  Following the end of WWII, the term “eugenic” was so closely associated with the horrific programs of Nazi Germany that eugenics societies across the world changed their names (e.g., the American Eugenics Society became the Society for the Study of Social Biology) and tempered their aims. Yet many of the same practices and beliefs continued under a different guise, from immigration policies, to forced sterilization, to population control (Kevles 1985; MacLaren 1990; Kline 2001; Broberg and Roll-Hansen 2005; Lombardo 2008; Paul, Stenhouse, and Spencer 2018; Willson 2018). In the United States, involuntary eugenic sterilizations of “feeble-minded” women in a variety of states didn’t officially end until the late 1970s and may continue covertly in some state institutions. California had the highest rate of forced sterilizations, which were widely performed on prison inmates, people in mental institutions, and women considered to be bad mothers. Such sterilizations were motivated by both perceived individual and social goods but were grounded on deep-seated prejudice as well as scientific inaccuracies (Kluchin 2009; Stern 2015). Concepts of “feeble-mindedness” were historically entangled in deeply problematic ways with ideas of race, class, and gender (Stubblefield 2007). California has now joined Virginia and North Carolina in passing legislation to compensate forced sterilization victims.