Ecofeminism
is an activist and academic movement that sees critical connections between the
domination of nature and the exploitation of women. The term ecofeminism, first
used by French feminist Francoise d’Eaubonne1 in 1974, was hailed as the third
wave of feminism. Ecofeminism, as Karen Warren notes,2 is an umbrella term for
a wide variety of approaches. One may be a socialist ecofeminist, cultural
ecofeminist, radical ecofeminist, ecowomanist, etc. Although the categorization
of ecofeminism is a contested point, what holds these disparate positions
together is the claim that, as Karen Warren writes, “there are important connections
between the domination of women and the domination of nature.”3
Ecofeminist
activism grew during the 1980s and 1990s among women from the anti-nuclear,
environmental, and lesbian-feminist movements. The “W omen and Life on Earth:
Ecofeminism in the Eighties” conference held at Amherst (1980) was the first in
a series of ecofeminist conferences, inspiring the growth of ecofeminist
organizations and actions. The politics behind these ecofeminist organizations,
conferences, and actions were based on an assessment of critical links that
were thought to exist between militarism, sexism, classism, racism, and
environmental destruction.
The
publication of Woman and Nature: The Roaring Inside Her,4 Gyn/Ecology: The
Metaethics of Radical Feminism,5 New Woman/New Earth: Sexist Ideologies and
Human Liberation,6 and The Death of Nature: Women, Ecology, and the Scientific
Revolution,7 in the 1970s and early 1980s, were precursors to a burgeoning of
ecofeminist scholarship, especially in the fields of philosophy, theology, and
religious studies. These and other books, such as The Politics of Women’s
Spirituality: Essays on the Rise of Spiritual Power W ithin the Feminist M
ovement,8 Dreaming the Dark: M agic, Sex, and Politics,9 and essays by Ynestra
King,10 were important texts for women trying to integrate and interconnect
their personal, ecological, and political concerns.
The
University of Southern California hosted the “Ecofeminist Perspectives:
Culture, Nature, Theory” conference (1987). This conference was followed by
similar conferences that inspired the publication of important anthologies that
articulated ecofeminist perspectives (e.g., Reweaving the World: The Emergence
of Ecofeminism,11 Reclaim the Earth: Women Speak Out for Life on Earth;12 and
Healing the Wounds: The Promise of Ecofeminism13). Anthologies and conferences
also reflected the growing involvement of ecofeminists in the international
arena, including an ecofeminist presence at the United Nations Conference on
Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro (1992).
Although
a range of woman/nature interconnections are being explored within ecofeminist
thought and action, three connections seem central to ecofeminist theory—the
empirical, the conceptual and/or cultural/symbolic, and the epistemological.
The empirical claim is that in most parts of the world environmental problems
generally disproportionately affect women. The increased burdens women face
result not from environmental deterioration per se, but from a sexual division
of labor found in most societies that considers family sustenance to be women’s
work. It is increasingly difficult for women in such societies to provide food,
fuel, or water. Empirical data supports this claim.14
A
second claim is that women and nature are connected conceptually and/or
culturally/symbolically. These connections are articulated in several ways.
Many agree with Ruether that Western cultures present ideas about the world in
a hierarchical and dualistic manner that is lived out in the way the world is
organized. The claim is that dualist conceptual structures identify women with
femininity, the body, Earth, sexuality, and flesh; and men with masculinity,
spirit, mind, and power. Dualisms such as reason/emotion, mind/body,
culture/nature, heaven/Earth, and man/woman converge. This implies that men
have innate power over both women and nature. This dualistic structure was
championed in the Greek world, perpetuated by Christianity, and reinforced
later during the scientific revolution. In this cultural context, the twin
dominations of women and nature seem justified and appear “natural,” primarily
because they are reinforced by religion, philosophy, and other cultural
symbols, networks, and constructions.
The
ecofeminist epistemological claim follows from the connections noted between
women and nature. The fact that women are most adversely affected by
environmental problems makes them better qualified as experts on such
conditions and therefore places them in a position of epistemological
priviledge; that is, women have more knowledge about earth systems than men.
This means that these women are in a privileged position to aid in creating new
practical and intellectual ecological paradigms. This kind of understanding is
advocated by Indian ecofeminist Vandana Shiva.
Various
responses to the woman-nature link exist. Although both a historical and
cross-cultural connection, some claim the link should be deconstructed and
contested. It has not served either women or the Earth. Others say it should be
celebrated and honored. Still others consider it to be part of past rather than
present history. Ecofeminist responses to these contested points vary given the
preclinations of the particular theorist (e.g., ecofeminists may be Marxists,
socialists, cultural ecofeminists, radical ecofeminists, postcolonialists,
postmodernists, ecowomanists, goddess-worshipers, deep ecologists, social
ecologists, etc., or from a variety of religious backgrounds or none at all).
Some
of the earliest ecofeminist tesxts in theology and religion examined the
historical origins of patriarchy via the philosophical and theological
traditions of Europe and the Mediterranean and found that patriarchal religion
justified the domination of both women and nature. In historical
reconstructions by Gerda Lerner, Marija Gimbutas, Carol Christ, and others, it
is alleged that goddess-centered cultures that valued women and nature predated
the patriarchal and militaristic systems that overthrew them. As patriarchal
gods replaced Earth goddesses, both women and nature were degraded. According
to these reconstructions, male domination and hierarchy became thr religious
symbols and social norms.
Cultural
ecofeminists embrace goddess-oriented ecofeminism. Drawing from nature-based
religions, paganism, goddess worship, Native American traditions, and the
Wiccan tradition, some ecofeminists construct feminist spiritualities that they
view as being more friendly to nature and women than the patriarchal religious
traditions.
