Elizabeth Badinter, a French feminist, recently published a book titled Conflit, La Femme et La Mère, which means Conflict, the Woman and the Mother. The theory of the book is that the green movement has placed a burden on women to be ideal mothers by providing them with a specific set of instructions of the “right” way to be a mother and wife. The result is a reversal of the liberation that the 2nd wave of feminists fought for and relapse to more traditional, established gender roles.
Badinter, age 65, is a philosopher/writer and one of the most prominent and controversial feminists in France. One of her most radical statements came from her book L’Amour en plus (1980) where she “famously argued that maternal love was not an innate quality of women”. (http://www.JWA.org) She has written extensively, often in collaboration with her husband, on the issue of gender roles and specifically their deleterious impact upon men. In 2003 she caused debate within the feminist community when she criticized the essentialists, who argue that women and men are inherently different, for perpetuating the idea of women as victims. She argues against the wearing of headscarves in public schools by Muslim women and believes the hijab to be a form of sex discrimination. Badinter has three children, and has been married since age 22.
The Times Online article paraphrases the thesis of the book as “the green movement is the enemy of feminism because it relies on women doing endless worthy chores – such as washing cloth nappies, in the quest for an organic, eco-friendly, planet-responsible lifestyle” (Times Online). I would guess that Badinter does not mean that there is anything inherent about the green movement itself that harms women, but that aspects of the movement have been placed on women’s shoulders and developed societal expectations of one correct way to act. Being green implies a certain morality, which women must uphold especially in the home. In addition to raising a family, the woman now has the burden of global climate change. Many aspects of environmentalism are in the traditional women’s sphere, such as cooking, cleaning, and managing the house. Badinter argues women are turned into domestic slaves and must sacrifice having a career in order to fulfill obligations like breast-feeding for a certain amount of time, home cooking, eating only organic food, and recycling. The issue is that women are not making the independent decision to breast feed because they think that is the right personal decision for them and their baby, but that they are guilted into it because it must be the right thing for their baby.
Badinter also cites examples of the banning of plastic utensils and disposable diapers, which would result in greater time doing manual labor. With the vast array of specialists that women receive instructions from, there becomes a greater consensus on a specific course of action which the mother is obligated to follow. She says this new idea of good motherhood “imposes new duties that weigh heavily on those who do not keep to them. It contravenes the model we have worked for until now [and] which makes equality of the sexes impossible and women's freedom irrelevant. It is a step backwards”.
Badinter’s arguments are similar to the sentiments of Betty Friedan in The Feminine Mystique. Friedan argued that women felt trapped into a meaningless, empty life of housework and devotion to the family, which was not only unrecognized as a problem but ignored in the celebration of the American woman having an ideal lifestyle. Similarly, Badinter would argue that an eco-friendly lifestyle is creating a set of demands that all women might not find meaningful. What provoked the second wave of feminism was not the fact that women were overworked, it was that their work was meaningless. This presents a potential flaw in Badinter’s argument, because the requirement of women to not use disposable cutlery is not a huge labor imposition. The problem is not the time or energy required in a certain environmentally friendly action, it is the fact that the action is a moral imperative and not an elected decision.
The eco-burden fits in nicely to Marilyn Frye’s metaphor of the birdcage. Each small requirement is not in itself a huge burden, the sum total of the expectations, or bars, amounts to a cage for a mother. One expert who espouses the benefit of breastfeeding isn’t oppressing women, but the accumulation of these guidelines and their placement on women’s shoulders presents a significant issue. An article in Parenting.com called “Pregnancy Dos and Don’ts” provides an example of one bar added to the birdcage. In response to “Can I do yoga during pregnancy?” the guideline is:
Yoga can be very beneficial during pregnancy -- it calms both mind and body. So take prenatal classes. But don't do any poses on your back after the first trimester -- they can reduce blood flow to the uterus -- and avoid inverted poses during the second and third trimesters. (Though some experts say that second trimester inverted poses may be safe if you've practiced yoga for a long time; ask your doctor.) Steer clear of Bikram or "hot" yoga; it'll heat your body excessively. (Parenting.com)
So the woman is expected to do a certain specific exercise class, which is not a particularly easy one to pick up, as it requires a certain studio and is relatively expensive, but be careful not to do certain part of the exercise at certain times during the pregnancy. The result of their action or inaction is a healthy baby or reducing blood flow to the uterus. The gathering of scientific information about biology and psychology of motherhood and parenting is both a blessing and burden. Unfortunately, the side effect of the green movement is that a woman is now expected to save the planet while she maintains the perfect family.
This issue also reflects the idea of patriarchy as a system, not cases of individual misogyny. Women participate just alongside men in reinforcing certain ideals of a “good mom”. It also shows the division of 3rd wave feminism, because just as Friedan was criticized for only reaching upper to middle class white women, the women Badinter discusses are an even more select group: the women wealthy enough to be able to have concern for the environment and the resources to eat organic food instead of worrying about just getting any type of food on the table.
The real question is the motivation behind the eco-friendly actions of women. Are the “endless worthy chores — such as washing cloth nappies — in the quest for an organic, eco-friendly, planet-responsible lifestyle” being completed because it makes women feel happier to help the planet, or because they feel conscripted to perform certain tasks due to societal standards? Women who are passionate about the environment and clean floors should gleefully scrub away with eco-friendly soap, but other women shouldn’t feel guilty about using plastic forks.
Other sources: http://www.parenting.com/article/Pregnancy/Health/Pregnancy-Dos-and-Donts-1199832063709/1
No comments:
Post a Comment