Brooks  Fall  2013  

  1

“Population Control”: Political Buzzword? Or Euphemism for Reproductive Oppression?

I. Introduction

Although there are established international measures that seek to provide women with

access to the highest available level of healthcare, there currently exists no impetus to heighten

the quality or accessibility of care for each individual nation – specifically with regard to the

developing world. There are cultural ideologies and norms within the vast majority of developing

nations that demonstrate a pervasive desire to seek control of resources and allocate them based

on worth; this worth is often, if not always, determined by ability to create profit. Because of this

structure, there cannot be a legitimate determination to fulfill the ideals of best possible health

care for the most possible people. Given this frame, the discussion about health as a commodity

and all other commodities generally will continue to be directed not toward the supply of

resources but rather toward the demand. Curbing population and ways to deal with the

population “issue” will remain subjects in the spotlight, especially with regard to populations

who are not producing profit. While population control remains an accepted societal goal, the

means of population production will remain an area of adjudication, and the woman’s uterus and

any rights regarding its function will remain a political talking point.

This paper seeks to take an eco-feminist (and/or eco-socialist) lens to analyze the ways

and reasons by which international treaties have failed to function at their highest level, and how

those failures impact women’s reproductive rights at large. After this introduction to the broader

scope of what this article intends to cover in this Part I Introduction, Part II will be an overview

of the discussion of overpopulation and population control. There, the goal is to outline the ways

in which the discussion is framed, and has been in the relevant history that has guided policy

making. Part III will look at eco-feminism both as an ideology generally, as well as in the

Brooks  Fall  2013  

  2

context of reproductive rights by analyzing ways in which it might be applied. International

human rights documents will be covered in Part IV, particularly with regard to access to health.

This fourth part will also shed light on the current health access situation of member States. Part

V concludes by coalescing these concepts, noting the possible impacts international convention

can have, and the challenges that may be faced, while highlighting how eco-feminist theories

could bridge the gaps – or entirely restructure the roads.

II. Population Control

“Eve is black, primitive and pregnant, and her reproduction is the Original Sin.”1

This bold and shocking statement by Betsy Hartman sums up the way population

research and policy tend to be framed. In general, the dialogue notes that resources are finite,

then notes the growing populations in non-western and underdeveloped nations, and begins to

analyze the “other” as an issue. Of course, when we dehumanize a society, minimizing it into the

problems that it creates for us, it becomes easily to reference them as breeding cattle – a

population to be controlled for our benefit. The population control discourse includes an

incredibly crowded area of research. There have been countless news segments, policies written,

marches organized, organizations formed, funding spent and articles written about the dreaded

“population dilemma”. Each of these seem to focus on varying ways in which we (the western

world or America) can address the concerns of growing populations within our borders as well as

globally. Often the issue is framed as an immediate and necessary one that encourages “fertility

                                                                                                               1 Betsy Hartmann, Liberal Ends, Illiberal Means: National Security, ‘Environmental Conflict’ and the Making of the Cairo Consensus 13 INDIAN JOURNAL GENDER STUDIES 195, 199 (2006).

Brooks  Fall  2013  

  3

assistance”2 for the “underprivileged… within the United States and abroad.”3 This framing

explicitly blames fertility for several world issues4, stating that we must have fewer births or

more deaths5. This false dichotomy of choice is validated and bolstered by citing several

different statistics, facts and figures pointing to (or creating) the relationship between failing

national stability and high population numbers. In fact, this perspective often criticizes the efforts

of underdeveloped nations to better their quality of living or economies, blaming their constantly

growing populations6.

There are a few participants in the discourse however who readily understand that this

chasm does not necessarily exist. Though most tend to ignore or not look for facts regarding the

amount of consumption in relation to the population of nations in the western world, some are

not quite so intellectually dishonest. Perhaps this is because those who do research within that

vein are generally not invited to the table for discussions of overpopulation and population

control. Regardless of whatever may cause this gap in understanding, there was one voice in

