Social Injustice.

Though we are a part of nature, humans have deteriorated the natural system to satisfy our needs, putting each element that makes up natural systems in danger not because we seek human survival, but because we see each element as a commodity. The consequences of this environmental destruction are varied, for example, the loss of wildlife, loss of non-renewable resources or renewable resources, loss of the natural landscape, climate change, social injustice. This essay aims to show how human beings, by not taking care of natural resources, cause social injustice, leading to environmental injustices and our moral responsibility to avoid social injustice.

It is essential to clarify that organisms need other organisms within natural systems to survive; this can be seen in the food chain. However, the way human beings consume natural resources is not natural. The massive consumption of resources is supported by Western culture’s economic models that have been implemented since colonialism. Similarly, some scholars claim that natural resources have an instrumental value, meaning that natural resources have value because humans use them (Jennings, 2016). However, other scholars claim that natural resources have an inherent value because they are worth it, not because humans use them (Jennings, 2016). Regardless of the philosophical perspective of the value of nature’s elements, not taking care of the environment impacts humans, and most of the time, this impacts more minorities in the United States and around the world. Those who have fewer resources are less able to navigate the impacts of environmental destruction and will feel the impact sooner and more deeply compared to those who are privileged. The disproportionate use of ecosystem elements has consequences in society, and these consequences depend on race, culture, income, etc; when the balance of each individual and society is broken, this is known as a social injustice.
Social justice is equality in all aspects, including in the economy, health, education, and all those things humans need in order to flourish in society and enjoy a fulfilling life. One aspect of social justice is environmental justice. According to Environmental Justice US EPA 2020, “Environmental justice is the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income, concerning the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies.” Pichon (2020) defines social justice as a vision to decrease inequalities created by climate change. Climate justice recognizes and addresses those least responsible for climate change experiencing the most significant impacts; also, climate justice is ethically rooted in moral actions and consequences. An example of Pichon’s definition would be what happen in Katrina in New Orleans, 2005. Even though New Orleans was impacted by climate change for many years prior to the 2005 natural disaster, Hurricane Katrina was one way to show the rest of the world the impact of climate change, particularly the disparate impact of climate change on oppressed populations. The most affected population were Black communities, where they tended to live in areas that experienced more significant flooding and suffered housing damage (Fussel, 2010). Here, there are two elements that arose when the impact of Katrina is studied: race and income.
First, race is a social construct used by white supremacy as a tool to position itself at an advantage in the world and leave others who do not belong to their groups at a disadvantage that includes salaries and opportunities to improve themselves. In Hurricane Katrina, it was not by chance that the largest affected population was Black communities. (Pincho, 2020). In the United States, the concept of race changed over time; for example, before, the Irish and Italian community does not consider themself as white, or the white Latino term did not exist. However, in the same way, race harms those who not are white.
Second, in Hurricane Katrina, if people lived in a neighborhood where they belong to a lower social income, the money for reconstructing the house after Katrina (provided by the state) was less to those who live in white neighborhoods (Pichon, 2020).
Environmental justice is one element of social justice which describes the fight for the environment and tries to protect people in society from degradation of the environment and climate change. However, because not everyone in society has equal social standing or equal access to rights, the term environmental racism was created to describe how communities of color, especially Black communities in the US, are disproportionately affected by environmental degradation. Scholars of Environmental racism believe that it is not a coincidence that communities of color are disproportionately impacted by air pollution, chemical spills, toxic waste, flooding, and other environmental hazards; rather, the social inequalities that impact these communities in other areas also spill over into the area of environmentalism. Environmental racism impacts environmental hazards on people of color ("Environmental Justice & Environmental Racism – Greenaction For Health And Environmental Justice" 2020).
In the United States, some communities have a tremendous disproportion impact by hazards. According to Whited (2019), Black people are 54 percent more likely to be exposed to air pollution in the form of fine particulates (PM2.5) compared to the overall population. This particulate matter is related to illnesses such as lung disease, heart disease, and premature death; therefore, Black communities are three times more likely to die from asthma. Also, racial minorities are more likely to live near toxic sites and landfills and drink unhealthy water (Whited, 2019). When governments let these injustices happen, this is known as institutional racism because they are creating specific laws that only benefit a specific group, or are only enforced in specific communities but not for others.
The way we see natural resources only as a tool to accumulate wealth and how mass consumerism is promoted has a significant impact on the earth's ecosystems and significantly impacts human populations, especially those who belong to minorities or live in developing countries. Environmental ethics could help society to make people understand the inherent value of each element in an ecosystem. After this, advocacy could help create better laws that protect all instead of just one group. This would result in more equitable opportunities for all, which means improved environmental justice that would result in a more just society.
When the whole picture is evaluated, the system we live in feels difficult to change, given all the structures in place that have built things to be the way they are. However, environmental ethics can provide individuals with tools that can help reduce the impact of environmental degradation. Environmental ethics can give us a set of norms and values ​​that can help us change habits that we are used to that affect the environment. For example, some areas that can be changed including trying not to travel if it is not necessary, eating local food, reducing meat consumption, reducing our amount of waste, stopping consumerist behavior, and being actively participative in politics so that our voice can be heard. Protecting the environment is not just about fighting for the ecosystem or protecting nature; it is also about fighting against social oppression. It is a moral responsibility for all of us who live on and depend on the environment and each other.

