19 June 2010 Ecofeminism: A Feminist Approach to Environmental Ethics

MOHAMMAD KAOSAR AHMED Ecofeminism is a strategic response to the continual Western association of women with nature. Now, feminist theorists have known for a long time that women have historically been associated with nature and that nature has often been feminized as in myths such as Mother Nature. It is assumed that the oppressed along with the oppressor similarly regards the status of nature as inferior to all that is human so that a hierarchical system is imposed in which some people are thought of as more human than others. As everybody knows, the term ecofeminism was first coined by the French feminist Francois dEaubonne (1974). However during the 1970s there was not a coherent body of ecofeminist theory. Instead there were differing accounts that wove together a perceived interconnection between the domination of women and nature. Particularly, Rosemary Radford-Ruether's New Woman, New Earth- Sexist Ideologies and Human Liberation, Susan Griffin's Women and Nature - The Roaring Inside Her and Carolyn Merchant's The Death of Nature - Women, Ecology and the Scientific Revolution. None of these texts actually articulate an 'ecofeminism' per se. However, they all provide important historical evidence for the Western association of women with nature. The womens movement during the 1970s was clearly intertwined with a peace and environmental movement. By 1980 these connections had coalesced into ecofeminist activist groups. Ecofeminism as an academic discourse did not develop until the mid to late 1980s. It is really difficult to speak of a singular ecofeminism since it is a far from homogenous standpoint. But modestly it may be said that all ecofeminists regard the Western domination of women and nature as conceptually linked and that the processes of inferiorisation have mutually reinforced each other. For example, Merchant (op. cit. p.165) argues that from its beginning the discourse of modern science in the West was informed by imagery that portrayed nature as female. Given womens status this both aided and eroticized the domination of nature for men of science. Interwoven with this discourse has been the inferiorisation of women via the discourse of women as closer to nature and thus further away from a dualistically opposed and politically deployed concept of reason. This is by no means a solely ecofeminist argument and has become part of the established discourse of feminist theory. A precise typology of ecofeminism is impossible though it is worth exploring Plumwoods distinction between cultural and social ecofeminism. The difference between the two pivots upon what they do with, and how they conceive of, a womennature connection. Cultural ecofeminists tend to naturalize this connection and see women as having an epistemologically privileged understanding of nature through, for example, access to a subsistence principle. Moreover, essentialism is deployed in positing a polarised and rigid notion of feminine and masculine values, as in Spretnaks claim that women are more empathic than men. During its short history, ecofeminism has undergone a process of academisation and thus has been subject to various pressures and constraints. Moreover, this has had certain consequences for ecofeminism as a whole. In the academic context it has been argued

that ecofeminism has been disproportionately colonized by philosophical perspectives. Cook writes, "The tactics being employed by some to gain academic standing for philosophical ecofeminism reduce ecofeminism to philosophy without considering the implications of doing so". The concern here is that a specific philosophical ecofeminism is attempting to speak for ecofeminism as a whole. Karen Warren's edited collection Ecological Feminism can be cited as a specific example of this colonizing practice. The important point is the tendency of philosophical ecofeminist positions to engage in a preliminary disavowal of essentialist or spiritual (often conflated) ecofeminist positions without actually engaging textually with such positions or even identifying specific texts. A recent example of the defensive philosophizing move is Chris Cuomo's Feminism and Ecological Communities - An Ethic of Flourishing that favours the term 'ecological feminism' over what she sees as the falsely universalizing tendencies of ecofeminism. As an academic discourse ecofeminism has been conceptualized as part of the field of Environmental Ethics along with theories/movements such as deep ecology and social ecology. Beyond this there has been a curious lack of engagement with ecofeminism from feminist academics. It is very rare to find mention of ecofeminism in feminist/Women's Studies texts. This absence is particularly true in the UK, and only slightly less so in Australia and the US. Ecofeminism echoes the call of Collins to re-vision class, gender and race as interlocking systems of oppression, and yet does so in critique of her call for a humanist vision. This points to an important post-humanist difference between ecofeminism and most feminisms. For ecofeminism does present a decisive ethical challenge to feminism