particular mentioned within Hauser’s anthology that did mention the concerns of

                                                                                                               2 “Fertility assistance” read: birth control access; tubal litigation; any forms of slowing down or ceasing reproduction from education to lowering sperm count. See e.g. Frank W. Notestein, Dudley Kirk, and Sheldon Segal, The Problem of Population Control, in THE POPULATION DILEMMA 125, 134-136 (Phillip M. Hauser ed., 1963). 3 PHILLIP M. HAUSER, Introduction and Overview to THE POPULATION DILEMMA, at 3 (Phillip M. Hauser ed., 1963). 4 See, e.g., Harold F. Dorn, World Population Growth, in THE POPULATION DILEMMA, supra note 3 at 7, 14, 15; Arguments presented as “Malthusianism” in by Irene B. Taeuber, Population Growth in Underdeveloped Areas, in THE POPULATION DILEMMA, supra note 3 at 45; Notestein, Kirk, and Segal, supra note 2 at 130; The Final Report of the Twenty Third American Assembly, in THE POPULATION DILEMMA, supra note 2 at 179 – 180; To be clear, these are citations to several articles which state overpopulation is to blame for the crippling fear of horrendous poverty and lack of education and resources to come. Very little is said about the negative impact of “overpopulation” today. 5 See, e.g. Frank Lorimer, Issues of Population Policy, in THE POPULATION DILEMMA, supra note 3 at 144; Taeuber, supra note 4 at 31. 6 HAUSER, supra note 3, at 3

Brooks  Fall  2013  

  4

disproportionate western consumption while also pointing to the concerns of overpopulation.7

This article specifically stated that there needs to be movement in both directions for there to be

proper healthy progress – that there must be a lowered birthrate (while still, intentionally or not,

concentrating the fault of the dilemma on poor women of color), but also saying that resource

allocation was a valid place to begin seeking solutions.8 However, there are several more voices

equally as cogent and perhaps a little louder even if just by the crowd alone, that demean that

viewpoint based entirely upon what seems to be the most pragmatic in administration or what

seems to create that best situation for the future, or would or would not work – with the

understanding that something as simple as sharing is not one of the things that could work9.

Many seem to be unimpressed with the idea of redistribution of resources even on extraordinarily

small scales because of nationalistic sentiments. Some go so far to say that the world dos not

function as a unit and that it should not and it cannot10. This argument extends to speak on the

issues of the “available resources skills and knowledge to meet needs” without critiquing

whether or not there are ways to get around the barriers of different needs by nation.11

Although each contribution to this discourse has its own perspective ranging from

immigration policies to industrialization to sterilization, they all seem to carry the same

underlying tones. This tone insinuates that there is a certain proper sort of family, and that family

is small and deserving of the right to build a family. The idea of earning the right to build a

family via some status or other (be it being American/Western, or wealthy, or white, or all of the

                                                                                                               7 Joseph L. Fisher and Neal Potter, Resources in the United States and the World, in THE POPULATION DILEMMA, supra note 3 at 95. 8 Id. 9 Dorn, supra note 4 at 14 – 15. 10 Id. 11 Id.

Brooks  Fall  2013  

  5

prior) seems to be a concept so fundamentally understood and ingrained in the way we think

about organizing families that it permeates the discourse with few challenges.12

III. Eco Feminism

“That feeling of being part of everything, not separate at all. I knew that if I cut a tree, my arm

would bleed.”13

This quote may seem like a strangely new-age hippie way to perceive feminism, but the

idea of women being connected with nature is certainly not new. Aspects of nature like nurturing

and sustenance have usually been characterized as feminine things, even with things so simple as

the term “Mother Earth”. Eco-feminism takes a step further in the analysis. Although eco-

feminism is unique in its overlapping women’s issues with issues of nature, it is not a far cry

from other theories that notice the connections between the environment and power structures

and oppression. Social ecology (or eco-socialism)14 and anarchist ecology (eco-anarchism)15 are

also developed philosophies that run along a similar vein of sorts. Though this paper will focus

on analyzing issues through the lens of eco-feminism, for the sake of clarity it is important to

note that there are points in which these theories overlap. Eco-feminism does not reference only

one idea but rather a subset of several that have a particular interest in observing the treatment of

nature. It is one ideology that does in fact challenge the ideas promoted by the perceived

population dilemma. Though it seems to be one of the less popular feminist philosophies, it is

