At 10:09 12/3/96 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>I thought we were talking about "e-mail" junk-mail, which
>I think I am correct to say does not actually use paper,
>unless one is stupid enough to actually print it out.
Richard ......... this is true, tho' it was never made clear in the
original posting ... or yours for that matter.
>However, such junk on the e-mail is also a waste of energy.
Indeed it is!
>My comment was just about the lack of discussion on ecofeminism
>on this list. But maybe that's cos this is a 'Women and the
>Environment' list rather than an ecofeminist one???
I think the lack of discussion has to do with many things ... one
of them is related to the nature of the net, and the people on it.
While womyn are on the net, many of us tend not to be as interested
in extended discussions in an abstract way as the men are. For
myself, if it doesn't relate to what I'm doing in the world I might
read it but I'm not likely to respond to it. On the other hand
many of the men I know on the net feel some sort of obligation to
respond to everything that crosses their email-box.
Another reason for lack of discussion has to do with, on the part
of womyn, being just a wee bit uptight about being "flamed" on the
net ... it can even inhibit one from making a post just because you
don't want to be attacked for what you believe.
The bottom line is this: the net is a microcosm of the world at
large and if one really wants truely insightful discussions online
then it will be necessary for many people to learn new ways of
communicating. I for one am a radical, militant, *non-violent*,
anarchist, environmental/social justice activist and I'm a very
strong believer in building community (communually organized
housing even), and in consensus process. All of that very much
informs where I locate myself in the world and on the net. So,
what I'm trying to say here is that as long as discussions take
place with an attitude of being "right" ... or "winning" or
dominating--and many on the net are thus--there will likely be
much less discussion than you, and others, would like to see.
Hope that all made sense since I'm writing this "stream of
conciousness."
.......... Moonshadow
Thanks,
>for your comment though, Moonshadow..
>Richard.
>
>--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"When a woman seriously asks herself what it |
means to be a woman she is pulling at a | <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
thread that can unravel an entire culture." | <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| http://www.persephone.org/
Kim Chernin - "Reinventing Eve" |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
My PGP Public Key can be found at: http://www.persephone.org/PGPKEY.shtml/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Dec 4 04:06:39 1996
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 1996 11:03:19 GMT
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Coping with Junk Mail
Thanks again for your response, Moonshadow. For sure there are many
reasons for the lack of _discussion_ on this discussion list. For
example, if I lived in an actual community of real (ie fleshy people,
though I am not denying your existence!?!) ecofeminists I would be
spending less time here, but living in London one does not encounter
(m)any ecofeminists.
I would like to disagree with you though on what you said about
the net being a microcosm of society. The net has pockets within it which
hopefully allow some alternative viewpoints to be expressed. I would like to
think that the men on this list are aware of the ecofeminist critiques of
dualism, and thus can hardly be criticised for being abstract, distanced
and unemotional. You can homogenise men if you want, but this is inconsistent
with ecofeminist politics since Plumwood (1993), for example, identifies
homogenisation as a key element to Western dualism. I would not homogenise
'women' though many _cultural_ ecofeminists might. For some 'women' to
homogenise/essentialise 'men' is to fall into the trap which the late
Audre Lorde identified as 'using the masters' tools to dismantle the
masters' house' i.e. I don't think it works, and is hardly progressive
in forming the coalitional politics, which for me personally, is rather
crucial.
BTW, was that recent account of activism yours? I can't remember.
Anyway it would be good to hear more stories of activism, no matter how
long they are, in fact the longer the better. Such postings I would not
delete.....
Richard :-*
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Dec 4 08:05:38 1996
Organization: HEADWATERS DEAL IS **NO DEAL**! DEBT FOR NATURE -- JAIL CHARLES HURWITZ!
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 1996 07:03:04 -0800
To: STUDIES IN WOMEN AND ENVIRONMENT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: Moonshadow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: Coping with Junk Mail
At 11:03 12/4/96 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Thanks again for your response, Moonshadow.
You're welcome. :)
For sure there are many
>reasons for the lack of _discussion_ on this discussion list. For
>example, if I lived in an actual community of real (ie fleshy people,
>though I am not denying your existence!?!) ecofeminists I would be
>spending less time here, but living in London one does not encounter
>(m)any ecofeminists.
Actually, sometimes no matter where one is it is difficult to connect
with the particular community one is looking for. Unless one looks in
really obvious places, like academia and environmental organisations
for ecofeminists, or Lesbian/Gay neighborhoods (ghettos?) for queer
community, it is much more difficult to connect. My best response is
to go looking, and to look hard ... get involved at a grass roots
level ... get involved with direct action environmental groups ...
there's lots of possibilities.
> I would like to disagree with you though on what you said about
>the net being a microcosm of society. The net has pockets within it which
>hopefully allow some alternative viewpoints to be expressed.
[snip]
>and unemotional. You can homogenise men if you want, but this is inconsistent
>with ecofeminist politics since Plumwood (1993), for example, identifies
>homogenisation as a key element to Western dualism.
