In the learning module this week, the first link, the VICE article “The Brazilian Slum Children Who Are Literally Swimming In Garbage” shows us how environmental impact the poor and the young in the global south. Recife is one of the largest cities in Brazil and is a popular tourist destination, it is famous for its bridges, architecture, and metropolitan area. But like a lot of tourist traps once you leave the ritzy white people areas, you are confronted with mass litter and poverty, to the point where children submerse themselves in garbage for amusement.
The second link concerns the South Asian Chipko Movement which I found most fascinating. “In the 1970s, an organized resistance to the destruction of forests spread throughout India and came to be known as the Chipko movement,” I did not know where tree hugger came from and am saddened at how the term has become an insult and is usually used to belittle the actions of environmentalist all over the world. The Chipko movement shows us both how women are particularly impacted by deforestation, and how they are on the front lines of activism fighting it. The movement began “in the hills where the forests are the main source of livelihood” the women of the hill tribes prevented a lot of forests being cut down by physically blocking the trees.
In “Speak Truth to Power” we see that African women face unique challenges that environmental damage makes harder. It is women that “hold primary responsibility for tilling the fields, deciding what to plant, nurturing the crops, and harvesting the food.” While of course everybody needs food and if their is a lack of agricultural growth African men and boys suffer to, but the work that goes into it is primarily handled by women, and again women were at the forefront of African enviornmental activism. In Kenya Wangari Maathai founded “The Green Belt Movement” in the late 70s which helped farmers plant trees which encouraged better growth.
Us Americans also need not go beyond our borders to see women lead environmental activism, the standing rock protests were lead by Native American women, who did not wish the Dakota Access Pipeline to be built on Native land. This was a two prong issue as it related both to Native American land rights, and protecting the environment from the damage these oil pipelines can do.
When it comes to the idea that behind the material deprivations and cultural losses of the marginalized and the poor lie the deeper issues of disempowerment and/or environmental degradation, I;m inclined to agree for the most part. But I also don’t believe it is particularly insightful or shocking. I think the reality is greed is the root cause of most forms of oppression (I am also aware that this is not a particularly profound statement either. I think poor people are going to naturally be disempowered, they have access to less resources,they often work long hours, and thus are not as able to participate as wealthy people who have more time and resources.
Overall I’m still not 100% convinced that it is women who suffer the most from climate change and environmental damage. I think definitely women seem to suffer uniquely but so do men it seems. The VICE article shows us that in Brazil boys are the ones playing in pools of garbage. I did try to find more info on the jobs that men are holding in Africa but couldn’t quite find ones that I knew for certain were linked to the jobs that womens are described as holding. To put it another way I wanted to find out what jobs men were doing while women were gathering women and planting, I failed to do so. But the reality is men were certainly doing something and that was impacted by the environment. I also take particular issue with a passage in “Speak Truth to Power” that says “As mothers, they notice when the food they feed their family is tainted with pollutants or impurities: they can see it in the tears of their children and hear it in their babies’ cries.” Now I am of course not denying this but I don’t like the way reads. I think arguments of mothers having this divine connection with children is superstitious. While of course good mothers have emotional connections to their children, so do good fathers. I’m still very critical of the whole argument that women are these magical creatures that have this deep connection to nature. It seems anti-science and based in patriarchal stereotypes.
I apologize if I went a little off topic on this.
Works Cited
https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/kwpwja/the-brazilian-slum-children-who-are-literally-swimming-in-garbage-0000197-v21n1
http://edugreen.teri.res.in/explore/forestry/chipko.htm
http://www.greenbeltmovement.org/wangari-maathai/key-speeches-and-articles/speak-truth-to-power