Dirt, Drought and Drudge: Australian women’s experience of drought
Margaret Alston and Jenny Kent
Centre for Rural Social Research
Charles Sturt University
malston@csu.edu.au
Australia is emerging from one of the worst droughts in over 100 years. Yet we know
little about the experiences of the people most affected - the members of farm
families. Research conducted in 2003 with people in three case study sites in rural
New South Wales indicates that drought is a gendered experience. Women enter
agriculture largely through marriage and patrilineal inheritance practices dominate
farm transfer arrangements in Australia. For many farm families this results in
differential task allocation for men and women. Women are more likely to work off-
farm and to be responsible for household and care tasks and to be the farm financial
managers. Data emerging from the study reveals that the drought has also increased
women’s workload on farms. What the study also indicates is that women’s increased
and multi-faceted workload has impacted on their health status. This paper examines
women’s experiences of the drought, and in particular, focuses on the health
consequences for women.
Dirt, Drought and Drudge : Australian women’s experience of drought
Drought is defined by Botterill and Fisher (2003: 3) as a 'mismatch between the water
available and the demands of human activities'. Such a mismatch characterises the
drought of the early years of the twenty-first century in Australia which has been
widespread, enduring and intense. Described by the Prime Minister as the worst
drought in one hundred years1 it is the scale of the drought and its manifestations over
an extended time period that has made it such a significant event. Yet since the mid-
1990s drought is no longer viewed as a natural disaster at least by those shaping
policy at a distance from those most likely to be affected. In the policy environment it
is viewed as a business risk to be managed by the businesses affected (Botterill,
2003). Consequently the focus of national political and media attention on economic
fallout and environmental consequences has overshadowed the impacts of the drought
on the people most affected, rural dwellers in communities dependent on agriculture.
It is arguable that these people do not share the notion of a one in one hundred year
drought being labelled a manageable business risk.
Spurred by the lack of attention to the social consequences of drought the writers
undertook a study in New South Wales (NSW) in 2003 analysing the social impacts
of drought in three disparate geographical regions of the State. One of the most
significant themes to emerge from this study is the confirmation that drought is a
gendered experience for farm family members (Stehlik, Gray and Lawrence, 1999;
and Stehlik, Lawrence and Gray, 2000). Stehlik (2003: 91 and 105) notes that their
study conducted in NSW and Queensland in 1996-8 found that families are the first
line of defence against drought, men and women experience drought differently and
their communities should not be taken for granted. Further she notes that policy
makers should not ignore the centrality of the husband-wife partnership in farming,
women's changing roles on farms, the impact of stress in times of crisis and the
importance of family labour in keeping the farm afloat.
Our 2003 study builds on the work of Stehlik, Gray and Lawrence undertaken during
the 1990s drought drawing out the gendered consequences of the drought experience.
Because of the different ways that men and women come to farming, the subsequent
power imbalance, the gendered expectations that frame negotiations around task
allocations and the subsequent way men and women live their lives on farms, the
impacts of the drought largely vary by gender. Women, for example are more likely to
be undertaking multiple roles on and off the farm often seeking much needed income
to cover the family’s on-going consumption costs; to be monitoring the sometimes
deteriorating health of other family members and to be overseeing the farm’s financial
management and compliance processes. Men are more likely to be: working longer
hours on farm hand feeding and carting water for livestock; aware of lack of farm
productivity; more socially isolated and emotionally impacted by watching stock die
and paddocks blow away in dust storms.
