Views from Carol J. Adams: Women- Nature Association

What is Anthropornography?

What is Anthropornography? This term coined by Carol J. Adams will shed some light how animals and non-human animals are related to each other. Adams explores how the advertising industry has fooled us into seeing animals as nothing but consumable objects rather than living beings objectified and violated similar to the ways women are objectified by men. She also makes the connection to patriarchy and food saying that “women are animalized and animals are sexualized and feminized” (Adams 13) therefore connecting males and manliness to being the consumer of meat. She further details that meat eating is associated with masculinity and subsequently being male means eating meat. In the list of who is a consumer and who is the consumed she identifies white males as the consumer. White-males being the most privileged in our culture is the reasoning behind her assertion. Females and animals are the consumed as their privilege in society is much less. In this way anthropornography like pornography is advantaged based on how privilege is formed.

Animal consumption is made to look sexy as a way to rationalize the torture, degradation, and suffering they face to satisfy consumers. Therefore the advertisements sexualization of animals makes it seem okay to consume animals because like women they are sexualized and made to look like objects, not living beings. Adams explains this phenomenon by saying, “Animalizing women and feminizing animals helps in this process because it renders women and dead animals used as flesh as commodities” (Adams 15). Lisa Kemmerer who shares similar views to Adams points out, “‘everyone can enjoy the degradation of women without being honest about it’. These images are part of the structure of our culture, so we fail to notice that women are also being exploited: we fail to notice that ‘consumable’ animals are invariably portrayed as feminine, as sexual – available to men, just like female human beings” (Kemmerer). Anthropornography can be then seen as, “misery made sexy” (Adams 15).

Because women become symbolically female and fall into the category of consumable females they are seen as meat… this concept reiterates what we see in the images from Adams slide show of food advertisements. Looking at one of the images we can see how this chicken has been sexualized as a female, ready for consumption.

The advertisement makes the chicken look promiscuous like it wants to be eaten; to be consumed by a male. A second image advertises an ice cream company not only picturing a cow’s exaggerated rear end to look large and volumptuous but with the wording saying, “dairy air” further focusing on the female cows backside making the dairy product of the cow appear sexy therefore consumable. Here, a female’s body parts are represented by a female cow. “If animals are burdened by gender, by gender associations, by the oppression that is gender, then clearly they cant be liberated through representations that demean women” (Adams 20). Clearly the image of the cow being compared to a women is demeaning to women but as Adams argues is inviting to men. Finally a third image pictures a famous black male holding onto a black females leg like he is an animal ready to devour his meal. In the forefront is a chicken and a beer represented as female. Not only are black women seen as promiscuous but they are also depicted as being wild and needing to be tamed. The wild nature of the picture sends the message that the male is taming his meal. Adams see’s this as the overlapping of “absent referents” (Adams). The overlapping absent referents here are white males and animals. Kemmerer describes the goal of these advertisements targeted at the white male as “Nonhuman animals are whoring for you. Nonhumans want you, too” (Kemmerer). Another image I came across is that goes along the same lines of Adams’ theory that animals are sexualized. In this advertisement of lobster a women’s behind is shown with the words “Lobster, all the meat is in the tail.” Just as females are used as objectifaction for males an animal is depicted in this advertisement as also raw material for consumption of humans.

I think Adams has some very interesting insight when it comes to how the meat industry advertises meat that is obviously targeting the white male. As Adams states everything about the advertisement is intentional. We have become unaware of the messages behind these advertisements and desensitized to the patriarchal implications of the meat industry. For instance, “Female cows, chickens, pigs and other species, are routinely exploited due to their reproductive abilities” (Pevreall). This and the other concepts I discussed are some of the situations that have been forgotten on our quest to satisfy our privilege.

Bibliography

Adams, Carol J. “The Politics of Carol J. Adams.” Antennae. Annie Potts. Ed. Glovanni Alol. 2009. 12-24.

Kemmerer, Lisa. “The Pornography of Meat By Carol Adams.” Philosophy Now (2006).

Pevreall, Katie. “Sociaology Professor Deems Not Eating Meat A Feminist Act.” Live Kindly, 2017.

 

Annotated Bibliography:

This short article written by Katie Pevreall explains how a sociology professor Anne DeLassio-Parson makes the connection between eating meat and patriarchy. In the article she asserts that not eating meat can affect gender hierarchy and binaries in a variety of positive ways. She addresses the intersectional ways that black women are affected by their decision to be vegan and how that decision has become an act of social justice. Finally DeLassio touches upon the exploitation of animal’s particularly female animals, because of their reproductive capabilities.

