Month: March 2020

Abortion

I agree with Hawkins’ argument for pro-choice and further agree that pro-choice is the “pro-life” choice.

Overpopulation

At the time Ronnie Zoe Hawkins wrote the article, “Reproductive Choices: The Ecological Dimension” in 1993, the world population was between 5 and 6 billion people. Today, in 2020, the world population reaches between 7.7 billion. According to World O Meter, the percentage of births are 58% higher than deaths. The environmental perspective is that the planet’s resources cannot support a large human population. There is also a strong link between overpopulation and increasing factors of environmental damage.

I think this article gives a nice overview of the environmental effects of overpopulation. Below are some of the environmental impacts of overpopulation.

1. Depletion of natural resources

2. Habitat destruction

3. Climate change and global warming

4. Loss of biodiversity

5. Pollution

6. Pandemics and epidemics

That last point is intriguing considering the recent spread of COVID-19/Coronavirus. This article that was published in BBC News at the end of January 2020,  explains how outbreaks of new diseases will become “more of a problem in the future as climate change and globalism alter the way animals and humans interact”. Although it assures that “humans have always caught diseases from animals”, that changes in the environment are speeding up the process and can spread more quickly. The more that humans change the environment, disrupt ecosystems, the more opportunities for infectious diseases to grow.

People might see wildfires on the other side of the country, or the world, or think of coral reefs as far off problems but here we are, every single one of us, and every system in the world has been affected by COVID-19. If we take into consideration that every other point listed like polluted water or global warming could harm us all we would pro

How Abortion Can help Population Control

Hawkin’s suggests that “many people will agree that some form of human population limitation is needed”, though people in developed countries think that it’s a 3^rd world problem and that abortions are “not an “acceptable method” of birth control”. However, in consideration of the larger picture as mentioned above… abortion is the most logical option and one part of the issue at hand regarding overpopulation.

In my opinion, this relates to the trolley problem. The scenario is that there is a trolley, brakes gone and nearing toward a split in the tracks.  On one side of the tracks there is one person standing in the middle of the tracks and the other side there are five, also on the tracks. You have the option to pull a hand lever that will either turn the train right or left which in effect would either save five people or only save one person. The second scenario is you have the option to push someone onto the track who would stop the train from hitting the many others.

One scenario you would be involuntarily letting someone die while the second scenario you have the choice to actively kill one person to save five.

“The trolley problem”, is a moral paradox first proposed by Philippa Foot in her 1967 paper, “Abortion and the Doctrine of Double Effect,” and later expanded by Judith Jarvis Thomson. Which brings to question human morality and consequentialism.

These types of philosophical questions “have real-world implications for how people behave in society, governments, science, law and even war.”

We have seen this unfold in Italy where Doctors are deciding who will be receiving healthcare in relation to COVID-19. However, these same principles are taken into consideration when thinking about abortion and environmental effects.

 

So Now What?

Women should have the agency over their own body to make the decision, not through coercion, violence, or laws, to make the following decisions:

1. To have an abortion
2. To not have an abortion
3. To decide when and how far apart they want children
4. Access to safe abortions
5. Free will over their own body

 

This can only be helped with safe access to abortions and access to reproductive healthcare. According to The World Health Organization, the percentage of unsafe abortions are very high in undeveloped countries in comparison to wealthier nations. Unsafe abortions also cost healthcare systems is overwhelming and has created a “global burden”.

1.https://www.eartheclipse.com/environment/problems-of-overpopulation.html

List of environmental effects of overpopulation.

2. https://www.eartheclipse.com/environment/problems-of-overpopulation.html

Article published by a professor about overpopulation and spreading diseases.

3. https://people.howstuffworks.com/trolley-problem.htm

Explanation of the Trolley Problem.

4. https://people.howstuffworks.com/trolley-problem.htm

Further reading about the double doctrine effect – an argument used by Catholics on abortion.

