Hello Everyone!
@-#-@-#-@-#-@-#-@-#-@-#-@-#-@-#-@-#-@-#-@-#-@-#
I recently subscribed to PNEWS, a so-called radical news listserv that is
overwhelming and broad (too broad 50-60 messages a day!). However, the
following quotes posted were interesting:
"There has also been a growing awareness of class issues, a recognition that
in the women's liberation movement, some women are more equal than others.
This has not necessarily translated into an understanding of the nature of
class society, and even less to an adoption of a winning strategy for the
movement"
"The influence of French feminist and linguistic theory on women's studies
curricula in Australian universities has been enormous. Women students eager
to explore the reasons for the oppression of women in our society have been
attracted to a seemingly radical and powerful methodology which sees reality
as a linguistic and/or individual construct,... probably related to, the
popular New Age concept that one can, as an individual, heal one's life by
simply thinking and speaking about it differently....What is presented is not
a strategy but an anti-strategy, a reason for feminists not to act publically
but to act internally."
These two quotes interest me because of the dual nature of ecofeminism's
reputation.
On one side I have read that ecofeminism is new-age, witch-related, elitist
and emotional to the point of being untranslatable. Obviously I do not
subscribe to this view.
On the other, I have sensed that the movement is inclusive, populist, and
veering away from the language-oriented arguments of campus feminism toward a
method of empowerment that is uniquely about regaining ecological balance -
far more positive and action oriented than endless circles of language
correction, and yet still addressing the overall problems of a patriarchical
society.
How do you all feel about the reputation of ecofeminism? Do you feel that it
ought to be addressed? Is the movement united enough to define itself? Should
it bother? I am curious.....meow
Kim
