Category: Uncategorized

Abortion is an emotional topic and one that is always being debated. Every side of the conversation has its extremist. There is the pro-life stance that’s about protecting fetuses because they are people and the pro-choice stance that’s about allowing women the right to choose. Ecofeminist Ronnie Zoe Hawkins challenges the idea of what pro-life is in her essay Reproductive Choice: The Ecological Dimension.

As someone who considers themselves pro-life within reason. This means to me is that I think if people think they are old enough to decide to engage in sexual activity they should have to deal with the ramifications of choosing not to be safe about it. I think that every time you have sex there is a risk of getting pregnant and if individuals aren’t takin steps to lower the risk then you shouldn’t use abortion as your form of birth control. I think that in case of rape, incest, and the mothers and/or child health is at risk than abortion is perfectly understandable. However, I do believe that women can do whatever they want with their bodies and they are the only ones that should make whatever decision they see fit.

I understand where Hawkins is coming from with concerns about how the growing population and how with the trends, we are seeing humanity is going to grow past the number of resources that we have available. “The links between population growth, poverty, and environmental degradation, however, are becoming increasingly well documented, resulting in what has been called a “downward spiral” (Hawkins 690). I think that Hawkins makes some valid points about how if we continue on this trend, we are putting ourselves and future generations at risk of having not enough environmental supplies for the demands of the population.

I think that Hawkins’s writing is persuasive, and I can see her point of view for the ecofeminist view on abortions. “At this present time, recognition of our connectedness with all other life on the planet reinforces the need for abortion. When the interest of life in this larger sense are taken into consideration, the prochoice position is the one most deserving of the adjective “prolife.” (Hawkins 693) I think that Hawkins does a great job in connecting pro-choice with pro-life because she is talking about life on a broader perspective than a single fetus. Hawkins challenges a moral dilemma is sacrificing the few for the many the real pro-life stance.

In this imagery, it doesn’t only perpetuate women as food for human consumption, but it also reinforces stereotypes about the black community and especially black women. In this advertisement you see them trying to attract the black community. There is rapper Ludacris with a big plate of chicken, hot sauce, and beer. These are common stereotypes that are associated with the black community. This imagery shows Ludacris taking a bit out of this black woman’s leg as if she was a piece of chicken. Black women face being over sexualize dating back to slavery. “Women are animalized, and animals are sexualized and feminized.” (Potts 13). During slavery, black women were raped, abused, and used as baby-making machines for white slave owners to profit from. “Female animals are the absent referents in meat-eating and in the consumption of dairy and eggs. There would be no meat-eating if female animals weren’t constantly made pregnant. Female animals are forced to produce feminized protein, (plant protein produced through the abuse of the reproductive cycle of female animals, i.e., dairy and eggs).” (Potts 13). Having this woman be seen as a piece of meat for a man consumption reinforces the stereotypes of black women being lesser than and only something to be used by men and then thrown away when they chose to be done with them.

Compare to the advertisement above this is classier and more targeted to a different demographic that is not the black community. Even though this advertisement is sexualizing these women on their beast, they are still able to be seen as respectable women. They are in nice formal gowns with their hair and make-up done and can be interpreted as a part of the upper crust society. This advertisement uses a play on words to draw the viewer in. Even though it’s an advertisement for racks of ribs they have these women with large cleavage on display and one single rack of ribs. “Meat advertisements show us how pornographers do this: take a defeated being, in this case, a dead animal, and pose him or her according to a pornographic convention, say, a restaurant that sells dead lobsters claiming “Nice tail;” barbecued pigs posed as young women (all pink, signifying whiteness), hanging on the arms of men; anorexic cows; chickens in high heels. In each case: She is dead and yet she wants it. Wants what? Wants sex; wants to be sexually used; wants to be consumed.” (Potts 15) This ad is insinuating that men who dress a certain away and can eat at this establishment will be able to obtain girls like them. Also, women are sexually turned on by men being able to afford a prime rack of ribs. There is a clear connection about how women and animals are perceived in western society. There are ways to describe women that are also terms for different cuts of meat showing that women are meant to be consumed and men are meant to be the consumers.

