To Mary - no, I don't think *WE* (environmentalists - whatEVER we
want to call ourselves) get "too hung up on human relationships,"
but I think OTHERS do.....
To me there is not really a distinction - the environment is certainly
a part of *ME*, therefore, it is most assuredly a part of ANY human
(or animal) relationship I might have! If others think they escape
this "partnership," they are simply not in tune with themselves (or
nature...)
Jackie
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jul 25 20:12:41 1995
by VAXF.COLORADO.EDU (PMDF V5.0-3 #8140)
25 Jul 1995 19:17:23 -0600 (MDT)
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 1995 20:50:13 -0400 (EDT)
From: Toshihide Hamazaki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: deep ecology and ecofem
In-reply-to: "25 Jul 1995 10:45:50 -0600 from" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (CST)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sometimes criticisms goes beyond what an author have never imagined. Sara's
criticisms on deep ecology is partially true. Deep ecology focuses on criticis
ms of anthrpocentrism and propose bio or eco centrism. Because of this, deep
ecology does not pay attention to gender issue. In a way, both male-centerdnes
s and female-centerdness are anthropocentric.
I do not think that the usage of "man" in the Bill Devaul's book means "male
only". In fact, "man" is still a generic term for "male and female" in English
.. And I also refer their quatation of 15 people as their limited knoweldge of
information source, not sexist.
As a person from Japan, I see most of the discussions are nothing
but "Euro-centric" because nobody have ever mentioned great literature in Easte
rn traditions which has long history of environmental ethics. So, am I right
to call most of the ecofeminists in this list as "Euro-centric"? Or should I
call them "ignorant of Eastern thought"? Are ecofmeres in this list should be
blamed of their "Euro-centrism"?
Human capacity and selection of information is limited by her surrounding envi
ronment. In a way, everyone is biased. It's easy to criticise somebody based
on her/his biassed writing, but it's diffidult to realise that we are all biass
ed. Let's admit it and start constructive criticisms rather than negative
criticisms.
Toshihide Hamazaki
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Jul 26 02:59:56 1995
id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 26 Jul 1995 21:06:28 +1200
; 26 Jul 95 21:04:07 +1200
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 1995 21:03:32 +1200
From: LORIETTE MORRIS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: deep ecology and ecofem
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Organization: Lincoln University
Kia ora e te whanau
>Sara wrote:... I also found disturbing in this text a consistent
>construction of the earth as female/mother/nurturer, a mindlessly
>romantic notion that, IMO, doesn't stand up to even the most
>superficial scrutiny.
Well I've never been accused of being a romantic:), mindless (yes,
sometimes when I've had too much sambuca). But isn't this
being abit Euro-centric... sorry don't take offense, but what do you
mean by the earth as female/mother/nurturer as a *mindlessly romantic
notion*?
Maori wahine/women/womyn/... especially wahine who celebrate mana
wahine believe that Papatuanuku/mother earth is the source of our
spirituality, strength and mana. When we are born our
whenua/placenta is buried to symbolise our connections with
Papatuanuku; when we karanga/bring visitors onto our sacred
marae/meeting place, we bring the spiritual world up to the world of
the living (the men have their whaikorero/oratory where they bring
the spiritual world of the heavens down to the world of the living...
my mother always says that they walk around with their heads in the
clouds:), the bringing together of the two elements of spirituality
lead to kotahitanga/unity. Without kotahitanga we have an
imbalance; when we die, we are buried within Papatuanuku and our
spirits rest with Hine-nui-te-po/great goddess of the underworld.
>From YOUR point of view that may sound *mindless romantic*, but it is
my tradition, this belief/vision has helped me grow and love myself as
wahine/woman (we all know that society today gives wahine/women very
little to be proud of, especially wahine/women of colour like
myself). Please don't try and belittle something that we have fought
so hard to hang onto. It's bad enough some of our bloody men keep
chopping and changing traditions to suit them and their boys club
(that's another story).
>In fact, it always burns me when ecofeminism is perceived by non-
>ecofeminists as somehow celebrating the woman/nature connection
>when my reading has shown me that ecofem is, in part, about
>deconstructing that notion.