Rosemary
Radford Ruether, Anne Primavesi, Sallie McFague, and other Christian
ecofeminist theologians do not explicitly promote worship of pre-historic
goddesses but they do question the historical accuracy of the claims. T hey
argue that the possible existence of pre-historic goddesses may serve as a
“liberation from the ultimacy of the biblical/Christian image of the
patriarchal god,” 15 but they claim that a historically uncertain past will not
liberate the present. McFague and Merchant examine the connections between
religion, culture, and scientific worldviews, claiming that the mechanistic
models of Western science led to a rupture between the material world and the
sacred that has harmed both women and nature. McFague, Primavesi, Merchant,
Ivone Gebara and others look to the science of ecology to articulate a “common
creation story” as part of an ecofeminist/natural sciences dialogue.
Although
this essay has focused on the growth of ecofeminism in the North America, a
variety of regional, ethnic, and cultural ecofeminisms exist. Vandana Shiva
frequently invokes Hindu concepts and goddesses in her ecofeminist thought.
Ecofeminism and the Sacred16 included essays from Buddhist, Native American,
Hindu, womanist, Christian, and Jewish writers. Ruether's text, Women Healing
Earth: Third W orld Women on Ecology, Feminism,17 includes essays from
contributors living in Latin America, Asia, and Africa. Gebara, a Brazilian
theologian, articulates an ecofeminist liberation theology connecting social
justice to ecological health.18
Ecofeminist
critics, some of whom are ecofeminists themselves, warn of essentialist
positions latent in some forms of ecofeminist thought. Others doubt that the
woman/nature link holds cross-culturally. The borrowing of symbols from other
traditions by some ecofeminists is often harshly criticized, especially by
Native Americans such as Andy Smith. Others criticize the dominance of white
well-educated and privileged North American ecofeminists. There is also much
debate over the place of ecofeminism within other ecological paradigms, such as
with social ecology or deep ecology. Finally, for many the historicity of the
matriarchal to patriarchal shift remains suspect. The central premise of
ecofeminism remains; the dominations of women and nature are linked in various
ways (e.g., historically, materially, culturally, or conceptually).
End Notes
1 Francoise d'Eaubonne,
"Le Feminisme ou la mort." In New French Feminisms: An Anthology,
eds. Elaine M arks and Isabelle de Courtivron (Amherst, Mass.: University of
Massachusetts Press, 1980).
2 Karen Warren, ed.,
Ecological Feminist Philosophies (Bloomington, Ind.: University of Indiana
Press, 1996) x.
3 Ibid.
4 Susan Griffin, Woman
and Nature: The Roaring Inside Her (New York: Harper & Row, 1978).
5 Mary Daly, Gyn-Ecology:
The Metaethics of Radical Feminism (Boston, Mass.: Beacon Press, 1978).
6 Rosemary Radford
Ruether, New W oman, New Earth: Sexist Ideologies and Human Liberation (New
York: Seabury Press, 1975).
7 Carolyn Merchant, The
Death of Nature: Women, Ecology, and the Scientific Revolution (New York:
Harper & Row, 1980).
8 Charlene Spretnak, The
Politics of W omen’s Spirituality: Essays on the Rise of Spiritual Power within
the Feminist Movement (Garden City, N.Y. : Anchor Books, 1982).
9 Starhawk, Dreaming the
Dark: Magic, Sex, and Politics (Boston, Mass.: Beacon Press, 1982).
10 Ynestra King,
"Feminism and Ecology," in Toxic Struggles, ed. Richard Hofrichter
(Philadelphia, Pa.: New Society Publishers, 1993), 76–84; Ynestra King,
"Healing the Wounds: Feminism, Ecology, and the Nature/Culture
Dualism," in Reweaving the World: The Emergence of Ecofeminism, eds. Irene
Diamond and Gloria Feman Orenstein (San Francisco, Calif.: Sierra Club Books, 1990),
106–21; Ynestra K ing, "The Ecofeminist Imperative," in Reclaim the
Earth: Women Speak Out for Life on Earth, eds. Leonie Caldecott and Stephanie
Leland (London: Women's Press, 1983), 9–14; Ynestra King, "Feminism and
the Revolt of Nature" Heresies 13 (fall 1981): 12–16.
11 Irene Diamond and
Gloria Feman Orenstein, eds. Reweaving the World: The Emergence of Ecofeminism
(San Francisco, Calif.: Sierra Club Books, 1990).
12 Léonie Caldecott and
Stephanie Leland, eds., Reclaim the Earth: Women Speak Out for Life on Earth
(London: Women’s Press, 1983).
13 Judith Plant, ed., Healing
the Wounds: The Promise of Ecofeminism (Philadelphia, Pa.: New Society
Publishers, 1989).
14 Rosi Bradiotti, et
al., W omen, the Environment, and Sustainable Development: Towards a
Theoretical Synthesis (London: Zed Books, 1994); Irene Dankelman and Joan D
avidson, Women and Environment in the Third World (London: Earthscan
Publications, 1988); Joni Seager, Earth Follies: Coming to Feminist Terms with the
Global Environmental Crisis (New York: Routledge, 1993); Vandana Shiva, Staying
Alive: Women, Ecology, and Development (London: Zed Books, 1989).
15 Rosemary Radford
Ruether, ed. Women H ealing Earth: Third World Women on Ecology, Feminism, and
Religion (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis Books, 1996) 4.
16 Carol Adams, ed.,
Ecofeminism and the Sacred (New York: Continuum, 1993).
17 Rosemary Radford
Ruether, ed. Women H ealing Earth: Third World Women on Ecology, Feminism, and
Religion (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis Books, 1996).
18 Ivone Gebara, Longing
for Running Water: Ecofeminism and Liberation (Minneapolis, Minn.: Fortress
Press, 1999).