Both men and women are significantly affected by the additional stressors that a
major disaster like drought brings - the loss of income and, in many cases, escalating
1
Prime Minister John Howard, media release 9th December 2002,
www.pm.gov.au/news/media_releases/2002/media_release2025.htm
debt, the cost of children’s education, the impacts of belt-tightening strategies on the
family’s quality of life, the inability to take holidays and the significant impacts of
drought on farm children and older family members (see also Gray, Lawrence and
Stehlik, 1999). The findings reported here are part of a larger study of the social
impacts of drought undertaken during 2003 and funded by the NSW Department of
Agriculture and the NSW Premier’s Department. The study arose from concerns
within the department about reports from government and private charitable
organisation workers in the field noting that the social consequences were greater than
anticipated and that services were thinly spread. Data emerging from our study
reveals that there are notable health consequences for women and men on farms in
times of drought as a result of these stressors. Because this paper was prepared for
presentation at the Well-being of Women Seminar held in Wagga Wagga in
December 2003, it focuses particularly on the health consequences of drought for
Australian farm women drawing attention to a significantly under-researched and
largely overlooked area of farming life.
Theoretical overview
In order to fully understand, firstly, why women's work has secondary status in the
agricultural discourse, secondly, the health outcomes for women of increased
workloads during drought and, thirdly, why the health outcomes for women are often
overlooked by themselves and those around them, an analysis of the operation of
gender within the farm family is illuminating.
Feminist researchers have allowed a critical understanding of the way gender relations
impact on the lives of men and women. Gender refers to the socially constructed
expectations of men and women in everyday life that shape and constrain the way
individuals respond to issues, events and others around them. Gender relations are not
static but are constantly renegotiated and reshaped at micro levels in response not
only to the wider macro level gendering of social life, but also to consequent
discursive practices that articulate gendered understandings. These processes shape
individual interpretations of, and responses to, cultural cues and social relations and to
events such as drought.
The way rural people live their lives is very much shaped by gendered social relations
and expectations. In rural communities and on family farms inequitable gender
relations are reinforced through structural imperatives that largely circumscribe
opportunities available to women. In the early decades of the twentieth century a
separation of spheres was evident in farm family labour arrangements with women
more likely to work within the private sphere of the family and men to be solely
responsible for the more public world of the farm (see Alston, 1993 and Fink, 1992).
Sachs (1996) refers to these as ‘gendered fields’, the customs and practices such as
patrilineal inheritance, women’s point of entry to farming, the low number of female
inheritors, the expectation that women will be the major care-givers and the
segmentation of the rural labour force, that ensure that women on farms negotiate
gender relations from an inequitable position. Historically for farm women this has
resulted in a narrow range of acceptable activities and gendered expectations that have
rendered them largely invisible (Sachs, 1983, Alston, 1995).
Ownership and control in agriculture are structured along patriarchal lines resulting in
men being the public face of agriculture (Brandth, 2002) and agricultural discourse is
shaped around a male perspective. Legitimacy is therefore given to the male farmer
occupation over the off-farm income sourcing work of women and their work in the
home and in the community and this equates with high status in rural areas (Poiner,
1990). Farm women’s work lacks the same legitimacy and status thus providing
evidence of a dominant masculine hegemony prevalent in rural life (Connell, 1995,
2000) that allows a certain type of male power and influence to dominate at the same
time as this position is normalised. As Foucault (1980) notes, with power comes the
ability to construct a discourse that privileges certain ‘truths’ and overshadows others.
The privileged ‘truths’ in rural communities ensure that hegemonic masculinity is
legitimated and other ‘truths’, notably those that acknowledge and validate the work
of women are overshadowed.
With the decline in commodity prices and other financial pressures on farm families,
together with the higher education levels achieved by Australian women, including
those on farms, in the latter part of the twentieth century (Board, 1997; Alston 1995),
changes in gender role differentiation have occurred on Australian farms. Of
significance are the impacts of these changes on women. In the post second world war
years of the twentieth century women provided economic support to the farm unit
through their subsistence production tasks in the private sphere (Alston, 1995; Fink,
1992). From the 1980s onwards farm women's economic contributions both on and
off farm in income generating positions have taken place in the public sphere and thus
have been more visible. What is also significant is that, although farm women have
made quite extraordinary changes in their roles in recent decades, there appears to
have been little shift in the allocation of tasks within the private sphere and women
still perform most of these tasks (Alston, 2000; RIRDC and DPIE, 1997). The stresses
experienced by farm women consequent on work role changes (and drought) have
been exacerbated by gender role expectations in rural communities (Gray, Lawrence
and Dunn 1993). Oldrup (1999: 356) for example notes that women ‘talk of the many
compromises, painful experiences and broken expectations that they experience as
part of constructing identity in relation to their life on the farm’.
