Rethinking the Environment : Women and Pollution
Pollution is an umbrella term that encompasses a wide array of assaults on
the environment. Broadly defined, it is best understood as the introduction
of substances into the natural environment which cannot readily be assimilated
or rendered harmless by normal biological processes (Crump 1991; Rodda 1991).
Pollution is usually categorized into one of three types, although there is
considerable cross-over and transfer among the three: air pollution (gas, chemical,
and particulate emissions), maritime and freshwater pollution (runoff and dumping
of chemical, industrial, biological, and waste effluents), and land pollution
(dumping and disposal of wastes of all kinds). Because the planetary ecosystem
is maintained by large-scale circulatory processes such as the hydrological
cycle, air circulationn systems, and ocean currents, pollution released in one
place is seldom contained: typically, pollutants are circulated over wide areas
(even globally) and throughout large ecosystems.
Natural processes, such as volcanic eruptions and erosion, produce pollution,
sometimes quite acutely, but the primary environmental concern today is with
anthropogenic pollution. Since the Industrial Revolution, human activities have
produced pollution at a dramatically accelerating pace, and the pollution produced
is increasingly toxic and persistent. "Man-made" substances of extreme
toxicity, such as pesticides, plastics, synthetic chemical products, and radioactive
wastes represent an increasing preponderance of the pollutants that are being
released into the environment.
Pollutants undermine the integrity and health of animals, humans, and ecosystems.
Over much of the globe, our oceans and waterways have become dumping grounds;
in many places just breathing is a health hazard, and wastelands of extreme
and chronic toxicity dot the global landscape. However, specific knowledge of
the effects of pollutants typically lags far behind our capacity to produce
and release them; controls over pollution lag even further behind. This gap
is due to several factors. While some pollutants act acutely and dramatically,
others act slowly and almost imperceptibly; in some cases, the effects of pollutants
may not be manifest for years or decades. The materials produced by chemical
industries are of particular concern. Literally thousands of synthetic compounds
have been introduced and accepted into ordinary life with little understanding
or monitoring of their potential environmental effects. The long-term effects
of slow-acting pollutants are often noticed only if someone is looking for them.
In general, there is much less commitment to examining the pollutant effects
of new substances than there is to their initial production and dissemination.
Many of the materials, products, and processes which produce pollutants have
become thoroughly integrated into modern lifestyles and economies (this includes
plastics, chemicals and cars, among others); it is difficult to achieve consensus
on the implementation of pollution control if such control is seen to necessitate
sharp reductions or elimination of these materials. Powerful forces are also
at work in undermining the efficacy of pollution control: industries, governments
and militaries typically have vested interests and profits in the economic activities
which pollute; while pollution control, in contrast, is often perceived as an
impediment to the conduct of their business.
Feminist perspectives and the work of women have made significant contributions
to our understanding of environmental issues and of pollution.
Feminists have been particularly active in reframing the ways in which environmental
relations in general, and pollution in particular, are understood. Women's Studies
scholars, especially in the sciences, have produced trenchant critiques of the
extent to which the ideological underpinnings of modern Western science are
environmentally destructive (see, for example, Harding 1986). Indeed, feminists
argue, the conduct of Western "industrialized" science, and the widespread
reliance on scientific rationality, is responsible for much of the egregious
environmental damage we now face (see for example Shiva 1989). Recent feminist
scholarship further challenges the prevailing paradigm of environmental understanding
which frames environmental problems as disruptions in physical systems. If environmental
problems are framed as physical phenomena, then feminist, humanistic and cultural
analysis is marginalized. It is clear to feminists that the environmental crisis
is not just a crisis of physical ecosystems; it is, rather, a crisis of culture.
Feminist environmental analysis refocuses attention on "agency" -
the institutions, behaviors, and norms that produce our dominant "culture
of pollution" (Seager 1993). Since these institutions, behaviors and norms
are gendered, it is clear that a feminist analysis of gender, power, and agency
is crucial to understanding the current environmental crisis. Everywhere, militaries
and multinational corporations rank at the top of the list of agents of environmental
destruction; militaries are especially powerful agents of destruction and are
responsible for a disproportionate share of global pollution of all kinds.
At the same time, many women activists and scholars have forged a vision of
recasting human relations to the environment with an "ecofeminist"
sensibility. Although there is a considerable range of ecofeminist thought,
most ecofeminists share a core understanding that the earth is a living entity,
that the web of life is interconnected, that all life is dependent on the health
and integrity of the whole, and that degradation of the environment is the product
of a cultural imbalance (see for example Caldecott & Leland 1983, Diamond
& Orenstein 1990).
Women activists and scholars have been instrumental in focusing attention on
the differential impacts of pollution. The effects of exposure to pollution
cannot be generalized across a population; they will vary considerably with
age, class, race, nationality, gender, geographic location and social location.
