Month: February 2020

Upon looking at this particular image for the section, my attention immediately goes toward the human figure and the knife sticking out of the piece of meat. It is easily identifiable that the human figure in this picture seems to be male, signifying the masculinity behind the domination of the meat industry and the overall idea that meat in general is a masculine food. The knife sticking in the piece of meat, to me, means that man is exercising its power over the animal and symbolizes the initial killing of the animal in order to produce this meat. The knife represents the disregard of life of the animal being killed for consumption and instead heavily focuses on “meat” being consumed by man.

Unsurprisingly, when thinking of gendered eating, my mind automatically went to the idea of meat for men and some sort of salad, fruit, or “lower-calorie” alternative for women as we read in the HuffPost article, “Meat Heads.” This instinctive thought further proves the perpetuation of masculinity even in the foods we eat. With men being associated with meat, it yet again displays the patriarchal oppression of nature and its creatures, or speciesism as Greta Gaard states. Associating women with salads and other natural plant-based foods links to the overarching theme of ecofeminism in that the patriarchy oppresses both women and nature. However, I felt as though I wanted to go a bit deeper to examine gendered eating practices since the idea of gendered foods is something that was fairly easy to identify. In an article by Barbara J. Rolls, she details the impacts of eating habits on adolescent and adult men and women, as well as masculine and feminine eating styles. According to the studies she conducted, Rolls found that a gender difference in eating is that men often eat more calories than women due to the sizes of their bites/sips (Rolls 1). Women in the studies that Rolls conducted were shown to eat smaller bites and take longer to finish foods, and that they tend to eat smaller portions of food (Rolls 1). In a study that Rolls references, women were also found to display different eating patterns depending on who they are with, showing that they eat less when with desirable males or in large groups than with females or less desirable men  (Rolls 1). These findings perpetuate “sex-role appropriate” eating behaviors, where eating smaller bites, smaller portions, and slower is seen as feminine, and aasociated with someone being concerned about appearance and possess stereotypically feminine traits (Rolls 1). As Curtin also discusses, women are more pressured to conform to oppressive body shapes (Curtin 1), which contributes to this style of gendered eating practices. For men, their eating practices, as stated, reflect higher-calorie eating by taking bigger bites and Examining the eating styles through Rolls’s information provides even further that there is a divide in the way that food is viewed in terms of gender, whether it be the food itself or the actual consumption of the food.

I found the perspectives of both Gaard and Curtin very interesting, especially as a feminist who is not a vegetarian. Based on both readings, it feels to me that ecofeminists perceive non-human animals as their own beings that are deserving of respect with the abilities to live free of oppression. In Greta Gaard’s article, she details the relations of humans and non-human animals that serve the role of pets. Gaard feels as though speciesism is a prevalent form of oppression that reinforces other forms of oppression, such as sexism (Gaard 20). She compared the situation of the parakeet, Bella, she saw at the video store to that of other house pets, zoo animals, and dairy cows, to display her belief of society’s animal exploitation (Gaard 20). In Curtin’s essay, she describes the practice of moral vegetarianism, which brings ethics into the ecofeminist perspective of vegetarianism. One of Curtin’s points of moral vegetarianism is that human consumption of meat is an act of violence that is not necessary, and that there is a choice behind using senseless violence to consume non-human meat (Curtin 1). Both women bring up compassion in their respective articles, but in different ways. The articles show this perception of compassion on ecofeminist thoughts on vegetarianism in order to, as Gaard states, “…suffer with another, to imagine to the fullest extent possible the experience of another’s pain, and to commit oneself to taking action to alleviate the suffering (Gaard 22).” The relationships that ecofeminists seem to want to have with animals is one of mutual respect and compassion. Curtin brings up the morals behind senselessly killing animals for consumption, or for justified reasons such as starvation or dangerous encounters with a bear (Curtin 1). Both articles approach the idea of respectfully coexisting with non-human animals by displaying compassion and embracing vegetarianism as a practice to end another form of oppression, speciesism, that links to the overall oppression of women as well.

Sources:

Curtin, Deane. “Contextual Moral Vegetarianism.” ‘Toward an Ecological Ethic of Care.’ Hypathia, No. 6, Spring 1991, pp. 68-71. http://www.animal-rights-library.com/texts-m/curtin01.htm

Eisenberg, Zoe. “Meat Heads: New Study Focuses on How Meat Consumption Alters Men’s Self-Perceived Levels of Masculinity.” HuffPost, HuffPost, 13 Jan. 2017, www.huffpost.com/entry/meat-heads-new-study-focuses_b_8964048.

