Meet Mark Crutcher, the Man Behind 'Maafa 21'

Appearing throughout the anti-abortion documentary Maafa 21 as an authority on Margaret Sanger and the history of Planned Parenthood is a bald, pink head belonging to one Mark Crutcher, president of Life Dynamics, the company that produced the film. And that’s how he is identified in the film—“Mark Crutcher, President of Life Dynamics”—suggesting that being president of the company that produces a documentary is qualification enough to appear as a source in it.

According to Lisa Morris, spokeswoman for the Pro-Life Coalition of East Tennessee, Crutcher’s credentials are sound. “He’s very solid, very well-respected in the pro-life community and beyond,” she says. Asked what she means by “and beyond,” Morris says “I mean, he’s nationally known.” Morris says the information contained in the documentary Crutcher produced is legitimate, too. “There’s almost two to three minutes of credits,” Morris says. “And [Crutcher] said that it was over a three-year period that all of that was researched. So he’s done the research.” Yet according to Esther Katz, professor of history at New York University and editor of the Margaret Sanger Papers Project, Crutcher is unknown in academic circles.

“We have control of every document, in the sense that we know what’s in it, where it is, how many copies there are and what the context was that Sanger ever wrote,” Katz says. “He’s never been in touch with me that I know of. So I don’t know what research he might have done that would have given him these qualifications. I mean, every other major scholar that has written about Sanger has been in touch with me or one of her biographers or one of the archives, so I know what’s out there and who’s working on it.”

Crutcher’s reputation in anti-abortion circles fares far better than his reputation among academics. In 1992, he authored Firestorm: A Guerilla Strategy for Pro-Life America, a guide to setting up barriers to obtaining abortions without actually overturning Roe V. Wade. One method gained national media attention in 1996, when the New York Times and Time ran stories on Crutcher’s creation of a network of over 600 lawyers to sue abortion providers for malpractice, the ultimate goal being to drive insurance premiums so high that doctors would be forced out of business.

In more recent years, Crutcher has detailed his thoughts in a blog called “Mark’s Blog: Unique Perspectives on the Battle for Life.” In a November 2008 entry, just after the election victory of Barack Obama, Crutcher wrote, “Besides being a Marxist, Barak Obama [sic] is the most rabidly pro-abortion, morally defective and completely unqualified person to ever be given the keys to the Oval Office. This man is thoroughly evil and I have little doubt that we are likely entering into the most dangerous period in the history of our country.”

His criticism isn’t limited to Obama. After the murder of abortion-provider George Tiller by anti-abortion activist Scott Roeder, who is now serving a life sentence, Crutcher attacked the media for what he saw as consistent “hyperventilation” and unnecessary coverage of these crimes in the mid-90s: “Compared to the thousands of taxi drivers, convenience store employees, police officers, firefighters, and other workers who were killed during that time, it is obvious that all of this wailing and hand-wringing about violence against abortion providers is complete nonsense.”

Crutcher and Life Dynamics are also behind a number of “black genocide”-themed websites, including blackgenocide.com and klannedparenthood.com, which features a cartoon doctor wearing a Ku Klux Klan hood while holding a blood-soaked uterine currette, an instrument an abortion doctor would use. Under the website’s heading, it says, “Abortion! Because lynching is for amateurs.”

It’s difficult to find out more about Crutcher. Asked to comment for this article, he demanded a statement guaranteeing everything he said would be printed in its entirety, “with no editing”—a condition no print journalist can grant an interview subject. When told this wasn’t possible, he blamed the reporter for his being unable to participate, and said he would do what he needed to do to protect himself from the “dishonesty, the bias, and the incompetence that dominates the American media today.”

© 2010 MetroPulse. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Comments » 8

Aquagirl writes:

I have seen Maafa 21 and it is very compelling; the facts speak for themselves. What makes you think that a person speaking facts into a television camera makes them claim to be an expert on the subject? Seems to me he is more of a narrator of facts than someone claiming to be an expert.

As for the woman from NYU that seems to think than nobody can know, write or produce anything unless it comes through her first...well, she is arrogant and ridiculous.There are plenty of writings available on and by Margaret Sanger that fully supports what is in Maafa 21. To this day, Planned Parenthood has never tried to distance themselves from her; their highest award is even named after her.

