Dear Ecofem list members, I posted a question on essentialism, and I got two kind answers from Richard Twine and Jennifer Hudson. I am posting here my opinions because, if it is allowed in this list, I would like to open a discussion on essetialism because my perception is that ecofeminism after a period of great creativity, got stuck preciselly because of the criticism of essentialism. And we need to reestate some issues to surmount this impasse.
To begin with,I would be happy to hear other voices on the ideas exchanged with Richard: R. This is usually the perception that ecofeminism says that women have an inherently closer connection to nature by virtue of child-bearing, menstruation & lactation. T. I dont believe that women have closer connection with nature, but that women as the life givers have a different biological and ecological function in nature. R.however, very few ecofeminists actually hold this view. T. I am one of the few, outdated, because I am writing on the ecology of sex. R. but it is set up as a stereotype with which to knock down ecofeminism wholesale. T. Stereotypes are created by society, the motherhood function of women was created by nature. R. but, 'motherhood' is also a social construction. T. What we can call motherhood exists in many sexual species, in primates and birds for sure. R. the way motherhood is experienced is very much down to social and power relations and not 'nature'. Remember ecofeminism T. My experience of motherhood has two sides: one is natural, I am endowed naturally to behave as a mother, and to take care of my descendents, this forms part of my biological program. The other side of it, are the social-cultural prescriptions on motherhood that I can obey or not. If there are some women that do not feel motherhood as a part of their basic biological program, it well may be natural because human variability is greater than in other species, however most women at least in developing countries, feel that motherhood is one of their most important functions. R. is anti-dualist, so you cannot separate 'society' from 'nature', at least in my opinion. T. That is precisely my point,if we cannot separate society from nature we cannot say that something is socially constructed alone, there must be biological bases for these constructs. Thanks for the interest on these topics, because I would like to explain latter, why I believe they are fundamental for feminist ends. Teresa Flores