Gaard, Greta. “Ecofeminism on the Wing: Perspectices on Human-Animal Relations.” Women & Environments. https://www.academia.edu/2489929/Ecofeminism_on_the_Wing_Perspectives_on_Human-Animal_Relations

Rolls, Barbara J., et al. “Gender Differences in Eating Behavior and Body Weight Regulation.” Health Psychology, vol. 10, no. 2, 1991, pp. 133–142. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1037/0278-6133.10.2.133.

Barbara J. Rolls examines studies surrounding gendered eating behaviors to discuss the overall differences between men and women in terms of societal norms of food. Rolls identifies such differences between different age groups of men and women, the eating habits of men and women, as well as the impact of social environment and societal standards of appearance on gendered dieting and eating disorders. This source is very informative in displaying information regarding gendered eating practices as it lends to the idea that there are gendered differences in the foods that are being eaten and how they are being eaten. It is also illuminating on not only the women’s eating habits and their struggles, but also details men’s eating habits.

I have lived in Upstate New York all of my life, and the picture I chose is one that I took in I believe the summer of 2015 in my hometown. There’s a small portion of landscape seen under the sunset, and unfortunately a lot of the pictures that I took from that period of my life have been lost, but this picture holds a lot of personal memories and values for me. I remember we were driving up the large hill that is near my house to see the most amazing sunset I have ever seen, and made my grandfather pull over so I could take pictures of it. I stood outside taking pictures of the magnificent view over the barren corn fields until it got dark and I don’t think I could ever forget how breathtaking it was to experience this sunset in real time.

Living in rural upstate New York, I was surrounded by many farms and Amish homes, so where I lived wasn’t very populous or busy. All us neighborhood kids that lined the street had free rein of the environment around us and we took advantage of it nearly everyday. I grew up being outside the majority of the time that I wasn’t in school, exploring the woods and streams behind my house in the nearly 4 acres of land my family possessed, playing man-hunt in the summer nights with all of my neighbor friends, and wandering through the rolling hills of corn fields that surrounded my home. I also remember that as a younger child I never wore shoes anywhere in my small part of town. I could say so much more about the emotions and memories this picture draws from me, but now that I haven’t lived there since summer 2016, I can say that it makes me feel, more than anything, nostalgic and guilty that I took nature for granted, rather than being more appreciative of every aspect of it.

There was always an appreciation of what nature provided in my community, whether it be from hunting, fishing, or growing our own produce in the large gardens I had in my backyard to the larger fields of produce being grown by local farmers. It was a much simpler time when nature was very much an integral part of my community, however I never recall there being a stressed importance on nature other than the fact that most of the town hunted and fished in it. I don’t believe that this place would function on the basis of Terry Tempest Williams’s bedrock of democracy. I don’t necessarily believe as though my community has the sense of passion and deep connection, more so than just an appreciation. It is not to be diminished that there is appreciation present, but as Barbara Kingsolver and Terry Tempest Williams both allude to, there is no sense of protection of nature. Referring to land, Williams states that, “…they will not remain ecologically intact without our vigilance, without our willingness to protect what is wild.” (Williams 6). My community lacks the value of protecting and preserving nature to its highest potential to be able to continue to use it as a resource, but instead only views it as a resource and nothing more.

I do agree very much with Kingsolver’s view on needing wildness. Without having some sort of wildness in one’s life, it would be hard to have a sense of what the world and nature has to offer them. When Kingsolver talks about her husband showing kids from cities about fruits and vegetables coming from the ground, it shocked me that they had not a fraction of a clue about what nature has to offer. “I wonder what it will mean for people to forget that food, like rain, is not a product but a process.” (Kingsolver 1). This quote gives me great emotion due to the fact that I was lucky enough to grow up being in tune with nature to some extent rather than being completely out of touch with it. I believe it is completely possible for city-dwellers to have this connection with nature, if they choose to seek it out. When we live in a society in which all of our basic needs are essentially presented to us, there is no direct need for those in cities to go into nature unless it’s by choice. To me, some form of connection with nature, whether it be small or large, is significant in raising awareness of ecological needs and delving into this bedrock of democracy in order to protect the world around us more efficiently.

