Readings such as these really highlight the differences in lifestyle between western societies and non western ones. Here in the west, we often take things for granted. We do not have to immediately worry about a source of water such as the women in third world countries. Areas being deforested and cut away for industries and places of agriculture is commonplace here and not nearly as jarring as it is in other parts of the world. Here, it is rather hard for most of us to imagine going without a proper source of drinking water for days on end. Most of us have the luxury of being in the vicinity of 1 or more vending machines at any given time, negating any worry of having to go thirsty. But for many disenfranchised people this is simply not the case. This goes for food and shelter as well. If there is a long and heavy drought that plagues a certain area, people will go on without food and water for a long time. Here, we have ways of dealing with issues that arise from the lack of rainfall. We have supermarkets and local farms that are already supplied with water. We do not have to worry nearly as much as individuals do in other parts of the world. In Non western societies, the idea of ecofeminism becomes much more literal. Women are intertwined with the environment for survival and because they have to work side by side with nature in order to survive. When discussing the ideas of ecofeminism it is nearly essential to think of it from a non western perspective. It is very easy to think of it in terms of spirituality but when it comes to everyday survival it is much more important.

Out of the two perspectives we have learned and read about, I personally found that Agarwal’s was more engaging. I found that she has done a lot more in comparison. Whereas Warren and Hobgood-Oster relatively keep their ideas small, Agarwal seems to have bigger things in mind. She has done so much for her local environment as well as the environments of other societies, and you have to admire all of the work she has done and the progress she has made. Something that had stuck with me is when she described the Chipko movement. During an interview she explained how “peasant women were coming out and embracing trees to prevent logging. My father had been a forester and I had grown up on those hills. I had seen forests and streams disappear. I jumped into this movement and started to work with the peasant women.” This seems like such a noble cause; not only is she fighting to protect the environment but she is fighting for women born into poverty and women with no money to their names. I do not want to undermine the efforts of Hobgood-Oster and Warren, but in my opinion Agarwal has done much more for both the sake of women and the environment. The mental image alone of a poor women clinging to a tree is a perfect representation of what ecofeminism is. We need to bring attention to those who are treated unjustly and those who do not have all of the same luxuries we do.

Well, that was a bit wordier than last week’s post but the topic this week made my mind go off a bit. This class has definitely made me think a lot harder about these sorts of things.