Questions surrounding gender and the role of the patriarchy keep coming back into my mind throughout my time on the farm and participating in class conversations. Though the male farmer is a popular and dominating image in our society, as a child and an young adult I associated the production of food with the feminine, with women. I believe this is in part because, though I lived on the border of Kansas, I never visited many farms (except to pick blueberries). Gender dynamics on the farm was something I was unfamiliar with and didn’t have a lot of knowledge about. Additionally, as a child it was my mom who first introduced me to gardening and taught me how to take care plants (she always said I was the best weeder ever...which I know see as a trick to get me to help.) She also always took me to the farmers’ market with her and was always in the kitchen experimenting with a new recipe. As I got older and gained greater knowledge of the food system my understanding of how gender plays into the system expanded. What I see are contradictions. The Earth is a “mother,” but it is men who are expected to work large farms. To “plow” the Earth. They are the ones who are considered to have the strength to complete the work. Small-scale gardening and cooking are the activities advertised through the media as appropriate for women and often not depicted as work but instead as leisure activities. How else is farming and food production gendered and how is it damaging to our society? How does it impact our physical and mental health? What expectations and limits does it place on people? How does it reinforce the gender binary? Additionally, I am wondering how the fact that most farmers are white men connects to the removal of people from land, the idea of private property and needing to own land in order to be considered successful, and property rights.
Farming has been a profession dominated by white men, but individuals are pushing back against this trend and more women are entering the profession. The following story by NPR explores this trend and why it is occurring: http://www.npr.org/2011/03/30/134979252/u-s-sees-more-female-farmers-cropping-up The article discusses how a number of women who are going into farming are entering organic farming. Why do you think this is? An article from the Atlantic http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/09/agriculture-needs-more-women/279987/ claims that it is in part because women are more capable of empathy and compassion than men and thus they are attracted to small-scale organic farming. I have multiple issues with that argument because I think it reinforces traditional gender norms and expectations. What are your thoughts? What ideas or strategies do you have for building a food justice movement that combats the patriarchy?
I also think it is important to draw connections between this post about gender and Abby’s post about farm workers. What ties do you see?
This is a really large topic with many angles that can be explored. Thank you for engaging in this conversation with me. I am excited to read your blog posts and work on deconstructing how the patriarchy and gender binary manifests itself in the food system.
When I read this post I was instantly reminded of the videos Amy had us watch last week. There was a moment when the farmer was talking about a larger tool and he referred to it as "gender friendly"-even women were capable of handling this! That rubbed me the wrong way a bit. Yes it is true that typically men tend to be larger and physically strong than women but that does not mean female farmers should be put in the box of physically incapable of this labor. I think this roots back to the idea of women being dainty fragile creatures incapable of hard work. Now women are more and more being welcomed into spaces of intellectual labor (although there is of course more work to be done here) but I think there are outdated ideas of women when intense labor is involved. I'm not sure what the best way to address this is. There are more layers to this issue than that which I am addressing here but I think that idea of women being perceived as weaker is definitely a factor and should be brought into the conversation.
ReplyDeleteI'm so glad you caught that; I had an immediate reaction to the statement as well, even though, like you, I knew he didn't mean any harm by it. Thank you for bringing it up :)
DeleteI agree with Emma! I'm happy to see that agriculture in general and particularly the move towards sustainable & organic farming is not just including women, but being very much led by them. And to sort of jump off from Emma's point about gender stereotypes, and take it in a different direction: The Atlantic article argues for something that I agree with: inclusion of women in fields that have been historically dominated by men. But, as Isabelle pointed out, a large part of the argument the author makes is that women are more naturally empathetic and "capable of compassion" than men. The author pulls in gender-essentializing psychological studies, and suggests that there are perhaps "two human natures." All of this is honestly a huge red flag for me. Not only does it reinforce gendered expectations for women (to be caring, loving, maternal), but places the opposite expectations on men (to be unfeeling, calculating, mathematical), doing a disservice to both. This article also doesn't clearly define what it means by man or woman (chromosomes? hormones? socialization? etc.), but assumes those identities are obvious and natural, which reads as if trans people (and others who don't fit neatly in either category) don't exist at all. Even for the cis folks it *does* address though, this article really limits itself. By arguing that traits like compassion are more natural for women than for men, it seems to subtly be discouraging men from getting involved in the fight for "safer food and more humane farming" instead of encouraging them to reflect on their own identities in relation to this work (and the intersections of gender & food production).