Annotated Sources:

Kingsolver, Barbara. “Knowing Our Place.” Small Wonder. HarperCollins Publishers, 2002. Kingsolver details her experiences with encountering nature in order to describe how crucial it is to have a connection to nature and wildness. In her writings, she discusses what it is like to live surrounded by nature and the ways in which she sees the value in tapping into this connection. Kingsolver examines nature as it impacts her writings, her daily living, and the way in which she views the world by utilizing aspects of the wilderness.

Williams, Terry Tempest. “Home Work.” Red: Passion and Patience in the Desert. Vintage Books, 2002. Terry Tempest Williams details the struggles between citizens of Southern Utah and the government involvement regarding the protection of nature. Williams writes about the usage of wilderness for commercial development rather than allowing it to be the unregulated wilderness it. Williams discusses the failures of the government to protect the land of her hometown while also examining her personal link to the deserts of Utah.

Environmental degradation is a widespread issue for the Global South that has impacted females arguably more than any demographic in these nations. In my post from last week, I discussed the negative impacts of climate change that women face in Third World nations. From living in agrarian societies where women are mostly relied on as the sole providers of sustainable food sources, degradation of the environment has put a large strain on the food sources for many (Daza 1). Leading into the discussion on drinking water in the Global South, women experience the same types of oppression when it comes to food and water. With a lack of resources, women and female children are forced to travel often far distances to provide their families with necessities because it is a societal expectation of them. Women and young girls travelling for resources increases the risk of physical danger and health issues, and decreases the time that women may spend doing other such things like getting an education (UNWater 1). On top of being expected to take on sustaining their families, women are also limited with work due to less job opportunities, leaving them with seasonal agricultural jobs that yield little in sustenance (UNWater 1). When reading the interview with activist Vandana Shiva, she discusses her experience with the impacts that deforestation had on peasant women in India. Shiva stated that these peasant women were well versed in what nature had to offer them, but with the forests being cleared, these women no longer had the trees and plants needed for food sources, firewood, and medicinal purposes (London 1).

In Bina Agarwal’s article on ecofeminism, or as she refers to it as “feminist environmentalism,” the main difference between her perception of ecofeminism and that of Karen Warren and Laura Hobgood-Oster, is stated to be a matter of ideology versus material. Agarwal addresses the commonalities of key elements of most ecofeminist theories, those of which are the connection between the oppression of women and nature, women/nature being inferior to men/culture, women’s efforts link to environmental efforts, and that there is a call to use more non-hierarchical systems in society (Agarwal 120). These elements are not unfamiliar and can also be found in the perceptions of Warren and Hobgood-Oster. However, Agarwal goes further to express her belief that ecofeminism in the West has ignored material influences, such as class, race, and lived experiences with nature (Agarwal 122-123). Agarwal also argues that Western ecofeminism generalizes women into one large category without recognizing the impacts of intersectionality on the impacts of environmental degradation, and that it almost gives off the idea that the link between women and nature is essentialist (Agarwal 122-123). 

I personally find that the perspective of Bina Agarwal more intriguing due to her use of the word “material” when describing the differences. Agarwal advocates for a more experience-based approach to ecofeminism, taking into account the lived realities that different demographics of women to examine how gender and class play into the environmental changes and their responses to it (Agarwal 126). Last week when I read a post by my classmate Mandi, she raised the excellent point of intersectionality playing a part in ecofeminist thinking that I had not previously considered. With Agarwal’s perception of ecofeminism, it becomes more clear that not every person has the same relationship or experiences with nature, and are impacted in much different ways based on their gender, geographical location, race, and class/caste. I do find that the ideological theories presented by thinkers such as Karen Warren and Laura Hobgood-Oster are very beneficial in terms of identifying thoughts and oppressions that can’t be physically seen, especially through Warren’s connections. Pairing with Agarwal’s experiential take on ecofeminism, I feel as though it would benefit the cause of ecofeminism to not only examine what it believed about the oppressive link of women and nature, but also to see it in real-time to further challenge, as Agarwal states, notions made about gender and the environment’s purpose, as well as the material division of labor and resources based on gender, and the human use of the environment’s resources (Agarwal 127).