                                                                                                               12 This is an assumption I read into the discourse by the lack of critique of the western/developed world, and also because of the constant criticisms of the low or undesirable economic state of nations with growing populations. 13 ALICE WALKER, THE COLOR PURPLE (1982); NANCY LEVIT & ROBERT R.M. VERCHICK, FEMINIST LEGAL THEORY: A PRIMER 12, 31(2006). 14 See e.g. JIM MERKEL, RADICAL SIMPLICITY: SMALL FOOTPRINTS ON A FINITE EARTH 3-6 (2003); MURRAY BOOKCHIN, THE PHILOSOPHY OF SOCIAL ECOLOGY (1994); 15 See e.g., GRAHAM PURCHASE, ANARCHISM AND ECOLOGY (1997);

Brooks  Fall  2013  

  6

directly applicable to issues of the gaps between the status quo and the realization of women’s

agency and human rights generally on the international level. However, before discussing the

ways in which the theories in co-feminist philosophy can be applied, a brief history of the

ideology might be helpful in granting better understanding.

A. Conceptual Basics

The history of the eco-feminist movement traces its advancement origins to the 1970s.

More specifically, the idea and the term were first popularized in a 1974 piece written by

Françoise d'Eaubonne entitled “Feminism or Death”.16 The underlying idea is that society’s

oppressions of women and of nature are interconnected.17 D’Eubonne explains this idea noting

that a significant portion of patriarchy was formed and institutionalized because of men’s

demand for control and power. This meant control of both the means production (i.e. with land

and trade) and reproduction (i.e. women).18 Over time that idea has evolved to include that men

have felt the need to maintain control and power generally by maintaining hierarchies generally.

Now, modern definitions of eco-feminism include a broader approach, still predicated on the

focus of the treatment of nature, but now asserting there are connections between the treatment

of women, the poor, and people of color.19 Some now even say that it is an “umbrella term for a

variety of different positions” of oppressive dominations of any marginalized person and that

                                                                                                               16 Françoise d'Eaubonne, Le féminisme ou la mort [Feminism or death], in NEW FRENCH FEMINISMS: AN ANTHOLOGY 64, 66 (Elaine Marks and Isabelle de Courtivron ed., 1980); Carolyn Merchant, Ecofeminism and Feminist Theory, in REWEAVING THE WORLD: THE EMERGENCE OF ECOFEMINISM 100, 100 (Irene Diamond and Gloria Feman Orenstein ed., 1990).; NANCY LEVIT & ROBERT R.M. VERCHICK, FEMINIST LEGAL THEORY: A PRIMER 12, 31 (2006). 17 LEVIT & VERCHICK, supra note 1, at 31. 18 D’Eaubonne, supra note 1, at 66. 19 Karen J. Warren, Introduction of ECOFEMINISM: WOMEN, CULTURE, NATURE, at xi (1997); LEVIT & VERCHICK supra note 1, at 31.

Brooks  Fall  2013  

  7

same domination as seen in the treatment of nature.20 D’Eaubonne originally wrote her piece

with a focus on this formulated system of oppression as being a “male System” and in some

ways seemed to decline the opportunity to further analyze the connection of that idea with the

concepts of control and distribution of resources in an economic sense.21 Her writing does note

that the harm to Earth is specifically because of “profit motive”. She separates the ideas

however in explaining that the “profit motive” is structurally a part of the male System – an

innate part of the masculinity that she calls out as being an issue rather than a separate system to

be deconstructed.22 Conflating masculinity with capitalism and therefore passing on the occasion

to critique capitalism distinctly as it relates to women’s rights did not stop others from reading

that critique into her writing. That open door along with the growing popularity of more

inclusive forms of feminism23 is likely part of why the term is now considered to be much more

broad24.