ReplyDeleteI think that the connection between gender and alternative food movements– i.e. women getting more involved in organic/small-scale farming, etc. has everything to do with this historical moment and (tbh) little to do with the kind of psychology the article points to... Yes, agriculture needs women, but not because women are "naturally" anything in particular. Just to throw some half-formed ideas out there: the (complicated but significant) impact of 2nd wave feminism's push for (mostly middle class, white) women to work outside the home & a wave of environmental/organic ag movements seem to have been emerging around the same time (late '70s to present)...? Also the historical/cultural priority of male heirs (of land, of family businesses, etc.) would've impacted women's ability to own/work their family land. Which agricultural spaces have women historically been able to occupy, and in what ways? What I would've liked to see in this article is less of a scramble to naturalize the gender binary, more of an historical approach, and examples of women doing amazing work in food/farming as well as suggestions for how to support that work.
🙌🙌🙌
DeleteThe Atlantic article was problematic for me too. As Maddie so gracefully articulated, the author both reduces gender to a binary (implying that trans folks or those who don’t fit into the categories of man/woman don’t exist or don’t have a place in this conversation) and is unclear about how one “is” a man/woman (though it appears that Faruqi considers gender (and the traditional norms attached to it) to be “natural” rather than socially constructed). Though I don’t expect an author to construct a “perfectly postmodern” argument (because can we?), Faruqi reduces the complexity of this conversation to an extent that, as Maddie, Emma, and Isabelle all noted, problematic tropes/stereotypes/behavior are reinforced and reproduced, not disrupted or questioned. Maddie’s comment about this constructed binary giving men permission to opt-out of changing our food-system (snaps for that) also seems to parallel the article Abby offered us about sexual assault and farm workers; if traditionally masculine behavior (including unconcern for “humanity”) is encouraged in agriculture, I would bargain that that permission to “opt-out of humanity” translates to the treatment of farm-workers (including their bodies). Likewise, I found it difficult to swallow the author’s use of the word “humane.” Faruqi doesn’t qualify the term with any explanation, but she often used it in the context of the treatment or killing of animals. As with gender, Faruqi simplifies the highly complex social/philosophical/cultural conversations surrounding animal welfare. She seems to privilege the cultural conception of animals as “sentient beings” as “humane” without exploring or mentioning how animals might be understood as food or otherwise by some people. I mention this because it seems that Faruqi’s argument first reduces those who are “best fit” to perform agricultural work to the “traditional woman” then further narrows this category of “best farmers” to women who fit her Western understanding of what is “humane;” Faruqi doubly others/excludes people from participation in and responsibility for the work of fixing our problem-laden food system. The food justice conversation needs to complicate traditional categories/expectations/responsibilities etc. rather than reinforce them to incite change.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWow! Another very interesting topic. When I think about connecting these two ideas’ I have to think of the, ‘good ol’ boy’s [club]’ that Abby’s NPR story mentioned. I think that the two connect via this idea and masculine identity that is taken on when managing and running farms. Abby’s NPR story mentioned that the male farm manages often won’t even ask questions or really engage in the sexual assault training as much as she hoped. This attitude of not paying attention to things that interplay of power shows a greater disrespect towards women. I see these two relating as a desire to keep power and keep dominance. When it comes to woman wanting to run farms, again comes the question of power and ownership. When women are able to provide for themselves on the farm, it puts the structure of “farmers wife” (as Isabelle’s article put it) under question and again butts up against ownership. I think this question also speaks to systems of power and questioning the structures put up by past generations.
ReplyDeleteThe Atlantic article is interesting and touches on the great debate of nurture vs. nature. While I study psychology, I stand with sociologists on this one that the reason that women’s brains may wired to be more compassionate has almost everything to do with how we are socialized. I think that is turning me away from the author’s idea a bit. I am not saying that there isn’t some validity in the argument because the author was able to interview farmers and listen to their experiences. The high numbers of men in the industry can be connected to Abby’s topic on farmworkers when we look at cultural norms. A large percentage of farmworkers or migrant workers are Latino or from Latin America and most of the time there is the understanding that the men of the family need to support the family. I think that the issue of having lesser percentages of women in agriculture cannot simply be solved by having more forums or support groups in agriculture schools. I agree that this would be useful, but it is important to understand that this high percentage may be partly because of cultural expectations. Women migrant farmworkers exist as we can see in NPR article, what we can take from this is that cultural norms are crossing borders as well.