>
Why are only wahine/women connected with nature? I thought tane/men
were too? Maybe I haven't read the right books (help Stef!). Thanks
Sara for giving me something to think and write about.
Naku noa ano me te aroha
Nellie
********************************************
Loriette NELLIE Morris
Centre for Resource Management
Lincoln University
majoring in: trying to work out how to do a Phd.
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Jul 26 07:16:48 1995
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 95 08:19:46 CDT
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Shawn Boeser)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: deep ecology and ecofem
I believe the primary difference between deep ecology and
ecofeminism is that ecofeminist theory has surpassed deep
ecology. Deep ecology (DE) has had many important contributions to
environmental ethics, ecofeminism has simply built on those
contributions. Just as radical environmentalism built on
theories of early conservationists like Leopold, Muir, Abbey,
etc.; ecofeminism has applied radical or socialist feminist
critiques to radical environmentalism and, in doing so, has
corrected for some of the mistakes of its predecessors or
contemporaries.
The main problem ecofeminists have with DE is that it's not
feminist. It doesn't take into consideration the systems whereby
all women, men of color, working-class or impoverished men,
queer men, differently abled men, non-human animals, wilderness,
etc. are all oppressed. Without addressing these interconnections, DE
is incomplete. In a sense one could say they value on oppression
over all others and, in doing so, they will be unsuccessful in
ending the oppression of non-human nature.
This is where over-population fits in. I don't believe ecofeminists
have neglected the issue, it's simply a symptom of larger social
and economic problems--social injustice and capitalist consumption to
name two.
Many DE's are excellent environmental activists, some of whom are women.
Ecofeminist theorists and activists find it hard to work in "environments"
with some of these sexist, racist, specieist men and women. Ecofeminists
are raising these issues. And, personally I'd rather spend my time doing
activism than arguing but, it must be done.
Shawn
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Jul 26 07:21:23 1995
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 95 08:24:21 CDT
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Shawn Boeser)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Contextual Ethics
I'd like to comment on some issues raised by Nellie and Toshihide.
According to Nellie, in her culture the concept of "earth as mother" is
central to individual identity. Ecofeminist ethics are contextual
for this very reason; perceptions vary from one culture to the next.
It's not o.k., in my opinion, for women of other cultures to tell
Nellie that her culture is sexist. Many women with European cultural
identities do have a problem with the "earth as mother" concept because
in their culture women and nature have been denigrated. They find this
analogy offensive. These are two valuable experiences and each should
be considered.
Toshihide raises another issue about ecofeminism being "western centered".
I believe she is correct. I think that I'm ignorant of eastern environ-
mentalism. I've largely rejected eastern and western spirituality because
I believe most religions are too sexist for me to stomach. But just as
radical environmentalists have learned from sexist white men, like Edward
Abbey, so too can we take lessons from others who are not feminist. I am
a Euro-American woman and have been very happy to see women and men of other
cultures on this list. I'd love to just listen to non-Euro women's views
on ecofeminism for awhile. I also wish for ecofeminist literature to be
less dominated by Euro-women. Nellie and Toshihide: ever think of submitting
articles for publication?
Shawn
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Jul 26 09:30:09 1995
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 1995 10:32:21 -0500 (CDT)
From: Kathryn Brasier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: deep ecology and ecofem
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date sent: 26-JUL-1995 10:24:56
hi! i've been a lurker for quite a while but i have to jump in now and
ask a question about this latest discussion of deep ecology and ecofeminism.
most of the posts i've seen have criticized deep ecology for ignoring
systems of oppression, particularly as related to the oppression of women
(see the snip below). ecofeminism recognizes systems of oppression,
especially of women, but also domination in general. what separates
ecofeminism from social ecology, which also examines the ways in which
humans dominate each other and the environment?
>I believe the primary difference between deep ecology and
>ecofeminism is that ecofeminist theory has surpassed deep
>ecology. Deep ecology (DE) has had many important contributions to
>environmental ethics, ecofeminism has simply built on those
>contributions. Just as radical environmentalism built on
>theories of early conservationists like Leopold, Muir, Abbey,
>etc.; ecofeminism has applied radical or socialist feminist
>critiques to radical environmentalism and, in doing so, has
>corrected for some of the mistakes of its predecessors or
>contemporaries.
