas que obran lego sobre toda la existencia.” (LUISI, 1919, pp. 8, original).

^[96] Ibid., pp. 10.

^[97] “El cansancio físico, la fadiga mental, las preocupaciones morales, las intoxicaciones transitorias como, por ejemplo, la enfermedad o la convalecencia; las producidas por las intoxicaciones crónicas, como la  tuberculosis o la sífilis; así como las producidas por el abuso de venenos como el alcohol, el tabaco; o las intoxicaciones profesionales, como el plomo y otras, repercuten indefectiblemente sobre la descendencia inferiorizando o degerando sus unidades.” (LUISI, 1919, pp. 10, original).

^[98] “En efecto, los decendientes de alcoholistas son seres débiles, raquíticos, en malas condiciones de resistendcia física contra los avances de las enfermedades.” (LUISI, 1919:12, original).

^[99] “[…] desde el punto de vista del porvenir de la raza, el alcoholismo es un peligro para la humanidad” (LUISI, 1919, pp.16, original).

^[100] Ibid., pp. 23.

^[101] “[…] raquíticas ou idiotas, indivíduos que apresentam monstruosidades diversas,  crianças retardadas, crianças que, com dez ou quinze anos, têm a inconsciência de sua juventude e cometem atos de degeneração, dos quais engolir seus próprios excrementos é um dos mais brandos.” (LUISI, 1919, pp. 23, original).

^[102] Ibid.., pp. 24-26.

^[103] Ibid., pp. 29.

^[104] Idem.

^[105] “La plataforma electoral presentada al pueblo por el partido socialista en las últimas elecciones ha abordado valientemente muchos de estos problemas con la altura y el conocimiento de causa dignos de la alta finalidad que persiguen sus esfuerzos, noblemente dirigidos a la consecución del más amplio bienestar y la mayor felicidad de nuestra especie.” (LUISI, 1919, pp. 29, original).

^[106] Ehrick, The shield of the weak, pp. 99-100.

^[107]  Sapriza, “Ciencia, política y reforma social: esperanzas y conflictos de la primera médica del Uruguay, Paulina Luisi (1875–1950)”, p. 74.

^[108] Marius Turda, Aaron Gillette, Latin eugenics in comparative perspective, Bloomsbury Publishing, 2014, pp. 245-248.

^[109] Marisa A. Miranda, “La eugenesia tardía en Argentina y su estereotipo de familia, segunda mitad del siglo XX”, História, Ciências, Saúde-Manguinhos, v. 25, n. suppl 1, 2018, pp. 33-50.

^[110] Paulina Luisi, Pedagogía y Conducta Sexual, El Siglo Ilustrado, Montevidéu, 1950. Disponível em: https://anaforas.fic.edu.uy/jspui/handle/123456789/63802.

^[111] Ibid., pp. 15-18.

^[112] “El presente trabajo es en parte una reconpilación, y en parte una ampliación de otros trbajos publicados relativos a „Enseñanza sexual y eugenésica” de 1910 hasta la fecha, y de varios que no han visto la luz todavia […] Desde otro punto de vista, esta publicación trambién conserva su actualidad porque expresa mi doctrina y mis convicciones, las que lejos de haberse modificado, se han afirmado con más vigor […] [M]is convicciones , expuestas aquí, no han sufrido, repito, la más leve alteración, ni he debido modficiar para nada la doctrina psico-pedagógica desarrollada.” (LUISI, 1950, pp. 15-18, original).

^[113] Paulina Luisi, Carta para Renato Kehl, manuscrito, Casa de Oswaldo Cruz: Fundo Renato Kehl, Cartas Particulares, 1941.

^[114]            . Educação Sexual. Boletim de Eugenia. Rio de Janeiro, v. 2, n. 24, 1930, pp. 3-5.

^[115] Ehrick, The shield of the weak, pp. 99-100.

^[116] Fernanda Sosa Cedrani, Santiago Zemaitis, “Educación sexual, eugenesia y moral en el pensamiento de Paulina Luisi. La experiencia de la cátedra de Higiene Social (Uruguay, 1926-1930)”, Mora (Buenos Aires), v. 27, n. 1, 2021, pp. 11-20, p. 21.

^[117] Idem.

^[118] Marisa A. Miranda, “La antorcha de Cupido: eugenesia, biotipología y eugamia en Argentina, 1930-1970”, Asclepio, v. 55, n. 2, 2003, pp. 231-256.

^[119] Gustavo Vallejo, Marisa Miranda, ““Civilizar la libido”: estrategias ambientales de la eugenesia en la Argentina”, Iberoamericana (2001-), v. 11, n. 41, 2011, pp. 57-75.

^[120] Miranda, “La antorcha de Cupido”, pp. 231-256.

^[121] Vallejo, Miranda, ““Civilizar la libido”: estrategias ambientales de la eugenesia en la Argentina”, pp. 57-75.

^[122] Richardson, Love and eugenics in the late nineteenth century, p. 9.

^[123] Ibid., pp. 45.

^[124] Ibid., pp. 46.