in its revaluation of nature and nonhuman animals. Ecofeminism offers a more thorough examination of the political and exclusionary uses of ideas of the 'human' colonised as it has been by constructions of masculinity and rationality. This is not to denigrate such feminism or to deny its pragmatic political goals but to emphasize the limited consequence of equality with a sphere which has been colonized by partial definitions of the human: namely as white, male, middle-class, disembodied and as based on notions of reason, distance and objectivity which are mistakenly assumed to be neutral, tenable and universal values. Ecofeminism builds upon the lessons of second wave feminism. First its theory follows a methodology that argues against prioritising one form of oppression over another. Plumwoods desire to set up class, race, nature and gender as the four tectonic plates of liberation theory resists the urge to prioritise one over another. She states Methodological priority for gender assumes that women's oppression must always be ranked as more fundamental, strategically prior to other forms of oppression in all contexts (1996b:194). Second it builds upon the recognition by feminist theory that gender is inseparable from race and class. In critiquing this methodological purity ecofeminism is in fact a very promising response to some of the problems of feminist. Ramazanoglu writes, Feminism is not a total social theory that can explain the connections between different forms of oppression. But the problem remains that the oppression of women is, in complex and contradictory ways, enmeshed in all other forms of oppression that people have createdFeminist energy needs to go into making the connections between gender and other forms of oppression. Ecofeminism is not a total critical-social theory. The ecofeminist endeavor too much ignored by mainstream feminist theory has initiated in important ways this very process called for by Ramazanoglu. Ecofeminism is not alone in arguing for the importance of

theorizing intersectionality. Such calls can also be heard within disability studies and the growing field of critical gerontology. For example recent research has examined how empirical gerontological studies support or discount various theories of intersectionality between age, gender, race and class. Central to ecofeminism is its analysis of Western dualisms. The Western patriarchal way of thinking is based on "dualism." Dualism is a world view that splits mind from body, spirit from matter, male from female, humans from nature. It thereby creates imbalanced power relationships by artificially dividing entities in half, according one side of the equation greater worth over the other. These dichotomies give rise to an "other" which is then demonized and discriminated against. The Western patriarchal mindset is often referred to by academics as the "dominant/subordinate duality paradigm," and in its classic form delineates the following hierarchy of value: God Man Woman Children Animals Nature The modern version of the paradigm includes racism (white people valued over people of color, sexism (men prioritized over women), speciesism (human animals deemed superior to other animals), and classism and imperialism (haves pitted against havenots). The Western patriarchal belief system also places higher value on linear, mechanistic, analytical, and rational qualities. The intuitive, emotional, anarchic, and earthy are negatively perceived as passive, weak, irrationaland female. Nature is paradoxically considered inert, dead mass and a wild, chaotic force. By either reckoning, nature is to be dominated and harnessed for human ends. By extension, the patriarchal mind objectifies, controls, and devalues all that is labeled "female." Both women and men are socialized to accept these man-made values. Although men, too, are harmed by patriarchal practices, they nonetheless benefit from them at the expense of women. For example, men own 99% of the world's property while women perform two-thirds of the world's labor. Another example: men rarely shoulder the physical, social, political, or psychological consequences of the experience of rape (unless sexually abused as children or as prison inmates). It is women of all ages who are burdened with the psychic fear induced by a climate in which the threat of sexual violation looms like a distant rain cloud: sometimes miles away, other times hovering right over us. Although ecofeminism is not a movement in the traditional sense, patterns exist among those who think and act with an ecofeminist consciousness. Ecofeminists affirm qualities traditionally considered "female" such as being cooperative, nurturing, supportive, nonviolent and sensual. Ecofeminists further strive for a balanced synthesis with qualities traditionally deemed "male" that in appropriate contexts are valuable, such as competitiveness, individuality, assertiveness, leadership, and intellectuality. The concept of "female" and "male," however, are social constructions and not innate qualities. Both men and women share in the pool of human character traits, some of which came to be categorized as "female" and "male."

