by Hannah Lichtenstein
The association between women and nature is a long-recognized means by which societies have sought to understand an unpredictable and powerful earth. Looking to mythology, the Greek tradition describes the goddess Gaia as the personification of Earth. In Hindu narratives, she goes by the name Bhūmi or Prithvi. Secular discourse too, spanning centuries. is riddled with prose of those cowering in fear, thanking and praying to a natural world that is distinctly coded as feminine — “Mother Nature” as we so often hear it used. Women, like the Earth, are reproductive, harboring the ability to give life. In addition to these conceptual associations, we may also look to lived experiences to identify these connections. For example, the division of labor in many societies, particularly those with subsistence economies like in Niger, classifies a woman’s domain and work to be within the domestic sphere of such endeavors as traveling to collect water or weaving baskets. With this understanding of a feminine nature and women’s aptness for the natural world, it is unsurprising to think the destruction, domination, and management of Earth is often deeply tied to the marginalization and subordination of women.
It is precisely this issue, the critical linkage between gender and environment, that lays at the heart of the academic, political and philosophical movement known as “Ecofeminism.” The term was coined in the mid-1970s, as a school of thought that pulled from various anti-oppression movements at the time. Environmental disasters such as those at Love Canal and Three Mile Island were painful examples of deadly events spawned by science and the cost of growth paid by communities and their environment. Women were often the first to speak out about the damage.
By the 1970s, modernization and industrialization were proving to be malevolent tyrants, and it was unclear what human or environmental events would be sufficient enough to finally trigger regulation and control. It was this issue, in part, that influenced a body of literature that began investigating how culture — technology, science, materialism — was so harmfully triumphing over nature and in turn, how this dynamic might be further understood and addressed through a feminist approach. Here we begin to see the roots and underlying theory of ecofeminism: “These women conceptualized the earth as an oppressed being, which was exploited for the economic and political gain of others. They saw similarities in men’s treatment of the earth and their treatment of women” (Harkness). The seeds of ecofeminism were planted and have been flourishing ever since, coming to encompass a wide and multifarious range of issues that speak to not just the oppression of women but others marginalized by deeply ingrained social, economic and cultural values.
Theoretical considerations aside, it is useful to give concrete examples of ideas that have been analyzed from an ecofeminist perspective. Pollution and environmental contamination have been taken on by ecofeminists. Discussion of agricultural pesticide use, toxic waste removal, and other issues implicitly raise questions of who exactly faces more physical and psychological long-term damage from these decisions. While no one can escape a changing global climate, women are disproportionately affected by the effects of this phenomenon. In Niger, since most men travel to work in the city, rural women are forced to grapple with and manage the effects of climate change first hand in their day-to-day tasks. The arduous undertaking of traveling to obtain clean water is one major way Niger women bear the brunt of a changing climate. Women have to travel anywhere between 4-6 miles to find (often contaminated) water in Niger. Considering the rising temperatures and that drought is “by far the greatest risk facing the country”, that commute is likely to increase as areas with water shrivel up.
Take the top of the biomagnification chain, for example, which traces the increasing concentration of a substance in the tissues of organisms in successively higher levels of the food chain. The highest concentration of a potentially harmful substance in our environment ends up being concentrated in the female body, within the child-rearing relationship more specifically.
As a movement, ecofeminism does not merely seek to identify and articulate these issues. It is also a call to action. As Mies describes, “whenever women acted against ecological destruction and/or the threat of atomic annihilation, they immediately became aware of the connection between patriarchal violence against women, other people and nature, and that: In defying this patriarchy we are loyal to future generations and to life and this planet itself” (Mies). Women who are at risk see environmental injustices first hand every day and ultimately have more to lose should their voices be stilled. Kenya’s Green Belt Movement, India’s Chipko movement and dozens of other environmental justice campaigns sprouted and continue to gain energy from women and their unique experiences/position.
Ecofeminism asks us to re-evaluate, to look at issues we have examined for decades, through a different lens. It challenges us to re-conceptualize our thinking about an oppressed earth by looking closely at who and what creates and perpetuates harmful mores and whose bodies suffer the most at the hands of these perpetrators. In turn, it also seeks to empower and mobilize those who have been mistreated by calling attention to their potential power as leaders in ameliorating these concerns.
Sources:
Adams, Carol J. The Sexual Politics of Meat a Feminist-Vegetarian Critical Theory. Bloomsbury Academic, 2017.
Harkness, Jane. “Ecofeminism 101: Women Going Green – Athena Talks – Medium.” Medium, Augmenting Humanity, 12 Feb. 2018, medium.com/athena-talks/ecofeminism-101-women-going-green-910d72f7295f.
Mies, Maria, and Vandana Shiva. Ecofeminism. Zed Books, 2014
“Tackling Climate Change in Niger.” World Bank, www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2013/04/03/tackling-climate-change-in-niger