Shortall (2002) notes that the primacy given to the occupation of agriculture as the
main activity of the farm household allows the income generating activities of women
to be overshadowed even when it is this work that ensures the family remains farming.
It is clear that Australian farms, like those of other industrialised countries (see for
example Brandth, 2002 and Oldrup, 1999), are largely dependent on the off-farm
income generated most often by women (RIRDC and DPIE, 1998) with over 50%
dependent on off-farm income, 80% of which is done by women (RIRDC and DPIE,
1998). The overshadowing of their work and the lack of public validation of this work
within the industry adds additional stresses to women coping with abnormal
circumstances such as drought. In fact, because of the status attached to the 'farmer'
role, it may be that men are more likely to resist leaving the farm and may ignore the
additional stresses placed on women and other family members because these stresses
are integral to farm viability and the 'farmer' role.
With the onset of drought and the increasing labour demands on all family members,
previous barriers to women working on and off the farm have all but disappeared only
to be replaced with new and complex inequalities. These include rural labour market
segmentation, the insecurity of jobs resulting from loss of services, the casualisation
of the workforce and the low paid positions on offer that may result in women taking
jobs off farm for which they are overqualified or may result in them travelling
significant distances for work (Alston, 1995). Most farm women who work off-farm
are also working double and triple shifts (farm work, off-farm work and household
work) in their efforts to keep the farm and family afloat (Alston, 2000). It appears that
men have adapted to the need for women to work off-farm but not to the need to
redistribute household tasks or to recognise the efforts of farm women. The constant
renegotiations of gender roles that take place at the intimate level of the family take
place against a backdrop of patriarchal legitimation and primacy accorded to the
agricultural occupation, or the ‘farmer’ role, ensuring that, despite women’s heavy
work loads, household and care tasks are rarely renegotiated. What has not changed
despite changing work roles is that women construct their gendered identities against
the backdrop of discursive practices that render their work roles and economic
contributions secondary.
It is evident that drought has added another layer to the work of all family members.
Our 2003 research reveals however that farm women living with drought are more
likely to have increased their on-farm work, to be working off-farm in some capacity
where work is available, to be doing most of the household and care work and to be
overseeing the farm’s financial management. Men on the other hand are more likely
to have increased their on-farm workload, to have reduced their off-farm work as
contracting work such as shearing and machinery work dries up and to be less
available for household and care work. According to Brandth (2002) the discursive
power of the male farmer image and the public power and influence accorded to men
in farming provides women with three choices – to resist the dominant discourses by
leaving the system, to voice opposition or to remain compliant. Watching the
emotional stresses on those around them in times of crisis such as drought usually
means that women remain compliant with the excessive demands on their time
because to do otherwise risks destabilising relationships and the emotional health of
others.
In examining the impacts of drought on the health of farm women it is important to
note that changes in farm women’s work roles preceded the drought and that what
appears to have changed is the scale and intensity of their work. There is no doubt
they are doing more on farm and, where possible, working off the farm while their
responsibility for household and care tasks continue. Our research confirms that
women take on the responsibility of overseeing their family’s health care (also noted
by Henard, Monroe, Atkinson and Blalock, 1998). They are more likely to be
monitoring the health of those around them, at the same time as they ignore their own.
The consequences of drought for women’s health has received little attention.
The Study
Three geographically disparate communities in NSW were the sites for the study, one
a remote area, one in the central west wheat belt and one in an irrigation area. In all
over 120 in-depth interviews (62 of these with farm family members, 37 of whom are
women) and several focus groups were conducted. The findings presented here focus
on the women in these families and their stories.