References 
"Environmental Justice & Environmental Racism – Greenaction For Health And Environmental Justice." 2020. Greenaction.org. http://greenaction.org/what-is-environmental-justice/.

"Environmental Justice | US EPA." 2020. US EPA. https://www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice

Jennings, Viniece, Jessica Yun, and Lincoln Larson. 2016. "Finding Common Ground: Environmental Ethics, Social Justice, And A Sustainable Path For Nature-Based Health Promotion." http://10.3390/healthcare4030061 ).

Pichon, Colette. 2020. "Climate justice as social justice IGA 455: Colette Pichon Battle Guest Lecture - Zoom." Harvard.zoom.us. https://harvard.zoom.us/rec/play/tJR-c7ygqG43TNGXswSDU_V5W47sfaqshCga8qBbyh2wVCVSMFDyYuBHZbGhM1hE8sKklCA3Y5z5ulC4?continueMode=true&_x_zm_rtaid=uZcgFKkLQeeMAPPAnAaPpA.1585922846800.0f2f0f9757c600bc8fb86da2f53757fc&_x_zm_rhtaid=938 .

Whited, Brittany. 2019. "With Environmental Rollbacks, Communities Of Color Continue To Bear Disproportionate Pollution Burden | State Impact Center." Law.nyu.edu. https://www.law.nyu.edu/centers/state-impact/press-publications/expert-commentary/environmental-justice-juneteenth-2019 ).

Imagine if you were a snake..

 

 

 Environmental ethics

 

Imagine if you were a snake. Imagine if you had become a resilient species that adapted to this new ecosystem and are successfully surviving in a forest in Honduras. Imagine that every time you manage to catch a prey, you feel successful; you are the master of the forest. Now, imagine if one day you are sunbathing when you hear the roar of a truck, the shovels digging the earth. Imagine that you get scared and hide in the cave without understanding what is happening. Imagine that you get trapped and you are very scared. When you carefully manage to go outside, you realize that your home is no longer there. It has been converted into a golf course. Imagine that you try to look for food, but it is scarce, resources are limited. At the end of that endless corridor, you manage to see the light and carefully decide to look for resources in these places. The ecological system is no longer available for you. You reflect on humans and their anthropogenic perspective, and why they cannot see the inherent values of each element in the ecosystem. You feel overwhelmed and can't stop thinking that the people who destroyed your little house had no idea of environmental ethics. You also remember how the little ant commented on Leopoldo’s biological community in the land of ethics. It is difficult for you to believe that the little ant better understood that the tree leaf had to be eaten only when it had a vital need, as “Basic principles of deep ecology” said. You cannot reach the light. Your courage begins to disappear; you never find food nor water.

