understanding that toward the portection of >the environment, the complte elimiation of oprressive, patriarchal, >colonial, imperialistic and capitalistic, intitutional sytems of >power, is neccessary, then it is great. The expereinces of the >women leaders that I have been working with, reagrding the whole >feminist movement in United States, have been one of exclusion. As an upper middle classed, white woman I came to the feminist movement because I was a victim of sexual abuse and filed a lawsuit for sexual harassment in one instance. What I have found is that the "feminist" movement is definitely one of exclusion, that I am not accepted because I do not follow the party line - in particular that of poverty (since I worked my own way out of poverty). I am therefore excluded as many upper middle classed women are. The feminist movement is factionalized and divided and has lost much power in the U.S. I think your observations are right on the money. > > > > > > > >On Tue, 11 Nov 1997, Carolyn Gage wrote: > >> At 09:35 AM 11/11/97 -0500, you wrote: >> > It is important, in this discussion, to defien properly what is femism >> >and what are we are defining as ecofeminsm. For example, if we are >> >refering to the withe middle class feminism that has dominated the US >> >feminism movement and suportted directly and inderectly the socio-economic >> >structure of capitalism, then I do not see this kind of eco-feminism as >> >good. This is a very important discussion and it is imperative to keep >> >the dialogue. >> > >> >Carlos R.Alicea >> >> "White middle class feminism" no longer sets the agenda for the feminist >> movement in the US and hasn't for years. What an erasure of the very vocal >> and very activist women of color and working class/poverty class women >> activists! It's principle effectiveness is as a weapon for anti-feminist >> men to use in the name of multi-culturalism. Doesn't fool any of us. >> >> Carolyn Gage >> <http://www.monitor.net/~carolyn> >> > >> > >> >On Tue, 11 Nov 1997, Will Bason wrote: >> > >> >> > But, there is a very real topic here and if we don't focus on it >> >> >and get caught up in the politics of the vehicle we will be missing out. >> >> > >> >> > Green Village's are not ecofeminist societies. No one went out >> >> >of their way to take patriarchy out of their society, except maybe >> >> >lesbian communes. And even they, I would imagine must struggle. >> >> >Do these places exist and if so how did they arrange their society >> >> >differently? >> >> >And if they don't exist, how would we go about structuring a truly >> ecofeminist >> >> >society? How do translate ecofeminism to female/male relationships? >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >Cheryl Taylor >> >> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> >West Virginia University >> >> > >> >> >> >> You are right, cheryl, about there being a good topic here that we >> >> shouldn't let get "get caught up in the politics of the vehicle". >> >> >> >> I think it's safe to say that most intentional communities (IC) and >> >> all ecovillages(EV) are trying to take patriarchy out of their (and our) >> >> society or at least feel that they are involved in this struggle. Most >> >> communities have worked hard on this, but i wouldn't say its "going out of >> >> their way". I think the search for balance,and fairness, with each other >> >> and with the rest of nature, is the engine that drives the movement >> >> towards intentional community and ecologically sustainable villages. >> >> >> >> I believe that the small, largely self sufficient community will be >> >> a major componant of a future society that is true to ecological and >> >> feminist ideals. I like your term "green village" a lot better than >> >> "ecovillage", and i think we have a right to insist that any community >> >> calling itself either of these is working towards ecological and feminist >> >> ideals. >> >> >> >> Will Bason >> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> >> > >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Nov 15 13:07:52 1997 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: borders, et al To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sat, 15 Nov 1997 14:07:44 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.3.96.971114141455.15624A-100000@yoop> from "Charlotte Freeman" at Nov 14, 97 02:18:49 pm This topic came up on another list that I'm on and I thought I would add some points that came up there. Any time a person buys from a multinational corporation of any kind he or she is contributing to a decline in diversity of offerings. Something like 60 to 100 local businesses close when a WalMart moves into town. Buying from indies helps prevent the multinational corps from completely monopolizing culture. Just my two cents, Tina > I usually lurk on this list -- but as a writer, and an > independent-bookstore employee, I'd like to point out that there is a > bigger problem lurking behind the fact that the big chains are gobbling up > small independent booksellers. That is, that the buyers for the big chains > are weilding undue influence on publishers -- do we really want three or > four buyers around the country deciding what gets published? We'll wind up > in a world with no literary fiction at all ... just celebrity memoirs and > movie-tie-ins. So, by supporting your local independent bookstore, you are > also supporting free speech. > > --Charlotte > -- "Stealth is about the only defense the corporation has. Otherwise words fail them. When "Fortune" ran an article, years ago, complaining that McDonald's signs were marring the American landscape, a McDonald's executive wrote to the magazine arguing 'uninterrupted scenery, too, can get pretty monotonous.'" The Alphabet of Modern Annoyances Neil Steinberg >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Nov 16 04:17:39 1997 In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], STUDIES IN WOMEN AND ENVIRONMENT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> From: Beata Kozak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Polish wolves Date: Sun, 16 Nov 97 01:57:02 PST Dear EcoFems, this letter is from the discussion list of Polish Greens. @@@@@@@@@@@@@@ Dear Friends! On Wednesday, October 19th small demonstration will take place in the front of Polish Ministry of Nature Protection, Natural Resources and Forestry. The new government in Poland has just formed and we have new Minister of Nature Protection, Mr. Jan Szyszko. On Wednesday, we want to give him petitons with 15000 sigantures that we collected. We want Minister to make wolves in Polnad protected animals. There only few hundreds wolves in Poland,. they are protected everywhere but Bieszczady Mountains, where there are about 150 of them. This year local autorithies in Krosno set the bag limit for Bieszczady for this winter to 93 individuals!!! Imagine, 93 of about 150 wolves. It means that death of whole population. The second problem is that when wolves are not protected, local livestock breeders don't get any compensations if wolves sometimes attacks sheeps or goats. So taking wolves under protection is important also for breeders as well as for environmentalists. My organization is against hunting, but we can understand killing some individuals every year. I repeat, we are against it, cannot accept it, but we can understand that it is difficult to fully protect wolves. But we absolutely cannot agree of killing about 80% of population. Please help us save Polish wolves. Write, fax or mail to Minister of Nature Protection: Mr. Jan Szyszko Minister Ochrony Srodowiska ul. Wawelska 52/54 00-922 Warszawa, Poland phone +48 22 250001 fax +48 22 254705 !!!! very important !!!! e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] and demand wolves in Poland to be fully protected EVERYWHERE, it means that in Bieszczady (Krosno Province) also. Please forward this message to people you think that might be interested in. Thank you in the name of wolves Krzysztof A. Wychowalek "Xpert" Osrodek Dzialan Ekologicznych ZRODLA (The Center of Ecological Activities) ul. Kilinskiego 78 90-119 Lodz, Poland phone/fax +48 42 301749 http://www.most.org.pl/eco/mle/zrodla.html http://ikar.t17.ds.pwr.wroc.pl/~pga/psubraty @@@@@@@@@@@@@@
