April 22nd, 2017, the forty-fifth president of the United States tweeted his commitment “to keeping our air and water clean,” yet America faces a daunting future regarding environmental policy as the current administration seeks to cut spending of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) by thirty-one percent (@realDonaldTrump, Tabuchi). Within these budget cuts, Americans face the possibility of elimination of superfunds, jobs, grants, and protection programs. Unfortunately, this is not the first step back in America’s acknowledgment of climate policy, but it is evident that a new model of resistance is necessary to manifest continual change in policy. Historically, movements of resistance have risen such as conservation, ecofeminism, and environmental justice. Within the conservation movement, critiques highlighting the failure to acknowledge race and class led to the rise of environmental justice (Mock). Environmental justice, in response, has manifested as a movement with a “multi-issue focus”. This movement has been “multi-ethnic and multi-racial” in composition, encompassing a “multi-national scope” attentive to the “social needs of human populations” while “challenging capitalist growth” (Pellow and Brulle 3, 16). Arising around the same time period in the 1970’s, ecofeminism sought to connect the domination of women and nature through the tenant that patriarchy associates women with the natural and physical, and men with the cultural and the mind (Warren 328). This logic proves that the feminization of nature is yet another form of oppression that interlocks with sexism, classism, and heterosexism. This attention to the oppression of nature is the key difference between ecofeminism and the environmental justice movement. Today’s political climate stresses the urgency of action, yet current environmental justice efforts exclude a crucial aspect to dismantle root oppressions. Despite ecofeminist pitfalls, such as essentialism and trans exclusion, the incorporation of ecofeminist ideas such as attention to faith as a form of motivation, intra and interspecies interconnectedness, and a nondualistic worldview provides a new approach. This approach, combined with current environmental justice efforts, allows for individualism under an unified goal of climate and environmental justice opening opportunities for people to participate in the movement.
Critiques
If such a coalition is to be formed it must be careful to avoid the tenets of ecofeminism that ultimately led to its demise: universalism and essentialism. To understand these tenets one must first understand the primary types of ecofeminism: socialist and cultural. Notably, both of these facets of ecofeminism address the means of enacting social change, yet their means of doing so differ. Socialist ecofeminists use the destruction of nature as a result of capitalism to show how economic systems are environmentally destructive (Carlassare 92). Socialist ecofeminists argue that materialism is the force behind positive change within society (Carlassare 93). On the other hand, cultural ecofeminism focuses on manifesting change through “changes in culture and consciousness” which can be attributed to the creation of myths and language to reclaim women’s history and spirituality (Carlassare 95).
As a result of the core values of ecofeminism, it has been critiqued for culturally appropriating indigenous cultures, essentializing and universalizing womanhood. By “reclaiming” indigenous people’s cultures through faith, myths and language, the homogeneous, white ecofeminist movement further suppressed and erased native cultures. Thus, by associating people of color with nature ecofeminism essentialized race. This “racial essentialism” romanticizes brown skin by associating it with “‘indigenous’ spiritualities” (Sturgeon 264). Consequently, ecofeminists utilized the parts of others’ cultures without including them into the conservation eliminating the voices of those of color and generalizing people of color’s opinions.
Outside of race, cultural ecofeminists have been heavily critiqued for their use of essentialism where they embrace stereotypes associated with women through biological determinism. These stereotypes perpetuate that women are inherently intuitive, caring, nurturing, and emotional (Carlassare 95). Socialist ecofeminism contributes to this as well as it values “reproduction over production, both as a category of analysis and as a social and economic goal” (Carlassare 93). As a result, these stereotypes have alienated a wide variety of people including those who are not cisgendered women, those who fall outside the gender binary, women who do not hold these personality traits, and those whose anatomy is incapable of reproduction.
Furthermore, those who do not fit neatly into the gender binary’s normative behaviors or expressions of gender are further excluded from the reclamation of women’s spirituality as their foundations are built on interconnectedness. Restoration of their spirituality, to ecofeminists, is “listening to the natural rhythms”, the worship of nature and fertility, and their inherent ability to menstruate. Consequently, ecofeminists see their reconnection with nature as connecting back to the “nurturing” and the internal way of being (Goddess Remembered 1989). Universalizing women to being nurturing, fertile, and connected to the Earth and each other erases the rich diversity of what womanhood is. Additionally, this is limiting to their own practice by reducing it to women who fit this particular mold. Interestingly enough, these self-proclaimed feminists further ideas of biological determinism through their essentialization of themselves to be inherently nurturing.
