Feminist Legal Studies

, Volume 17, Issue 3, pp 241–265 | Cite as

“Gender-benders”: Sex and Law in the Constitution of Polluted Bodies

Article

Abstract

This paper explores how law might conceive of the injury or harm of endocrine disruption as it applies to an aboriginal community experiencing chronic chemical pollution. The effect of the pollution in this case is not only gendered, but gendering: it seems to be causing the ‘production’ of two girl babies for every boy born on the reserve. This presents an opening to interrogate how law is implicated in the constitution of not just gender but sex. The analysis takes an embodied turn, attempting to validate the real and material consequences of synthetic chemicals acting on bodies—but uncovers that finding a harm in a declining sex ratio depends on a static conception of the human form, based on unfounded assumptions of ‘naturalness’ and ‘normalcy’. Elizabeth Grosz’s theory of ‘becoming’ offers a compelling challenge, essentially pointing to the conclusion that we should find harm where we find illness and suffering and not simply where we find difference. At the same time, we cannot discount the political economy of the pollution: the paper concludes by returning the focus to the role of power, colonialism and the state in the perpetuation of the pollution on the landscape.

Keywords

Canadian First Nations community Chemical pollution Endocrine disruption Feminist theory of the body Gendered harm Political economy of pollution Tort law 

References

  1. Balsamo, Anne Marie. 1996. Technologies of the gendered body: Reading cyborg women. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Barker, Elizabeth. 2008. A world without men. Whole Life Times, February. http://www.lime.com/magazines?uri=wholelifetimes.com/lime/2008/02/healthyliving0802.html. Accessed 18 Sept 2009.
  3. Bender, Leslie. 1990. Feminist (re)torts: Thoughts on the liability crisis, mass torts, power and responsibilities. Duke Law Journal 37: 848–912.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bender, Leslie. 1998. Tort law’s role as tool for social justice struggle. Washburn Law Journal 37: 249–260.Google Scholar
  5. Bloom, Anne. 2009. Sex, bodies, torts. Unpublished manuscript, on file with author.Google Scholar
  6. Bottomley, Anne. 2002. The many appearances of the body in feminist scholarship. In Body lore and laws, ed. Andrew Bainham, Shelley Day Sclater, and Martin Richards, 127–148. Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
  7. Brown, Paul. 2007. Man-made chemicals blamed as many more girls than boys are born in Arctic. The Guardian, 25, 12 September.Google Scholar
  8. Bullard, Robert D. 1993. Confronting environmental racism: Voices from the grassroots. Boston: South End Press.Google Scholar
  9. Bullard, Robert D. (ed.). 2005. The quest for environmental justice: Human rights and the politics of pollution. San Francisco: Sierra Club Books.Google Scholar
  10. Butler, Judith. 1993. Bodies that matter: The discursive limits of sex. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  11. Carson, Rachel. 1962. Silent spring. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  12. Chamallas, Martha, and Linda K. Kerber. 1990. Women, mothers and the law of fright: A history. Michigan Law Review 88: 814–864.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chilton, Janice, Rikuo Doi, Lovell Jones, Devra Davis Lee, Hillary Stainthorpe, and Pamela Webster. 2007. Declines in sex ratio at birth and fetal deaths in Japan, and in US Whites, but not African Americans. Environmental Health Perspectives 115: 941–946.Google Scholar
  14. Chunn, Dorothy E., and Dany Lacombe. 2000. Introduction. In Law as a gendering practice, ed. Dorothy E. Chunn, and Dany Lacombe, 2–18. Don Mills, ON: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Colborne, Theo, Dianne Dumanoski, and John Peterson Myers. 1997. Our stolen future: Are we threatening our fertility, intelligence and survival? New York: Plume.Google Scholar
  16. Cole, Luke W., and Sheila R. Foster. 2001. From the ground up: Environmental racism and the rise of the environmental justice movement. New York: NYU Press.Google Scholar
  17. Colihan, Mary Ann. 2008. Chemical valley: Aamjiwnaang First Nation in Sarnia sounds alarm over toxins. CBC News In Depth. http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/aboriginals/health.html. Accessed 18 Sept 2009.
  18. Conaghan, Joanne. 1996. Gendered harms and the law of tort: Remedying (sexual) harassment. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 16: 407–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Conaghan, Joanne. 2002. Law, harm and redress: A feminist perspective. Legal Studies 22: 319–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Conaghan, Joanne, and Wade Mansell. 1993. The wrongs of tort. London: Pluto Press.Google Scholar
  21. Cranor, Carl. 2006. Toxic torts: Science, law and the possibility of justice. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Davis, Angela. 2008. Racism, birth control and reproductive rights. In The reproductive rights reader: Law, medicine, and the construction of motherhood, ed. Nancy Ehrenreich, 86–93. New York: NYU Press.Google Scholar
  23. Engels, David. 2000. Injury and identity: The damaged self in three cultures. In Between law and culture: Re-locating legal studies, ed. Lisa C. Bower, David Theo Goldberg, and Michael Musheno, 3–21. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  24. Erikson, Kai. 1991. A new species of trouble. In Communities at risk: Collective responses to technological hazards, ed. Stephen R. Couch, and J.Stephen Kroll Smith, 11–30. Peter Lang: New York.Google Scholar
  25. Global Community Monitor. 2006. History of the bucket brigade. http://www.bucketbrigade.net/article.php?list=type&type=74. Accessed 18 Sept. 2009.
  26. Grosz, Elizabeth. 1994. Volatile bodies: Towards a corporeal feminism. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Grosz, Elizabeth. 2004. The nick of time: Politics, evolution and the untimely. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Grosz, Elizabeth. 2005. Time travels: Feminism, nature, power. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Howden, Daniel. 2007. Toxic chemicals blamed for the disappearance of Arctic boys. The Independent, 12 September. http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/green-living/toxic-chemicals-blamed-for-the-disappearance-of-arctic-boys-402077.html.
