POPULATION, ENVIRONMENT AND WOMEN

By: Elizabeth Farians   as published in 1971

 

The human factors affecting the population-environment situation that we have considered so far are either fixed or relatively stable, but there are factors which are changing so rapidly that it is almost impossible to evaluate them. One of these is the role of women.

Traditionally this was to be housewife-and-mother, and it was reinforced by powerful ethical sanctions. These sanctions arose from the need for a high birth rate to counter a high mortality rate in an "underpopulated" world and the need to use both women and children to do work that is now performed by machines. With the disappearance of these needs, a traditional moral code that once promoted human survival has in some respects become an obstacle to it. Elizabeth Farians, feminist and theologian, argues for developing a code that would be relevant to the situation it is intended to control, and she considers this code especially as it would deal with the rights of women.

Miss Farians is a member of the Theology Faculty of Loyola University, Chicago, and founder and chairman of the Ecumenical Task Force on Women and Religion in the National Organization for Women. At present she is writing a book on feminist theology entitled, God Is Not Our Father.

 

One of the major considerations of anyone concerned with the ethical aspects of optimum population and environment must be the new dimensions of the problem. In our fast changing world it is no longer sufficient to look to the past for some immutable moral principle to guide present conduct. We can no longer take for granted that we need only to be faithful to a moral law which is ancient in order to meet future problems. We cannot continue to rely on a moral code supposedly given as an all embracing, once-for-all moral doctrine. The modern situation calls for radical re-evaluation. Its complexity defies the simple solutions of the past and its magnitude calls for deep change. No mere new application of old ways can cope with a population doubling every thirty years, a finite world being destroyed by man competing for power, the increasing awareness of the value of the individual, and the demand by women for the recognition of their personhood.

 

The Moral Code

Before considering the new dimensions of the problem it might be helpful to recount how a moral code develops; what is its origin and purpose. A moral code is formed slowly. As man experiences life he gradually organizes his reflections on it. Finally, after many years, perhaps centuries, of such experienced reflections, a codified system for living is handed down from one generation to the next.

The central principle of a moral code is that it promotes the good of the civilization it regulates. It comes out of the experience of life of the people; it is intended to protect that life. In this sense it can be said to be given and natural, or the natural law made specific according to the needs of a particular society. It is immutable or unchanging inasmuch as it fosters respect for life, however this is expressed specifically.

Any code that is moral seeks the good and avoids the evil. What is apparently good and what is truly good may be confused in particular times or places, and even particular goods or how to promote the good may be disputed, but all would agree that respect for life is the basic value advanced by any moral code. This the old moral code and the new moral code have in common. Of course with respect to any moral code a distinction must be made between what the code holds as the ideal to be sought and what people do in practice.

 

The Past Age

In the agrarian culture of the past, life was hard. The world was underdeveloped, and society was under populated. Existence itself was at stake. To stay alive was the challenge. All of the energies of society had to be mustered around survival of the human race. Many children were needed to do the work of the land, and at a time when war was the way to settle disputes many children were needed to man the military. In order to provide workers and soldiers it was necessary for women to bear as many children as possible. This was all the more true since these were times when more children died than survived into adulthood.

Respect for life during the first period of humanity meant peopling the earth. Everything was directed toward that end. Thus the moral code placed great value on large numbers of children. It was the quantity of life that was important. The quality of life could not be stressed.

Since the major emphasis was on survival the life experience of the people did not include a consciousness of the value of the individual or of the personhood of woman. Society was conscious of itself only as a group which must be sustained. The individual merged into the group and the function of woman was reproduction. Hence the old moral code was silent about the quality of life of the individual or about the person· hood of woman.

The land itself was underdeveloped and wild. In some ways the land was supportive of man, but man had to subdue it to reap its value. In many ways the earth was like a fierce enemy. It was mighty and it seemed infinite. The reflected experience of man contained no awareness of scarcity. Natural disasters, even those of famine and flood, were not the result of scarcity; they were the result of insufficient taming of the land. In such a society life depended on power: power over nature, over women, over other men. The most powerful survived. Competition was its dominant characteristic.

 

The Modern Situation

The post-industrial age is different. Much of the world is developed, some of it even overdeveloped. While there still remains the third world, partly in both periods, the world itself is now seen to be finite. We are running out of space, air, water, and other resources. Technical progress has increased the life span and insured the survival of most children. Hence women have many years to live after their fertile period, and not as many children must be borne to keep the population stable.

The demand for children has also lessened. Before, children were a means to the survival of the race either as workers or as warriors. Now automation has reduced the need for labor, and hopefully some day soon men will find ways other than war to solve problems, and sharing rather than competition will eliminate the need for power. Then children will not be a means of filling armies; they will be valued as ends in themselves, as unique individuals.

The change in attitude toward children has been one of the main factors in the change in the status of women. When the quantity of children is no longer stressed, then their production need no longer be the major function of women and women can be seen as persons in their own right.

The style of life has also changed. A number of factors have converged to make it possible to be concerned with the quality of life. Life is not just a question of survival. Life is not as hard as it once was. Man has tamed the earth, and the industrial revolution has given man comfort and leisure.

All of this has led to a new kind of life. There is time now for education, and this in turn tends to expand social consciousness and to bring out individual awareness. These produce a shift in emphasis from quantity of life to quality of life.

 

New Dimensions for the Moral Code

Ethical problems arise when the moral code lags behind the current situation. In some cases the traditional moral code is outdated in its evaluations, and in other cases it is silent concerning issues that were not the concern of past ages.

It is obvious that there has been a shift in values. Nowadays respect for life stresses quality of life rather than quantity. Mere existence is no longer seen as an end in itself.

Mankind has also reached a stage of overpopulation and overdevelopment. We have gone from overabundance to scarcity of natural resources, and from under population to more people than the earth can support. Hence we need conservation rather than continued expansion, and birth control rather than unlimited reproduction.

Coupled with the need for conservation is the need for a new form of economics based on sharing and cooperation rather than competition. This would seem to be a necessity in a finite world where limited resources means that one country's or individual's gains are another country's or individual's loss. A sharing, cooperative spirit in the world would surely change the character of man. Some say it is natural for man to be greedy, aggressive, and power seeking, but we do not know how another economic system would modify human nature. We do not know whether man is naturally cooperative or naturally competitive or even whether man could be a happy combination of both, because as society was organized in the past only the aggressive survived. Even in our modern world, man is forced to be competitive in order to succeed, if not to survive. The moral code has been silent about this, except to encourage moderation or balance in any attribute of the individual.

The moral code has never been able to successfully deal with morals on a national level. The prophets of old tried but in general succeeded only in becoming martyrs. Nowadays respect for the moral code has retreated almost entirely to the private sector of life.

It must also be pointed out that part of the present population crisis is caused not by too many people but by a competitive power-hungry economy. Much of the present starvation and wretchedness in the world is caused by mal-distribution of food and goods. Here the moral code has not been silent; but it has not been insistent enough. It has not been insistent enough on the immediate issue, the love for one's fellow man which should control and counteract greed and indifference.

At the moment there are some who are seriously considering the population problem as one of poor distribution. The Roman Catholic Church has taken this line, but it has done so to support its claim that artificial birth control is morally wrong. Other groups, especially certain minorities and certain other underprivileged groups, maintain that genocide may be the aim of the white rich, who will not voluntarily give up power and privilege.

Many are also becoming concerned about trying to solve population problems too quickly by somewhat simplistic proposals for birth control. Groups like the Friends' Service Committee and the New University Conference point out the dangers in allowing governments to decide who shall live, because it also means deciding who shall die.

Nevertheless, even though mal-distribution of the world's goods is the immediate cause of untold unnecessary suffering of mankind today, there is a population crisis -and a pollution crisis directly related to it which can only be adequately eased through birth control. Here the shift in understanding the bases of any moral code which urges respect for life, from quantity of life to quality of life is crucial, whether the method of birth control is abstinence, sterilization, contraception, or abortion. It is to be hoped that we can make this change in our moral code in time. When we realize that the purpose of a moral code is the good of society and when that society is in serious danger of overpopulation and total pollution, then it becomes clear that birth control of some kind becomes a moral imperative. There is no moral dilemma here once we recognize that respect for Iife as unl imited reproduction reflected the good of society in a very different situation. Now that adequate population is assured, understanding of respect for life can and should have a deeper meaning. The moral code must stress the quality of life rather than just quantity.

A note of caution must be introduced here. Quality of life does not confer a license to murder. To respect the quality of life is to respect life itself as the base of that quality. But to respect the quality of life does mean not to bring into being life that cannot be adequately supported or life that will be deformed.

Several further comments should be made about birth control:

 

1. To accept sterilization as a means of birth control does not mean that involuntary sterilization can automatically be considered moral. I can conceive of times when involuntary sterilization might be absolutely necessary, but at the present time I do not think we are able to determine when that condition exists for certain.

 

2. The distinction I have made between quantity and quality of life is not adequate to solve the abortion dilemma for those who hold that abortion is murder. It merely adds weight to the arguments in favor of abortion by showing that respect for life is consistent with abortion, because respect for life means concern for the quality of life as well as concern for mere existence. The respect for the quality of life meant here is not only for that of the child but also that of the parents, both father and mother. If they cannot support another child psychologically, physically, or economically, then the quality of their life may also be in jeopardy.

Besides, the whole burden of this paper is to show that the moral code as we now have it was developed by a previous age when the needs and awareness of society were different. If the need of society is to control birth, and if in the modern situation respect for life means concern for the quality of life, then the anti-abortionists may find their position to be self-contradictory.

It should also be pointed out that abortion came to be considered morally wrong at a time when women as individuals were not considered important. Their right not to bear unwanted children was never considered. Again the modern situation is different. Social awareness has been refined.

3. A further word should be said in favor of sexual abstinence as a means of birth control. Few today have any regard for sexual abstinence or virginity. Many indeed deem it harmful to a heterosexual relationship, and some even consider it harmful to the adult individual, However, there is very little evidence for this, and countless people lead happy and successful lives despite sexual abstinence. Moreover, some experts with their eyes on the future, such as Marshall McLuhan and Margaret Mead, claim that sex is "cooling off," so that abstinence may become more popular than anyone previously thought possible. I mention this only so that we avoid a too ready discarding of something we do not adequately understand.

 

As mentioned earlier, another consideration of the modern situation which gives use to a new dimension to the moral code is the new awareness of the personhood of women. Again, a number of causes have converged to improve the status of women, but the one with which we are mainly concerned here is birth control. Regarding birth control, a reciprocal interaction is involved. A new regard for children resulted in a new regard for women, but at the same time, an increased respect for women in justice demands a lower birth rate, even if there were no population crisis.

In a previous age, women moved from being a chattel or plaything of man to a position of respect as the producer of children, as mother. Now that role is being somewhat modified. When society needs less children the role of women must change. Women can no longer be defined totally by their function as reproducers. Some women understand this, as does some of society.

But some women resist this change, and so do some segments of society. Once again, in order to understand this resistance and overcome it, we must call to mind the origin of the moral code which stressed the role of childbearing and thus enhanced the concept of motherhood.

Also, some women may tenaciously cling to the role of mother because they realize that it is at present their major source of status. These women must be helped to see that a more fundamental dignity comes from being a person in one's own right.

If birth control is to become a means of obtaining optimum population and environment and for the sake of justice itself, the moral code must broaden it’s evaluation of women. There must be a shift from identifying women solely as mother to identifying her also and primarily as a person in her own right. Society must be supportive of this fuller role for women, and the moral code must begin to actively call for fair, just, and equal treatment for them. Whereas before the moral code was silent on the rights of women, it must now make this a new dimension.

 

Click here to download this document as a printable .pdf

Animals, People and the Earth                                                  

Contact Elizabeth J Farians at ejf.ape@juno.com