Attention to Faith
These pitfalls ultimately led ecofeminism to decline in popularity after the 1970’s; however, before one can explore how the ecofeminist model provides a means to revolutionize current movements, one must understand another aspect which pushed ecofeminism away from mainstream feminism: faith. Often, ecofeminism is associated with earth-based spirituality as it seeks change through “personal transformation and changes in consciousness” (Carlassare 90). This association has been primary evidence by feminist academics of how essentializing and apolitical ecofeminism was, but this critique fails to address how faith informs individuals’ political actions (Gaard 39). Starhawk, a major contributor to the cultural ecofeminist movement, argues in her essay, “Feminists, Earth-based Spirituality and Ecofeminism” that “Earth-based spirituality influences ecofeminism by informing its values” (Starhawk 175). She presents three aspects of Earth-based spiritual practices that “can resurge in new cycles of political momentum” which includes immanence, interconnection, and compassion. These values “shift our definition of power,” “furnish the basis for our political understandings,” and help us “develop alliances with those whose interests and issues parallel ours” (Starhawk 177-181). Starhawk calls for coalition politics to not only complete “short-term bandages” but to also “support long-term recovery” so that there can be a political agenda enlightened by all issues (Starhawk 181). Through Starhawk’s work it is evident that faith plays a major role in why people take political action.
Understanding how exactly earth-based spirituality influences individuals provides the model that will change mainstream movements today. Paganism, a collection of non-Christian faiths that are collectively unified through their connection to the Earth and values for balance, reverence for life, and interconnectedness, was a major faith followed by ecofeminists. Centered around a goddess, many used their beliefs to support their activism. In a 2012 study, completed by Gwendolyn Reece, out of three thousand three hundred eighteen self-identified pagan respondents, fifty-five percent claimed that social justice work was a part of their spiritual practice. On the same note, forty-seven percent identified that political activism was a part of their faith (Reece 45-46). More important to note is the fact that each individual that responded manifests their political action in a different way, but they do it as a result of similarly held beliefs.
The rich history of Paganism has led to multiple divisions among practitioners. Major sects of Paganism today include Wicca, Druidry, and Hellenism which inherently hold similar morals, but uphold them in various ways. Similarly, Ecofeminism contains a vast array of different influences due to the variety of earth-based practices that influence its means to best effect social change; however, ecofeminists are innately striving to dismantle oppression and end environmental destruction (Carlassare 89, 95). Reece’s data demonstrates this connection between paganism and political actions, more importantly, it demonstrates empirically that even among groups of extreme diversity within their own faiths that they are unified overall in their core beliefs. This attention to faith brought forth by ecofeminism provides a model for current environmental efforts to acknowledge that individuals have different motivations and beliefs, but collectively are fighting for the same goal.
Interconnectedness
Additionally, ecofeminism’s values of interconnectedness provides a means for the longevity of a movement by providing a form of analysis that is attentive to the interrelationships of oppression. Stemming from paganism, interconnectedness is the “ability to feel with and identify with others-human beings, natural cycles and processes, animals, and plants” (Starhawk 178). Interconnectedness, presented by Starhawk, a major cultural ecofeminist, is the foundation which fuels political understanding, but those who are in power seek to prevent us from seeing these connections (179-180). Once one sees the interconnectedness of the world one can see that political issues are not insuperable but are actually a connected in a web (Starhawk 179). This value of ecofeminism provides a lense for us to see our focuses may divide us “from those who might be our allies” if we “other” those who are different from us (Starhawk 180).
Understanding that we are all connected, through means of oppression or culture, presents us with an approach that can seek to tackle the interlocking web of domination. Consequently, interconnectedness can bring forth compassion. Once one understands our inherent connectedness through mutual oppression, we can begin to see the “multifaceted views of the world” and see problems “in their true complexity” (Starhawk 180). The awareness created by understanding the relationship between people, plants, animals, and nature contributes to our understanding of our individual actions affect those not directly in front of us. This model allows for collaboration that expands past individuals and allows them to form relationships that are stronger on a local, national, and global level. If we can understand how individual actions, in turn, affect those beyond us and can mobilize around this concept, the current environmental movement will be able to communicate its demands of protecting those disproportionately impacted who have the least say more effectively to elicit change.
Agential Earth and Nondualism
This mobilization must also be attentive to the idea that the Earth has agency to fully understand that if we continue to disregard this idea, we further the logic of domination. Ecofeminists hold a nondualistic worldview which is the way “of conceptually organizing the world in binary, disjunctive terms, wherein each side of the dualism is “seen as exclusive (rather than inclusive) and oppositional (rather than complimentary), and where higher value or superiority is attributed to one disjunct (or, side of the dualism) than the other” (Gaard 115-116). Ecofeminists understand this notion and believe that the superiority of self is a result of viewing the differences between the self and others (Gaard 116). Consequently, due to seeing oneself as intertwined with the Earth, Ecofeminists believe that if one believes that they are “at odds” with nature or if one is trying to exploit it for its resources then they see only the differences with nature and not their shared connections furthering the domination over the natural world (Starhawk 178).
Seeing the Earth with agency acknowledges our “ability to create dysfunctional relationships with the earth, with our ecological community, and with each other” by acknowledging that the earth continues on with or without humans (Ruether 147). If we continue to ignore this facet then the current environmental movement continues to use its privilege of intelligence. This privilege is one that allows humans to “alienate and dominate the world without concern for the welfare of all other forms of life” (Ruether 147-148). To begin to understand this privilege however we must first address how we subject other humans as lesser before we can restore value to nature. We equate marginalized people with nature such as people of color, women, and people of developing countries through dualistic thinking. While the environmental justice movement seeks to dismantle the oppression affecting marginalized people it fails to acknowledge the earth as one of those subjects. We must acknowledge the earth as an oppressed figure or we do nothing to acknowledge our dualistic thinking as we then choose a living being to be lesser.