Map of the areas that formed part of the study
Findings
In the 62 farm families represented in our research women were heavily engaged in
on-farm work in 75% of cases and were working off-farm for income in 50%. Even in
the remote area surveyed women had found off-farm work in 38% of cases, often
necessitating involuntary separation as they, with or without their children, moved
into a town for work. The pressures of increased workloads, loss of farm income and
worry about children were evident in the responses of women.
Gendered expectations
In some cases it is evident that women find the expectations on their time
extraordinarily difficult to reconcile. Some note they would like to leave the industry,
or, as Brandth (2002) notes, to resist the dominant discourse by leaving the system,
but instead choose to comply often because of the gendered expectations and their
feelings of responsibility for others prevent them. The following quotes, the first from
a woman in her early forties and the second from a woman in her fifties illustrate this
point.
I just thought, 'What are we doing here? This is ridiculous. Everyone else has an
easier life.
I’d like to bloody well just walk out of here, get in my car and just go North and
leave the whole lot of it behind. It’s all so hard but I can’t do that. I’m very
responsible. I’m responsible to my husband. I’m responsible to a farm. I’m
responsible to myself and I’m responsible to my family. Personally I would have
liked to just pack up this year and go work on a big cattle station and do
something absolutely totally different. But now I’m locked into this.
Work pressure
The multiplicity of tasks undertaken by farm women consequent on changing roles
and the additional stress of drought were evident in the responses of farm women.
Farm women report that they enjoy their off-farm work and gain personal satisfaction
from earning income (also noted by Stehlik et al, 2000, who argues that off farm work
empowers women). Yet it is evident that debt built up as a result of drought and lost
income generally means that many women will need to work long after the drought
has broken whether they want to continue or not. It is also evident that their increased
workload is both on and off the farm. The following three quotes illustrate the way
women and their partners perceive the work of women on and off the farm as
absolutely necessary to the survival of the farm. The first is a woman in her fifties, the
second a man in his sixties discussing his wife's need to work and the third is a man
who now views his wife's work on the farm as crucial.
Even after the drought’s finished I am now looking at working probably forever.
She’s 58 her back’s not that flash. She’s been wanting to knock off work for a
few years but financially I don’t see how it’s possible.
It’s changed the work on the farm in a huge way. My wife’s had to come into
play in a big way. She’s always been a lot of help, don’t get me wrong.
For several women in our sample the need to source off-farm work means involuntary
separation – the need to move away from home to find work, leaving their partner and
sometimes their children at home. The following quote comes from a younger woman
in the remote area of the state who was forced to leave her young child behind when
she went away for work.
I prefer to be at home than to have to move [into town]. … It was very hard. It
was very hard on everyone. We are a very close-knit family and I certainly
didn’t want to move into town. It was very hard on [son]. He used to get quite
upset Sunday night when I was ready to go which was really hard.
Emotional stress
The results of increased workloads, financial stress and tiredness were evident in the
responses of many women in this study. Drought has added additional worry and
weariness and for some this leads to feelings of despair. The following quotes are
from a woman in her forties, one in her fifties, one in her twenties and a woman in her
late forties forced to move away for work. The last two are typical of the many
women interviewed who expressed the stress felt as a result of the ongoing drought.
I wake up early and lie there and drive myself crazy thinking about all the things
that could go wrong.
I'm fifty and I feel like I'm being dragged into being old. … I have nobody to talk
to and I don't want anyone around here knowing my business so I keep it to
myself.
You go up and down all the time. You just feel so exhausted. You feel like
everything is going wrong and it just makes you want to just cry. … I went to
work the other day and [colleague] said to me ‘you’re really down. I’ve never
seen you this down’.
You are still so tired the next day. You are so worn out you can just sleep and
sleep and sleep forever. But I know you can’t.