I believe this is an advertisement that is supposed to encourage people to stop consuming meat. Even though it’s in support of reducing the number of animals that are being killed for human consumption it still sexualized women and animals. “Anthropornography provides a way for men to bond publicly around misogyny. Men can publicly consume what is usually private” and these images have become so much a part of our culture that we fail to notice (p.115).” (Adams) This is another advertisement that uses a play on words to get their point across. The sticker also clearly states men’s attitudes towards women. That men want women for their sexual pleasure only and that animals are a way to discuss female body parts in public using innuendos.

To state the obvious this ad is associating fellatio to eating their sandwich. I think that this ad is targeted towards men because there is a woman who represents western civilizations’ standard of beauty with her mouth open wide for this big seven-inch sandwich. I am not sure how to interpret the advertisement because of its sexualizing women, but emasculating men. As a man, I assume you’re supposed to see it as saying that women are good at giving fellatio. But not all men are the same size and they emphasize that the sandwich is seven inches. Although this ad is targeted towards women saying that you can get the same sexual excitement as fellatio when you eat their sandwiches. I think this ad changes the concept of who is supposed to be consumed and who the consumer is. “They are working to maintain important aspects of consumer culture, to reinforce privilege by defining who is the consumer and who is the consumed, and to maintain the important fictions of essential differences between men and women and humans and nonhumans that enable power over the nondominant.” (Potts 15) This ad sexualizes women because it insinuates a sexual activity that pleasurable for men but it’s the woman who is the one who’s eating the meat and men are being eaten. This ad switches the role of consumer and consumed but it still perpetuates women as the object for male sexual pleasures.

From all the ads you see women being shown as sex objects, but you can still see the disconnect between the way different races are sexualized. Once we can understand that women’s rights are minority rights and that we all need to protect the environment because we only have one earth, we will be able to make greater advances in ecofeminism.

I think that you chose this particular image for the section is because although meat has been gendered in society the individual who is cutting the meat is genderless and there is no way of associating gender with it. I also think that you choose this image to see if people did assign a gender to the person which would reveal people’s unconscious bias to who they associate meat and the person who cuts meat is.

An example of gender food is meat. Meat is heavily associated with masculinity and male genitalia. I think because the meat was such a hard process to obtain in the caveman time that man has been linked to it since the dawn of time. After all, men were the hunters and gatherers. “For many men, meat is an inarguable symbol of masculinity. We’ve been fed this idea for decades. If you are what you (m)eat, and you’re a man, then you eat meat.” (Eisenberg). I think because red meat is cows, boar, mutton, etc. are seen as powerful animals, eating them makes men feel powerful too. In Eisenberg’s article, she talks about how she looked up men eating and the images that came up. I decided to do the same thing and it was instantly pictures of men devouring meats especially hamburgers.

An example of food eating practices that women are meant to eat food like salads and fruits. There is a common stereotype that people associate being vegetarian with being lesbians. I think that because there is a heavy emphasis on meat being associated with men and male genitalia is the reason to assume women who are vegetarian as a lesbian. I went out with my female friend to lunch and I ordered a chicken cobb salad while my friend ordered buffalo chicken dip, truffle mac and cheese, and a tuna salad sandwich. When the waiter came to bring us our food, he automatically placed the salad in front of my friend and the rest of the food in front of me. “It’s hard to shift an individual’s perception without first tackling their society’s view.” (Eisenberg) It was an interesting experience because we are used to associating women with fruits and veggies, we just assume these stereotypes to be true.

There are different perspectives on how ecofeminist see non-human animals and our relationships with them. Two of these different perspectives come from Greta Gaard and Deane Curtin. Curtin talks about our contextual moral vegetarianism. “Though I am committed to moral vegetarianism, I cannot say that I would never kill an animal for food. Would I not kill an animal to provide food for my son if he were starving? Would I not generally prefer the death of a bear to the death of a loved one? I am sure I would.” (Curtin 5). I am not a vegetarian, but I have known people who were, and they saw the situation as black and white with no understanding of the grey areas. I respect how Curtin doesn’t see the world as black or white but as I prefer this, but I could be persuaded to the other side depending on the situation.

Gaard focuses on the connection between the oppression of animals and the oppression of women. “Feminists and ecofeminists alike have noted the ways that animal pejoratives are used to dehumanize women, pointing to the linguistic linkage of women and animals in such derogatory terms for women as “sow”, “bitch”, “pussy”, “chick”, “cow”, “beaver”, “old bat”, and “bird-brain.’” (Gaard) These terms used for animals are also used to describe women as well. This connection shows how sexism and speciesism are closely related. These slang words for women is a systematic way of making it socially acceptable to degrade women and subconsciously preserve the idea that women are lesser than men. Gaard states an interesting question about which shows the human-animal relationship, the pets that we have, or the animals we eat.