    We must extend our morality to the entire biotic community, as the “The Land Ethic” by Aldo Leopold tells us to avoid damage to our ecosystems. Each living being has a role in an ecosystem; if one organism disappears, it affects the whole system.  With the snake’s experience, we see each element of this system as an integrated and complex community where the absence of any of its organisms would affect the whole ecosystem. It is necessary to have an ethical relationship with nature and as part of that community. Therefore, as members of the biotic community, we must extend our morality to the community. In the same way, as members of society, we have to respect other human beings as we have to respect and care for each biotic member community. In the story of the snake, the intrinsic value of each organism can be seen. Therefore, it has a moral value and fulfills a role within its ecological niche, and everything is connected. It teaches us that we have to treat each element of the ecosystem with value and respect, as we would treat each human with respect.

    Similarly, Basic Principles of Deep Ecology by Arne Naess and George Sessions would help us to avoid damage to nature because it gives a list of basic principles that views the system as whole, like Leopold, but also adds the non-living elements such as rivers, lakes, etc. This list of principles gives us philosophical thought and advice on improving natural resource treatment. The list shows that each living element and each non-living element has richness and diversity, and all have intrinsic value. Deep ecology remarks that the only way to reduce the biological community’s elements (richness and diversity) is if humans have vital needs, meaning absolutely necessary or essential not wanted. In this case, the gold course is not a vital necessity, and the impact it has on the snake and all the other living and non-living elements is a tragedy compared to the recreation that golf provides for humans. Besides, deep ecology establishes that overpopulation impacts the deterioration of nature and this impact is unsustainable on the natural ecosystem. This cannot be improved unless we change the economic and technological way in which we live. This can be done through public policies that protect these systems. If we recognize these principles and are aware of our actions’ consequences, maybe we can achieve some change to preserve the earth's ecosystem. We may not be able to save the snake who died on the gold course, but maybe we can protect the snakes to come. #RIPsnake

 

My Analysis of Among Women by Marie Ponsot.

Estamos en el mes del amor, ay Dios mío que bonito! We are in the month of romantic "love,"  for this reason, I decided put one of the most powerful poem that I have ever read in my entire life. Yes, my entire life! "Among Women" by Marie ponsot.