>
>The main problem ecofeminists have with DE is that it's not
>feminist. It doesn't take into consideration the systems whereby
>all women, men of color, working-class or impoverished men,
>queer men, differently abled men, non-human animals, wilderness,
>etc. are all oppressed. Without addressing these interconnections, DE
>is incomplete. In a sense one could say they value on oppression
>over all others and, in doing so, they will be unsuccessful in
>ending the oppression of non-human nature.
>
kjb
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kathryn Brasier Office: (414) 424-1460/2030
Dept. of Sociology Fax: (414) 424-7428
University of Wisconsin Oshkosh Home: (414) 231-2665
Oshkosh, Wisconsin 54901 Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Jul 26 12:44:28 1995
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Golden)
Subject: Info on Mumia nat'l e-mail lists (fwd)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 95 11:46:29 PDT
Forwarded message:
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 1995 08:14:20 -0400
Reply-To: Progressive News & Views List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sender: Progressive News & Views List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: PNEWS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Info on Mumia nat'l e-mail lists
From: Mark Dickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: 23 Jul 1995 14:05:15
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Recipients of conference <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Info on Mumia nat'l e-mail lists
From: Paul Steven Lefrak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent from an antifascist list I'm on (if you want more info about that,
e-mail me). It has e-mail addresses for the major Mumia lists and if you
got on those, more folks could get on the freemumia2 list and get the
other info direct.
Paul
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|| ANTIFA-L: Saturday, July 22, 1995 ||
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dear Comrades,
It is almost impossible to keep up with the incredible work being
done by groups across the country and throughout the world, of
those working to stop the racist execution of Mumia Abu-Jamal. I
would strongly urge ANTIFA-L subscribers to contact: Arm The
Spirit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> the Prison Activist Resource Center (PARC)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> for updates and to subscribe to their
incredible e-lists. It is literally beyond the capacity of one
person (namely, yours truly!) to post all the information on what
we can do to save Mumia's life, which is why I urge you to
subscribe to these lists.
in struggle,
Tom Burghardt (BACORR)
*****************************************************************
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 95 12:48:17 -0700
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: National Demonstration and Lobbying Day
Call for National Demonstration and Lobbying Day in Washington,
D.C. at the Justice Department
August 1 and 2 (Tuesday and Weds)
Get the Word out! Everyone To Washington D.C.
Let Attorney General Janet Reno Know that we hold her accountable
for Mumia Abu Jamal's life. The coalition in NYC decided on
friday, after realizing that things not only had to move more
quickly in response to judge sabo's obvious attempts to drag out
the proceeding until as close to the 17th as possible and the
fact that they can still execute Mumia on the 17th if no stay is
granted even if he still has appeals in court (this is obviously
why ridge signed the warrant even though he knew that Mumia was
appealing for a new trial) There is little hope that Mumia will
get relief from Pennsylvania and it is of the utmost importance
to put pressure on attorney general janet reno and the federal
goverment.
Attorney General Janet Reno
Main Justice Building
10th and Consitution Ave.
Washington DC 20053
phone (202) 514-2001
fax (202) 514-0468
Also, it is important for people internationally to target U.S.
embassies, etc.to let the Clinton Administration know that the
world is wathcing what he does on this too.
President Clinton
The WHite House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington DC 20500
phne (202) 456-1111
fax (202) 456-2461
Let your Congressperson know They Must Not Let Mumia Die!
Sponsored by the Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition - New York City
For More Information - (212)330-8029
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
++++ stop de execution of Mumia Abu-Jamal ++++
++++ if you agree copy these lines to your sig ++++
++++ see http://www.xs4all.nl/~tank/spg-l/sigaction.htm ++++
--
Michael Golden
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Department of Biology
Grossmont College
8800 Grossmont College Drive
El Cajon, CA 92020
619-465-1700 x332