                                                                                                               20 JYETTE NHANENGE, ECOFEMINISM: TOWARDS INTEGRATING THE CONCERNS OF WOMEN, POOR PEOPLE, AND NATURE INTO DEVELOPMENT 98, (2011). 21 D’Eaubonne, supra note 1, at 66. Here she references and critiques the harms of the system in that it praises masculinity and men having power charging “complete responsibility of the male System, in so far as it is male (and not capitalist or socialist).” 22 Id.; Elaine Marks & Isabelle de Courtivron, Introduction II of NEW FRENCH FEMINISMS: AN ANTHOLOGY, at 25 (1980). 23 See e.g., Verna Williams and Kristin Kalsem, Social Justice Feminism 18 UCLA WOMEN'S L.J. 131, 2010; JYETTE NHANENGE, ECOFEMINISM: TOWARDS INTEGRATING THE CONCERNS OF WOMEN, POOR PEOPLE, AND NATURE INTO DEVELOPMENT (2011). 24 This figure is included in an effort to provide more clarity to the otherwise, even after several articles and lectures, somewhat nebulous concept of ecofeminism. Though the visual explains quite a bit, this figure is from 1997. I would argue that know there is far more overlap in all of these sections. Dorceta E. Taylor, Women of Color, Enviornmental Justice, and Ecofeminism, in ECOFEMINISM: WOMEN, CULTURE, NATURE 38, 65 (Karen J. Warren ed., 1997).

Brooks  Fall  2013  

  8

B. Eco-Feminist Response to the “Population Dilemma”

Eco-feminism, in conjunction with feminist socialism or feminist Marxism, would halt

the discussion of population concerns at its inception to reframe the issue. One article stated that

there need to either be fewer births or more deaths in order to evade whatever perceived

impending doom there might be should the population continue to grow at its same rate.25 This

framework falsely creates a limited scope of options. By focusing only on the propensity of

growing demand, the controlling discourse narrows the spectrum of possibilities and forces out

several many solutions that take a much different perspective. The eco-feminist approach

functions in two steps. First, the Eco-feminist-socialist26 looks at the control of the means of

production and critically analyzes the ownership of land and industry and resources. Secondly,

eco-feminism does not ignore the similarities between those methods of control and the control

exercised over women’s bodies and decisions.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     

25 Notestein, Kirk, and Segal, supra note 4 at 130 26 This is a mesh of my own artistic linguistic license and a desire for clarity and brevity. This

Brooks  Fall  2013  

  9

In taking the first step, eco-feminism acknowledges the patterns of ownership and

consumption. This approach notes a few facts: the United States consuming 24% of the world’s

resources while only containing 5% of the world’s population.27 The western world as a whole

has numbers that are markedly similar.28 Given this incredible disparity in the amount of

consumption per capita, it seems nearly absurd to focus the concerns of population control

anywhere outside of American soil. In doing this analysis we then come to understand that there

are more movable pieces at play that are simply not being moved. The allocations of resources

do not have to be fixed. Population is not the only thing that could alter in order for everyone to

be accommodated for. In fact, given the previous statistics, it would seem that only an alteration

in the allocation of resources or the amounts of consumption would make any sort of meaningful

change with or without population growth or decline. It is a child like attitude of refusal to share

reflected in the masculine pride of the “male System” that posits that there is not enough pie for

everyone when only two people were given both halves. This attitude of entitlement is ownership

is inherent to capitalism and industry. Though industry may not previously have considered a

moving piece to be analyzed when discussing eco-feminism, it seems to fit the expanded version

of new ecofeminism given that industry implies ownership of land and the means of production.

The second part of this analysis is to look at the treatment of nature and control and

observe the treatment of women and search for the connections therein. Here it is plainly

delineated. If there is a more widespread even handed or even nearly proportional degree of

resource allocation then we see that there is far more than enough for everyone to consume and

procreate as they so see fit. Of course, this challenges the dynamics of the masculine power

                                                                                                               27 DEVELOPMENT DATA GROUP OF THE WORLD BANK, WORLD DEVELOPMENT INDICATORS, (2008) available at http://data.worldbank.org/sites/default/files/wdi08.pdf 28 Dorn, supra note 4 at 20

Brooks  Fall  2013  

  10

structure or “male System” that d’Eaubonne critiques.29 Suggesting that there be a shared value

of all people is considered to be one of the feminine traits that is oppressed in the male system

that is deemed to be weak and unfit because it does not produce profit. This analysis brings us to

the driving force of ecofeminism in which the promotion of celebrating, embracing, or even

accepting as valid ideals of nurture that are generally associated with feminism then leads to the

liberation of women. When that piece is moved and the concern no longer becomes population

the political pressures shift away from the creators of life and toward the creators of industry and

those who hold funding and their obligation to mankind. The onus for sustaining the world is

placed where it belongs – on those who are actually draining the earth of its sustainability to

begin with.

