i believe that the book your referring to "rethinking ecofeminism" was
written by janet biehl who is comining out of the socialist greens
movement. whereas i am very suympathetic to socialists & greens, i was
apalled by janet biehl's critique of ecofeminism. i could be sarcastic
and say, "well, excuse me for having a spiritual connection to the earth"
OR "why prayer to your higher power when you can sleep with him" (NB
janet quotes her boyfriend as her ultimate proof that ecofeminsm is
irrational). i will however offer other critiques that contribute to
rather than subtract fro the ecofeminist debate. the first is "gaia and
god" by rosemary radford ruether. rosemary is a catholic femist
theologian who has participated in the ecofeminist dialogue for years and
has been antholgized in the major ecofemist collections. naomi wolfe
also quickly (and irresponsibly) critiques ecofeminism in her latest book
"fire with fire". both rosemary radford ruether and naomi wolf are less
than thrilled with "gaia" spiritulaity (rrr defends christianity against
the ecofeminist charge that christianity is a "death" cult; nw feels that
the values of ecofeminism are "non-gendered"). both rrr & nw critique
ecofeminism with the hope of promoting the feminist agenda; janet biehl's
critique of ecofeminsm reads as a trivialization of feminsm &
spirituality and as propaghanda for the socialist greens.
should reading janet biehl--absolutely not, because she has some
excellent things to say about class, labor, and resource issues. we
should, however, be aware of her political agenda just as we must be
aware that rosemary radford ruether is catholic (none of her stuff reads
like an apology for the vatican) and naomi wolfe is the self-anointed
prophetess of "i am not a feminist, but..." contingent (and frankly her
power feminism can be easily warped into male-identification). my
advice is READ EVERYTHING WITH DISCERNMENT.
PAX GAIA
On Wed, 19 Oct 1994, Monique Flannagan wrote:
> I'm new on the list and anxious for some responses to ecofem.
> criticism. In one text I have just finished reading (I think the title is
> "Rethinking Ecofeminism") claims that ecofeminism supports the status qou
> by mystifying the relationship between society and nature. She sees
> social ecology more helpful in explaining what ecofeminist have called as
> "interconnectedness" and "oneness." I too have a problem with Reisler's
> vision of the Neolithic "partnership" society and the sense that we need
> to go back to that kind of society. Doesn't embracing the Goddess seem a
> little sexist? It does to me. Anyway I feel I am throwing these gems
> out in hopes to get another discussion going (other than vegetarianism).
> Could someone, at least, suggest texts that respond to criticism
> similar to the ones above?
>
>
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Oct 20 06:15:23 MDT 1994
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Oct 20 06:15:23 1994
Received: from runningman.rs.itd.umich.edu (runningman.rs.itd.umich.edu
[141.211.144.15]) by csf.Colorado.EDU (8.6.9/8.6.9/CNS-3.5) with ESMTP id GAA01218 for
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Thu, 20 Oct 1994 06:15:21 -0600
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from um.cc.umich.edu by runningman.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.6.9/2.25)
with SMTP id IAA23898; Thu, 20 Oct 1994 08:17:49 -0400
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 94 08:13:54 EDT
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-MTS-Userid: GGDQ
Subject: Women of Color Involved in Environmental Justice Struggles
Here are a few examples of the kinds of life and death struggles that
many women of color in the U.S. face. How do these women fit into the
the ecofeminist debates and into the discussions we have had so far on
this network? D.T.
------- Forwarded message
Received: from PSUVM(MAILER) by UMICHUM(MAILER) via BITNET
with RM id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mon, 17 Oct 94 17:09:38 EDT
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from PSUVM.PSU.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@PSUVM) by PSUVM.PSU.EDU (LMail
V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 4535; Mon, 17 Oct 1994 17:06:10 -0400
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 1994 13:13:19 -0700
Reply-To: Environmental Studies Discussion List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sender: Environmental Studies Discussion List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: torres-martinez
To: Multiple recipients of list ENVST-L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 94 16:13:18 EDT
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: torres-martinez
Dear Anne Marie:
What follows is an update on the sludge situation at Torres-Martinez. I
would be interested in anyone else's thoughts as well on what to do.
