Toxic Masculinity
Has lead poisoning worsened gender-based violence? The feminist case for environmental regulation.
Lead poisoning rots your brain. Babies exposed to lead are more likely to academically under-perform, get suspended, and become violent criminals.
In Rhode Island, economists Anna Aizer and Janet Currie shows that a one-unit increase in lead increased the probability of suspension from school by almost 10% and the probability of detention by between 27 to 74%.
Leaded gasoline was a major cause of poison in the US, but that varied with geography. Lead bioavailability is highest in areas with non-neutral pH, like the South-East and East. Exploiting this subnational variation, Federico Curci and Federico Masera show areas with more lead saw more violent crime. Scared city-dwellers then fled to the suburbs.
Toxic masculinity?
If lead poisoning worsens impulsivity and physical aggression, it may also corrode intimate partnerships. There may even be local area effects. Pervasive infidelity and abuse may have bred a culture of distrust, lowering romantic commitment and marriage.
‘Toxic masculinity’ is obviously just a pun. Forgive me, I like word-play. Women are of course equally affected by this poison.
As far as I am aware, these interactions have never been studied. Gender scholars who focus on individual-level characteristics (like education, occupation, race, and wealth) may have neglected lead’s impacts on neighbourhoods. I merely ask, did pollution increase betrayal, sexual violence and other forms of intimate aggression?
In countries with strong environmental mobilisation and strong state capacity, lead poisoning has been massively reduced. Even in Flint (Michigan), children’s blood lead levels reduced from 2.33 micrograms per deciliter in 2006 to 1.15 micrograms per deciliter in 2016.
In low and middle income countries (LMICs), regulation is typically far weaker. So when the USA toughened up regulation, lead-acid batteries were then exported to Mexico. Babies born near these recycling plants were more likely to be underweight.
In LMICs, children’s blood lead levels often exceed 5 μg/dL. It is dangerously high in Egypt (8.24), Palestine (9.3) and Pakistan (9.27). It’s over 10 in Telegana, Tamil Nadu and Rajasthan.
Here’s another estimate:
Has lead poisoning worsened gender based violence?
We don’t know. Studies have previously focused on individual-level characteristics and/or gender norms. Education and household wealth are strongly, negatively associated with both acceptance and experience of intimate partner violence. Gender norms also matter. In more patriarchal countries, wife-beating is more likely to be justified. And widespread acceptance strongly predicts widespread prevalence. Assault is widespread in countries where wealth is controlled by men, as reflected in large gender inequalities in earnings, land ownership, and legal rights. This violence persists over generations. Sons of abused women are more likely to beat their own wives. Their sisters are more likely to endure beatings. Violence begets violence.
There’s a lot going on. Lead poisoning may be making it even worse. In Pakistan (2021), a young woman was making a Tiktok video for Independence Day, and was then viciously assaulted by a massive angry mob. Was this patriarchal backlash exacerbated by Pakistan’s exceptionally high rates of lead poisoning?
TLDR:
Lead poisoning thwarts learning, while amping up impulsivity and aggression. As far as I am aware, no one has researched how lead impacts gender. But the existing evidence suggests it could be seriously corrosive.
In “The Narrow Corridor”, Acemoglu and Robinson argue that ‘strong states and strong societies’ are vital for prosperity and liberty. These are also fundamental for environmental regulation (see David Vogel’s fantastic book on California Greenin’). This probably feeds into the Great Gender Divergence. In countries with weak environmental regulation, women may be at high risk from male violence.
I could be wrong! I just wanted to share this as a hypothesis for interested researchers.
Another area would be revisiting Donohue–Levitt hypothesis using a gender based analysis. Donohue–Levitt hypothesis suggested the availability of abortion resulted in fewer births of children at the highest risk of committing crime. A research question could be Did abortion policy lead to a reduction in intimate partner violence? Could it be shown that women with access to abortion could at the margin leave partners committing violence and by having an abortion also reduce the number of births of males who would go own to commit intimate partner violence themselves or births of females who were more likely to be victims of intimate partner violence. Critics of Donohue-Levitt hypothesis have a problem with the twenty year time lag but the same time lag criticism seems to have been overcome in the lead research.
You may be wrong because the effects of lead could be overblown. There is publication bias in the field and a first meta-analysis of the literature suggested that lead exposure may not explain the majority of the large fall in crime observed in some countries. https://www.gla.ac.uk/media/Media_774797_smxx.pdf.