               Throughout history in many societies, women always have been in unequal systems where society imposes stereotypes and absurd rules on them. As a result, this unequal system makes women feel that they have to lose their freedom in order to love freely. This is exactly what Marie Ponsot shows in her poem “Among Women.” Marie Ponsot demonstrates the way that women should love freely and how important it is to recognize this freedom; Ponsot develops this poem with hyperboles and paradox which highlight feelings and add special features to her characters. The meaning of loving freely is deeper than what it seems. In this poem, the author shows how the speaker’s grandmother wanted her granddaughter to learn her right to this freedom to love or not to love whomever she decides.
               The poem begins with the speaker questioning in general terms “What women wander?”.  “to wander” means to walk around slowly in a relaxed way, without any clear purpose or direction. Therefore, the reader can assume that the poem is about something negative; who would want to walk in any direction without an objective? However, the question  refers to more than the literal dictionary definition of the word. Why should women always walk with a purpose, or why not? The author is not only referring to walking, literally, but is referring to how women choose to live their lives and make their life choices, including whether or not to fall in love, settle down, have a family, and do all the things women traditionally do. Those women who “wander” could be understood as women who choose not to go down this traditional path, but instead make other choices about where they want to go in their lives. Then, the second line answers the speaker’s question of “what women wander” with  “Not many. All. A Few.” This means that only a few women actually make the choice in their life to “wander”, or to love freely who their choose (or choose not to love at all). The tone in this line lets the reader know that not many women can wander, or they choose not to. Not many women can love freely - just a few. Why not?
           In the next two lines the speaker shows the reader that she is a women and she feels the need wander too, which means to love with freedom. The speaker says “Some, and I’m one,” marking herself as one of the women she is describing. Moreover, she is “Wandering sitting still”, meaning that even when she is not actually out in the world wandering, or loving freely and making choices about her life, she is “wandering while sitting still”. This means that even when the speaker is not actively participating, she is still thinking about wandering, and daydreaming about it. This makes the reader imagine that the speaker has a great desire to “wander,” or to love freely, and this takes up all her mental and emotional energy, even when “sitting still.”
             In line 7 the speaker makes a reference to her grandmother. The speaker says “My small grandmother,” this is used to describe a person, it can mean “young,” but clearly, her grandmother is not a young person. However, it could be that the author was referring to when her grandmother was younger, as she describes many of her grandmother’s life choices and how she chose to love. The word “small” could also bring to mind a negative connotation, like “less than,” but in fact the author could be using this as a paradox. In fact, her grandmother was great and wise, and taught her many things. Saying “my small grandmother” could be a way to say “my wise grandmother”. After line 7, the speaker says that her grandmother “..Bought from every peddler.” “Peddler” is a word that in the past meant someone who sold things house by house. But why did the speaker’s grandmother buy from each seller? Then the speaker says “..Less for the ribbons and lace;” the grandmother bought from the peddlers, not because of what they sold, but because of their “scent” - referring perhaps literally to the smell of men she found attractive, but more figuratively referring to the “scent” or the air or feeling of the freedom she felt being with the peddlers. When the speaker refers to “ribbons and lace,” she is also bringing to mind the image of the traditional women of the time, who were only supposed to busy themselves with feminine, domestic concerns like sewing, and making themselves look beautiful and attractive with “ribbons and lace” for other men, in order to achieve their ultimate life goal of catching a good husband and settling down. However, the reader is reminded that for those women who chose to “wander,” like the speaker’s grandmother, they were not concerned with ribbons and lace, but rather with the peddlers themselves and their “scent” of freedom.  Thus, the grandmother likes buy thing from each peddler just for the fact that she likes feeling free, and this is represented by the “scent.”.  In these four lines is where the hyperbole starts, and the author starts to show the most significance of this poem.
                 In line 10 the speaker says, “..Of sleep where you will” which is still part of the last sentence because in line 10 there is no period. The grandmother reminds her granddaughter to feel something that she wants, or “Of sleep where you will;” in other words, sleeping where she wants, with who she wants, or alone if she so chooses. She says  “Walk out when you want,” urging her granddaughter to be in control of her own life and her path, doing the things she wants, rather than settling down just because this is expected of her by societal expectations. Thus the grandmother is telling the speaker not to feel afraid to wander in life; to be free; to love freely. Therefore, she says  “..choose Your bread and your company,” which means to choose whatever thing you want to choose, or the men that you want or choose the women that you want to choose. Love freely.
           The speaker remembers that her grandmother warned her, “Have nothing to lose.” That means not to be afraid of taking a risk, and knowing that even if it does not work out, she will be okay. In other words, the grandmother is letting her granddaughter know that if she loves freely and this love disappoints or mistreats, she can leave him/her. Do not feel afraid, and feel the same “scent” of freedom that the grandmother felt when bought from the peddlers.
     In the next paragraph in the line 14, the speaker starts to remember who her grandmother was, and she says,”She looked fragile but had High blood, runner’s ankles.” This is a description of a woman who appears to be vulnerable, but life has taught her to be strong. She may look “fragile” on the outside, but she is full of inner strength and wisdom. For this reason the grandmother “Could endure, endure.” This means she could bear suffering. The reader also knows that this line is very significant because it is the only place where the author repeats. She says the word “endure” twice, meaning that she really endured, and makes the reader imagine all the things she may have suffered and overcome in life. The reader understands the author’s point that her grandmother was the strongest person, not fragile.
          Therefore, the grandmother “Loved her rooted garden,” and “..her Grandchildren” instead of loving a man. The grandmother decides to love freely, who she chooses, her family, instead of the stereotype that society imposed upon her. She wanted that the speaker to feel free to do the same. However, this does not mean she never fell in love, or was incapable of loving a man. In the line 19 the speaker tells the reader that her grandmother once loved a “Wild man.” With the word “wild,” the author is saying that grandmother once loved someone who was a wanderer like her. However, things with this love, this “wild man” may have gone wrong, so the grandmother chose instead to love her garden, and her grandchildren. Whereas society may have forced women to stay with their husbands and settle down no matter what, the grandmother was a wanderer, and loved freely the people and things that made her happy. In addition, the poem ends in the same way it starts, in general terms, with the speaker saying,  “Women Wander As best they can.” Here is the only place where the author uses a rhythm with “man” and “can,” adding extra emphasis to this line in the poem. Here, the author is conveying her main point in the entire poem, using rhyme as a tool to draw readers’ attention to this point.
        Finally, Marie Ponsot creates a poem with a complex issue, using an intergenerational relationship between a wise woman “the grandmother,” and her granddaughter, a figure that many readers can relate to, no matter where they are located in history. Using the wisdom the grandmother passed down to her granddaughter, the author is trying to pass along a message to her readers to show that one does not need to suffer the expectations that society puts upon women, but that they should choose to love freely, just as the grandmother chose to love her family and her garden instead of a love who can hurt her. Women can love with freedom or decide not to love. Women can wander.

