>On Thu, 11 Jan 1996, Linda Tyler wrote:
>
>> Karen J. Warren offers an interesting definition:
>Aren't these the links that we vegetarians/vegans tried to point out to
>you, over and over again?! There are _obvious_ links between the eating of
>meat (hence the degradation of animals and the environment) and the
>oppression of women. Not eating meat is an ecofeminist motivated
>political action. To continue to eat meat, although comprehending (or not
>comprehending, as it may be) the correlation between the oppression of
>animals and the environment by eating meat and the oppression of women,
>is to ignore principles central to ecofeminist philosophy. That in turn
>would make you a token ecofeminist because you are unwilling to give up
>the _convenience_ of eating meat for the sake of the environment and/or
>ecofeminism. If you really care about the environment, you have to make
>some sacrifices, and giving up the consumption of meat is really the
>easiest way of expressing your compassion/empathy.
Now thats scary! And a bit condesending too. It sounds like the stuff
shoved at you in polisci. I may be afeminist but I sure don't see myself as
oppressed. I'm on top of things most of the time. Its easy. men can't even
figure it out. Just do it! Thats my approach. I like the enviroment like
anybody but that doesnt mean giving up meat. Its as silly as saying if your
a feminist you have to give up sex...with men anyway. Express
compassion/empathy by not littering, wise use of things and cleaning up the
water. Being a ecofeminist should mean having a life , a full life, not
some sacrifice-look-at-me-suffering sort of existence.
Betty (Elizabeth if you like)
