“Nature is not out there, we are part of it. And…protecting nature is not a luxury…The very foundation of every economic activity is the rivers, the lands, the forests and the biodiversity” (Shiva, film above).
Bina Argawal, in her writing “The Gender and Environment Debate: Lessons from India,” states that women of India face a significant crisis in their rural towns and villages due to environmental degradation. She describes Dr. Vandana Shiva’s understanding of the demise of the feminine principle, Shakti, during the colonization/industrial period and the overthrow by masculine power, Parusha, bringing about the death of Prakriti (activity and diversity) and the inevitable “marginalisation, devaluation, displacement, and ultimate dispensability” of the feminine (p124). This brought about violence against women and nature that remains today. Yet, Argawai argues, that is a Hindu understanding and does not address the entire story.
Argawai believes women can…”be seen as both victims of the destruction of nature and as repositories of knowledge about nature, in ways distinct from the men of their class” (p126). They have key information, passed down from generation to generation by their mothers and grandmothers, regarding plant life and how to utilize nature. But through appropriation by the state, causing destruction of the environment and appropriation by privatization, causing a more extreme divide between the poor and wealthy, this knowledge is slowly in decline. What was once communal resources and knowledge has been stripped away, leaving the poor poorer. Deforestation, excessive fertilizer and pesticide use, and groundwater level drops have all contributed to the ever increasing lack of natural resources. “The statization and privatization of communal resources have, in turn, systematically undermined traditional institutional arrangements of resource use and management” (p 133). No longer are local communities the stewards of their own environment.
Along with the two significant issues stated previously, there is also population growth and the Green Revolution. The former is still under study, but the latter created immediate abundance of crops but long term degradation of soil. And, again, we see the dualism that Warren described in our readings last week, with scientists seen as experts while locals are viewed as ignorant, “between intellectual and physical labor, between city and countryside, and be- tween women and men” (p 136). Until we no longer divide and conquer, these issues will persist.
Women in Nepal. borgenproject.org
There is extreme gender/class division in India. The problem is three-fold, as Agawai describes:
- a pre-existing gender division of labor requires women and young girls to spend more time searching and acquiring daily tools and food for family due to deforestation and poisoning of water and the loss of generational knowledge of plants for sustenance and medicine
- there are fewer females vs. males, they (women) become ill due to parasites and pesticides in water and soil, and morbidity rate is higher, including a rise in suicide from feeling alienated and alone
- women have fewer resources, labor and training opportunities, limited property rights, the destruction of social and community support systems where once women worked together, and now each family fends for themselves
“As some environmentalists have rightly argued, this predominantly commercial approach to forestry, promoted as “scientific forestry,” is reductionist-it is nature seen as individual parts rather than as an interconnected system of vegetation, soil, and water; the forest is reduced to trees, the trees to biomass” (p 144). The unsustainable monoculture imposed in these Indian communities contrasts sharply with the vast diversity from the past, leaving women with very little in the way of food, medicine, firewood, and water. These issues are multiplied by climate change. “(Dr. Vandana) Shiva’s idea was that a decentralized approach to agriculture, based upon a diverse array of locally adapted seeds, would be more likely to weather the vagaries of a changing climate than a system relying on only a few varieties” (https://www.britannica.com/biography/Vandana-Shiva). But the state and private companies have little interest in what is best for women and their families.
I find the Global South perspective much more interesting and imperative than the Western one. Because Indian women live with nature and derive their livelihood, health and longevity from it directly, there are dire consequences for them both immediately and in the future. Since the 1970’s India’s women have acted in protests, forest protection activism, forming organizations to change and implement policy toward a biodiverse culture, just as they enjoyed before colonization. Western ecofeminists see all women as one group, which often marginalizes the plight of third world communities and women of color. Combining intersectional feminism with an ecological approach would go much further to understand and incorporate remedies for women with differing societal struggles. Western ecofeminists view the connection of women and nature as being dominated by man (patriarchy) who believes himself to be superior. India ecofeminism appears to actively work within the dominant political structure to change minds and policy.
The more I discover the deep connection between the treatment of women and the treatment of their land, the angrier I become. And the more frustrated. So many women in countries other than the United States are suffering at the hands and policies of a structurally contrived patriarchy. Can it be that government and big business have no conscious when it comes to raping and pillaging both women and our planet? It seems to be so.