Best, hal
--------- "RE: Toxic EMERGENCY" ---------
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 1994 15:05:00 EST
From: Indigenous Environmental Network <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subj: So. CA. Toxic EMERGENCY on Reservation (Press Rel)
Mailing List: NATIVE-L ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
August 16, 1994
STATE OF EMERGENCY ON THE TORRES-MARTINEZ AND CAHUILLA
RESERVATIONS - COMMUNITY MEMBERS IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
UNDER SIEGE!
ATTENTION ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE GROUPS, HUMAN RIGHTS
ORGANIZATIONS AND CONGRESSIONAL LEGISLATORS!
The Indigenous Environmental Network (IEN), on behalf of Mary Belardo,
Tribal Council Chairwoman of the Torres-Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians
of Southern California, is requesting your support on an environmental
justice issue that is impacting her community. Please refer to the
attached newspaper clippings for more information on the situation at
Torres-Martinez (T-M).
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The T-M Tribal Council, as the governing body, along with community
grassroots support, has officially adopted a Council Resolution
prohibiting sewage sludge dumping and compost processing within the T-M
Indian reservation (attached). The T-M Tribal Council, through this and
previous resolutions, have sought for the cease and desist of all
sludge dumping and processing on a tract of allotted trust lands owned
by Geraldine Ibanez, an enrolled tribal member. This tribal member has
leased her allotted land to an off-reservation, non-Indian company by
the name of Terra Farms, Inc., previously operated by Cino Corona Farms,
Inc. Terra Farms is in partnership with sludge processing companies by
the names of Pima Gro Systems, Inc. and HCK Company, Inc. These
companies process the sludge on the site into fertilizer for use on
farms and suburban gardens. The site of this sludge dump and processing
facility is located on federally-owned Indian trust property that falls
within the jurisdiction and authority of the T-M governing body.
Currently, a mountain of approximately 500,000 tons of sewage sludge is
illegally piled at the site. Tests by the local off-reservation
California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Colorado River Basin
Region 7, indicate the presence of heavy metals such as lead and
arsenic, high levels of nitrates, as well as fecal coliform bacteria
that have leached into the ground water beneath the sludge deposits.
Based upon these monitoring tests results, the Regional Board issued a
Cleanup and Abatement Order on April 28, 1994 to the operators. The
operators have ignored the order. According to the Tribal officials,
reservation members, including children, have gotten sick from the dump.
One woman is being tested at the Cedar-Sinai Medical Center in Los
Angeles for cyanide and cadmium poisoning.
Members of theT-M Tribal Council, community members, Indigenous members
of other regional Bands, concerned off-reservation residents, and
environmental organizations have formed alliances and have formed
roadblocks prohibiting trucks hauling this toxic sewage sludge onto the
reservation. Municipal sewage sludge contains materials from the
household, commercial, and industrial waste stream that contain
hazardous substances such as heavy metals, and persistent organic
chemicals. The composting processing activity that takes place there
further increases numerous health and environmental risks through the
release of fugitive dust, pathogens, metals, and certain inorganic and
organic chemicals. To our knowledge, there is no regulatory authority
and no monitoring activity on the illegal operation. It is not known if
there are management policies in place that protect the workers, the
health of the local Indigenous population and the quality of the
environment. Numerous attempts by the tribal governing body requesting
information has been ignored by the sludge operators.
The Tribal Council with active support of the grassroots community have
requested that the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and the federal
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to take enforcement action on this
illegal operation and shut them down. These lead federal regulatory
agencies have passed the buck on this situation. Catch-22 regulatory
shuffle has taken place between the BIA, and the EPA, while the health
of the people is being jeopardized each day.