Actually, I was not, nor am I, homogenising anything ... what I said
is the net tends to be a microcosm of culture/society. In most of the
western world (generalizing here) our culture/society is very dualistic
and that carries over to the net. This is not to say I like it or even
support it, but rather that is what happens.
This list, for example, might have a higher than average number of men
who embody the ecofeminist approach, but this is but one list of thousands
perhaps millions on the net. And, all of those lists taken as a sum could
very well represent a dualistic, homogenised picture.
>Audre Lorde identified as 'using the masters' tools to dismantle the
>masters' house' i.e. I don't think it works, and is hardly progressive
>in forming the coalitional politics, which for me personally, is rather
>crucial.
I completely agree with you on this point ... I don't think using "the
masters' tools to dismantle the masters' house" works either. If I did,
I wouldn't be involved with Earth First! now would I? *smile* Coalition
politics is a difficult to reach goal for the simple reason that many
groups (individuals/organizations) often feel they've got more to
protect/lose than some other group ... hence they are loathe to cooperate
for fear of being cut out of the pie--so to speak. This is--I think--
largely a result of how we've internalized the patriarchal message of
*power over* others. Rather than cooperate, we are in a competition for
just a few slots in which we might be treated more equally. How do we
overcome this? I'm not entirely sure, but it is one of my goals ...
to see that the oppressed *do not* become the oppressors.
> BTW, was that recent account of activism yours? I can't remember.
>Anyway it would be good to hear more stories of activism, no matter how
>long they are, in fact the longer the better. Such postings I would not
>delete.....
Yes as a matter of fact it was! *grin* I also write ecofeminist essays
from time to time too ... and if one is relevant to this list I may well
post it here.
One of the things I find frustrating about posting such accounts to lists
such as this, is I would expect it would generate some discussion on some
level. Yet, in this case there hasn't been any ... are we all so well
informed, so much in agreement, that there are no questions about what
the struggle for Headwaters is about, or for that matter questions about
the direct action movement to save the forests, oceans, liberate animals,
etc.? It surprises me tremendously. You yourself raised the point about
lack of discussion and this is unfortunately another example of that.
Struggling for the forests and social justice ......... Moonshadow
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"When a woman seriously asks herself what it |
means to be a woman she is pulling at a | <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
thread that can unravel an entire culture." | <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| http://www.persephone.org/
Kim Chernin - "Reinventing Eve" |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
My PGP Public Key can be found at: http://www.persephone.org/PGPKEY.shtml/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Dec 4 09:47:14 1996
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 1996 08:51:15 -0800
From: Katy Barber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Coping with Junk Mail
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Moonshadow wrote:
I for one am a radical, militant, *non-violent*,
> anarchist, environmental/social justice activist and I'm a very
> strong believer in building community (communually organized
> housing even), and in consensus process.
I am also interested in consensus process--something that is talked
about a lot at the university I work and am a student at but isn't often
practiced. But as a lurker on this list and others, I wonder how
consensus methods could possibly work on the net, a space in which who
is part of the conversation isn't known, where it is easy to participate
unevenly or not at all, and where a few voices seem to dominate the
discussion (that is not a slight to those who do participate but perhaps
a criticism of those, like myself, who often don't).
How does this ongoing e-mail conversation fit into a feminist activist
framework that values inclusion and consensus?
Katy Barber
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Dec 4 13:03:58 1996
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1996 15:03:42 -0500 (EST)
From: "S.E. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: FUNDING: Carl Albert Center, U of Oklahoma
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
quit subscribe
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Dec 4 13:45:16 1996
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1996 21:53:09 +0300
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Meira Hanson)
Subject: Feminist or green?
Hi!
I've been lurking on this list for quite some time without contributing, as
I joined it to get some idea of what ecofeminism is about while writing a
paper on the subject. I wrote the paper for a under-graduate seminar on
feminist political theories and tried to combine 'green' ideas and a
feminist politics. The paper I wrote was theoretical and general, but since
writing it I have arrived at some new insights regarding local enviromental
activity.
Environmental and green issues are new to the political scene in my country
(Israel) and the movements here seem to be developing in the same form as
most extra-parliamentry movements and groups in Israel, that is, they are
all run by males.
On the other hand, feminist work is done seperately, in 'women only' groups,
of which many choose to disassociate themselves from men. As the Israeli
society is extremly male-chauvinist (not to mention militaristic), women
must either prove themselves equal and behave like men, or take the chance
of being classified as cry babies or nags, who don't understand how things
work in 'real life'.
This long introduction leads me to a current dillema: does one raise a
'feminist' flag within the green movement and risk being 'out'? Furthermore,
what should such a feminist theme say when asked what women would do
differently? In other words, would a feminist critic in this case focus on
equality issues (currently the main feminist issue in Israel and one which I
fear is doomed to fail since equality here is on male terms); or should this
feminist critic address subjects such as internal organisation and politics
of environmental groups, and risk getting caught up in an 'essentialist'
debate regarding the unique contribution of women?
I'd appreciate any insight on this from members of the list (and please
excuse any spelling mistakes I may have missed, as English is not my mother
tongue).
Meira Hanson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
