I’m looking at the object on my desk as I write this column. It’s not a big thing: about eight inches long, made of plastic, with a spring-like bit about an inch and a half from the top that allows the tube to bend and twist. It’s a hollow tube used for drinking. It’s been around for eons, and there are, by my rough count, about a dozen different shapes and almost that many types of straws.
But the drinking straw has become a contentious object.
Multiple companies have jumped on board the plastic straw ban with a swiftness I envy. Would that they applied such speed for social change to pay equity, minimum wages, workplace safety, etc. — but, I digress.
Invariably when a new company announces a wholesale ban of straws, the discussion often goes like this:
- Ban announced
- Cheers from anti-straw proponents
- Boos from pro-straw allies
- Counter-arguments from both sides
- Escalation of debate
- The bell rings and people retire to their corners to mutter imprecations.
The pro-ban arguments include do without, choose alternatives, bring your own, wash and reuse.
The anti-ban arguments note alternatives do not meet the needs of people with disabilities due to types of use, and they are often guilted by statements which accuse them of not caring about the environment.
Things get complicated with a ban. For instance, many consumers are absolutely certain there will be no negative impacts in getting rid of plastic straws.
Oh, but there are. Consider the voices coming from the disabilities community, which has been trying to get into a conversation that’s been pretty much one-way.
I understand that the “sudden” groundswell about single-use plastic straws has actually been years in the making. But in the last couple of months, as retailers like Starbucks and A&W Canada jumped onboard, I didn’t see much, if any, debate about the consumers who truly need plastic straws.
For many disabled people, a plastic straw is no minor thing. It’s light, inexpensive, flexible and hygienic. It can be used in hot beverages in a way that metal straws or disposable paper straws cannot.
Sure, for lots of people, paper straws will fit the need simply and easily. (And, I would imagine, there’s little thought given to the ecological impact of pumping out all of those straws.)
I understand that the “sudden” groundswell about single-use plastic straws has actually been years in the making. But in the last couple of months, as retailers like Starbucks and A&W Canada jumped onboard, I didn’t see much, if any, debate about the consumers who truly need plastic straws.
While reading up on this topic, I was struck by how disempowered marginalized people with disabilities are feeling about this campaign. For advocates, one solution is to have a limited supply of plastic straws behind the counter, where a consumer can ask for them. For someone with a disability, that feels like begging.
In academic language, that’s called “othering,” or setting a particular group of people apart as strange and different, and the ones who need to carry the burden of a problem.
Meanwhile, I’m not sure how much will be accomplished by getting rid of plastic straws. In actual fact, it is lost or discarded fishing gear that poses the largest threat to sea life. There needs to be an attitude shift about single-use plastics because our plastics problem goes far beyond straws.
We are foolish to think that a ban at our local coffee shop will fix that problem. We need a broader conversation, one that looks at industrial design, economics, education and consumption.
We also need to look at what we choose to use and why, and how decisions can affect different groups of people differently. We also need to see who is or is not part of the conversation when policies are made or changed.
The straw ban comes from a place of privilege where abled people who don’t have to use straws can easily do without. The demands placed on people with disabilities are greater. Bringing your own or using washable straws is not quite as simple when you have mobility or motor issues.
There are no easy answers to complicated questions. But listening more to marginalized voices when it comes to change is a good place to start.
Recent columns by this author
Martha Muzychka: Smoke gets in your eyes
Martha Muzychka: What part of putting kids in cages is right?
Martha Muzychka is a writer and consultant living in St. John’s.