by Bethanie Walder
A few weeks ago I got a demoralizing phone call, highlighting how some people refuse to see things in any colors other than black and white.
Wildlands CPR has been distributing the book Thrillcraft: the Environmental Consequences of Motorized Recreation. While we didn’t publish the book, we think it is an important addition to the debate about the appropriateness of motorized recreation on public lands. Though the subtitle focuses on ecological impacts, I would argue that the book is actually more about the dominant culture of lawlessness among off-road vehicle recreationists. It uses extreme examples to paint a polarizing picture that certainly doesn’t represent the large number of law-abiding off-road vehicle riders.
Nonetheless, we think the book is an important contribution to the off-road vehicle debate, so a few weeks ago we sent copies to about 100 Forest Service Supervisors, Regional Foresters and Regional Recreation Directors throughout the country. Many other conservation organizations have also been distributing the book to their local Forest Service offices.
Soon afterwards, I got that phone call, from the Forest Service. They said that the books we sent to their California offices would be returned because some photos in the book violate the agency’s sexual harassment policy in that region, which prohibits “inappropriate material” in the office. The book’s dust cover, in particular, features a dune buggy with a cartoon caricature of a topless woman wrapped in an American flag. That same photo shows up inside the book, and apparently there are one or two others that are also explicit. I can understand the importance of a strong sexual harassment policy, and that this photo might be in violation.
The woman who called is not the first to object to the cover photo, nor will she be the last. The photo is offensive, and probably shouldn’t be on the cover. But it’s there for a reason – to show exactly what type of attitude pervades off-road vehicle recreation on public lands. It’s not glorifying such activities, but is directly, unequivocally condemning them. The book is intended to be provocative, and the editor chose a cover photo that serves this goal.
As an aside, I find it fascinating that not one person who has objected to this photo has mentioned that the scantily clad woman is wrapped in an American flag. No one seems offended by that, but couldn’t it be considered unpatriotic, or even a desecration of the flag?
I explained to the caller that the book reveals the inappropriate nature of off-road vehicle recreation on public lands, including the offensive photos. She countered that, taken out of context, the photos could make some uncomfortable and that is what their policy is supposed to prevent. But while I do not want women to feel uncomfortable looking at a book about off-road vehicle recreation, perhaps being aware of this troubling culture is more important in the long run. What about women who attend ATV rallies on public lands and remove their shirts before crowds of drunken men? There are no photos in the book showing this, but on several occasions law enforcement officers have had to escort women out of such scenes. In fact, officers have reported that they felt their own lives threatened by this behavior, occurring on our public lands.
The agency caller would not waiver: the book violates their policy. I pointed out that it would be hard to take the photos out of context when they are in a book about ATV recreation and rider behavior. She would not back down. I said that a book demonstrating inappropriate behavior and calling for it to be stopped is not inappropriate. No dice. Finally, I told her to go ahead and return the books, and hung up the phone in defeat and anger.
I’m angry because I’m a feminist woman and an environmentalist, and the Forest Service is more offended by a cartoon of a topless woman on a dune buggy than by the damage that dune buggy causes the land. I’m angry because a whole group of men think it’s funny to wear t-shirts while riding their ATVs that say, “If you can read this it’s because the bitch fell off.” (I’m pretty sure that is the only other “offensive” photo in the book.) I’m angry because these men don’t think the land is worth anything, and apparently don’t think women are either, except for their bodies, perhaps. And I’m angry because the Forest Service caters to these people rather than addressing the damage they cause.
I thought about classes I took a long time ago on ecofeminism, about the intersection between the domination of nature and the domination of women. According to Wikipedia (more handy than digging up my old textbooks), ecofeminists argue “the social mentality that leads to the domination and oppression of women is directly connected to the social mentality that leads to the abuse of the environment.” The Forest Service does NOT consider the culture of lawlessness pervading off-road vehicle use on public lands and resulting in the profound destruction of nature inappropriate. Nor will they allow a book in their offices that illustrates just that reality, because it contains perhaps two or three offensive photos. If they find this book so contrary to their policies, why don’t they find this destructive form of recreation inappropriate and against their mission to protect forest resources for all Americans?
As I previously mentioned, not all off-road vehicle riders break the law. (But studies from Utah and Colorado show that more than 50% of riders routinely ride off-route, even when they know it’s not legal.) Likewise, it would be unfair to say that most off-road vehicle riders are misogynists. In fact, most motorized recreationists are college-educated, professional men, with above average income, our neighbors, brothers, and friends, who probably don’t behave badly at home. Yet, they seem to behave badly when driving off-road vehicles, especially in large groups.
This behavior, tolerated at off-road vehicle rallies in particular, results in nothing other than profound desecration to the land, and in many instances, very serious harassment of women. It is not appropriate. And the Forest Service would do better to spend their time trying to figure out how to get off-road vehicle recreation under control, and ensuring that the activities they allow on their land are appropriate, to women and to the land, than rejecting a book that points out how wrong such behavior is.
Quite frankly, it’s embarrassing. Perhaps it wasn’t the best idea for the publisher to choose a controversial photo for use on the dust cover. But it’s an even worse idea for the agency to put blinders on about the real problem. Some forms of off-road vehicle recreation provide textbook examples (ecofeminist textbooks, anyway) of the destruction of nature combined with the domination and oppression of women. In this situation, the black and white interpretation of the sexual harassment policy makes no sense. To look at a picture that is included only as evidence of inappropriate behavior and say that it violates a policy designed to prevent inappropriate behavior seems an extreme interpretation. If the Forest Service is going to prevent sexual harassment in the workplace, it’s time that they also prevent lawless, reckless, and inappropriate off-road vehicle recreation on the national forests.