Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay
As observed in the readings, connections between the oppressions of women and nature come in the reinforcement of ideals and behaviors which prevent women from achieving any true social or ecological advancement, leaving them perpetually fighting for their equality and challenging the oppressive beliefs which continue to harm women and the environment. Gebara writes, “while all these [ecofeminist] discussions are going on, the destruction of the Amazon forest, the rain forest, and others, continue” (94). Activism has to move beyond theorizing solutions, and begin enacting them. Otherwise, the very issues we so passionately converse over will never change, contributing to lasting harm. Corrêa, writing on the issue of poverty and environmental degradation in Brazil, notes publicity on the issue, “hasn’t yet resulted in the other children of the slums getting more money or services.” Gebara also notes this lack of action, which causes further harm, writing “they have not tried other alternatives to the garbage…they are hostages of their own poverty and inconsistency” (96). Oppression and inequality, even when recognized, are maintained without action to counter their validity.
One challenge in making real change, however, is the resistance activists meet. When Wangari Maathai, a Kenyan environmentalist and women’s rights advocate challenged the creation of a skyscraper which would lead to immense natural devastation, she faced appalling harassment and threats which specifically targeted her femininity: “a government-run newspaper questioned her sexual past…and [government officials] threatened to mutilate her genitals in order to force Maathai to behave ‘like women should’” (Maathai). This resistance to her work exemplifies the overlapping oppression of women and nature, as feminine protection of nature is seen as a threat to a patriarchal (President Moi) ideal of control (threats/political action/environmental degradation); thus, the angered masculine power relies on gendered social assumptions (in this case, gender-based violence) to intimidate diverse thinking, and neutralize the perceived threat.
Image by Dominic Wunderlich from Pixabay
Patriarchy (and other social inequalities) is/are reflected in human-nature interactions. And, despite the reality “that humanity itself is inseparable from nature as a whole,” one is less likely to experience or understand the inequalities of harm if their circumstances offer them the privilege of ignorance (something I mentioned in my blog on women in politics) (Kings 71). Environmental degradation does not impact people equally, and a system (patriarchy) which reinforces privilege (and social inequalities) does not have the framework for appropriately handling these issues in an inclusive/caring way. Hence, according to Gebara, “the solution of social and environmental problems and the oppression of women can’t come from this patriarchal structure of dependence” (96).
I agree; deeper issues of disempowerment and environmental degradation underlie the material deprivations and cultural losses of the marginalized/poor. When our society is fundamentally based in hierarchal belief systems, this hierarchy is going to adapt itself to various situations (in America, patriarchy, capitalism, and “Christian traditional theology”) (Gebara 98). By doing so, American society/values is/are structured around systems of inequality. With knowledge of intersectionality (pertaining to ecosystems and humanity), if these inequalities are upheld, those most affected by environmental degradation will be the ones who are not only causing less damage to the environment, but the ones with the least influence/capacity to stop the damage/fix the problem. According to Stokes, “one and a half billion people depend on forest directly for survival.” Further environmental destruction will eliminate the natural resources they rely on. Norgaard and York write, “in an unequal society, the impacts of environmental degradation fall disproportionately on the least powerful” (507). However, these impacted citizens may be more likely to advocate for the proper handling of an issue, championing causes and requesting support from those in power. It comes back to devaluation; when privileged groups devalue nature, and people with less social privilege, these inequalities (due to systemic prejudices) will leave socially underprivileged groups more vulnerable to the effects of environmental degradation (likely caused by the privileged groups). Thus, as I have argued in previous blog posts, impactful change requires 1) a shift in values, prioritizing environmental care and social equality; and 2) that we lift the voices of, and listen to, those most affected by environmental issues, coming together to develop sustainable solutions to heal the environment and help struggling communities. Our activism must reflect these opinions and values, challenging oppressive systems which disregard environmental and human diversity.
Works Cited
Corrêa, Talita. “The Brazilian Slum Children Who Are Literally Swimming in Garbage.” Vice, 20 January 2014. vice.com/en/article/the-brazilian-slum-children-who-are-literally-swimming-in-garbage-0000197-v21n1/. Accessed 1 April 2025.
Gebara, Ivone. “Ecofeminism: A Latin American Perspective.” Crosscurrents, Spring 2003, pp. 93-103; University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth, myCourses, WGS 307-7101: Ecofeminism: Philosophy & Practice – On-Line (2025 Spring CE1). Accessed 1 April 2025.
