Jayne wrote;
Are there gender implications at >the production
end? The
>demise of the "family farm" and the rise of
>agribusiness...?
Jayne you brought up a very important point.
I think there are very strong gender implications
at work here. When you have both parents working
in a majority of families and a large number of
single parent household, where the parent is
working, I think it is obvious that the
possibilities for making preserves, cooking and
baking are decreasing. When we add to this the
need to be environmentally conscious about the
products we buy, it means that going shopping can
can be a tedious and demanding activity(reading
and analysing ingredients)if we are not fortunate
enough to have a local producer whom we can trust.
In order to be able to eat what is locally
produced according to the seasons, i. e. to be in
tune with the nature's productive cycles we must
do some planning and preserve and dry local
produce for the winter. This requires time indeed,
and believe me, I speak from experience. While at
the same time trying to pursue an academic career,
where the pace of competition has not diminished,
spend some quality time with my family and ideally
also be involved in local politics. For many of my
female friends it is becoming impossible to live
like this. But what are our options, here ?
I certainly think that there are connections
between the fast-food production/consumptions and
ecofeminism, which we need to uncover.
It appears as if even though women have advanced
in a certain sense in the political, academic, and
business career lifestyles have not change. There
has been no reduction in working hours or in
career competition and there has been no real
change in the quality of life issues, whereby
healthy sound food which is locally produced
becomes high priority a human/nature
relationships.
Annica Kronsell
Department of Political Science
P.O.Box 52
Lund University
S-221 00 Lund, Sweden
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Oct 27 08:09:39 MDT 1994
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Oct 27 08:09:39 1994
Received: from seventhsun.ehsg.saic.com (seventhsun.ehsg.SAIC.COM [139.121.79.9]) by
csf.Colorado.EDU (8.6.9/8.6.9/CNS-3.5) with SMTP id IAA19358 for
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Thu, 27 Oct 1994 08:09:37 -0600
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from lan828.ehsg.SAIC.COM by seventhsun.ehsg.saic.com with SMTP id AA04471
(5.67a8/IDA-1.5 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>); Thu, 27 Oct 1994 10:20:41 -0400
Received: from DEPT_828_LAN/MAILQUE by LAN828.EHSG.SAIC.COM (Mercury 1.12);
Thu, 27 Oct 94 10:26:43 -600
Received: from MAILQUE by DEPT_828_LAN (Mercury 1.12); Thu, 27 Oct 94 10:26:10 -600
Organization: SAIC EHSG WE RECYCLE
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 1994 10:26:05 EST
Subject: breast cancer
Priority: normal
X-Mailer: PMail v3.0 (R1a)
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Hi-
I've been lurking in the background for quite some time now--
basically because I accidentally subscribed myself to the list while
subscribing somebody else, but I stayed on because I found some of
the issues of enough interest to at least scan through them every
morning. Anyway, I'm happy to see some of the discussion trying to
move on to new issues.
I don't know how many of you heard it, but yesterday the news had
some report linking, although tenuously, having had an abortion with
increased rates of breast cancer. I wonder if anybody knows about
this report and whether they are saying that having an abortion can
increase your risk of breast cancer or whether certain socio-
economic variables (e.g., diet, access to health care, education,
etc.) that may (or may not--I don't know) lead to higher rates of
abortion may also lead to an increased incidence of breast cancer.
Any thoughts on this? I know it may not seem on the surface an
ecofeminist issue but I think at its core it is.
Thanks- Colt
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Oct 27 08:12:48 MDT 1994
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Oct 27 08:12:48 1994
Received: from uu9.psi.com (uu9.psi.com [38.145.107.9]) by csf.Colorado.EDU
(8.6.9/8.6.9/CNS-3.5) with SMTP id IAA19449 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Thu, 27 Oct
1994 08:12:42 -0600
Received: from wri.org by uu9.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-PSI/PSINet) via SMTP;
id AA18716 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Thu, 27 Oct 94 10:19:39 -0400
Received: from smtpgate id: 2EAFB390.BA3
(WordPerfect SMTP Gateway V3.1a 04/27/92)
Received: from earth (WP Connection)
Received: from TCPBRIDGE (WP Connection)
Received: from HOBBES (WP Connection)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mmdf-Warning: Parse error in original version of preceding line at earth.wri.org
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mmdf-Warning: Parse error in original version of preceding line at earth.wri.org
Subject: Re: Yea for Regional Consumption! (SMTP
Date: Thu Oct 27 10:05:04 1994
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Jayne and Ahandrige (sp?): I *love* food and agriculture issues
and I think they are "fertile" :) discussion material. Some
thoughts:
1. I also read the Sierra Club issue on food - it was good, but
in relation to some of the interest in diversity issues (esp.
class) that the restaurant portion was problematic. Chez Panisse
is very exclusive (I got to go once and I was intimidated),
certainly not food for the masses. The sad thing is, I think that
corporate agriculture has resulted in cheaper food (i know, i
know at what cost!) but still more is available now at cheaper
prices. Does locally grown, organic produce have to remain in the
realm of the middle/upper classes?
2. Seeds. Did anyone see some articles in maybe the New York
Times or Wash. Post that Vandana Shiva's latest efforts were
focussing on opposition to a treaty which allowed seeds to
patented. Farmers in India now often save seeds from year to
year, which is impossible with hybrids. It also has implications
for biodiversity. Is anyone involved in saving heirloom seed
varieties. My reaction was let agribusiness do what they want,
the grassroots folks can refuse to plant Burpees Bestest Super
Giant Longkeeping Tomatoe/Squash hybrid. But perhaps small
farmers will be restricted by cost or lack of access.
Paige
