So what is ecofeminism? To sum it up it’s a combination of feminist and ecological issues that is said to be a result of a male dominated society. This image
shows the connection between women and nature in a very obvious way but it can be directly connected to both Karen Warren and Hodgood-Oster’s interpretations of ecofeminism and it’s place within our society. The image above, presumably very obvious, is a woman acting as part of the tree; one with nature. However, my interpretation of the image was a little different than what simply meets the eye. The woman is being held up by the roots of the tree because there is nowhere else to stand, as suggested by all the white space. Yet she is the one that holds up the top half of the tree, she helps it reach heights that it couldn’t without her. It’s a balance, nature supports us and in return we make sure that it’s able to keep growing by helping it thrive. Thus ecofeminism is born.
My interpretation of this image involves women being part of nature not just “closer to nature than men” are. As Karen Warren explains, implying that women are closer and even a part of nature worries some ecofeminists because “any view that makes any group of humans closer to nature than any other is conceptually flawed and methodologically suspect: it maintains just the sort of value dualistic and hierarchical thinking that is critiqued by ecofeminism”. I found this to be funny, because how can you claim to be an ecofeminist; which is the belief that ecological and feminism issues are directly connected; while essentially not believing the main concept of ecofeminisim; that women are closer to nature than any and all other groups of people. Hobgood-Oster says that “Ecofeminist positions reflect varied political stances that may be, and usually are, transformed through time and place”. Which can explain why some ecofeminists don’t like to insinuate women are closer to nature than others, but personally I think changing/not believing the core belief of ecofeminism doesn’t really make you an ecofeminist, at least not in the traditional sense.
Karen Warren identified eight connections between women and nature; all of which are interesting and relevant. Her first one though, is the most intriguing to me and the one that makes the most sense. “One alleged connection between women and nature is historical”. Warren explains how our history proves that feminist and environmental issues is a direct result of our patriarchal culture. The best example of this is our track record for elected Presidents. Not one woman, and only one person of color. Makes you wonder, if a woman was in power would we have as many environmental and feminist issues? I’d like to say we would because other wise I’d be admitting our culture is unknowingly pinned against women and the nature that was supported us from day one. But the truth is I believe that women and nature would be better off with a woman in power. It’s ironic really, the two things; nature and women, that have the most power, women who bear children and nature, which quite literally allows us to breathe; are the two that are overlooked the most buy our patriarchal culture. All I can hope for is some serious change to take place within this new decade. Maybe it will look like this.
A little bit of history about Ecofeminism….
The idea of ecofeminism came to be in the 1970’s and 80’s, although at the time it was merely “feminist and environmental theories and activisms intersected”. The actual term was coined by Francoise d’Eaubonne in 1974. While others believed ecofeminism to merely be a third wave of feminism. Hobgood-Oster says that “Ecofeminism asserts that all forms of oppression are connected and that structures of oppression must be addressed in their totality”. The main focus here is that you can’t simply focus on one aspect of oppression, or one ‘victim’ of it, but rather it be tackled all at once. So now we know that ecofeminism isn’t just the connection of feminist and ecological issues, but rather the belief that these issues need to be tackled simultaneously in order to see an real progress within either set of issues. I’ll leave you with a quote that I really like that Hobgood-Oster brings up, that was said by Rosemary Radford Ruether:
” Women must see that there can be no liberation for them and no solution to the ecological crisis within a society whose fundamental model of relationships continues to be one of domination. They must unite the demands of the women’s movement with those of the ecological movement to envision a radical reshaping of the basic socioeconomic relations and the underlying values of this society”.
Hi Madison,
I love the way you explain the picture. With a society where nature and women are left unnoticed, they become there own support. Women are stronger, they bare the burden of child birth. Give life to a new born. Trees on the other hand build stronger roots in order for the stem to grow strong and upright. Also the picture you added of women in formal dresses is beautiful, you gave such a brilliant concept of women in power or higher position you can say. I hope we can see this change soon.
I think you make very valid points throughout your blog post. Especially when it comes down to the facts that our nation has yet to elect a president that has taken up the reins when it comes to truly effecting change that will not only benefit our earth, but also women. However, when reading the Warren piece I found myself interpreting the connection between nature and women a little differently. While I agree that women should not be the only ones allowed to call themselves ecofeminist, I interpreted Warren saying women are “closer to nature than men” as some what true seeing as women and nature have historically been either ignored or simple used and abused. Seeing as often times both women and nature have been viewed as not only property, but also something that can be shaped and molded in order to benefit the patriarchy.
I think that you do a good job at interperting the picture you choose. I agree that the “image involves women being part of nature not just “closer to nature than men” are.” because I think that it shows how women and nature our intertwined and both need to be liberated. I also, hope to see the change in government where women are able to prove what they can do because the men that have been running the government haven’t been doing the best job.
Love the picture you chose, where the women is is in the middle of a tree and its roots. The way you interpreted the picture was 100% the same way I interpreted it just by looking at it. It’s fascinating how much nature and women have in common and I wouldn’t even have known that. To be honest it was your blog that allowed me to understand ecofeminism a bit more and where my blog idea stemmed from. Thank you for that, I love that you linked how you interpreted the image to what Karen was saying as well. From my perspective you agreed but ALSO had your moments of disagreeing with her which allows myself and other to understand just your intake because you value her opinion but also shed light to yours. Thank you!
Hi Madison, I like your description of Ecofeminism, It helped me gain a better understanding of the overall meaning. You brought up how the environment has been going down a dark path for a very long time, the ecosystem is in danger because we are taking so much and destroying the atmosphere with so many harmful chemicals that help us with machinery which is a short term benefit. The planet is dying and we aren’t doing anything to reverse these negative effects that we’ve been causing for many years. We have a hierarchy of dominance which ties into women and how they are constantly being oppressed in this patriarchy. Your description of the image is similar to mine, the woman is connected to nature and together they both prosper and grow. I like how you connect it to women bearing a child for 9 months and the child growing and the mother is the root like a tree is to nature. Nature does serve humans. I agree, but I don’t think humans fully appreciate it, humans are draining the life that is supposed to keep them alive. Nature gives humans everything they need but they take way more than they have to and this disturbs the balance and subsequently causes consequences such as climate change, and other disruptive changes to the planet overtime. This also relates to how women are viewed as sexual objects rather than essential to life, people don’t appreciate women and just take take take, just like we take from nature. Nature is being drained just like women are being drained just for selfish benefits. I like how you mentioned women as only being advertised as bodies to be displayed for the pleasure of others. Overall this post really helped me almost fully understand what Ecofeminism is and how it relates to our daily lives, in society today.