Feminists are particularly active in exploring the ways in which the health
impacts of pollution are different for men and for women. Women, whether in
Vietnam, India, or Canada, often experience distinctive - or singular - health
problems from exposure to environmental pollutants. The timing, prevalence,
and rate of particular cancers (especially breast cancer), reproductive disorders,
and chronic health impairments are typically very different in women than in
their male counterparts. Until women started organizing around these issues,
the impacts of pollution on women's health were ignored by mainstream environmental
organizations, by official health monitoring organizations, and by the biomedical
research establishment. Questions about women's health and pollution, until
recently, were not examined, not taken seriously, and not followed up. In consequence,
women's health has suffered and the opportunity for early detection of pernicious
environmental degradation was, in many cases, forfeited. Women community activists
and researchers in the medical and environmental fields are increasingly effective
in raising these issues and insisting that women's experiences of pollution
be disaggregated from the more typically generalized studies of pollution impacts.
The fact that men and women often do not experience the effects of pollution
in the same way can be attributed to three factors: economics, biology, and
gender roles. The effects of environmental degradation are pushed down the socio-economic
ladder and felt more acutely by those who cannot afford the means to buffer
themselves from environmental deterioration. Everywhere in the world, women
are disproportionately clustered at the bottom of the socio-economic ladder.
Biological differences between women and men, including important differences
in hormonal structure, mean that women and men are susceptible to different
health effects from exposure to toxins and other pollutants. For example, the
globally escalating rate of incidence of breast cancer in women is possibly
due to exposure to industrial pollutants, especially to the synthetic organo-chlorines
which are ubiquitous in industrialized countries. Everywhere in the world, women
do different work, in different places, and they fill different social roles,
than do men. Women everywhere have primary responsibility for meeting the daily
needs of their families. This often means that, literally, women are in the
front lines of exposure to toxins in the environment. Because of their social
location, (which also often has a real locational correlate), women are much
more likely than their male counterparts to have early and prolonged exposure
to water-borne pollutants, pollutants in the food chain, and household pollutants
including indoor air pollution.
Except for dramatic pollution incidents, such as oil spills or chemical factory
explosions, the effects of pollution are often subtle and only slowly apparent;
deterioration in environmental quality more typically shows up in small ways
in the ordinary, lived environment. As a result of women's social location as
managers of the ordinary domestic environment, they are also typically the first
to notice the effects of pollution. As a result, everywhere in the world, women
are now in the forefront of grassroots environmental organizing. To an astonishing
extent, women are the leaders in community-based environmental activism.
Women are less represented in the "official" channels of environmental
assessment, organizing, and policy-making. They are grievously under-represented
in the environmental sciences, in government agencies with environmental responsibility,
and in the large international environmentalist organizations. However, a number
of women who have been able to speak from positions of legitimated authority
have made significant contributions to our understanding of pollution. Dr. Rosalie
Bertell, an American now living in Canada, and Dr. Alice Stewart, of England,
have both challenged the nuclear establishment and have conducted research into
the health effects of exposure to radioactive materials. Both researchers have
compiled compelling evidence to support their conclusions that exposure to low
levels of nuclear radiation, even officially-designated 'acceptable risk' levels,
is extremely dangerous. The late Rachel Carson, in 1962, alerted the world to
the dangers of pesticide pollution; in her book, Silent Spring, she wrote, "What
we have to face is not an occasional dose of poison which has accidentally got
into some article of food, but a consistent and continuous poisoning of the
whole human environment." When Silent Spring was published, the chemical
industry attacked Carson with great vehemence and misogyny. However, the clarity
of her argument and the strength of her evidence eventually led to the banning
of DDT and dozens of other pesticides in the US and in many other industrialized
nations. (The pesticide industry, however, continues to produce and sell in
the Third World products which are banned in the wealthier industrialized countries).
Carson died of cancer in 1964, but the importance and prescience of her work
remains undiminished.
Joni Seager, a Professor of Geography at the University of Vermont, is the author of Earth Follies: Coming to Feminist Terms with the Global Environmental Crisis and The State of the Earth Atlas.
References and Further Reading
Caldecott, Leonie & Stephanie Leland (eds.) (1983) Reclaim the Earth. London: The Women's Press.
Carson, Rachel. Silent Spring (1962) Boston: Houghton Mifflin
Crump, Andy (1991) Dictionary of Environment and Development, London: Earthscan.
Diamond, Irene & Gloria Orenstein (eds.) (1990) Reweaving the World: The Emergence of Ecofeminism. San Francisco: Sierra Club Books.
Harding, Sandra (1986) The Science Question in Feminism. Ithaca NY: Cornell
University Press.
Rodda, Annabel (1991) Women andtheEnvironment. London: Zed Books.
Seager, Joni (1993) Earth Follies: Coming to Feminist Terms with the Global Environmental Crisis. NY: Routledge, London: Earthscan.
Seager, Joni (1995) The New State of the Earth Atlas. London: Penguin; NY: Simon & Schuster.
Shiva, Vandana (1989) Staying Alive: Women, Ecology &Development. London: Zed Books.