Hi Tari,
In response to your perspective of the Global South (Non-Westernized), I too felt a bit uncomfortable upon learning more about the ways in which women have been displaced. I also think that Agarwal said it best, that environmental degradation not only affect women in the US and Canada, but everywhere. She was very careful not to put down feminist scholars but want them to understand the true nature of oppression of women in Third World countries not as “poor peasant woman” but as women who live in economically challenged communities, due to environmental degradation. “I locate the perspectives and responses of poor peasant and tribal women (perspectives which are indeed often interactive and holistic) in their material reality, in their dependence on and actual use of natural resources of survival, the knowledge of nature gained in that process, and the broader culture parameters which define peoples activities and modes of thinking in these communities…” (Agarwal, 149).
In the Westernized sense, just because women of the Third world might not behave think or do not share the same beliefs/values such as religion, education and so on, they are considered poor and even demoralized. When in reality their struggles cannot be compared to the Westernized way. Argawal illustration and choice of words toward Western feminist scholars is so straight direct that I want to hear what else she has to say.
Mary
Hi.
You mention he violence against women Dr. Vandana Shiva discusses in her essay. I think it’s also worth mentioning the Chipko movement Bina Agarwal discusses and the importance of that movement. It was organized to support feminist environmentalism. She says that although the approach doesn’t necessarily take into account class and gender concerns it did create an understanding for these women, of forest protection and environmental regeneration. As a result of the movement and protest from the women they overturned the decision to cut down a forest for a potato seed farm. These women protested because they didn’t want their only source of local fuel and fodder. They felt that the money that would come from the commercial potato farm would not make up for the “fuel collecting journeys” they would have to take as a result. When you say also that it makes you angry because of the connections to treatment of women and the land. I agree. I also find myself more frustrated as I learn more about women-nature connections and the oppression that results from patriarchal systems in place. However, when I see movements established like the Chipko, although not perfect, it is a step in the right direction to liberating women and their relationship to nature. Agarwal says, “environmental and gender concerns taken together open up both the need for reexamining and the possibility of throwing new light on, many long standing issues…it also underlines the critical importance of grassroots political organization…”(Agarwal 152). I believe this is true in both the Global South and the Global North to initiate change. Do you think grassroots groups are enough to challenge government and big business oppression? I wonder if the results would be different in the Global South vs. the Global North.
No, Holly, I don’t think grassroots efforts are enough to alter the course of the state and big business. They have little concern for the poor and indigenous. I think of the Dakota pipeline here at Standing Rock Indian Reservation and, no matter how long or how many stood up to the Energy Transfer Partners, they lost. Protesters in the middle of winter, standing up for what they knew to be an illegal act on their Indian Reservation and, still, to no avail. It delayed it, but didn’t stop it. Governments must change and policy must change.
Greetings Tari.
Your post is very engaging, you have many comments on “…the global south.” Agarwal described the problem of extreme gender and class division in India- fewer females than males, a high morbidity rare and rise in suicide, and also she(did not mention) the practice of killing girl babies. India has a dominant caste system, and most of these women are in the lower caste, so the state would have little interest in their well being. Crusaders like Dr.Shiva give hope, but is she still active? The struggle continues there by groups like JAIVIK KRANTI for Anna Swaraj 2020 in the Diverse women for Diversity piece. Who is supporting women here? You wrote “to dismantle dualism is one way Ecofeminist can change the subjugation of women…and so many women in countries other than the US are suffering at the hands and policies of a structurally contrived patriarchy.” The dualism of mind/body is seen in the continued scourge of domestic violence in the US. Natalie Nanasi wrote in SLATE about the recent unnoticed change in this admdinistration’s stance about Domestic Violence. (January 2020) They stripped many of the criteria used, making it harder for women to claim it. No feminist group raised the alarm. Seasonal farms and poultry farms female workers, are mistreated by their employers, not much attention given from the Ecofeminists here. You are correct. Government and big business don’t have a conscience. But our feminists seem to reinforce this behavior.
bridget.
I enjoyed reading your blog, it brought out another new perspective outside of women and nature, or women in nature. The fact that both women and nature are being over looked and controlled by men in many other countries is frustrating as you said. In my blog I stated that it is unfortunate that in some countries it is apart of culture and a lifestyle, to be under or to be managed by a man. Whether it be politically or daily in the household, women will probably always have to deal with this “power struggle” because for years and centuries there is fear or out stepping that boundary or not wanting change. I do feel that most of us, especially millennials have been raised in a mostly open minded environment and especially if you grew up in the typical modern American life everyone mostly holds their own end of the bargain in home/family life. With that being said, do you think that some women do not feel suppressed by the control by men over nature and themselves, or that they believe solely that it is apart of their culture, religion, lifestyle and being born into that they do not see any issue in it.
test