[Stoves] Fuel and Forestry etc.

[Erin Rasmussen]

Pish posh Samer, I have read your paper and I find that it ignores the
substantial contributions of the thinkers from the African Gender Insistute
.   The Feminist Africa Issue from 2010 titled "Rethinking Gender and
Violence" is very good, and I think it would be a good one for you to read:
http://agi.ac.za/journal/feminist-africa-issue-14-2010-rethinking-gender-and
-violence

 

One of the more cogent points is this one from  Sexual Violence in Conflict:
a Problematic International Discourse
<http://agi.ac.za/sites/agi.ac.za/files/3._fa_14_-_feature_article_eva_ayier
a.pdf>   by Eve Ayiera 

<blockquote>

"This problematic construction of gender and sex is the platform from which
the international discussions and responses to sexual violence in conflict

launch. The resulting conceptual framework affirms a patriarchal social
order which normalises the aggressive, heterosexual, dominant behaviour
associated

with masculinity and the subjugation of females. .... Violence against women
becomes an integral part of exerting power over women and maintaining a
system of male hegemony. Sexual violence is feminised - it happens to women
because they are female. The current discourse on sexual violence has been
astute in analysing the patterns of sexual violence in conflict, but has
failed to interrogate the normalisation of patriarchy as the basis for human
interaction."

</blockquote>

 

To sum up and repeat the point, rape is a form of violence against women
that happens because there is already a context that it's somehow to ok to
be abusive to women. This is a global problem, and is not limited to any
particular country.  Specific instances of the crime tend to happen in a
very specific cultural context, and to be deeply dedicated to understanding
that context is an investment of considerable time and energy.  Also it
helps to have some understanding of intersectionality - which is the
startling obvious idea that people are often subject to discrimination not
just because they may be wealthy or poor, of some social standing or
another, of some color or another, or of some other point of contention.
They may be subject to discrimination for all or none of these reasons, and
there is a considerable ripple effect on their lives and world outlook and
may even have an impact on how they use something simple and utilitarian,
like a cooking stove. 

I suggest that you read Eve Ayiera's whole paper. It is very good, and may
help you with your thinking. 

 

I don't mind you raising the issue of marketing stoves.  I actually have
been tracking that meme or storyline that you've been talking about very
specifically. I think it is a poor one, and I'm often surprised how it's
managed to perpetuate its self, but that's not the reason that so many
people build and distribute cooking stoves. 

 

Cooking and eating is a vital activity, it's really at the core of
everything, and improving the well being of others is a vital, and often
generous activity.  Many of us work in this field for very simple reasons.
Babies who grow up in households with good stoves don't die of pneumonia.
Women with good stoves are less likely to die of lung problems. Children
aren't marred for life by burns. Families are able to have time for other
activities, often improving the economic life of the family.  Children have
time for school work. Children with good lighting have better opportunities
to learn to reading writing and mathematics.  Families with access to cell
phones can communicate more effectively with far flung loved ones.  Many of
us have seen the impact of a good cooking stove, and it is profound, and in
the best cases it has a long lasting positive change in the life of that
family.  In the worst cases, it does the opposite of that.  I'd like to
believe that we're doing our best as a community to contribute to the best
case scenarios. 

 

Kind regards,

Erin Rasmussen

erin at trmiles.com 

 

From: Stoves [mailto:stoves-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] On Behalf Of
Samer Abdelnour
Sent: Saturday, January 18, 2014 11:45 AM
To: stoves
Subject: [Stoves] Fuel and Forestry etc.

 

Otto, Paul, thanks for your comments, very helpful directions to follow up.



Dear Erin,

It might be helpful if you could explain your outrage. Some people have been
outraged once they realize how the lives and vulnerabilities of poor
displaced women and girls are relegated through the stoves-rape rhetoric.
Others have reacted to the suggestion that underlying racial/gendered
stereotypes have been key to mobilizing well-meaning people to a cause that
stoves can do little to address. It seems you are reacting to the very idea
that the conversation should even take place, which would be a first.

If you read the paper you will find that I have certainly done my homework.
The paper was certainly motivated by the disjuncture I witnessed in Darfur
between the vulnerabilities of displaced people and the claims NGOs (in
their marketing materials outside Sudan) promoted. The paper thus demands
accountability of the humanitarian industry to the claims they promote,
while insisting that the genuine vulnerabilities displaced peoples face
cannot be so easily disregarded. These issues are very close to my heart: my
parents were refugees displaced by violence, I've spent many months
living/volunteering in refugee camps in Beirut, and I've also spent over 2
years doing research in across Sudan.

Perhaps it might reassure you that a number of gender scholars (including
Sudanese) had reviewed drafts of the paper and have also been quite
supportive of its direction. It is about to be published in a recognized
scholarly journal, and the paper is already being included as required
reading in courses in North America, the UK, and Asia. The recent short
article has been widely shared, and I've had private encouragement from top
officials working in UN agencies and NGOs in Sudan, including Darfur, and in
New York, some of whom engaged stoves solely for its purported ability to
stop sexual violence.

With regards to your specific points about user needs (etc.): though design
and testing around user needs may be 'old news', it seems that efforts to
develop universal standards has resurrected this important issue as Paul and
Crispin (and others) note.

Warmly,

Samer

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20140120/12237be7/attachment.html>