This is College Park and I’ve gone with my family every year since second or third grade to celebrate our annual family reunion. This place holds special meaning to me because it’s where all my family from around the United States come and gathers to eat, celebrate family, and enjoy nature. We take pictures together and reminisce about our lives throughout the year and talk about what we hope to accomplish in the upcoming school year. I get to hear stories about my older relatives that have passed away and about my mom from when she was growing up. When you drive up to get to the pond the cell service becomes faint until finally, it vanishes. A couple of years ago when I was old enough to start driving my brothers and me, I got nervous because I wasn’t able to rely on the GPS. I got so accustomed to relying on a GPS.

I thought I didn’t know the direction to a place that I have gone to a thousand times. That’s when I realized the internet wasn’t an advancement but a crutch to forgetting how nature is the ultimate compass. “I consider myself lucky beyond words to be able to go to work every morning with something like a wilderness at my elbow. In the way of so-called worldly things, I can’t seem to muster a desire for cellular phones or cable TV or to drive anything flashier than a dirt-colored sedan older than the combined ages of my children.” (Kingsolver 11) I think that she makes a valid point about how when you emerge in nature the materialistic world fades away. When my family is at the pond no one is worrying about their sending text, streaming videos, face timing, or any other modern convince. People are playing in the water, throwing the football around, playing in the same, and just enjoying the nature around us.

Williams’ bedrock of democracy “Once strengthened by our association with the wild, we can return to family and community. Each of us belongs to a particular landscape, one that informs who we are, a place that carries our history, our dreams, holds us to a moral line of behavior that transcends thought.” (Williams 19). College pond functions as my bedrock of democracy because it’s the land my family adopted as our place to celebrate nature and life. This is the place my family always tries to leave cleaner than we left it and preserve the beauty of it for future generations to come.

I agree that we do need wilderness. I believe that we need water because it shows us our past and our future I remember going to college pond as a child every year and when I went back as an adult it’s like nothing has changed it’s still the same parking lot it’s still the same one slope down to the beach and the picnic tables which are still next to the grills. The trees still stand tall protecting me from the sun’s rays. The reason we need nature is that nature never forgets. Nature is a screenshot of the places you’ve gone to and the places you have seen. Nature in the wilderness is consistent for the most part unless man decides to destroy it. Nature will always be there even after we’re all gone. “My great-grandfather grew up in the next valley over from this one, but I didn’t even know that I had returned to my ancestral home when I first came to visit.” (Kingsolver 3). I think that nature will always allow you to find your home even if you don’t know it.

I believe that city dwellers can still achieve the same type of connection to the wilderness. I think that they have to look for it. They can still have the same connection, but they’ll experience it differently. When they see a tree or the grass growing in the playground, they are still experiencing nature but in micro dosages. Nature is everywhere you just have to be open to experiencing it because nature will always return to grow over manmade challenges like grass and flowers growing in a crack of concrete.

The ways women in the Global South are affected by environmental degradation is that they are unable to receive a proper education, shame, and no privacy to go to the bathroom. These women in these low-income countries aren’t able to do so because they have to manage the house. Which includes duties collecting water, cleanliness, and health. Collecting water is very time consuming and demanding which doesn’t leave them time to attend school. Having to walk and use the bathroom in defecation sites make females more vulnerable to rape and sexual assault. Another way women in the Global South affected by environmental degradation is that they don’t have access to certain hygiene needs during their periods, pregnancy, and giving birth.

Agarwal believes that environmental issues are the reason for the feminist issue. Warren and Hobgood-Oster who are western feminist explain how the partocracy is responsible for environmental and feminist issues. Agarwal breaks her paper into two main themes. One of the themes is women as victims of environmental issues. Water plays a part in the conversation because of all the difficulties that are associated with it in low-income countries. The second theme is the connection between women and the environment. Agarwal discusses how women are often playing a vital role in protecting the environment. This connection is often seen in low-income countries because they are affected by it more than the western world.