ReplyDeleteI too have issues with some of the arguments made in the Atlantic article. I agree that the compassion and empathy argument does reinforce traditional gender norms and that this is similarly damaging to progress towards gender equality. I also agree that agriculture, as well as many other industries, would similarly benefit from the inclusion of more women. Furthermore, I feel that the article makes an excellent point in arguing that education is central to increasing the ranks of women in agriculture. Agriculture is certainly not for everyone, it is both physically and mentally taxing, but one’s ability to be a successful farmer has less to do with one’s gender and more with one’s drive and passion. Classes like ours are invaluable for their ability to get students from many diverse backgrounds on their hands and knees, in the dirt, doing the work of a farmer, showing you that you really are capable of being successful if you can muster the drive and tap into your passion.
ReplyDeleteI'm inclined to agree with Josie's mention that our gender differences come almost wholly from the construct created from the way people interact differently with biologically male vs female children. Even so, as a child with a twin brother, I've often wondered about these ideas, mostly because we have always been so very very different from one another. I wonder how different things may have been if not for the fact that we also had three older brothers who treated us very differently, far more so than the adults in our lives. Anyhow, that's a personal aside and has always made me wonder whether there is some validity to the nature argument, not necessarily across a gender binary but simply among people that can be enforced by disparate treatment across development. Thinking historically, I wonder if the separation of women away from farming didn't come with the mechanization of the industry. When we look to ancient civilizations, the majority incorporate women cultivators and sometimes also as hunters. Maybe other forms of socialization to machines socialized men towards a now-mechanized version of agriculture, or maybe the concepts of property ownership and corporate leadership in male hands played the greater rollin this shift. If that is the case, then maybe it might make sense that a removal of some of those mechanized features via organics would affect the demographics of involvement. Mostly, I think that women would always have been more involved if our societal roles had so permitted. Their newness to the career as owners may just allow the right opportunity to start out the right way; I imagine that more people of any gender or identity wold be doing the same if they were starting afresh and often with small acreage plots to work with.
ReplyDeleteI can't speak to this as much as I would like to. I feel as though the mother earth and plowing is a bit of a stretch. I don't know if fields that we farm are in any way natural, especially the way that this majority of white men in farming practice their farming. I believe that the patriarchy is definitely a problem and it may exist in the farming industry. I honestly don't know how to combat this other than encouraging everyone I can to enter this industry regardless of their gender, sex, ethnicity , etc. This encouragement would also include responsible farming practices such as organic movements. There have been many systems that have been dominated by white men that have taken time to dismantle and on e of the large driving forces was time and talking. Sooner or later people will recognize what ideas make the most sense and those who disagree will die off. It will take constant pressure and action to change things. If we want the system of agriculture to have more women in it, do what you can to encourage women to join and show them it is possible. As for the paper reinforcing gender norms, I think that it is important to not disregard something as true or valid because we don't like it. I for example hate the fact that I am one of the reasons that the climate is changing and why habitat is being destroyed but it is true. I do what I can do help reverse or at least mitigate these effects. Again the way to dismantle systemic problems is individual action and community support.
ReplyDeleteMuch of what you've all already commented upon resonates clearly with me as well (as long as we're using anecdotes to draw conclusions, I'll note that I live with one of the most empathetic people I know and he happens to be a guy). In addition, I'll say that from my perspective, women in farming is nothing new. My mother worked just as hard as my father on my family's farm and had an equal legal share in the business--that he was called "farmer" and she called "farm wife" was a product of those gender binaries that labeled the earth female and called for the farmer to plow her and plant his seed. Following that metaphor a little further, in a homophobic society, a woman farming would then be a transgressive act. And in a society where property is traditionally passed from father to son, a woman's access to property may come through her husband's family rather than her own since if she has a brother, it is likely than he will inherit the farm, not her. Hence, her husband becomes the farmer, she the wife. This might seems like something out of ancient history to you all, but I can assure you that these dynamics are alive and well just a half an hour's drive north of Kalamazoo!