5.https://spot.colorado.edu/~heathwoo/Phil160,Fall02/thomson.htm

The philosophy regarding abortion – discusses the violinist moral question.

6. https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1253282/coronavirus-italy-latest-update-young-prioritised-old-people-at-risk-hospital-beds-icu-cri

An example of today about how overpopulation is directly resulting in real deadly environmental changes. It also relates to the moral question of the Trolley Problem. Real-life example.

This photograph is of the famous rapper, ludacris. He has a plate of chicken wings/thighs in front of home, with hot sauce and beer. In the upper right hand corner of the image is a female chicken with womanly features such as large breasts, arms, etc..

 

The text around the chicken says “chicken, beer’. In the center of the image we see ludacris about to take “a bite” out of an actual woman’s leg and is pouring salt on it with his mouth wide open and hand grasping her ankle. 

 

As if to imply that biting a woman’s leg is no different than eating chicken wings.

 

With this imagery in mind we can analyze it with a few of Carol Adams’ 9 points. First, is that meat eating is a sign of male identity. In this image the male is in control of the female’s body. One of Adams’ other points is that both animals and females are connected in an objectified, fragmented, and consumed way in patriarchal culture. Visual jokes are created to substitute one for the other. This image is telling us women are chicken and that chicken are also women and both are for eating with beer. 

This next image is of a pig standing on two legs, holding down a blowing white dress. This advertisement uses iconography to make a pig “sexy”. This is referencing Maryln Monroes’ famous image of her standing on a subway vent when the air blows her dress up. This image becomes iconic, recognizable and also an object of the male gaze. Meanwhile, here we see an iconic image of the standard of beauty, the male gaze, sexuality, the fantasy of innocence, transformed from the human form into pig form. This brings us back to women being animalized and animals being sexualized, as what is happening in this image. 

The third image is equally as dynamic as the first two. This image is of three guys, who are part of a “meat club” as we can see on the banner behind them. One of them is holding grilling tongs, and each of them are wearing a white shirt. The white shirt reads, “got meat?” and there is an image of the female body posing in a sexual way with the head of a cow on top. 

First, “got meat” is reference to the once popular, and retired slogan, “got milk”. “Got milk” has its fair share of sexualized ads. However, “got milk” is telling us indirectly that if we do not have milk we should get milk and we should drink it. With this thought process, “got meat” is telling us if you don’t have meat, you should get some and when you do have meat you should eat the meat. 

 

The image on the shirts, as already described, are of a naked woman’s body and a cow’s head. So, with the caption “got meat” are they suggesting to eat Minotaurs? Are they saying we should be eating women, eating female cows, or both?! Either way the blend between the live human female body and the cow’s head is overall disturbing. It would have at least made more sense to have the meat product on the shirt instead. This is as Adams’ described as “pornographic rendering of women as meat” aka, anthropornography. 

 

 

The image I chose was of Lady Gaga wearing a meat bathing suit on the cover of Vogue magazine. Adam’s mentions the art show displaying raw meat tacked up. She also describes that “Another 21st century enaction of the sexual politics of meat is the resurgence of the raw as “real”. Which she says is part of some fantasy of consuming flesh and women.

I’ve also included the YouTube clip here>>> of Carl Jr’s 2015 Super Bowl Commercial. Adams’ mentions his name and after googling it I realized I have seen these ads before. It is of a naked woman walking through a farmers market and ends up eating a burger…

An article from lady clever magazine, in response to the ad, says “Apparently, you think that superimposing tomatoes over Charlotte McKinney’s butt and two melons (come on – actual melons?!) over her breasts will sell, too. Ugh. Excuse us as we barf. I think we just caught a whiff of your burgers bullsh*t.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4USya4T9is

 

https://ladyclever.com/food/can-we-stop-with-the-sexist-and-sexualized-food-ads/

This article is a review of Carl Jr’s ad from the 2015 Super Bowl describing the ad and discussing sexualizing women and meat.