My Analysis of “The Scar” by Jane Dotchin

“The Scar,” written by Jane Dotchin, tells a brief but meaningful encounter of destiny, when two people find each other a long time after an accident has marked their lives. Dotchin describes what is going on in the present, and adds flashbacks to describe the accident that happened in the past. In the past, the narrator - we never learn the gender of the narrator - was playing with his or her brother when he or she accidentally drowned in a swirling whirlpool in a river. Dotchin tells how the mother rescues the narrator and gives him or her “the kiss of the life” to save the narrator’s life. The narrator’s brother tells him/her that he/she looks like “..an astronaut floating in space” as the narrator was floating underneath the water, because practically the narrator was close to death until the mother saves his/her life. Her child’s near-death event marks the mother’s life, so she decides put her child in swimming class where the narrator meets the coach for the first time. The coach has his own style to educate new swimmers, which helps students to learn in a “funny” way and get rid of their fear. Unfortunately his own style brings death to narrator’s mother. Now, in the present day some 15 years later, they are together in a waterfall exploring the fear of the coach, who does not realize that the narrator never forgot his face, and of course never forgot that he accidentally led to the death of the narrator’s mother. Subtly the narrator takes the coach to explore his own fears without telling him who he/she is or that they know each other from the past. In the end, the coach finds out that they know each other and that the narrator is that child who lost his/her mother in a fatal accident, for which the coach feels responsible. 