  30. Howe, Adrian. 1991. The problem of privatized injuries: Feminist strategies for litigation. In At the boundaries of law: Feminism and legal theory, ed. Martha Albertson Fineman, and Nancy Sweet Thomadsen, 148–167. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  31. Hubbard, Ruth. 1997. Abortion and disability. In The disability studies reader, ed. Lennard J. Davis, 187–202. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  32. Jain, Sarah. 2006. Injury: The politics of product design and safety law in the United States. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Jain, Sarah Lochlann. 2007. Cancer butch. Cultural Anthropology 22: 501–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Krupp, Staci Jeanne. 2000. Environmental hazards: Assessing the risk to women. Fordham Environmental Law Journal 12: 111–138.Google Scholar
  35. Kukla, Rebecca. 2005. Mass hysteria: Medicine, culture, and mothers’ bodies. Lantham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar
  36. Langston, Nancy. 2008. The retreat from precaution: Regulating diethylstilbestrol (DES), endocrine disruptors, and environmental health. Environmental History 13(1): 41–65.Google Scholar
  37. Lazarus, Richard J. 1997. Fairness in environmental law. Environmental Law 27: 705–739.Google Scholar
  38. Luke, Timothy W. 2000. Rethinking technoscience in risk society: Toxicity as textuality. In Reclaiming the environmental debate: The politics of health in a toxic culture, ed. Richard Hofrichter, 239–254. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  39. MacDonald, Elaine, and Sarah Rang. 2007. Exposing Canada’s chemical valley: An investigation of cumulative air pollution emissions in the Sarnia, Ontario area. http://www.ecojustice.ca/publications/reports/report-exposing-canadas-chemical-valley/attachment. Accessed 18 Sept. 2009.
  40. Mackenzie, Constance A., Ada Lockridge, and Margaret Keith. 2005. Declining sex ratio in a First Nation community. Environmental Health Perspectives 113: 1295–1298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. MacKinnon, Catharine A. 1979. Sexual harassment of working women. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Martin, Aryn. 2009. “Your mother’s always with you”: Material feminism and fetomaternal microchimerism. Resources for Feminist Research forthcoming.Google Scholar
  43. Mellor, Mary. 1997. Feminism & ecology. New York: NYU Press.Google Scholar
  44. Mitchell, Gary. 2004. Predominance of female babies on Niue Island—a sign of endocrine disruption? Journal of Rural and Remote Environmental Health 3: 29–39.Google Scholar
  45. Mittelstaedt, Martin. 2008. Humanity at risk: Are the males going first? Globe & Mail, F4, 20 September.Google Scholar
  46. Mostafa, Randa M., Z. Mirghani, K.M. Moustafa, Y.M. Moustafa, and M.H. El Hefnawi. 2007. New chapter in old story: Endocrine disruptors and male reproductive system. Journal of Medical Sciences Research 2: 33–42.Google Scholar
  47. Nolan, Donal. 2007. New forms of damage in negligence. Modern Law Review 70: 59–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Nye, Jennifer L. 1998. The gender box. Berkeley Women’s Law Journal 13: 226–256.Google Scholar
  49. Oudshoorn, Nelly. 1994. Beyond the natural body: An archeology of sex hormones. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  50. Prialux, Nicky. 2004. That’s one heck of an “unruly horse”! Riding roughshod over autonomy in wrongful conception. Feminist Legal Studies 12: 317–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Roberts, Dorothy E. 1991. Punishing drug addicts who have babies: Women of color, equality and the right of privacy. Harvard Law Review. 104: 1419–1482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Scott, Dayna Nadine. 2008. Confronting chronic pollution: A socio-legal analysis of risk and precaution. Osgoode Hall Law Journal 46: 293–346.Google Scholar
  53. Sheth, Darpana M. 2006. Better off unborn? An analysis of wrongful birth and wrongful life claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Tennessee Law Review 73: 641–666.Google Scholar
  54. Shildrick, Margrit. 1997. Leaky bodies and boundaries: Feminism, postmodernism and (bio)ethics. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  55. Smith, Linda Tuhiwai. 1999. Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples. London: Zed Books.Google Scholar
  56. Solomon, Gina M., and Ted Schettler. 2000. Environment and health: Endocrine disruption and potential human health implications. Canadian Medical Association Journal 163: 1471–1476.Google Scholar
  57. Steingraber, Sandra. 1991. We all live downwind. In 1 in 3: Women with cancer confront an epidemic, ed. Judy Brady, 36–48. Pittsburgh: Cleis Press.Google Scholar
  58. Tremain, Shelley. 2002. Theoretical perspectives on the construction of the gendered body and disability. In Head, heart and hand: Partnerships for women’s health in Canadian environments, ed. Penny Van Esterik, 455–486. Toronto: National Network on Environments and Women’s Health.Google Scholar
  59. Verchick, Robert R.M. 1996. In a greener voice: Feminist theory and environmental justice. Harvard Women’s Law Journal 19: 23–88.Google Scholar
  60. West, Robin. 1988. Jurisprudence and gender. University of Chicago Law Review 55: 1–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. West, Robin. 1997. Caring for justice. New York: NYU Press.Google Scholar
  62. Witting, Christian. 2002. Physical damage in negligence. Cambridge Law Journal 61: 189–208.Google Scholar
  63. Witting, Christian. 2008. The house that Dr Beever built: Corrective justice, principle and the law of negligence. Modern Law Review 71: 621–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Osgoode Hall Law School and Faculty of Environmental StudiesYork UniversityTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations