The association with women and material is almost everywhere in culture. From Madonna to Saucy Santana and sentiments from Old Hollywood, such as ‘Diamonds Are A Girl’s Best Friend’, we have conceptualised being a ‘material girl’ as camp and indulgent. As Donna and Tom from TV sitcom Parks and Recreation would say: ‘treat-yo-self!’ This has been a popular reaction gif in recent years, but is being a ‘material girl’ actually all that fun?
With the impending doom of the global temperature rising, we’re now expected to turn to zero-waste living. However, women are carrying this burden more than anyone else and will be the most affected by global warming.
Beauty standards & fast fashion
Beauty standards and fast fashion have always had an impact on how women view themselves. To fit into the mould of what is currently ‘pretty’, ‘cool’ or ‘attractive’ has always surmounted pressure and poor self-worth. This is not a revelation, however, trend cycles appear to be getting exponentially faster and faster. Our cultural environment is all the more immediate and all the more disposable.
On platforms such as TikTok, fashion trends go out of style almost within a month. During my time on the platform, I have seen Fairycore, Alt Fashion, Indie, Cottagcore, Twilightcore, Baddie Fashion, Euphoria inspo, and the list goes on.
There is also more pressure now that certain styles are then listed as ‘cheugy.’ This is what Urban Dictionary defines as:
“The opposite of trendy. Stylish in middle school and high school but no longer in style. Used when someone still follows these out-of-date trends. This may include but not be limited to fashion, habits on social media, usage of slang, etc.”
Cheugy, Urban Dictionary, <https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Cheugy>
Capitalism is to blame for this issue, but as well as the ridiculously high standards we hold women to. Of course, women do not have to buy into these trends and not all women do, but our need to be ‘pretty’ means waste! From the packaging of cosmetic products to the silicone in hair products. This is all harder to grapple with, alongside the guilt of having to be zero-waste or reducing your waste.
Heterosexual couples & domestic work
Women have historically been seen as materialistic creatures or as expensive burdens. In period pieces and TV shows like Bridgerton, we can see that a dowry must have been presented to a willing suitor for us to be wed. This then guaranteed our financial stability and prosperity. Women have been seen as desirable objects who require material objects to gain our affection. This includes jewellery, clothing, cosmetics, flowers, fine dining, holidays, and the list goes on.
On the other hand, we are also seen as the world’s primary consumers under capitalism. As a result of the Industrial Revolution and the birth of the ‘nuclear family’: ‘[Women were assigned to the] “domain of the home in order to consume the ever-increasing supply of products’ (1).
This includes domestic equipment for cooking and cleaning. Such as appliances for the kitchen (microwaves, toasters, kettles, dishwashers), or cleaning products. Women have had to bear the social burden of being the main consumers to support things like the economy. This is all because of the expectation that we must be domestic goddesses, and yet we have been scrutinised for our wastefulness!
Is zero-waste possible for most women?
The expectation that we must be child carers and carry out domestic responsibilities makes it almost impossible for women to be zero-waste. It may seem that today we are distancing ourselves from the 1950s housewife mentality, but studies have shown otherwise. A 2019 study by McMunn et al which examined British couples specifically found that even within heterosexual couples with the most ‘equal’ attitudes towards gender, women performed more of the housework than men (2). Women are therefore made to be a part of what has been called the ‘second shift.’ This is where women come home from work and then have to do the majority of the domestic work. This idea comes from Arlie Russell Hochschild’s book The Second Shift (1989).
Green female influencers
These are problems which YouTubers Kristena Lynn and Shelbizleee (Shelby) discuss. Kristena states:
“Look around environmentalist YouTube and you’ll find countless videos of YouTubers showing zero-waste hacks, zero-waste morning routines and zero-waste pledges… Do you notice something in common with these videos? Women are leading the conversation.”
Kristina Lynn, ‘Is the zero waste movement sexist?’ <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mzs0Tav0b0>
How does this relate to global warming? Put simply, domestic work = waste. The packaging of any pre-made cleaning supplies, as well as frozen food or ready meals, are all wasteful. These products once facilitated the career girl since with the aid of such products, domestic work took less time – such as the ‘ping’ meal or microwave meal which notoriously comes wrapped up in plastic.
There are many female zero-waste influencers online. On their blogs, there are arrays of mason jars separated by food product, chemical-free cleaning product recipes and tote bags galore. Yet all of these things get rendered as ‘girly’ due to their domestic associations (which are rooted in misogyny). Moreover, there is an expense to living this way which not everyone can afford. Zero-waste supermarkets are not widespread or accessible enough for most to shop at.
Why will women be the most affected by climate disasters?
On the whole, globally, the world’s poorest people are women. Specifically, 70% of the 1.3 billion people living in poverty are women (3). Dr Mayesha Alam writes for the National History Museum that climate disasters such as drought, floods and displacement ‘are costing lives and livelihoods.’ Additionally, they are disproportionately harming women and girls. ‘These harms can be measured by rising levels of child marriage, surges in gender-based violence, the number of girls withdrawn from school, and casualty rates during extreme weather events’ (4).
These issues especially affect women in the global south. Drought means that women in more rural zones may no longer be able to work on farms. Therefore marriage is the alternative for financial prosperity – sadly for young girls too. Shortages of water mean further distances have to be travelled to collect it, and in some communities in the global south, this tends to be tasked to young girls. These young women are therefore at risk of violence from men they come into contact with on their way to source water. In particular, a study in West Dafur found that 82% of sexual assault cases treated in clinics occurred during tasks like finding water.
What’s the solution?
We need to get rid of this myth that women are materialistic and wasteful because it has been shown that climate activism is largely conducted by women. We also need to realise that women can never be perfectly zero-waste! Since zero-waste living comes with a financial and emotional cost that not everyone can afford, women shouldn’t be expected to do it perfectly. Women are tangled up in a climate disaster which they cannot fight alone, and disproportionately affects them more than anyone else.
Find more feminist articles here >
Written by Phoebe Bowers
Illustrated by Francesca Mariama
Works cited
1. Eileen Fischer, ‘Woman in a Material World: Two Interpretations of a Consumer Case Study’, Meaning, Measure, and Morality of Materialism, ed. By Floyd W. Rudmin and Marsha Richins, (UK & Canada: The Association for Consumer Research, 1992).
2. McMunn, Anne, et al., ‘Gender Divisions of Paid and Unpaid Work in Contemporary UK Couples’, Work, Employment, and Society, Vol. 34, Issue 2, (25 Jul 2019), <https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0950017019862153> p. 165.
3. Balgis Osman-Elasha, ‘Women…In the Shadow of Climate Change’, United Nations, <https://www.un.org/en/chronicle/article/womenin-shadow-climate-change> [Accessed 1 June 2022].
4. Alam, Mayesha, ‘Why Climate Change is Sexist’, National History Museum, (24 Nov 2021), <https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/why-climate-change-is-sexist.html> [Accessed 1 May 2022].