Federal law requires companies doing business with reservation-based
Indigenous persons and governments to secure an approved lease from the
Secretary of the Interior. The BIA is an Interior department with
delegated responsibilities to initiate this action. Without an approved
lease, government agencies such as EPA are saying that they cannot
enforce many federal regulations, including environmental protection
laws. Terra Farms, Inc., never secured an approved lease for the sludge
dumping and processing site from the BIA. The BIA is the federal agency
that is responsible for implementing the guidelines of the National
Environmental Protection Act (NEPA). Under NEPA, any action or activity
requiring federal action (an approved lease) must undergo an
Environmental Assessment (EA) to determine whether a more comprehensive
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) would be required. No EA or EIS
was ever conducted at this toxic sludge dump!
The Torres-Martinez Tribe and the Indigenous support group California
Indians for Cultural and Environmental Protection (CICEP), which is an
IEN alliance group, have been meeting with the regional EPA and local
area BIA officials. CICEP has reported to IEN that these federal
agencies have not taken appropriate action to their requests for
immediate enforcement action to close the toxic sludge facility and to
remediate prompt clean-up. The EPA is reluctant to enforce existing
federal laws regarding toxic dumping and claim that enforcement at T-M is
a gray area.
The CICEP members have video tapes of public meetings whereby the BIA
and EPA have been promoting T-M and other local tribal reservation
governmental leaders to become toxic dumping and processing vendors.
These tapes show BIA officials denying any authority to stop the dumping
activities and in the same breath, generously offering assistance to the
Tribes if they desire to develop their own regulatory program to allow
sludge dumping on their land.
SIMILAR SITUATIONS ON OTHER NEARBY INDIGENOUS RESERVATIONS
IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
The Cahuilla Band of Indians, located at Anza, California has been
trying to stop the operation of a toxic waste dump for the past couple
years. The Candelaria Land Company (owned by a Cahuilla tribal member)
has been accepting hydrocarbon contaminated soil, sewage sludge and
possibly other unknown toxic materials on assigned tribal lands under
the direction of tribal members, Lois Candelaria and Dee Alvarez. Rose
Ann Hamilton, previous tribal council chairperson took a strong
leadership role in attempting to stop the illegal operation. Because of
Rose Anns active role speaking out against the toxic dump, the
Candelaria and Alverez family managed to organize a tribal council
takeover and voted Rose Ann from the chairperson office. Rose Ann and
supporters contend that the action was illegal, yet the BIA recognized
the takeover action.
The Candelaria Land Company, also known as Candelaria Environmental
Company (CEC) is still operating. Recently obtained trucker manifests
indicate some contaminated soil is coming from the Camp Pendleton
military base. Actual levels of contaminated soils are unknown. Rose
Ann has received death threats as recently as last Thursday, August 4,
1994.
The Soboba Indian reservation has a history of accepting hazardous
waste. In 1991, RANPAC, Inc., paid $1.2 million in civil and criminal
penalties for dumping soil contaminated with lead on the reservation.
The RANPAC case began in 1990 when it paid a hazardous waste carrier to
haul soils off of land purchased for apartment development to the Soboba
reservation. The soil went to the Tribal Chairman, Robert Salgados
land site and he was paid thousands of dollars. Over 220 trucks
traveled 26 miles each to dump soil at the Soboba reservation. In 1994,
BIA staff observed medical waste being dumped at the reservation. The
latest happenings are that Ernie Salgado, brother of Robert, is pursuing
a waste recycling center.
The Los Coyotes Band of Mission Indians for the past couple years has
been trying to build a toxic waste landfill that would service the
regional area. The landfill is proposed by Chambers Development
Corporation of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Tribal members are opposed to
this planned activity. The Chambers company has promised $2 million or
more of income per year to be distributed or used as the Band decides,
in addition to developing a scholarship fund, assistance in developing
housing, building a cultural center, and providing jobs.
The Campo Indian reservation is one of the first Indian tribes in the
nation that has built and obtained federal government approval to site a
commercial waste dump on their tribal lands. The Campo Indian tribe has
developed a partnership with Mid-American Waste Systems, from Illinois.
Mid-American is a partner with the transnational corporation, Waste
Management, Inc.
