Reproductive Rights as Human Rights: Womenof Color and the Fight for Reproductive Justice offers an in-depth account of how and why the reproductive justice (RJ) movement- led by Sistersong Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective- adopted a human rights approach to its organising. SisterSong is the US national organisation that coined the term ‘reproductive justice’ in 1994 and remains at the forefront of the RJ movement. The movement aims to improve institutional policies and systems that impact the reproductive lives of marginalised communities. Derived from archival, participant observation and interview data collected over many years, Luna's close proximity to SisterSong lends her the perfect position from which to "tell the story of SisterSong" and to demystify human rights in the context of social justice organising in the US, p.21.

The book is structured through eight chapters: Luna begins by reviewing and contextualising the history of human rights in the United States, followed by an exploration of how the RJ movement emerged out of the larger US women's movement. The third and fourth chapters narrate the formation of SisterSong, emphasising the global scope of RJ, and drawing on interviews with founding members regarding how human rights discourse was incorporated into their organising. Chapter five delves into the tensions which arose around the mainstream women's movement's continuing marginalisation of women of colour and the subsequent reframing of the 2004 March for Women's Lives. The final three chapters focus on how SisterSong educated people about human rights, how individual members conceived human rights, and how the human rights approach was received and utilised (or not) by SisterSong's member organisations. The book concludes with ‘Making Utopias Real’, where Luna highlights the transformative power and scope of the human rights approach as a vision for movements to work towards in the increasingly hostile US context.

A key concept laid out at the beginning of the book is the US government's strategy of ‘restrictive domestication’: where the focus of US human rights activities is placed on social problems outside of the United States. Luna provides examples of instances where the United States has used human rights as a tool to abuse and punish other governments, without holding themselves to the same standards (referred to as US exceptionalism). Further, Luna emphasises the fact that US government policy promotes ‘first generation’ civil rights, for example voting, while largely ignoring second generation (social and economic) rights, for example; the right to free and accessible health care. The human rights framework adopted by the RJ movement necessitates us to go further than making reforms to existing systems (e.g. introduction of more liberal laws), suggesting instead that revolutionary systemic changes are made to make way for more supportive social structures. Luna suggests that the RJ movement, and SisterSong more specifically, might be viewed as a case study for what she terms the ‘revolutionary domestication’ of human rights.

The author draws attention to the RJ movement's positioning within the wider reproductive rights discourse of the late 20th century. While mainstream pro-choice abortion advocates focused on a woman's right to choose, RJ sought to emphasise the issue of access (e.g. to legal abortion). Women of colour-led organisations at the time were emphasising their multi-dimensional realities, where race, class and gender intersected and could not be prised apart. For them, ‘choice’ was secondary to the larger context in which choices were being made. Luna also suggests that the mainstream reproductive rights movement was failing to recognise issues surrounding the right to parent. For instance, forced sterilisation—which disproportionately affected Indigenous women and women of colour—was built around the problematic ideology of population control which systematically discouraged people of colour from reproducing.

In the final chapters, the author explores the continued challenge of engaging with human rights discourse and the common misconception that human rights relate only to abuse happening elsewhere in ‘Third World’ countries. It is important to note that a number of the founding members of SisterSong did not have formal human rights training and some found the language of human rights "too academic" and "international" in the beginning, p. 96. What members did share, however, was the presumption that "while globally women of color experienced different problems, the root of them was the same- white supremacist capitalism- and the strategy to maintain these problems was the same- restricting human rights" p. 83.

Reproductive Rights as Human Rights provides an in-depth insight into the ways that the human rights approach was adopted by the RJ movement. Although Luna does not focus on the practical formation or structure of SisterSong as an organisation, the theoretical strategy by which it is underpinned is explored, and assumptions about the value and usefulness of human rights as a framework for organising are unpacked. The book might have included a more rigorous discussion of the future of RJ, such as how it might be adopted in other contexts, for example Assistive Reproductive Technologies, with queer communities, or outside of the United States. Luna does, however, encourage readers to recognise the transformative potential of human rights beyond advocating for equality within existing structures, towards a world in which every human can thrive. Reproductive Rights as Human Rights: Women of Color and the Fight for Reproductive Justice may be of particular interest to individuals working in the field of human reproduction and/or health inequalities who are looking at how they might adopt a transformative theoretical framework to research, practice and activism.