Conclusion
Overall, the falling out of ecofeminism due to essentialism, universalism, and appropriation have been justly critiqued; however, revisiting ecofeminism to understand how nondualism, interconnectedness, and the incorporation of faith within a movement can enhance the current environmental justice movement to aid in its longevity, inclusion, and effectiveness. Moving forward, current environmental groups must incorporate an ecofeminist line of thinking to bring forth change. The environmental justice movement must go beyond seeking justice just for human beings, but for the earth as well or it is hypocritical to say it is working to support the “social needs of human populations” (Pellow and Brulle 3). Humans are inherently tied to the ecological systems and processes of the earth.
To help further understanding of an agential earth, the environmental justice movement must see our lives interconnected within and outside our species. Our actions affect more than just the human race. This value will protect the longevity of the movement as it allows us to understand who our allies are and that political issues are not separate from each other. This allows for collective organizing and support at the local, national, and global levels.
In turn, however, while a national platform is a powerful unifier, it does not change the lives of those affected directly at an individual level. By creating a movement with a uniform identity that allows for the expression of individual’s beliefs and practices manifests a truly intersectional approach as it provides a platform for those from all intersections of identity to participate in whatever means they are capable. Acknowledging the different motivations such as faith within the environmental movement consequently will allow for a larger understanding that faith is not apolitical. Faith informs the thoughts and actions of many individuals and as environmental activists acknowledge this they can rally people from what motivates them best. This is not to say the environmental activism movement must be religious, but it must acknowledge that faith as a motivation to be attentive to individual communities.
Ecofeminism, a model of the past, ultimately demonstrates key values that the environmental justice movement needs to take on to progress with support effectively over time. Climate change is not going to reverse itself or be fixed; yet, we must come together to combat the social stratifications that will occur as a result. Social, economic, and policy changes cannot occur without an overwhelming congregation of people tackling the issue of the future of the environment. Revisiting and applying parts ecofeminism to today holds the key to the future of activism.
(Spring 2017)
Works Cited
@realDonaldTrump. “I am committed to keeping our air and water clean but always remember that
economic growth enhances environmental protection. Jobs matter!.” Twitter, 22 April 2017, 5:49 p.m., https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/855901315305795584.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/10/climate/trump-epa-budget-cuts.html
https://www.marchforscience.com/mission-and-vision
BabyradfemTV. “NFB Women and Spirituality series Part 1: Goddess Remembered.” Online video
clip. Youtube. Youtube. 9 June 2016. Web. 6 April 2017.
Bullard, Robert D. The Quest for Environmental Justice Human Rights and the Politics of
Pollution. 1st ed. San Francisco: Sierra Club, 2005. Print.
Carlassare, Elizabeth. “Socialist and Cultural Ecofeminism: Allies in Resistance.” Ethics and the
Environment 5.1 (2000): 89-106. JSTOR. Web. 22 Mar. 2017.
Gaard, Greta. “Ecofeminism Revisited: Rejecting Essentialism and Re-Placing Species in a
Material Feminist Environmentalism.” Feminist Formations 23.2 (2011): 26-53. Web. 26 Apr. 2017.
Gaard, Greta. “Toward a Queer Ecofeminism.” Hypatia 12.1 (1997): 114-37. Web. 10 May 2017.
Mock, Brenti. “Mainstream Green Is Still Too White.” Color Lines. Color Lines, 2 Apr. 2013.
Web. 26 Apr. 2017.
Monroe, Douglas. The 21 lessons of Merlyn: A Study in Druid Magic and Lore. St. Paul, MN.:
Llewellyn Publications, 2004. Print.
Pellow, David N., and Robert J. Brulle. Power, Justice, and the Environment A Critical Appraisal
of the Environmental Justice Movement. Cambridge, MA: MIT, 2005. Print.
Reece, Gwendolyn. “Prevalence and Importance of Contemporary Pagan Practices.” The
Pomegranate, vol. 16, no. 1, 2014, pp. 35-54. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1558/pome.v16i1.20231.
Starhawk. “Feminists, Earth-based Spirituality and Ecofeminism .” Healing the Wounds: The
Promise of Ecofeminism . Ed. Judith Plant. Philadelphia: New Society Publishers , 1989. 174-85. Print.
Sturgeon, Noël. “Ecofeminist Appropriations and Transnational Environmentalism.”
Identities 6.2-3 (1999): 255-79. Web. 10 May 2017.
Tabuchi, Hiroko. “What’s at Stake in Trump’s Proposed E.P.A. Cuts.” The New York Times. The
New York Times, 10 Apr. 2017. Web. 26 Apr. 2017.
Warren, Karen J. The Power and the Promise of Ecological Feminism. 3rd ed. Vol. 12. N.p.: n.p.,
- Print. Environmental Ethics.