Sources:

Agarwal, Bina. “The Gender and Environment Debate: Lessons from India.” Feminist Studies, vol. 18, no. 1, 1992, pp. 119–158. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/3178217. Accessed 9 Feb. 2020.

Daza, Vanessa. “Two Fights in One: Feminism and Environmentalism.” Dejusticia, www.dejusticia.org/en/column/two-fights-in-one-feminism-and-environmentalism/.

Shiva, Vandana, and Scott London. “In the Footsteps of Gandhi: An Interview with Vandana Shiva.” Global Research, 3 Feb. 2016, www.globalresearch.ca/in-the-footsteps-of-gandhi-an-interview-with-vandana-shiva/5505135.

UN-Water. “Gender: UN-Water.” UN, www.unwater.org/water-facts/gender/.

Out of the many feminist theories that exist, ecofeminism seems to be a theory that is not as largely discussed when thinking about the oppression of women. Ecofeminism, simply put, is the link between feminist issues and ecological issues that intertwine to examine the oppressions of both women and nature. According to Laura Hobgood-Oster, ecofeminism provides environmental thought to feminism, and feminist thought to environmentalism (Hobgood-Oster 1). With the examinations of power and domination, it is acknowledged that in ecofeminist thinking, the patriarchy contributes to the oppression women as well as nature. Women are viewed as more in tune with nature, given the fact that nature is often described using feminine qualities. Ecofeminism challenges structures of power rather than individuals because patriarchal structures are what justify dominance over nature and women (Hobgood-Oster 2). 

When thinking about issues that can be addressed in an ecofeminist perspective, one of the first ones that came to mind was climate change. Climate change is a very widely discussed environmental issue in recent years that people are beginning to be more cognizant about, whether it is agreeing or disagreeing with its presence. On the supporting side of the climate change discussion, it is recognized that there are many aspects of climate change that are heavily impacting poor nations that rely on agriculture, and specifically the women that live in these poor nations. According to an article from Dejusticia, climate change has presented unequal effects on women who are stricken by poverty whose food security is growing smaller. The author of the article, Vanessa Daza states, “…in places where the effects of climate change are deeply felt, women must travel greater distances, which translates to less time for education and more exposure to health risks and violence.” (Daza 1). Women in developing countries that also work in agriculture don’t have the same access to land rights as men do, as well as difficulties in changing jobs due to less job opportunities granted to women (Daza 1). This is only one factor of climate change, but the lack of importance that is placed on women’s lives in these developing nations is directly linked to the suffering of the environment that they need to survive off of.

From Karen Warren’s eight connections between women and nature, the conceptual connection intrigued me the most. Warren’s conceptual connection states that there are links through conceptual structures of domination that work to oppress women and nature through androcentric values. One such conceptual connection that Warren identifies is the use of value dualisms, in which there are human/nature, reason/emotion, mind/body, and man/woman (Brendan 1). The dualism of the pairs work to establish which part of the pair holds the most value or hierarchy, in which Warren states that human, reason, mind, and man are more highly valued than the more traditionally feminine counterparts of the pairs, being nature, emotion, and woman. With these dualisms establishing concepts of superiority for male/masculine, it allows for the continued oppression and subordination of women and nature. The hierarchical structure that is conceptualized by society perpetuates the exploitation of those aspects of dualism that are labeled female and/or feminine. Hobgood-Oster ties in these dualism into her article as well, discussing that these patriarchal dichotomies of domination and binary division will continue (Hobgood-Oster 2-3). Tying into the real-life issue of climate change, an example of this conceptual connection is shown through the inferiority of women in nature when it comes to climate change. Regardless of the opinion one holds about climate change, it can still be acknowledged that women in poverty that depend on agriculture are struggling without little resolution. Their continued oppression is directly linked with the oppression of nature that is caused by the hands of humans and other structures of domination, such as capitalism and sexism.

 

Sources: 

Brendan. “Warren’s Introduction to EcoFeminism.” There It Is, 21 Jan. 2014, thereitis.org/warrens-introduction-to-ecofeminism/.

Doza, Vanessa. “Two Fights in One: Feminism and Environmentalism.” Dejusticia, www.dejusticia.org/en/column/two-fights-in-one-feminism-and-environmentalism/.

Hobgood-Oster, Laura. Ecofeminism: Historic and International Evolution . 18 Aug. 2002.