In an effort to be "equal," many mainstream feminists downplay biological female capabilities such as birthing, lactation, and menstruation. Ecofeminists are proud of women's unique physiology, and feel that equality with men should not come at the expense of disavowing or understating our physical differences. This does not imply that ecofeminists necessarily perceive women as closer to nature. As with other animals, humans are intrinsically part of nature. Ecofeminists are simply at the forefront in developing a deeper analysis of the human/nature dynamic. At the heart of that analysis is an understanding that for the past 5,000 years, the male has dominated the female. Many ecofeminists believe the planet at this point needs massive infusions of female energy to regain balance. Although ecofeminists are immersed in social and political struggles for reform on a variety of fronts to achieve this balance, there remains certain sympathy for Ynestra Kings classic declaration, "We dont want a piece of their rotten, carcinogenic pie." II. There are different relevant schools of feminist thought and activism that relate to the analysis of the environment. Ecofeminism argues that there is a connection between women and nature that comes from their shared history of oppression by a patriarchal society; this connection also comes from the positive identification of women with nature. This relationship can be argued from an essentialist position, attributing it to biological factors, or from a position that explains it as a social construct. Vandana Shiva claims that women have a special connection to the environment through their daily interactions with it that has been ignored. "Women in subsistence economies, producing and reproducing wealth in partnership with nature, have been experts in their own right of holistic and ecological knowledge of natures processes. But these alternative modes of knowing, which are oriented to the social benefits and sustenance needs are not recognised by the capitalist reductionist paradigm, because it fails to perceive the interconnectedness of nature, or the connection of womens lives, work and knowledge with the creation of wealth. Feminist environmentalists study gender interests in natural resources and processes based on their different roles in daily work and responsibilities. Social feminists focus on the role of gender in political economy by analyzing the impact of production and reproduction of men and womens relation to economic systems. Feminist poststructuralists explain genders relation to the environment as a reflection of beliefs of identity and difference such as race, class, gender, age, and ethnicity. In this way they try to explain the relation of gender and development. Liberal feminist environmentalists treat women as having an active role in environmental protection and conservation programs. This role can become problematic. There is a common symbolism in the idea of man pitted against nature while nature is feminized and woman is assumed to have profound connections with her environment. These views of gender and environment constitute feminist political ecology, which links feminist cultural ecology, geographical ecology and feminist political ecology into one concept. It argues that gender is a relevant factor in determining access and control of natural resources as it relates to class, race, culture and ethnicity to transform the environment and to achieve the communitys opportunities of sustainable development. The ecofeminist approach that best fits the Nariva Swamp issue in Trinidad and Tobago comes from Reweaving the World: The Emergence of Ecofeminism in which the editors, Irene Diamond and Gloria Orenstein lay out three strands in ecofeminism. One strand emphasizes that social justice has to be achieved in concert with the well-being of the Earth since human life is dependent on the Earth. Another strand in ecofeminism is spiritual, emphasizing that the Earth is sacred unto itself. A third strand emphasizes the

necessity of sustainabilitya need to learn the many ways people can walk the fine line between using the Earth as a resource while respecting the Earths needs. MacGregor writes that a focus on women acting on survival or subsistence imperatives erases moral choice and practices of making principled decisions to act, or not to act, in particular ways by focussing solely on the view from below: the moral insight that comes out of so-called unmediated experiences of survival. MacGregor states the problems that arise from the lack of acknowledgement that many of the women who ecofeminists romanticize as exhibiting a subsistence perspective or barefoot epistemology do so in conditions that they did not choose and that lifestyle does not necessarily determine human morality. Other writers seem to mock moral arguments, ignoring the reality that both Christian and non-Christian population use moral reasoning. Jacques claims that the environmental skeptic Peter Huber argues that humans have no moral obligation to nonhuman nature because humanity has the ability to dominate and control nature and this is what Judeo-Christian doctrine dictates (deep anthropocentrism - enlightened anthropocentrism favours saving coral reefs for future medical benefits or for biodiversity reasons and for resources that humans use currently and that may be used for future generations). Even the law in most former British colonies (and probably other countries) is based on Judeo-Christian religion, so how can morality be dismissed