One drought too many. One extension (mortgage) too many. One more bit of
hopelessness.
It just sends you mad.
I just cry at the drop of a hat.
The manifestations of this stress are also evident in a variety of health issues reported
by women. The first quote is from a woman working full-time off the farm to support
the farm. No matter how hard she works, she feels unable to make an impression on
the mounting debt. The second is a young woman not long married who is working in
a nearby town.
I have an anxiety disorder I'm on [medication] to try and keep the panic attacks
down. … The other night I woke in the middle of the night. I was concerned
about [husband] and like our next $10 000 water bill had come in and how were
we going to afford to pay that? And I went outside and sat on the verandah and
started crying and rang Mum and said, ' I need you here.'
You seem to say 'Oh it can't get any worse, it can't get any worse', and it is still
continuing. … and you lose a little bit of hope and that's really dangerous.
Some have found positive ways of dealing with their health issues and others more
negative ones. The first quote is from a woman in her fifties who found an unusual
but positive way of negotiating her stress. The second is from a woman in her thirties
who's negative coping strategy was more worrying.
I had chest pains all the time … and I just started taking time for myself and just
getting away. So I found myself a private little place up in the hills at home and
pitched a tent there. Everyone thought I was a lunatic.
I used to get sick of the drought and sit inside and have a drink .. So turn to
drink. I used to have one drink a night, now I turn to drink.
For many women it also results in increasing social isolation and withdrawal from
their community. The following three quotes are typical of the many from women
speaking about their increasing social isolation. The first two are older women whose
work on farm had increased leaving them often exhausted. The third is a younger
woman working off the farm in a part-time position and also working on the farm for
long hours.
I have stopped doing anything social. To do anything social is exhausting.
You just don’t want to talk to anyone.
You don't buy new clothes. Everything shuts down. You're just in a mode to
survive the best way you can.
Monitoring others
Meanwhile it is evident from our research that women monitor the health of their
partners and children closely at the same time as they ignore their own health issues.
The first quote is from a woman who, in addition to working on farm, works off the
farm several days a week. The second is a woman who works full-time off farm in
short term contract positions. The third is an older woman who summed up the
feelings of many women in the study.
[Husband] had a nervous breakdown last year. … Unless I give him a big push
every morning he just seems to stay inside and wait for me to come home.
I find I've got to keep going because [husband] falls into holes.
For as long as women cope the men will get by.
Ignoring own health
While the scrutiny of others is evident most women noted that their own health issues
were a very low priority even when their health issues were major. The first quote is
from a woman diagnosed with cancer who had delayed a post-treatment check up
because she felt unable to take the time away from her work. The second is a woman
in her lat forties who works off the farm as well as on the farm.
I've always found it really difficult to go anywhere and have a proper checkup.
You have to follow through with a specialist and it's so difficult and very costly.
I need to go to the dentist and I haven't been. I needed new glasses and I put
them off for 12 months until I would get headaches. I need chiropractic
treatment. I haven't been [for a massage] I have to send my husband in because
I think he needs it more.
It is clear that off-farm work provides many women with personal satisfaction, space
where they can achieve in their own right and much needed income. There are others
who struggle to maintain their commitment to multiple tasks off and on farm when
they have health issues. At these times the stress is significant. The following case
illustrates that some partners are in denial about the health issues of women. The
woman in question is in her fifties and has no choice about working on and off the
farm despite her health problems.
I [have cancer]. I was bald as a badger and not even standing up. … I’m
worried about the impact on my health … You’ve got to do your best and get up
and do it every single day [go to work]. … I’d go to Melbourne [for cancer
treatment] most of the time by myself. He [husband] didn’t ever talk about it. He
didn’t want to know about it. … I came home twice in the six weeks [radiation
treatment] to do the BAS [business activity statements for taxation compliance].
… I tried to get some home help but I lived too far out of town. … the only thing
it [illness] does restrict me with is shearing when I throw the fleece … But I had
to go back to work [off-farm].
