Women and the Environment

I have always read about the environment being toxic to humans in literature and the news, like Chernobyl--the threat always seemed distant and unreal to me. While I knew that environmental toxicity was affecting animals and other organisms, I never really truly considered the disastrous effects pollutions could have on something as seemingly harmless as breast milk.
I think the most surprising thing about the article was learning that these Inuit women were getting contaminated by dioxins produced from factories in midwestern American, thousands of miles away. It's scary to think that these waste products affect people who pretty much have no real connection to the issue, especially when the effects (i.e. cancer) are so terrible. Another thing that brings the issue closer to home is the fact that somehow we are putting human rights and something as basic as a healthy lifestyle below that of the "First World Polluters"--so it is terrible to see that the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) "has not explicitly linked linked the right to life and the right to a healthy environment." Why does death or some other extreme have to occur in order to procure this right? Why aren't environmental toxins produced by factories better controlled? The article mentions, and I agree, that marginalized populations are the most harmed in this. This article points out issues that we have discussed before--the unfortunate circumstances of minority women in terms of reproduction.
It seems as though this type of environmental toxicity is growing more prevalent with the growth of multiple industrialized societies. The harmful effects on human reproduction, not including the already dwindling numbers of numerous species of animals due to the same problem, has become a growing concern. I mentioned before Chernobyl--many children have grown up deformed because their mothers were affected by the nuclear meltdown. And these toxic elements often take hundreds to thousands of years to degrade to innocuous levels. We need to be more aware of how our society's waste products are not going to disappear. I think many people take the same view I had taken, that the issue is too distant to really consider.
I like how the author breaks down the issue in terms of feminist theory. I never realized how important it is to consider reports concerning "acceptable levels" of toxins. When I read that my plastic water bottle is leaking harmful chemicals and may affect my ability to reproduce, how do I know that the studies concerning "safe levels" can pertain to my situation?
Like one of the past articles, we talked about the linkage of environmental degradation and human oppression. This article brings in the element of Western, white, male ideologies, and how this contributes to the "othering" phenomenon, subsequently harming those that take on that minority identity (women, children, different ethnicities). This relationship is interesting because I can see how easy it is to get lost and complacent in the information we are given and how we react to it.
Another issue the author raises is the elevation of capitalism over environmentalism and how marginalized groups (including animals) and nature are turned into resources to be used for profit. With the "othering" that seems so intrinsically embedded in the way we think, it seems as though this is unavoidable. Feminist theory really allows us to get to the root of many of these societal ills that are facing us today. Can we use this to defend the plight of the Inuit? By deconstructing the issue, a greater emphasis and importance is placed on this population's problem, rather than that of the corporation/industries causing the problems. It's not the severity of the problem that should be looked at when considering the cure, but the fact that the problems, the bodily and environmental ills, are taking place at all. I agree with the way the author concludes the article. If we were truly concerned with the situation of the Inuit women, we would be going to the source--our consumption and energy use and the power we give to First World corporations.