The theme of this tragic story is how human beings feel the necessity to blame others in their grief, even when there may be no one to blame, and how at the same time, they are able to forgive. However, to find this forgiveness, human beings need to go through some steps. First, in the story the narrator feels angry and feels that the coach is guilty of the mother’s death all those years ago. “Fifteen years changes a seven- year-old a lot more than a forty-year-old” and then says” I recognise him but he doesn’t me,” like he/she requires that the coach recognise him/her because the narrator knows that the coach would feel terrible. Second, the narrator needs to see fear in the coach, and for this reason he/she brings the coach through a difficult pathway in the waterfall unnecessarily. The narrator justifies this action and says “I am not sending him the easy way. It's not exactly dangerous, but it's unnecessary to go through the fall” and “I send him that way because it’s more of a thrill.” The narrator needs to see coach afraid, just like when he/she was in that pool as a child because now the characters are inverted; the narrator is the coach and the coach just a mortal human learning something like the narrator was before, with a bit of fear and excitement. The narrator gives coach encouragement to continue like the coach used to give the narrator encouragement when he/she felt afraid of swimming in the other side of the pool. The narrator is waiting for this moment, and he/she says, “It’s a perfect moment” and “He is smiling” to describe how the narrator feels “it is the perfect moment” to make the coach feel miserable, just after his excitement and happiness of conquering the waterfall; perhaps he does this because he still blames to coach for what happened, and wants him to feel what he/she felt those years ago, and probably still feels. Third, the step of the forgiveness comes just when the narrator has gone through these feelings, which we can infer because of the way the story ends. The narrator bundles coach up and they are sitting, “holding hands, tight” while they are looking down to the pool feeling pain for the unfortunate events. This makes us feel that both are lost, because they are traumatized but at the same time, they win. I feel that the narrator forgives the coach even though they will live with this memory for the rest of their lives. 

The story is presented by first-person narration, which helps the reader to feel more that the reader is witnessing a personal event, as if we were living the story. This may also be one reason why we never learn the gender of the narrator, so that it may be easier for readers, male and female, to feel identified with this character and be able to see the story through the narrator’s eyes. The story does not have a chronological plot because the author brings us the narrator’s past with flashbacks, which constantly show us where and why the two characters met for the first time, and why the narrator never forgets the coach. Even though the plot is not chronological, the plot helps the reader understand what happens and why. In addition, the plot gives a rich characteristic of the two principal characters and the way the coach teaches, which is important to know in order to understand why the narrator acts the way he/she does in the waterfall. The scenes from the past which are lived as flashbacks are often mirrored in the present, but with the roles of the characters inverted - the narrator becoming the coach and the coach becoming the student. For example, the young narrator wins a medal for swimming 25 meters, and the coach climbs the 25 meter waterfall. This also points to how people can repeat cycles of trauma, especially when one has not forgiven. The author describes two settings, one in the past and the other in the present. In the present they are in a waterfall, referred to in the story as “scar”, which is a symbol is of the narrator’s pain and suffering. Also, through all the story the author uses the duck as a symbol which denotes maternal care, which was the reason why the mother died, and the trauma that the narrator has after the loss of his/her mother. The way that Dotchin describes the setting and the comparison that she uses helps the reader to understand more clearly what is going on in the story. The literary language that Dotchin uses was amazing, such as the way she describes someone who has drowned is very creative and subtle.  

In this literary piece, it is very interesting how Jane Dotchin describes two scenes which enrich this wonderful story because she makes a connection between two times of life without confusing the reader. Even though the story is very sad, the way she describes it makes it a wonderful piece of literature. Therefore Dotchin brings the reflection of how a mother gives everything for her children, but also she brings clearly how someone can be affected by death and tries to look for guilt or blame, but in the same way can find forgiveness in murky waters. Therefore, the author closed the story with “the water coils and boils into the whorls from the pouring waterfall,” but they are together holding hands looking this water. 

The story “The Scar” gives a reflection of life, of loss and how it is important to confront grief, anger, and trauma, and move toward forgiveness in order to learn to live with it. Sometimes it is not possible to erase these things that happen, and even when there is someone to blame, it would often not make up for what was lost - just like coach could not bring the narrator’s mother back to life. However, people carry these scars around and learn to conquer them, just as coach conquered the “scar” of the waterfall by climbing up it with the narrator’s help. Many things in the past flashbacks in the story were reflected later in the present scenes, a way of showing that people carry around these scars even years later, and sometimes repeat stories again and again as a way of trying to process them. This story’s ending, where both characters sit down together supporting one another, is a poignant ending that gives the reader hope that they will indeed heal their scars and learn to live life with them.