Vegitarian Ecofeminism

 

The Image of Meat on a Cutting Board

I feel the reason this particular image was chosen for this section is due to the “masculine” qualities the image insinuates. In the article “Meat Heads” the author discusses that the consumption of meat for some men tends to make them feel more masculine. He suggests that gendered effects of food choice have dictated this for decades. For example, “eat a steak, feel more like a man” (Eisenberg) is the proposed gender bias that men eat meat and women eat salads. The image chosen for this section, highlights that eating meat represents the male gender and being masculine means you eat meat. A male looking doughboy (perceived as male on TV commercials) lays claim to the meat by placing his foot on the cutting board with a steak knife in hand and another knife already inserted in the meat suggesting the meat is something he has laid claim to and will eventually consume. So there are several masculine traits are depicted in this image that represents eating meat is a masculine trait.

More on Gendered Foods

Gendered food is actually a real thing!   they exist I argue because of a gender divided society ruled by gender norma and expectations.  Another example of gendered foods is as mentioned above, that women (should) eat salads. Women in society are considered to be kind and gentle, more socially and ethically aware and subsequently make more emotional choices when eating avoiding “barbaric” animal eating habits. Although not all women, myself included always chose a salad when presented with the option. Another food that is gendered is in my opinion fruit. It doesn’t seem masculine to eat fruit. I think fruit is considered to be more feminine because it is tender, fragile, and vulnerable; many qualities a women is associated with. When it come to eating habits, men and women have different perceptions on etiquette. Women are supposed to be proper. Using manners, keeping a clean eating area, and chewing and eating slowly, etc. Men have more room for eating with less etiquette rooting back to caveman times. The man first of all eats first and as much as he likes. Besides that masculine eating can include eating quickly, consuming large bites of food and eating loudly. It is more acceptable to see a man eating this way than seeing a female eating this way because of societies perceived view of gender.

An Ecofeminist View of Our Relationship to Non-Human Animals

The way we see non-human animals is largely based on the patriarchal systems that are in place. As a food source animals are oppressed by humans and subjected to mistreatment and exploitation similarly to women in a patriarchal society.

Cow milking facility and mechanized milking equipment in the milking hall

I feel ecofeminism seeks to impose an ethic of care into the abuse of animals as a food source. Deane Curtin argues, “the case of killing animals for human consumption where there is a choice, this practice inflicts pain that is completely unnecessary and avoidable” (Curtin).  In addition to viewing non-human animals as a food source ecofeminist Greta Gaard argues that humans see non-human animals as inferior and as another form of oppression saying, “to be a pet is to have all of one’s life decisions controlled by someone else” (Gaard 21) underlining the relationship to non-human animals as inferior to humans. Both ecofeminist draw on the relationship we have with non-human animals as one that correlates with the oppression of women. Curtin mentions the choice to be vegan (free from not only meat but also free from consuming dairy and eggs) supports the decision not to exploit females reproductive systems. Gaard links sexism and speciesism giving the example of women being called derogatory terms that are related to animals such as “bitch”, “pussy”, “old bat”, and “cow brain” relating animals to be governed by patriarchy in the same way. Gaard also maintains that the same system of oppression, “these multiple systems-racism, classism, sexism, speciesism” (Gaard 20) govern non-human animals as well as humans.

Bibliography

Curtin, Deane. “Contextual Moral Vegetarianism.” 8 February 2020 <http://www.animal-rights-library.com/texts-m/curtin01.htm>.

 

Eisenberg, Zoe. “Meat Heads: New Study Focuses on How Meat Consumption Alters Men’s Self-Percieved Levels of Masculinity.” 13 January 2017. Huff Post. 8 February 2020 <https://www.huffpost.com/entry/meat-heads-new-study-focuses_b_8964048>.

 

Gaard, Greta. “Ecofeminism on the Wing: Perspectives on Human-Animal Relations.” Women & Environments (2001): 19-22.

 

Annotated Bibliography: Greta Gaard draws on the reasons the relationships we have with non-human animals can be seen as oppressive. She gives an eco feminist view of our relationship with the animals we eat and the relationship with our pets. Gaard argues that just as we oppress humans the oppression animals face id worsened by the patriarchal systems that govern animals as powerless at the hands of humans.