Despite their intense scrutiny of their partner's and children's health, not only do
women tend to ignore their own health issues, many also hide their stress from their
partners and family. The following quote is from a woman in her late forties in a very
remote location who works full-time on the farm.
I don’t like [husband] seeing me upset because I know that upsets him. … I’ve
gone in [to neighbour] and I’ll stay there a couple of hours (crying in
interview). So you get in the car and you go home as if nothing’s happened.
Conclusion
Farm women have moved beyond their relegation to the private sphere and have been
quick to move into the workforce, and yet their entry into the public sphere has its
own challenges. While their income has enabled families to remain in agriculture and
has been crucial to farms surviving the drought, nonetheless it is clear that the
patriarchal nature of rural communities and agriculture and the legitimacy given to
farming has allowed the efforts of women to be overlooked. Because of the secondary
status accorded to their role and work, the increase in demands on women during
crisis times such as drought and the consequences for their health are rarely
scrutinised. It is clear that agricultural policy in general and drought policy in
particular is gender-blind, ignoring the reliance of the industry on a compliant and
silenced female workforce.
It is evident from this research that many women are, in fact, as Brandth (2002)
suggests, complying with the demands on their time rather than challenging or leaving
the system and this is often because they are aware that all family members are under
pressure. Nonetheless the discourse of drought in particular and agriculture more
generally and the primacy accorded to the ‘farmer’ role has rendered the efforts of
women secondary and irrelevant to the business of farming despite its centrality to the
survival of family farming.
Our research reveals that farm women are juggling a multiplicity of work roles. While
it is clear that their workloads had changed prior to the drought, it is also clear that
drought has exacerbated this because their off-farm cash income has become so
crucial to the family. It is also clear that many farm women report significant stress
levels that impact on their health. These range from stress symptoms such as crying
easily and suffering sleeplessness to major problems such as cancer related illnesses.
It is clear that women studiously monitor the health of those around them while
making their own health needs and issues a low priority. In some cases this has
resulted in women ignoring follow-up cancer treatment. There is a well-articulated
obligation felt by the women in this study to keep going, or to comply with a
gendered system that expects much of women while overlooking their efforts.
Rather than creating significant changes, the drought highlights gendered
expectations. Women have been juggling multiple roles for some time and, during
crisis times such as drought, their efforts intensify often resulting in significant health
impacts. This research confirms that drought is a gendered experience because of the
differing ways men and women live their lives on farms. While not attempting to
diminish the health impacts on men, this paper draws attention to the need to
recognise and address the health impacts on women and to alert health providers to
the unique pressures facing women and their significant health and welfare needs.
To address the issues raised in this paper, the following points must be acted upon.
Drought policy must incorporate an understanding of women's efforts on and off
the farm. Gender-blind policy in agriculture and concerning drought often makes
the lives of women more difficult as they negotiate a system that effectively
disempowers them.
This paper reveals a significant need for services aimed at women that are
accessible, cost-effective and sensitive to gendered issues in rural life.
There is a recognised need in this paper for welfare service providers to target
women with information, services and support.
Peak bodies such as the National Farmers' Federation and state farming
organisations are too focused on commodity production, ignoring the social
impacts of drought for farm family members, and particularly the issues facing
women on farms.
There is a need for women's organisations to provide advocacy for women on
farms in the policy arena. Without strong advocacy women's status will remain
secondary and their health and other needs ignored.
If family farming is to remain the dominant mode of agricultural production in
Australia then farm organisations, Australian policy makers and service providers
must ensure that the interests of women are protected. To do otherwise is to risk not
only a decline in the industry but also the loss of the energy and commitment of
women.
References
The list of references can be found on the complete report available from the:
Centre for Rural Social Research, Charles Sturt University
National Rural Women’s Coalition Healthy Women-Healthy Communities
Forum October 2004, Melbourne
NRWC website www.ruralwomen.org.au