Dear Toni;
You might consider reading the book entitled "Myths of Gender"by
Anne Sterling-Faustino. I think . The author is a trained biologist who
points out the fallacious thinking and biased interpretations of the studies
you mentioned. I believe that the way we talk to and touch our children
communicate to them that there is a difference between the way our
society perceives males and females. I don't know what the official
word is on ecofeminist praxis but *I* do not believe that the differences,
if there are any, are significant. Such thinking is essentialist and
has implications that I find troublesome if not frightening. As soon
as essential differences are assumed, there follows a ranking or
hierarchy, a division of us\them. Women always come out on the
bottom wrung. The author was also recently on a television
documentary. I only caught a few minutes of it. I also recently
read "The Brain Has No Sex?" I may have the titles and or quthors
mixed up. I'll check it out tonight. One of the two books is
slightly more essentialist.
Peace,
Carolyn Feser On Tue, 2 Jul 1996, Toni Withers wrote:
> Hi
> As a different note from the vegetarian subject....
>
> I am unclear about an aspect of ecofeminism. Is one of ecofeminisms main
> premises an acceptance of the biological differences inherent between men
> and women ?
> Or if I call myself an ecofeminist, am I supposed to believe that women and
> men are so very much the same that any apparent differences have resulted
> from our psycho-social upbringing in a society tainted by a patriarchy in
> many areas. ?
>
> Because I have been reading a book that summarises all the very recent
> scientific findings about the structural and functional differences that
> have been found between the average male and female brain.
> They explain how the different hormones present in the mothers womb direct
> the foetus's brain to develop significantly differently bewteen baby boys
> and girls, and how these differences probably direct many of the different
> abilities and types and personalities in adults of opposing sexes.
> Its very interesting.
> And I can't help thinking that ecofeminism should probably be acknowledging
> these differences also, as part of recognising the tendency for women to be
> nurturing and compassionate towards animals and the environment, which may
> be more common than it is in men.
>
> Or does ecofeminism believe differences in status, type and personality
> between the sexes are purely a result of a past history of male domination
> and patriarchy..?
> Am i right in thinking this is an importance point for ecofeminism ??
>
> I'd appreciate alittle feedback
>
> Toni Withers
>
> CRC for Tropical Pest Management
> Queensland
> Australia
>
>
>
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jul 2 09:21:34 1996
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 1996 16:21:07 BST
From: Richard Twine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Ooops...
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I didn't want to enter this thread but...........
This list has seen many veggie debates, check the past threads
on the web.....
I can sympathise with Amy's rant but....
-I was shocked to see you list anti-abortionism with all the rest,
and how come no one else has picked up on this, was it a mis-print??
-secondly the rant was highly individualistic, ethical consumerism
is to be supported and lived BUT it only goes so far, it is working within
the framework which we want to change, therefore it is sadly piecemeal.
Re-Stephen's comment on human's natural omnivorous state. I quite
agree but........
Don't you think that this provides a beautiful moral opportunity???
That is, not to eat nonhuman animals. Animals feel pain, I don't think
plant life does - what else needs to be said?????Also you talked about the
monthly consumption of seafood and how this reminds you of your place
in nature and the recycling of matter - one point - there is natural death and
enforced death.........Doesn't eating plant life serve this purpose for you just
as well?
My distinction between animals and plants is dichotomy rather than dualism!
Thoughts~feelings.....
Richard :-)