Cabezon Band of Mission Indians operate a waste incinerator with the
type of material that they receive is unknown (request for information
is refused by the operators), and operated a U.S. governmental military
training ground for Central American right-wing armies. A private non-
Indigenous company that manages these Cabezon operations has been
reported to have ties to organized crime. Tribal members that have
spoken out against these business dealings have been threatened with de-
enrollment from the tribe.
STATE OF EMERGENCY IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
The situation at Torres-Martinez is at a critical state. Last Saturday,
August 6, 1994, Michael Hamilton, a 14 year old tribal member of the
Cahuilla reservation was killed by two bullets to the head. The killing
is under very suspicious circumstances. This youth is a member of the
Hamilton family that has maintained a long-term opposition to illegal
dumping activities on the 4 reservations in the area. These
reservations are the Ramona, Torres-Martinez, Cahuilla, and Soboba
reservations. Michael is the nephew of Rose Ann Hamilton.
Questionable elections have ousted tribal leaders, replacing them with
owners and beneficiaries of the dump operations. Rose Ann Hamilton, the
ousted Chairwoman of the Cahuilla reservation has received numerous
death threats.
The local sheriffs department have done little to investigate the death
of Rose Anns nephew. Witnesses say the sheriffs beat the boys
father, Manuel Hamilton, who is the Chairman of the Ramona reservation.
He was jailed on charges of arson and interfering with the
investigation. Manual had received an anonymous telephone call
informing him that his son was shot. Upon his arrival to the Ibanez
home he grabbed his sons body, held on to him, and out of grief, didn't
want to let go. The sheriffs fought with him over his sons body. When
he refused to release his son, the sheriffs mace him and beat him up.
His son was at the house of the Ibanez family (who operates the Torres-
Martinez sludge dump). The Ibanez family are saying that the youth
committed suicide, despite two bullets in the head.
Please note that Manual Hamilton, as the Chairperson of the Ramona
rancheria, was approached by the City of San Diego and the BIA in a
previous meeting to take sewage sludge and informed by the BIA official
that it was a lucrative business. He spoke out against toxic dumping
activities on local reservations.
On August 7, 1994, the house of Marina Ortega, of CICEP, was subjected
to a siege by automatic weapon fire during the night that her daughter
and infant grandchild were inside their home. The local sheriffs
refused to respond. The life of people is at stake at Torres-Martinez
and Cahuilla reservations. There is no justice to the Indigenous people
that are standing in defense of their Indigenous rights to a safe and
healthy environment. The Indigenous People of Southern California
demand Environmental Justice!
The Torres-Martinez Tribal Council and Grassroots Members have
already had many meetings with the Region 9 EPA Officials and the
Southern California BIA Agency and the Sacramento BIA Area Officials-
WITH NO ACTION!
There have been numerous Indigenous and non-Indigenous citizen
actions to form blockades preventing the trucks from entering the
dumping area!
Orange County, Los Angeles County and Antioch in the Bay Area and
others are renting Indigenous Sovereignty by contracting their
wastes to our lands!
THE TORRES-MARTINEZ AND CAHUILLA PEOPLE ARE FED UP WITH THE
LIES, DECEIT, AND LIP SERVICE OF THE REGIONAL EPA AND AREA
BIA OFFICIALS!
SUPPORT THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLE OF TORRES-MARTINEZ, CAHUILLA,
RAMONA, AND SOBOBA RESERVATIONS TO HAVE A DIRECT MEETING
WITH FEDERAL AGENCY ADMINISTRATORS OF THE INTERIOR
DEPARTMENT, THE EPA, AND THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT!
WRITE LETTERS TO THE FOLLOWING INDIVIDUALS REQUESTING THAT THE
FEDERAL AGENCIES TAKE TOP-LEVEL AND IMMEDIATE ACTION TO INTERVENE ON
THIS VERY EXPLOSIVE SITUATION BEFORE MORE PEOPLE GET HURT.
REQUEST THAT THE TOP ADMINISTRATIVE HEADS OF THE EPA, JUSTICE
DEPARTMENT AND THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR IMMEDIATELY MEET WITH
THE TORRES-MARTINEZ TRIBAL COUNCIL AND CONCERNED MEMBERS OF THE
RESERVATIONS.