The differences between the Agarwal and Warren and Hobgood-Oster perspective in ecofeminism is their difference in culture. Women in low-income countries are faced with different challenges than western women. Due to this reason, women in these low-income countries are affected by environmental issues to a greater extinct. I think that women in low-income countries see the environment as the catalyst for the challenges they have to endeavor and western women see that partocracy as the catalyst for their challenges they have to endeavor. Even though both perspectives are different they both want to achieve the same goals. Creating a better world to help protect the environment and women.

I find the Agarwal perspective more interesting because I find the concept of certain environmental issues to create and worsen feminist issues intriguing. I think that manmade difficulties don’t compare to the ones the earth has in store for humanity. Even though Warren and Hobgood-Oster talk about how the partocracy is responsible for feminism and environmental issues it doesn’t compare to drought, famine, and natural disasters. However: I don’t think the male-dominated world emphasis environment and women issues. I think you can’t have one perspective and without the other, because they both support the same cause.

Ecofeminism is the in the intersection between ecological issues and women issues both that are a result of a male dominated society. This image below is a visual representation of ecofeminism.

I think that eco-feminism is important because like women, nature is often taken advantage of and exploited by men for their gain. The reason I believe people say mother nature is because it goes back to the old ideas of what femininity is. These concepts allow for people to make justifications and excuses for destroying the planet we all live in. Ecofeminism is the connection between feminism and nature. Hobgood-Oster and Warren further explore this topic through the historical relevance of this connect and how there are so many connections between feminism and nature and how that impacts people’s understanding of both and how because of the male partocracy they both are been put a lower status.

I think Hobgood-Oster does a good job connecting women to the earth especially when she brings it back to mythology and the bible. Hobgood-Oster states, “The mother goddess, whose body often birthed or constituted the earth, became the target of the powerful sky gods, as evidenced by such creation stories as the Babylonian Enuma Elish. The pattern of male deities killing female or animal deities in an effort to establish a patriarchal order and to control forces assumed to be chaotic repeats itself consistently. The snake, once a symbol of life, was trampled under the foot of the male deity and connected to evil. Hell was in the earth and Heaven was removed to the sky. Paradise lost its materiality and became a masculine, hierarchical projection.” (Hobgood-Oster). This helps illustrate the need for ecofeminism. The symbolism of women with nature has become corrupted by male dominance. I think that toxic masculinity was created for men to feel more powerful over everyone and everything. Having nature associated with women gives the impression that both don’t matter and deserve less respect than men.

When Warren talks about women-nature connection and brought up symbolic connections I think that this is important to show the important need for ecofeminism. When Warren stated “Women are often described in animal terms (e.g., like cows, foxes, chicks, serpents, bitches, beavers, old bats, pussycats, cats, birdbrains, hare-brains). Nature is often described in female and sexual terms: nature is raped, mastered, conquered, controlled, mined.” (Warren). These toxics terms that women have to indoor is just another systematic way of under minding their intellect. I that the way people refer to women in this day and age is more derogatory terms and they used nature as a way to do it. Ecofeminism is the way to redefine the way we talk about women and through that rebranding we will also help the environment. Because the connection between women and nature is known, so when people start treating women with the same respect as men nature will get the nurturing it deserves.

Hi, my name is Rudy Williams. I’m a cisgender black male from a predominately white suburb near Boston. I am double majoring in Psychology and Women and Gender Studies. I find feminism interesting and the intersection between feminist theory and rape culture. When I saw “Her Me Out | Rape Culture and Women in the Media Blog” and the post about “11 Rape myths used in 2018 that will have you screaming into the void” I liked how the blog separated the different myths by country. I like this concept because of its engaging. I also like how some different pictures and memes are there for satire. The one thing I wouldn’t use in my blog is the podcast feature. I am not a big fan of the podcast.

Because I am from a wealthy suburb, they are always doing things in town to make it environmentally friendly. When they rebuilt our high school, they add water-efficient water fountains and solar panels. Many people have added solar panels to their houses including my family. Even though our town has the latest advances in environmental protection we still run campaigns to help the environment. Every year there is a service day where we go around town picking up litter. Recently the PTA brought in a speaker to talk about “Environmental Challenges of the 21st Century: How to be part of the solution”. I think it’s important that even though my town is already eco-friendly that it’s still important to know how to save the earth even more.

Solar panels installed in WHS’ parking lots