C. Eco-feminist solutions

When d’Eaubonne first wrote about ecofeminism, she provided only the guideline that

the answer to the horrors of over productivity and the oppression of bother nature and women

that it entails was for there to be a “great reversal” in which women remove power from men30.

She was clear, however, that she did not want “power-to-the-women” but rather a dismantling of

the power structures as they exist.31 Her focus on an eco-feminist approach was one in which the

expression of femininity became so amplified that it was respected enough to bring about an

ecological revolution.32 But to many, especially those frustrated with the seeming irrationality of

                                                                                                               29 D'Eaubonne supra note 16 at 66 30 Id. 31 Id. 32 Id. at 236

Brooks  Fall  2013  

  11

the idea of earth-loving feminism might find this to be a mere form of words.33 Though initiating

and sustaining the dialogue about the concept of ecofeminism and what it does mean, what it can

mean, and what it could do are all very important academic exercises, these acts provide little

comfort to the pragmatist looking do more and create change. However new eco-feminism34 in a

new time period of environmental oppression has carved itself a new niche that has a lot of room

for action. Now with nuclear plants and toxic waste dumping compromising the health of lower

income people, who are often people of color, who are often in households headed by women

ecofeminism finds itself partnering with environmental justice and civil rights advocates alike

because the harms are so tangible.35 In these contexts ecofeminism seems less tangential and the

connections become more clear.

Given these extended constructs of this philosophy, within the context of population

control, health equity becomes a ecofeminist solution. We have determined that the primary

issue is overconsumption rather than reproduction, and that continuing to strip women of agency

regarding their own reproductive health will only oppress women and not yield any results (other

than there being fewer poor and/or brown people on earth). By advocating for women’s health

                                                                                                               33 See e.g., Chris Cuomo, Toward Thoughtful Ecofeminist Activism in Ecological Feminist Philosophies 42, 49-50 (Karen J. Warren ed., 19996); Douglas J. Buege, Rethinking Again: A Defense of Ecofeminist Philosophy, in ECOLOGICAL FEMINISM 42, 42 – 46 (Karen J. Warren ed., 1994); Nearly every article in this anthology includes a critique or another of ecofeminism though several are pieces that reflect bewilderment at the idea of ecofeminism in practice that is not dendrocentric to the point of absurdity and forsaking women’s issues. This perceived lack of coherent pragmatic application is likely part of the reason this term began to expand in meaning and include more inclusive theories. 34 “New Ecofeminism” is how I am referencing ecofeminism as it has begun to peacefully dovetail and function as an important extension of social justice feminism as it is interconnected with issues of environmental justice. This is not a coined term (at least not from anything that I have read or found) but rather my attempt to create a clear distinction between the ecofeminist d’Eaubonne origins and how it functions in action today. 35 LEVITT & VERCHICK supra note 19 at p. 32,33

Brooks  Fall  2013  

  12

and valuing women’s health to the point of making it a societal charge, ecofeminist activism

manifests.

III. State of the States

Fortunately, there is already a stage set for the development of health equity as a solution.

Though the process of eco-feminist activism will not by any means by simple, and perhaps not

even necessarily the best or most accessible tool, there is space from which such activity could

springboard.

A. Treaties at issue

The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights calls for states to

recognize the right of access to the “highest attainable standard” of health.36 The Universal

Declaration of Human Rights also at several points recognizes not only rights to preservation of

health37 and rights to the benefits of scientific discoveries38 (which feasibly should include

medial advancements) but also acknowledges a duty to society39 and a duty to maintain social

welfare.4041

                                                                                                               36 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, adopted 16 Dec. 1966, G.A. Res. 2200 (XXI), U.N. GAOR, 21st Sess., art. 12, U.N. Doc. A/6316 (1966), 993 U.N.T.S. 3 (entered into force 3 Jan. 1976). 37 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted 10 Dec. 1948, G.A. Res. 217A (III), U.N. GAOR, 3d Sess., art. 11, U.N. Doc. A/RES/3/217A (1948). 38 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted 10 Dec. 1948, G.A. Res. 217A (III), U.N. GAOR, 3d Sess., art. 13, U.N. Doc. A/RES/3/217A (1948). 39 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted 10 Dec. 1948, G.A. Res. 217A (III), U.N. GAOR, 3d Sess., art. 29, U.N. Doc. A/RES/3/217A (1948). 40 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted 10 Dec. 1948, G.A. Res. 217A (III), U.N. GAOR, 3d Sess., art. 35, U.N. Doc. A/RES/3/217A (1948). 41 There are several other provisions applicable to certain regions; however, though not explicitly stated, the focus of this research mostly revolved around India.