CALL ATTENTION FOR THE PRESIDENTIAL EXECUTIVE ORDER ON ENVIRONMENTAL
JUSTICE BE CARRIED OUT!
TOXIC WASTE COMPANIES ARE TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THE LACK OF
ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATORY INFRASTRUCTURES IN INDIGENOUS TERRITORIES!
ASK FOR A CONGRESSIONAL HEARING TO BE SCHEDULED ON THIS SITUATION
THAT ALLOWS TOXIC WASTE DUMPING IN THE SACRED LANDS OF INDIGENOUS
PEOPLE!
CONTACT:
Rep. Bill Richardson Secretary Bruce Babbitt
Chairman/House US Dept of Interior
Subcommittee on Native American Affairs 1849 C Street NW
2349 RHOB Washington, DC 20240
So Capitol St & Independence Av SE 202/208-3100
Washington, DC 20515
202/225-6190 fax 202/225-1950 Administrator Carol Browner
US EPA
Senator John McCain 401 M. Street SW
111 SROB Washington, DC 20460
Constitution & Delaware Ave NE 202/260-2090
Washington, DC 20510
202/224-2235 Fax 202/228-8938 Janet Reno
US Attorney General
Rep. George Miller Department of Justice
Attn: Steve Lanich Constitution Ave & 10th St
2205 RHOB Washington, DC 20530
S Capitol St & Indep SE 202/514-2000
Washington, DC 20515
President Bill Clinton
Brian Burke 1600 Pennsylvania Ave
Domestic Policy Council Washington, DC 20500
Old Executive Ofc Bldg 202/456-1414
Washington, DC 20501
Senator Daniel Inouye
Kathleen McGinty Chairman/Select Committee
Director & Deputy Assistant on Indian Affairs
to the President for Environmental Policy 722 Senate Hart Ofc Bldg
Office on Environmental Policy Constitution Ave & 2nd St NE
1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW Washington, DC 20510
Washington, DC 20500 202/224-3934 fax 202/224-6747
202/456-1111
Ada Deer
Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs
US Dept of Interior
1849 C St NW
Washington, DC 20240
202/208-3171
____________________________________________________________
Send letters of support to :
Mary Belardo
Chairwoman, The Torres-Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians
66-725 Martinez Rd
Thermal, CA 92274
619/397-0300 fax 619/397-8146
For more info, contact: California Indians for Cultural & Environmental
Protection, Star Route Mesa Grande, Santa Ysabel, CA 92070 Phone/fax
619/782-3703 or
IEN National Office 218/751-4967 fax 218/751-0561
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Oct 21 05:20:58 MDT 1994
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Oct 21 05:20:57 1994
Received: from runningman.rs.itd.umich.edu (runningman.rs.itd.umich.edu
[141.211.144.15]) by csf.Colorado.EDU (8.6.9/8.6.9/CNS-3.5) with ESMTP id FAA02609 for
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Fri, 21 Oct 1994 05:20:57 -0600
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from um.cc.umich.edu by runningman.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.6.9/2.25)
with SMTP id HAA02629; Fri, 21 Oct 1994 07:23:28 -0400
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 94 07:22:20 EDT
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-MTS-Userid: GGDQ
Subject: Responding to Critiques of Ecofeminism
This is a comment on two posts. The first - [EMAIL PROTECTED]'s
response to someone's call for a discussion on Biehl's book. I think
we could find a better way of critiqueing other people's work and work
that might not agree with our viewpoint without resorting to insulting
comments about the scholar's sexuality and sexual orientation. There
has been numerous posts on this network in which derogatory comments
have been made about heterosexuality and heterosexuals. Are we to assume
that these comments will continue to appear in posts and people
will deem such comments ok?
An alternative way to deal with Biehl's comment is to take them point
by point and refute them with evidence. She hasn't committed any
scholarly crime by quoting her partner -- numerous people have done so.
