On 10 March, Kylie wrote:
For example we in, Perth Western Australia, via local councils are
recycling more refuse than that that is left for landfill. This started
small - just a few odd 'greenies' and now every self-respecting
middle class person recycles.
-----------------------------------------------------------
I think that this is a large part of the problem and has two aspects.
a) 'green' behaviour is seen as a middle class activity; and,
b) the middle class see recycling as sufficient.
Until other classes come on board and see themselves as part of both
problem and solution, things are unlikely to improve. Additionally,
the middle class lifestyle is in large part responsible for the
current environmental degredation which is taxing our minds (if not
our businesses).
This raises issues of class and social justice, both of which are
bound up in issues of economics with which we must wrestle before the
solution can be developed fully.
Alistair McCulloch.
(A former lurker who has now come out of his shell!)
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Mar 13 04:00:06 MST 1995
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 1995 18:58:51 +0800
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kylie Matthews)
Subject: Re: women degrade environments too
>Although I agree with most of what Kylie said a few days ago about indivi=
>dual
>responsibility to the environment, one statement did bother me:
>>A great many of the Earths deserts were man-made. (I am not >being sexis=
>t,
>womyn had nothing to do with this destruction.)
The actual deserts eg in Arizona were man-made by the male dominated
American govt. It was also the American Govt that approved the use of
Agent Orange (a defoliant) without thought to anything but defense results.
A lot of 'mans' destruction has been for pretty pathetic reasons -
defense, economy- big business.
>Just as women in many cultures continue to participate in their own
>oppression, (often unconsciously) women in the past (and present) all too=
>
>often degrade their natural surroundings. There is a fair amount of
>anthropological/archaeological evidence that women, as the =
>
>primary collectors of plant food, were the original domesticators of our =
>most
>of our important crops, and in many parts of the world women are (and mor=
>e
>were in the past) the main farmers, fuel wood
>collectors, that have the most immediate impact on the environment.
Impact yes, but not devastators. There is a difference between food
gathering and planting and the deliberate deforestation that men engage
in. The slash and burn agriculture was not performed by the women but by
the men. this was damageing and irresponsible. Also I don't think we can
blame women equally for their actions as they had little choice (as do many
today) but to obey their male 'owners?'. Even the marriage ceremony until
very recently, maid a woman promise to obey her husband. Many women took
this very seriously even to the point of belieiving that they were at fault
for angering their husband who in turn beat them. This still goes on.
Women are still dying at the hands of their husbands here in Australia and
I'm sure in the US.
Yes women contribute to their oppression by not standing up for themselves,
but I would not judge them if I were you until youve walked ten miles in
their shoes. Infant socialisation goes a long long way.
>As an archaeologist interested in the origins of gender inequality and
>agriculture, I=92d like to know when/where the ecofeminists in this newsg=
>roup
>think the oppression of women and environments began, and if they have al=
>ways
>been linked together...I agree they seem to be associated in Western cult=
>ure,
>but what about in Native Africa, =
>
>Australia, the Americas? =
Native Australia. Australian Aboriginies did not oppress the environment.
They did however oppress their women (cautionary note: there were over 200
completely separate tribes and most were wiped out when white man came.
Therefore it is possible that not all oppressed their women.) An example
of that oppression was that old men could chose young women to have sex
with and the woman had no choice. Women would also be forced to have sex
with visiting tribal leaders, where there was no choice for them.
Decisions were in the hands of the men.
Africa is huge and has many diverse cultures most oppress women to various
degrees. But for a culture that appears not to oppress women read about
the pigmy tribe in central America. I'm sorry I cannot recall the author
or the title. It is written by an Anthropologist and he was the first and
possibly only person to go and study them. They also live in harmony with
their natural environment - do not exploit- it is completely sustainable.
Ahh I have just recalled the name of the book... 'The Forest People' and I
think its by an Anthropologist called Colin Turnball.
Enjoy!
Kylie.
>
>
>Finally, here=92s quote on women & agriculture I just ran across that I t=
>hought
>others might enjoy:
>
>=93My people believe if you are close to the Earth, you are close to
>people...What an African woman nurtures in the soil will eventually feed =
>her
>family. Likewise what she nutures in her relations will ultimately nutur=
>e
>her community. It is a matter of living the circle...Because we have
>forgotten our kinship with the land, our kinship with each other has beco=
>me
>pale.=94 unnamed Kenyan woman, cited in Refuge, by Terry Tempest
>Williams=
>, p.
>49, 1991
>
>Sandy Dunavan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The thing women have got to learn is that nobody gives you power. You just
take it. -- Roseanne Arnold.
