Ecofeminism is a term used that now includes many groups that diverged from the idea that environmental issues and woman’s issues are the same issues and can be solved together. Many issues today surround human rights and cleaning our world. Nature has a lot of aspects to it that consist of feminine and masculine qualities. Though in the readings, the argument of dualism is seen as bad, I would say it is vital to recognize. Saying dualistic hierarchies need to go because they are “patriarchal structures justify their dominance..” I feel misses the point. Dualistic approach such as ying and yang are vital for balance. The issue in dualism that I would say needs to go is the idea that either one side or the other is better. I will say through history feminism has been lost and a society based on domination has come in its place. Older cultures were definitely aware that the woman is as important as a man, and what naturally occurs should not be shamed or hidden, but celebrated. What needs to be recognized is that both sides are integral to allow growth and prosperity.
In western societies, industrialism and capitalism has won, it drives our economies and how we perceive the world. It has caused a lot of damage in the way of human rights and environmental damage. Though it has also done a lot of good. It brought us into this age of medicine and global connection. It is allowing “non first world countries” to catch up and develop themselves into the new upcoming powers. A great example is India, its economy is almost skipping using fossil fuels and investing in cleaner energies, developing its economy with out dirty fuel. Also with the global connection we now able to connect even the most remote villages and they are able to obtain energy and knowledge.
I would argue overall what we lost in industrialization and the patriarchy domination is the other side, the feminist side. Meaning we as a people pushed forward, developing a world that only cared about profits and bettering our technologies and capabilities. The patriarchy in all this progress forgot to accept its other half, its feminist half as important. It forgot to stop and think and to say we are making all this progress, but what is being harmed and abused in this “forward movement”. Which what is being harmed is the rights of nature, the rights of all to be respected and recognized as important.
I think this is the most important idea when thinking about ecofeminism in the west, that we have lost the fight to capitalism. As much as we can make strides with things like The Green New Deal, we have prioritized money and power over our connection with the planet. Making moves toward a socialist society by taking away money from the 1% and redistributing the wealth to lower class individuals, whose interests are helping recreate humans bond with nature, can help to fix our capitalist society. Bina Agarwal’s /The Gender and Environment Debate: Lessons from India/ discusses how they use other ideologies to run their platforms, stating, “Although fueled by differing ideological streams, which Ramachandra Guha identifies as Crusading Gandhain, Appropriate Technology, and Ecological Marxism, these resistance movements suggest that those affected can also be critical agents of change.” (Agarwal, 145) Moving toward a more pure ecofeminism, for me, means moving away from capitalism and moving toward more Marxist ideologies, as much of the pollution that harms the planet and oppresses women comes from the 1%, and large corporations. I think that Marxism has a huge place within ecofeminism, as, similar to capitalism, the patriarchy dominates the lower classes through exploiting women and the land. This also contributes to why looking at the Global South is very interesting regarding ecofeminism, as it’s not as far along in the capitalist regime, so there are fundamental differences that our capitalist society can learn from.
I love that you have included the point that industrialism has made some bad decisions BUT that it has made some good ones as well. I feel like I see more and more of a biased/negative lens of industrialism lately, than any positive light. I appreciate that you brought in the good in the bad, because I believe society sometimes forgets to do that.
Hi Richard!
I want to start by saying, the way you defined ecofeminism was really clear and super easy to understand for say someone who might not know anything of the subject. Nature does contribute to aspects involving feminine and masculine qualities. I find we see a lot of this through symbolism, for example Mother Nature. I like that you pointed out what some might be afraid to point out and that is the problem of dualism in the case of ecofeminism. Sometimes dualism is good for balance, like you said. But in this case, like you also mentioned men are being perceived as better than women or superior to all. That’s where the patriarch system comes in, which is what non-western ecofeminists want to get rid of. Both sides should be considered equal no matter what we are looking at, everyone deserves rights and everyone should have the right to equality. Capitalism and industry have taken over the west, and this is also a huge problem that must be tackled by ecofeminists. Western ecofeminists look more at the connections between women and nature and the problems stemming from inequality with this. While industries have done good, they also have created problems with money and in turn we are not giving our planet that equal chance it deserves as much as you and I. We as people have created a society more worried about money and product and power rather than equality, fair treatment towards women, and towards nature. Ecofeminists in both western and non-western societies can bring together ideas and the problems they are seeing and create a common goal of saving the world. They want to bring equality towards women and nature by getting rid of dualism and patriarch systems and they want to rid the world of the abuse coming from industry and capitalism.