Understanding Place

As a child I grew up in a small rural town. Our house was on a quiet street and we had woods all around us. We often saw turkeys, deer and other small animals in our backyard. Our neighbors (none of which we could see) had a grapevine next to their house and my brother and I would sneak over to steal some of the fresh grapes in late summer and spit out the seeds. I remember taking a couple juice boxes, granola bars, and my backpack and going for “hikes” in the woods to explore. I would be gone for hours walking and looking at the ferns tree’s, and lady slipper’s remembering not to pick them because my mother told me they were endangered. I listened to the silence interrupted only by birds. There were no sounds of cars or trucks just quiet nature. It was one of my favorite things to do on the weekends. This photo reminds me of my walks through the woods when I was a child.

 

Bedrock of Democracy

Terry Tempest Williams discusses the hope of “bedrock of democracy “. Through stories of place and a relationship with nature people can remember what it means to be human, to remember where they came from. Williams argues that if we lose sight of our connection to nature over politics and possession of land we will lose a sense of ourselves, and humanity itself.

“As the world becomes more crowded ad corroded by consumption and capitalism, this landscape of minimalism will take on greater significance, reminding us through its blood red grandeur just how essential wild country is to our psychology…” (Williams 6)

Thinking of the place that I identified above as part of my history I realize that I would lose a piece of me, a piece of my childhood, if the lack of respect for the environment and nature continues. This was a place I could find peace and solace and where I could feel connected to a source of life. Something that was bigger than everything else in my life. It allowed me to put things in perspective.

So when I think of Williams “bedrock of democracy” I feel this place from my childhood supports his vision of a world where we allow our selves to reconnect with nature in order to reassess what is important to us and good for humanity. Williams encourages us to “strengthen our association with the wild” so we can engage in a more thoughtful and wholesome approach to a life lived not through greed and shortsightedness but by “standing our ground in the places we love, together” (Williams 19) in order to protect them.  My childhood memories remind me of what is like to feel connected to something greater than myself.

I was able to experience something pure, and untouched by this industrialized world free from greed and corruption.   These are the things I think Williams is referring to when he mentions a “moral line of behavior” (Williams 19) he is referring to those central and internal feelings we have when we connect with nature. A sense of innocence and sense of “self” that gives us a renewed sense of what it means to live as one with nature.

People Need Wild Places

Barbara Kingsolver asserts that, “People need wild places” (Kingsolver) and I tend to agree with her. She has had the privilege of having a childhood like mine where she had a place to enjoy the quietness and pureness of nature, a place to self-reflect. However not all of us have had that privilege. I don’t think it makes anyone better than the other but I do think it’s important to have the opportunity to connect with nature. Understanding that land cannot be used for greedy purpose, or owned, understanding that the land belongs to all of us is something that can be taught but it’s our experiences of place that remind us of that.

 

Bibliography

Kingsolver, Barbara. “PBS.” NOW. 6 February 2020 <http://www.pbs.org/now/printable/transcript_smallwonder_print.html>.

annotated: Kingsolver’s excerpt details her experiences of her childhood cabin where she has an intimate relationship to the nature around her. The log cabin, inherited by her husband’s family located in The Walker Mountain of Southern Appalachia is home to her in the summer months. Kingsolver is a writer who has become reliant on surrounding herself wit the scenery of the lag cabin home and has found that this place reminds her of how important it is to be connected to nature. How important the land is to people that rely on it and find comfort in the land and it’s peace and quiet. She notes that, “an ill-placed dam, well, ranch, or subdivision could permanently end the existence of their (the willow fly catchers and apache trout) kind. She goes on to stress the importance of respecting the earth and reminds that our food, oxygen, and sources of pleasure all come from the earth.

Williams, Terry Tempest. “Homework.” Williams, Terry Tempest. Red. n.d. 3-19.

Different perspectives on Eco Feminism

Women in the global South are affected by environmental degradation in a variety of ways. Women in the Global South are disproportionately affected by not having access to clean water. Without clean water women in low-income countries face sanitization and hygiene issues that complicate menstruation, pregnancy and childrearing. Having clean water is important and directly affects women in these areas. Further affecting women is the fact that women are responsible for collecting clean water for their household. This is time consuming and can have related consequences such as missed time for education and vulnerability for abuse and attack to use a toilet. Eco feminist are striving to alter this sense of reality and say, “Embedding gender equity into policy at all levels will be crucial to achieving water and sanitation for all” (https://www.unwater.org/water-facts/gender/).

https://images.app.goo.gl/31mqCRHzwh12CgYv7

In addition to the shortage of clean water women in the Global South are affected by exploitation of resources and the manipulation from the Global North that control those resources and ultimately make farmers dependent on them for agricultural necessities. Also many women of the Global South are dependent on the land for food, water and shelter therefore ecological destruction is a type of oppression as a result of economic greed. Vandana Shiva is a physicist and activist who has made groundbreaking progress on some of the issues that affect women-nature connections and puts it this way, “…people who are dependent on natural resources, on biodiversity, on the land, the forests, the water. Nature is their means of production” (Shiva). Bina Agarwal, also an eco feminist asserts that gender-class effects of environmental degradation are caused by a shift of natural resources to patriarchal systems like the state. Because women (and men) rely so heavily on the environment for healthy nourishment, clothing, shelter and fuel, the degradation of the environment is a direct patriarchal assault on women and the ecosystem.