When this, so called, journalist can't refute the message he chooses to shoot the messenger. Besides, it is his job to "report" not insert his personal opinions. I didn't see this labeled an opinion piece! Mr. Crutcher is smart not to talk to the press under the conditions they lay out and their history of unfair reporting confirms it.

Get Maafa 21 and decide for yourself; don't depend on someone as biased as Frank Carlson.

rapnsum writes:

Why haven't you published my comments??????

rapnsum writes:

Sounds like this so-called “ reporter” doesn't want to do ANY investigating so he is whining that Crutcher won’t do his job for him. He just wants to SLAM the MAN if he won't grant an interview. I watched Maafa21 all the way through to the CREDITS - something you obviously did not do. Because I saw listed in the credits and ALL throughout the film - documents, books, and research from Margaret Sanger's writings and many other Planned Parenthood founders as well. They were all on screen clear as day. Maafa21 quotes Sanger’s Autobiography, showing it on screen, something Crutcher appears to have in his possession, where Sanger admits to speaking with the KLAN. Maafa21 also shows, clearly on screen, many of Sanger’s Birth Control Review Publications, which ironically are all scanned IN FULL on Mark Crutcher's websites for ANYONE, including this reporter to read: (Perhaps NYU could call Crutcher for Sanger documents and ideology as well). But the most damming evidence that this paper and this reporter is slamming Crutcher without cause, is the fact that Maafa21 clearly lists the Sophie Smith College as a credit source. If you log onto the Sophie Smith College website (too easy for this reporter to do, I guess) you will see it is also a library which houses papers of Margaret Sanger and Planned Parenthood. I would be curious what the "credentials" for this reporter are, since he questions Crutcher's and is clearly on a witch hunt. This paper seems to be AGENDA and not FACT driven because they CANNOT refute the DOCUMENTS shown in Maafa21 - so they are attacking the reputation of the producer. Research is Research and anyone can read and listen to Sanger's words for themselves and come to a conclusion that she was RACIST. To discredit an organization, a man, and the film Maafa21 because you were to dam lazy to watch Maafa21 or to gather the documents Maafa21 showed, and list the MANY MANY sources in the credits proves that Crutcher was right to blow you off.

AParent writes:

Mr. Carlson,

In researching who Mark Crutcher is, you left out that a few years ago Mr. Crutcher and Life Dynamics obtained an American Medical Association mailing list of all the medical students in the United States under false pretenses. He did this so that he could mail his propaganda to all the medical students in the country. The mailing that he sent was a thinly vailed threat to all the potential doctors that might be willing to provide the full range of legal reproductive medical care. He made it clear that he knew who they were and where they lived. Mr. Crutcher's ethics have always been very shady. He obviously thinks that his point of view is not limited by ethical behavior.

rapnsum writes:

My credit card company, almost every retailer, and my bank, insurance company, and google - buy and sell lists with personal information on them. It is a LEGAL thing to do. Your point is misguided.

mmuench writes:

Interesting that Katz tries to suggest that he and the Margaret Sanger Papers Project are the sole guardians of Sanger's writings and that anyone who wants access to them must request such from his organization:
----
“We have control of every document, in the sense that we know what’s in it, where it is, how many copies there are and what the context was that Sanger ever wrote,” Katz says. “He’s never been in touch with me that I know of. So I don’t know what research he might have done that would have given him these qualifications. I mean, every other major scholar that has written about Sanger has been in touch with me or one of her biographers or one of the archives, so I know what’s out there and who’s working on it.”
------
Since he has now recollection of Crutcher contacting him for the records, then he must be a fraud who did no research to produce the film, right?

WRONG. Perhaps someone should inform Katz that his organization has made all of Sanger's writings available online in a fully searchable format:

http://www.nyu.edu/projects/sanger/we...

...or was Katz only referring to her private writings? Either way, virtually all of the Sanger quotes used int he film were straight from her public writings, all of which are fully available online from Katz's own organization.

Nice try.

mmuench writes:

It's also interesting that the entirety of this article is geared towards who Mark Crutcher is. Personally, I'd rather read an honest analysis of the film's content.

cturczyn writes:

in response to mmuench:

It's also interesting that the entirety of this article is geared towards who Mark Crutcher is. Personally, I'd rather read an honest analysis of the film's content.

Share your thoughts

Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.

Comments can be shared on Facebook and Yahoo!. Add both options by connecting your profiles.