作为人权的生殖权利：有色人种女性和争取生殖正义的斗争深入介绍了由 Sistersong Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective 领导的生殖正义 (RJ) 运动如何以及为何采用人权方法进行组织。SisterSong 是美国全国性组织，于 1994 年创造了“生殖正义”一词，并且一直处于 RJ 运动的最前沿。该运动旨在改善影响边缘化社区生殖生活的体制政策和系统。从多年收集的档案、参与观察和采访数据中得出，Luna 与 SisterSong 的亲密关系为她提供了一个完美的位置，可以“讲述 SisterSong 的故事”并在美国社会正义组织的背景下揭开人权的神秘面纱，第 21 页。

这本书由八章构成：Luna 首先回顾和背景化美国的人权历史，然后探索 RJ 运动如何从更大的美国妇女运动中脱颖而出。第三和第四章讲述了 SisterSong 的形成，强调了 RJ 的全球范围，并借鉴了对创始成员的采访，了解如何将人权话语纳入其组织。第五章深入探讨了围绕主流妇女运动对有色人种妇女的持续边缘化以及随后对 2004 年三月妇女生活的重新规划而产生的紧张局势。最后三章重点介绍宋姊妹如何教育人们人权，个别成员如何构想人权，SisterSong 的成员组织如何接受和利用（或不）人权方法。这本书的结尾是“让乌托邦成为现实”，其中 Luna 强调了人权方法的变革力量和范围，作为在日益敌对的美国背景下努力实现的运动的愿景。

本书开头提出的一个关键概念是美国政府的“限制性驯化”战略：美国人权活动的重点放在外部的社会问题上。美国的。Luna 举例说明了美国利用人权作为工具来滥用和惩罚其他政府的例子，而没有坚持相同的标准（称为美国例外主义）。此外，Luna 强调了这样一个事实，即美国政府的政策促进了“第一代”公民权利，例如投票权，而在很大程度上忽略了例如第二代（社会和经济）权利；获得免费和可获得的医疗保健的权利。RJ 运动采用的人权框架要求我们更进一步，而不是对现有系统进行改革（例如引入更自由的法律），而是建议进行革命性的系统性变革，以便为更具支持性的社会结构让路。Luna 建议 RJ 运动，更具体地说，SisterSong，

作者提请注意 RJ 运动在 20 世纪后期更广泛的生殖权利话语中的定位。虽然主流选择前的堕胎支持者集中于一个女人的选择权，RJ力求强调的问题访问（例如合法堕胎）。当时，有色人种组织的女性强调她们的多维现实，种族、阶级和性别相互交叉，无法区分。对他们来说，“选择”在做出选择的更大背景下是次要的。露娜也表明主流生殖权利运动是没有认识到周围的权利问题，以父母。例如，强制绝育——对土著妇女和有色人种妇女的影响不成比例——是围绕有问题的人口控制意识形态建立的，这种意识形态系统地阻止有色人种生育。

在最后几章中，作者探讨了参与人权话语的持续挑战以及普遍的误解，即人权仅与“第三世界”国家其他地方发生的虐待有关。值得注意的是，SisterSong 的一些创始成员并没有接受过正式的人权培训，有些人认为人权语言一开始就“过于学术化”和“国际化”，第 10 页。96. 然而，成员们所共有的是这样一种假设，即“虽然全球有色人种妇女经历了不同的问题，但问题的根源是相同的——白人至上资本主义——维持这些问题的策略是相同的——限制人权”页。83.

作为人权的生殖权利深入了解 RJ 运动采用人权方法的方式。虽然 Luna 并不关注 SisterSong 作为一个组织的实际形成或结构，但它探索了支撑它的理论策略，并解开了关于人权作为组织框架的价值和有用性的假设。这本书可能对 RJ 的未来进行了更严格的讨论，例如如何在其他环境中采用它，例如辅助生殖技术、酷儿社区或美国以外。然而，Luna 确实鼓励读者认识到人权的变革潜力，超越在现有结构中倡导平等，走向一个每个人都可以茁壮成长的世界。作为人权的生殖权利：有色人种女性和争取生殖正义的斗争可能对在人类生殖和/或健康不平等领域工作的个人特别感兴趣，他们正在研究如何采用变革性的理论框架来研究、实践和激进主义。