Until the points she makes is discussed with respect and refuted (if
possible) then simply resorting to dismissing her and discussing her
sexuality and her political agenda won't be an adequate response. It
certainly was not an adequate response to the question posed.
This raises the question, though, are critics of ecofeminism dismissed
out of hand or is there place in ecofeminism to discuss (and learn) from
these criticisms?
Another point - there has been an undertone on this network from the
very beginning; it is an undertone that assumes that lesbian/gay
vegetarian/vegan is the norm and heterosexuals, non-vegetarians (we
could probably add non-white, working-class or lower-class to this list)
are the OTHER. It has been interesting to look at the discussions about
the food at the conference (there has been more discussion about the food
than the agenda) has been discussions that assumes a lesbian-vegetarian
norm and everyone else are peripheral players whose interests are not
central to the discussion.
If the discussions on this net are any indication of ecofeminism in action
I would like to know who will ecofeminism attain UNITY IN DIVERSITY?
What does this phrase mean and how will it be achieved in a practical
sense? Given the conversations on this net, how is this different from
unity by tyranny?
The questions of attaining unity in diversity is also relevant to the
post regarding Eisler's book advocating goddess worship and a partnership
society. Again, how is unity in diversity attained through such visions.
Most people in the world (people of color) cannot trace an ancestry that
conveniently freezes itself in time in Neolithic culture. Many people
worship Father Gods. Are these people simply dismissed from Eisler's
version of the future society or are their experiences respected?
I raise these questions because it is unclear whether ecofeminism is a
movement of a club. If it is movement, then questions of diversity,
recruitment of new members, framing issues and messages, organizing
campaigns, etc. become important and vital to the growth and strength
of the organization.
Although ecofeminists critique the traditional environmental movement
and other sectors of the radical green movement, they comprise one of
the most segregated parts of the environmental movement. My question
is: Is this by design, is it desirable that ecofeminism remain a
middle-class, white women's movement? If this is not the case, why
is there so much reluctance to discuss diversity in realistic ways?
How then does the movement retain its integrity and be attractive to
women and men who are not white and middle-class? What are the implications
for ecofeminism if it chooses to remain a white-middle class women's
movement? How will racial, social-class, sexual, and gender diversity
change this movement?
DT
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Oct 21 12:41:05 MDT 1994
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Oct 21 12:41:05 1994
Received: from uu9.psi.com (uu9.psi.com [38.145.107.9]) by csf.Colorado.EDU
(8.6.9/8.6.9/CNS-3.5) with SMTP id MAA04210 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Fri, 21 Oct
1994 12:40:59 -0600
Received: from wri.org by uu9.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.071791-PSI/PSINet) via SMTP;
id AA26439 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Fri, 21 Oct 94 14:47:48 -0400
Received: from smtpgate id: 2EA809D2.FBB
(WordPerfect SMTP Gateway V3.1a 04/27/92)
Received: from earth (WP Connection)
Received: from TCPBRIDGE (WP Connection)
Received: from HOBBES (WP Connection)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mmdf-Warning: Parse error in original version of preceding line at earth.wri.org
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mmdf-Warning: Parse error in original version of preceding line at earth.wri.org
Subject: Re:ecofeminist critique
Date: Fri Oct 21 14:34:58 1994
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I'm responding to Dorceta's comments that the "lavender menace"
has invaded the ecofeminist discussion list. Lesbianism is the
norm for quite a few women and I fail to see how their treating
it has such constitutes "heterosexism". Yuck. The very concept of
which connoted, to me, all the whining about reverse racism &
sexism, the formation of white student unions, a group called
"the normal people" marching in a gay parade. Oh the poor put
upon white, straight people.
Also, critiqueing heterosexual constructs is not heterosexism. It
stands on one of the strongest, most interesting and most
problematic theories of feminism - the personal is political. I
would argue the same tradition of examining personal lives in a
political context encompasses the vegan/veggie debate.
And anyway, why should anyone care if the discussions contain or
are articulated from a marginal viewpont? Again, that is one of
the cruxes of feminist critiques, marginalized voices etc...
Paige