Kings, A.E. “Intersectionality and the Changing Face of Ecofeminism.” Ethics & the Environment, Volume 22, Number 1, Spring 2017, pp. 63-87 (Article); Indiana University Press; Project Muse, University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth. muse-jhu-edu.libproxy.umassd.edu/article/660551. Accessed 1 April 2025.
Maathai, Wangari. “Speak Truth to Power.” The Green Belt Movement, 4 May 2000. greenbeltmovement.org/wangari-maathai/key-speeches-and-articles/speak-truth-to-power. Accessed 1 April 2025.
Norgaard, Kari and Richard York. “Gender Equality and State Environmentalism.” Gender & Society, vol. 19, no. 4, August 2005, pp. 506-522; University of California-Davis; University of Oregon; University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth, myCourses, WGS 307-7101: Ecofeminism: Philosophy & Practice – On-Line (2025 Spring CE1). Accessed 1 April 2025.
Stokes, Calum. “Why the Chipko Movement is More Important Than Ever.” Academia.edu, n.d. academia.edu/34345657/Why_the_Chipko_Movement_is_more_important_than_ever. Accessed 1 April 2025.
I think this was a strong point to mention “activism has to move beyond theorizing solutions, and begin enacting them,” Gebara’s article reinforces this sentiment as well. This reminded me of Agrawal’s text from earlier in the semester who was critical of ecofeminist perspectives that emphasized theory and not much in the way of activism. I agree with both perspectives and feel similarly to you in that values need to shift, however with a culture that’s foundations are rooted in the opposite, it’s difficult to think what that will look like.
Dear Piper,
I appreciated your thoughtful reflections on the connection between the oppression of women and nature. Your observations highlighted how these injustices have been perpetuated and maintained, often without sufficient action to challenge their validity.
The example of Wangari Maathai, a Kenyan environmentalist and women’s rights advocate, is particularly inspiring. Her resistance to the creation of a skyscraper that would lead to immense natural devastation exemplifies the overlapping struggles of women and nature. Throughout history, women have faced oppression and been expected to be lesser than men. The feminine protection of nature is often seen as a threat to patriarchal ideals of control.
This issue is deeply connected to empowerment and environmental degradation, which disproportionately affects marginalized communities. To create meaningful change, it’s essential that we work together and listen to the voices of those most affected by environmental issues.
As an African proverb says, “One stick can create smoke, but together we can create a stronger fire.” I believe that collective action and solidarity are crucial in driving positive change.
Thank you for sharing your insights, Piper. I look forward to continuing this conversation.
The relationship between disempowerment and environmental degradation is a complex issue that connects with various social, economic, and gender-related factors. The articles you chose by Corrêa, Gebara, and Kings were a great way to give us readers insights into how these factors converge, the main point of marginalized communities like Brazilian slum children, and how ecofeminism can provide a resource for understanding these challenges. But what stuck with me the most is the children in Corrêa’s article because they are not only fighting against poverty but also a toxic environment that negatively impacts their health and future. The situation of these slum children is a direct consequence of socio-economic neglect, revealing a broader systemic issue. The degradation of their environment reflects a lack of attention and investment in marginalized communities, illustrating how disempowerment leads to deteriorating living conditions. Children in these environments are more at risk of waterborne diseases, respiratory issues, and other health complications. This situation shows us the urgent need for better waste management and environmental policies that prioritize the health and well-being of vulnerable populations. This is valuable because it shows us how certain governments and politicians don’t fight enough for these marginalized communities causing them to lack certain resources that puts their lives at risk for children and women. The vivid imagery and powerful points from the reading shows the struggle for survival in these inadequate living conditions. This article struck me because it brings attention to a crisis that affects millions of children worldwide and shows us the urgent need for social intervention and policy change.
Hi Piper! Wonderful post. I love the first image you chose, “There Is No Planet B,” because I think it’s a powerful statement considering the later point you made: there is no progress or solutions when enacted within patriarchal structures. It’s so hard to effect change when systemic forces work against us. Take Wangari Maathai’s confrontation with police at the skyscraper, for instance. She spoke her mind and pushed for progress outside the four corners of the patriarchy, and the overwhelming feedback she received was “you should not act like this”. I know I, as a woman, have experienced this firsthand. Even in banal situations like my grandmother telling me to act more ladylike as a child. Be quiet, sit down, stay out of sight — all things the patriarchy says to women, like one would scold a child for misbehaving.
Really well explained. I agree completely with your statements and also really appreciated the practical perspectives of Gebara and Maathai. I also really like your view on how those with the least power are most effected by environmental degradation, even though they often cause the least amount of harm to the earth. Your suggestions of shifting values and amplifying the voices of the marginalized are so spot on.