as a non-issue? Many of the laws on the books in Trinidad and Tobago have not been changed since their creation under the British colonial system. Huggan and Driver dont seem to realize that it is in fact Nature that is the non moral agent. Siurua discusses how David Schmidtz divides morality into two parts: a morality of personal aspiration, encompassing the ethical convictions and ideals according to which a person orients his or her actions, and a morality of interpersonal constraint, which forms the basis of institutional arrangements to regulate social interactions between individuals pursuing their personal goals. Schmidtz argues that strict preservationism (in the sense of a rejection of any instrumental utilization of nature in protected areas, often motivated by non-anthropocentrism) may be acceptable and justified as part of a morality of the first kind, but as long as the costs of actual preservation are to be borne by people who do not share preservationist values, the promotion of preservationism as the foundation of interpersonal morality is doomed to failure and consequently ought not to be undertaken. Arguable preservationism ought not to be undertaken with people who do not have preservationist values who should have been relocated to a more comfortable environment at State cost. The push towards quantifying Nature as ecosystem services, or the economic benefits provided by natural ecosystems is part of a market-oriented mechanism for conservation says McCauley in a much-discussed article in the journal Nature. The underlying assumption is that if scientists can identify ecosystem services, like the Manzanilla Windbelt, Bush Bush and Bois Neuf islands for birds, other wildlife, and the mud volcanoes and the tourist potential they represent, then they can quantify their economic value, and align conservation with market ideologies. This will then move decision makers away from environmental destruction. This McCauley claims is akin to saying that civil-rights advocates would have been more effective if they provided economic justifications for racial integration. Nature conservation should be framed as a moral issue and argued as such to policy-makers, says McCauley, since policy makers are just as accustomed to making decisions based on morality as on finances. III. A few stirring examples of ecofeminist activism:

1. Wangari Maathai's formation of the Green Belt Movement in Kenya in which rural women planted trees as part of a soil conservation effort to avert desertification of their land; 2. The women of Greenham Common Peace Camp in England whose over ten-year presence was instrumental in the removal of nuclear missiles there; 3. Mohawk women along the St. Lawrence River who established the Akwesasne Mother's Milk Project to monitor PCB toxicity while continuing to promote breastfeeding as a primary option for women and their babies; 4. Judi Bari's bringing together labor and environmental groups in Northern California to save the remaining five percent of old growth redwood forests from corporate logging; 5. Artist Helene Aylon's Sister Rivers performance ritual in which Japanese women placed rice, seeds, and soil from Hiroshima and Nagasaki in pillowcases and then floated the artwork down the Kama River; 6. Bernadette Cozart, a gardener and founder of the Greening of Harlem, who organizes diverse community groups in Harlem to transform vacant garbage-strewn lots into food and flower gardens; 7. Lois Gibbs' exposure of Love Canal as a toxic waste site, and her founding of the Citizens Clearinghouse for Hazardous Waste to share tactical skills with local environmental groups. IV. Ecofeminist Writers: Val Plumwood, Carol J Adams, Matri Kheel, Karen J Warren, Gloria Orenstein, Vandana Shiva II, Stacy Alaimo, Starhawk, Chris J Cuomo Ecofeminist groups: Feminists For Animal Rights, Arizona, USA; WVE! Womens Voices for the Earth Montana, USA; The Womens Enviornmental Network United Kingdom; Gaiaguys NSW, Australia, Boston Ecofeminist Action Massachusetts, USA Books for further Studies: Adam, Carol J. (1991) The Sexual Politics of Meat, Continuum New York Cuomo, Chris J. (1998) Feminism and Ecological Communities- an Ethic of Flourishing Routledge London Easlea, Brian. (1981) Science and Sexual Oppression- Patriarchys confrontation with Women and Nature Weidenfeld and Nicolson London Merchant, Carolyn. (1980) The Death of Nature- Women, Ecology and the Scientific Revolution Harper San Francisco Plumwood, Val. (1993) Feminism and the Mastery of Nature Routledge London Seidler, Victor. (1994) Unreasonable Men- Masculinity and Social Theory Routledge, London Sturgeon, Nol. (1997) Ecofeminist Natures- Race, Gender, Feminist Theory and Political Action Routledge London V. It is important to be aware of how environmental policies, or a lack thereof, influence our everyday lives. Women, children, low-income individuals, people of color, and residents of the Global South are particularly vulnerable populations whose rights to a healthy and sustainable future must be vigilantly respected and safeguarded. As we are all only as healthy as our earth, we must be mindful of how our lives positively or negatively impact the environment, and ultimately, ourselves. Women and the status of the environment are inextricably linked. In many cases, it is women across the globe, who primarily feel the effects of ecological change and the creation of toxic substances by humans. Mohammad Kaosar Ahmed is Head, Department of ELL, IIUC, Dhaka Campus kaosarahmed@rocketmail.con