In contrast to eco feminist like Hobgood-Oster and Warren who have more of a focus on dualistic hierarchies and historical and cultural factors such as Warren’s women-nature connection of “Symbolic Connections” Agarwal seems to focus on environmental degradation and its subsequent effects on women. Both seem to tie in the patriarchal entities that govern the oppression of both women and environment. Further she focuses on problems with the distribution of property, power, and knowledge, how that relates to the environment and eventually how it affects gender. For example, she mentions several terms in relation to resource management in India:

  • Forms of Environmental Degradation
  • The Process of Statization
  • Process of Privatization
  • The Erosion of Community Resource Management Systems
  • Population Growth
  • Choices of Agricultural Technology and Erosion of Local Knowledge Systems

These terms identify Patriarchal systems in which resources are either stolen or damaged and she notes that poor households and women are harmfully more affected. I enjoyed Agarwal’s perspective because of the diversity of her focus. Her Global South perspective is refreshing and should make us mindful that eco feminism just like feminism is intersectional and must be viewed in every context. Not just from our own geographic location but awareness of other countries and cultures can help us better understand the actions and changes that eco feminist can use to eradicate patriarchal structures that support the oppression of women and nature.

Environmental Justice: An EcoFeminist Perspective

“Environmental justice is the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income, with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies” (https://www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice).

Environmental Justice is a topic that can be looked at through an eco feminist perspective. According to Rosemary Ranford Reuther the environment is a feminist issue. Because patriarchal structures oppress both women and nature, “women must see that there can be no liberation for them and no solution to the ecological crisis within a society whose fundamental model of relationship continues to be one of domination” (Hobgood-Oster 1).  Ecofeminism actually challenges structures (political, economical, social, etc.) to oppose the systems of patriarchy that oppress women and the environment. Because of the different cultural and historical settings, ecofeminism strives to challenge the patriarchal power structures that are created by social constructs. Karen Warren, an eco feminist scholar discusses eight women-nature connections that ecofeminism identifies.

  • Historical, Typical Casual Connections
  • Conceptual Connections
  • Empirical and Experiential Connections
  • Symbolic Connections
  • Epistemological Connections
  • Political (Praxis) Connections
  • Ethical Connections
  • Theoretical Connections

These connections are links to the different types of ecofeminist theories as there is no one single theory of ecofeminism that exists. Laura Hobgood –Oster explains this phenomenon saying, “Ecofeminist trajectories are varied; there is no one accepted or orthodox “ecofeminism” (Hobgood-Oster 1). Depending on how you see feminism (meaning liberal, Marxist, radical etc.) will determine how you see genuine ecofeminism. There is not just one version of feminism so there is not one version of ecofeminism. Thus the eight women-nature connections listed above. Within these women-nature connections there are several that can apply to environmental justice. Environmental injustice occurs in practice and policy within a racialized context and criticizes inequalities of race, gender and class. Therefore environmental justice can be viewed as an eco feminist issue because of it’s women-nature connection Warren and Hobgood-Oster discuss.

Warren points out that Empirical and Experiential Connections focus on finding empirical evidence connecting women (as well as children, lower class, and minorities) with environmental destruction. “Some point to various health and risk factors borne disproportionately by women children, racial minorities and the poor caused by the presence of low-level radiation, pesticides, toxics, and other pollutants” (Warren).  This is interesting because it makes a clear connection to feminist and ecological issues. Environmental concerns and the patriarchal oppression of women/ nature are further explored in the seventh connection Warren discusses, Ethical Connections. It is here that environmental ethics are referred to as being inadequate and “hopelessly androcentric” (Warren) connecting patriarchy to the environment.

Even more interesting is the question of learning if environmental ethics can be looked at outside the male-biased. If environmental ethics are as Warren says, “hopelessly androcentric” how can eco feminist apply the knowledge they have to change power structures and ways of thinking to counteract patriarchal thinking from and eco feminist perspective?   Understanding more of women and their connection to the environment will give insight to eco feminist in order to raise conscience, analyze, to have a vision, and develop strategies to change the reality of not only environmental justice but also environmentalism as a whole.