Brooks  Fall  2013  

  13

If the language of these treaties were to be taken at their face value, it seems that there is

not a limited necessarily implied that limits the application of these to the nation’s borders. The

highest level of health attainable should certain not differ between different regions of India.

However, this could also be read to mean that the highest degree of health attainable should not

differ from the India to the UK to nations party to this treaty. If these treaties are read to develop

a network of interdependency in which we are relying on one another for the uplifting and

development and health of one another this address the “population dilemma” in two ways. First,

by providing information, education, and access to birth control and family planning, as well as

access to safe abortions, the issues of population growth or likely to begin to dissolve. Secondly,

in sharing in the development of resources, resource allocation begins to shift and the developed

fear of overcrowdedness and not having enough to go around begins to undo itself naturally.

B. Looking at India

There are several many egregious and horrific cases and research available on the state of

medical treatment in India, especially health options for women. The frighteningly high rates of

maternal injury, illness, and death almost entirely stem from health concerns that are completely

preventable in other nations.42 Even more hurtful is that these harms are worst to those in the

lowest social and economic brackets.43 These conditions are of course aggravated by the

existence of the caste system in India, but the preference of class should never be a reason to be

denied a fundamental human right.

                                                                                                               42 CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS, MATERNAL MORTALITY IN INDIA: USING INTERNATIONAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL LAW TO PROMOTE ACCOUNTABILITY AND CHANGE 14 (2008). 43 Id at 15

Brooks  Fall  2013  

  14

Interestingly enough, many of the village women that fall into this bracket of the poorest

and most harmed by maternal health concerns work within physical field labor.44 In the same

moment that nations begin to embrace the idea of health equity a barrier is lifted and suddenly

these nations are simultaneously respecting the nurturing and nature driven work of the rural

women most impacted. When poor women are consistently denied access to care, society is

reinforcing that the work they do and what they contribute to their communities is not valuable

enough to be rewarded with care. Deane Curtin suggests that if there is a societal shift that begins

to respect working with nature in field and rural work that the treatment of the most marginalized

women would immediately and drastically improve. She suggests instilling programs that allows

women to use their life work in expert capacities, which could turn the attention to the value of

their labor, and in turn, the value of themselves as people.45

IV. Conclusion

In defense of USAID, in spite of – or perhaps, because of - its sordid past with actively

revoking agency of women of color all around the globe through mass sterilization, their policies

have changed noticeably since the 1990s.46 Even if the website is no clear indication and the

policies reflected there are only a veneer to hide the same insidious agenda, the fact that our

government is not so brazen and proud about impending policies of reproductive oppression

                                                                                                               44 Dean Curtin, Women’s Knowledge as Expert Knowledge: Indian Women and Ecodevelopment,, in Ecofeminism: ECOFEMINISM: WOMEN, CULTURE, NATURE 82 (1997). 45 Id 85 - 88 46 Mathilde Damoisel, A Woman’s Womb (prod. Tancrede Ramonet, 2010); This documentary highlights several of the issues discussed in part II of this piece as well in showing the way the fear based policies functioned in practice.

Brooks  Fall  2013  

  15

abroad could very feasibly be a step in the right direction.47

In defense of the capitalist system and our reluctance to shift the way we handle health

internationally, it is important to note that there are factors besides the lie of the population

dilemma. Since the onset of these concerns in the 1960s, there have been several organizations

that have developed to address these concerns and made political alliances and academic

research institutions entrenching itself into regular political discourse and effectively into our

social norms48. Taking steps in the direction toward making higher degrees of health attainable

for all people will be more difficult because of those competing political interests. Although it is

unclear whether such entities specific to population have formed with such force in nations other

than the U.S., the pervasive nature of the ideology of overpopulation alone will likely still remain

a force. Without such organizations, countries, including the United States, would find more than

a little bit of resistance to the idea of sharing resources, regardless of the reason or treaty or

mandate.