ReplyDeleteI think women and those who don't identify with binary gender are making up a larger percentage of this new wave of small-scale farmers because industrial farming has been/continues to be an old boys' club that actively discourages anyone who isn't an old white boy from participating. This new farm movement is much more inclusive and supportive in general.
Also, just want to note that that thing about mechanization opening up farming to women because now farmers don't have to be strong is just bullshit. When things need to be done on a farm, you figure out how to get them done. If you have a large and physically strong body you might choose to use brute force. If you are a smaller person with less brute strength, you figure out a different way. Isabelle has been learning to farm with one arm, for goodness sake! Of course, the reason that that comment pisses me off so much is that I heard it so frequently growing up as a reason that I as a girl wasn't allowed to do something on the farm. But whenever the men weren't around, I got stuff done just fine.
Also, I'm really interested in thinking more about how disrupting the paradigm of binary gender could open up new ways of thinking about ourselves in relationship to the Earth. Looking forward to more of this conversation tomorrow!
What a fascinating topic you bring to the table. I've heard you wonder about this a few times before, and I was interested to see what sort of evidence you'd be able to find so all of us could have an informed discussion about it! As is the case in every other western industry (with some very few exceptions), men dominate farming. This stems from the tradition of men as laborers and women as caretakers (addressed in “Agriculture Needs More Women”), but it’s exciting to see changes taking place. Not because women are better suited for all of the smaller tasks that make up the larger title of Farmer (though, in my personal experience, it does tend to be women who give more of a shit about animal suffering for the sake of human gluttony), but because it means more people in general are showing concern for this massive issue, and every person brings with her a set of unique experiences and problem-solving skills to combat the evils industrialized farming continues to create.
ReplyDeleteI think the public misconception that the farming tools are heavy and can only be used by men is facilitating the stereotype as well. In addition to the heavy machines Isabelle mentioned in her post, like John and Amy were telling us at their farm the other day, people misbelieve that they need a lot of physical power in order to operate farming tools, such as rakes and shovels. In reality, like Amy was saying, the tools only require a small physical force so that the farmers wouldn’t get tired for working for a long period.
ReplyDeleteThe other thing is the stereotype that females are supposed to be taking care of children while working on house chores. This maybe true in some farming communities like the Amish farming communities, but people should understand that this is not necessarily the case for all the farming practices, especially today.
I had never realized my own view of the farmer-man/gardener-woman split. I think my own bias comes from my grandparents—my grandfather was in charge of the tractors and animals, which were used to grow products for sale. The food for the family, however, was grown in the family garden that my grandmother planted. I agree that the gendering of food likely permeates our current system. At the farmer’s market this spring, I’m excited to more closely examine the relationships of the men and women working the booths. Who’s more involved with the customers? Who handles the money? Obviously, any differences are just reflections of the gendered distribution of work throughout our economy.
ReplyDeleteOne of the things that struck me most about the USDA facts that Abby shared is that the majority of immigrant farmworkers in the United States are men. After taking a few moments to process this information, I realized that the deficit may be shocking, but it’s certainly not surprising. Gender norms in our culture and others teach that it is the man’s job to provide for his family, leaving his partner to care for their children. It would be interesting to know if most families follow their father for work, or if he sends money back to them. Either way, it is often the woman’s job to perform the unpaid labor of childcare. Both parents are caught between a rock and a hard place: they desperately want to provide for their families, but feel forced to withstand inhumane conditions in order to do so.
It is interesting that you mentioned needing to own land to be considered successful. A couple years back, I asked my mother what kind of life she hoped I would have. Her answer was surprising, a farmer’s life she said. I was taken back at first, I really didn’t expect that type of answer nor at that time could envision myself as a farmer. She went on to say that to her, growing up in Guatemala, a farmer was equated to be being rich and successful. They were the ones who never had to worry about where their next meal would come from, had enough land for their kids to run around in and essentially had investments (they could sell their livestock if needed be). Now with every passing day the idea of being a farmer seems less daunting, though not because the status quo has changed, but because I’m beginning to learn more about how farming actually works. Interestingly, when I asked about my sister’s life, my mother responded the life of a good wife. She went on to say that is what she expected for my sister, because that is what my grandmother expected for her.
ReplyDelete