Whether or not what is just or proper seems palatable to the wealthy western masses does

not negate the necessity of these actions. There are a few ways in which I would like to suggest it

is possible toward making change without sparking a capitalist revolt of entitlement. These are

not independent actions that must happen in a specific order, but rather a list of related factors –

most of which should be considered vital to the forward process of equality and full respect of

human rights already outlined. First, we as an international human rights community as well as

individual Western nations must begin to invest in the paradigm shift. Through academia,

                                                                                                               47 Nina J. Crimm, The Global Gag Rule: Undermining National Interests by Doing Unto Foreign Women and NGOs What Cannot Be Done at Home 40 CORNELL INTERNATIONAL LAW JOURNAL 587, 589 N. 13 (2007); as compared to http://www.usaid.gov/who-we-are 48 Betsy Hartman, Liberal Ends, Illiberal Means: National Security, ‘Environmental Conflict’, and the Making of the Cairo Consensus, 13 Indian Journal of Gender Studies 195, 204 (2006).

Brooks  Fall  2013  

  16

sponsored research, and new organizations, information needs to enter the marketplace of ideas

in order to efficiently dispel the myth of the fixed-pie49 of resources. Once we stop telling a lie

like it is the truth because we as a society come to know better, perhaps we will be better

equipped or at least slightly less reluctant to examine the status quo. This takes an eco-feminist-

socialist perspective in that it demands that people acknowledge who is controlling and

consuming resources to whose detriment, and acknowledging that a shift must take place in order

for women’s rights and human rights more broadly to be respected. Secondly, there must be a re-

reading of these treat to read in an obligation to help advance the state of human rights generally,

when possible, and not only within one’s own particular nation. Reframing the “duty to society”

in this way will likely create new ideas about the way we are meant to interact with one another

and perhaps even expand the understood definition of “highest attainable”. It is certainly

arguable, however, that other than changing the way the treaties “feel” or “seem” is the only

thing they will do. There could not imaginably be a penalty for a nation not sharing its medical

scientific advancements immediately upon their being patented, however I do not find it

unreasonable to create a system in which a percentage of profits made from those discoveries

fund health advancements in other nations. It is vital to keep in mind that different nations have

different needs and creating a platform of health internationally could include activities ranging

from developing access to clean water, or sterilization technology and tools, or building clinics in

                                                                                                               49 Bazerman, Max H. "The Mind of the Negotiator: The Mythical Fixed Pie." Negotiation 1, no. 1 (November 2003). (newsletter.); This term is used to describe the fact that there are always more solutions within the given situation that others are not willing to examine because they do not want to give from what they already have. This is within the context of negotiations and being able to reach settlement, but I believe that the same concept applies.

Brooks  Fall  2013  

  17

rural areas. This brings me to the third factor which is bottom-up50 development of agencies

within nations as well as their separate regions so that needs are understood, represented, and

adequately addressed. Organizing in this way gives nations with the most need for medical

advancements the sense of autonomy of which they are often stripped when accepting assistance.

For example, when the World Health Organization or USAID have reached out to nations in the

past there is always a condition on what monies may or may not fund, and the dissemination of

those funds are recorded and overseen by outsiders who do not understand the nation’s needs51.

Granting this self-determination not only provides an effective solution, it creates opportunities

for members of these communities and citizens of these nations to become involved in their own

healthcare, and more aware of its inner workings. This direct interaction lays the groundwork for

a healthy transition into less dependence on assistance.

The views presented here, by the kindest of readers, would be considered wildly radical.

To most, these ideas are undoubtedly a part of an absurd communist agenda. I am comfortable

with that perception. What I do hope this information has portrayed is the need to reconsider the

framing of “overpopulation” as a dilemma, the broadened concept of what eco-feminism has

become, and how that lens may be helpful in beginning to make steps toward international

equality and health. In changing the way we think about resources available to all people we hold

the power to end the war on women’s wombs, and begin to function as a global community, with

dignity and autonomy for all.

                                                                                                               50 See, e.g. supra note 23; this article is one of a handful I am aware of that address Social Justice Feminism as turning on its ability to function on a “bottom-up approach”. Here, marginalized parties organize to give input so that actual concerns are heard rather than input coming solely from government officials and academics that have not had that lived marginal experience. 51 See, e.g.