Theories Of Ecofeminism

Rachel Carson’s Man and the Stream of time possesses enlightening perspectives of nature that have been marinating in her mind for ten years. Her writing reflects upon the effects that man has on nature and the role he plays in the ever changing environment. Her sole observation is that it is man’s nature to want to conquer the world, but nature is not one to be conquered. The writer affirms that nature is an entity that must be dignified, Like English poet Francis Thompson said, “Thou canst not stir a flower without troubling of a star.” Most environmentalist would agree that nature is not stationary, we cut the trees now today, its not just the trees that disappear ten years from now. As humanity advances, we create a multitude of

In the reading “The Power and the Promise of Ecological Feminism”, the author, Karen J. Warren, explains her argument on the inevitable connection between the oppression of women and the oppression of nature. She further suggests that ecofeminism provides a framework to re envision feminism and create an environmental ethic which takes into account the connection between sexism and naturism.

This paper will begin with an exposition of the article, “Radical Environmentalism and Wilderness Preservation: A Third World Critique” written by Ramachendra Guha, a sociologist and historian involved in ecological conflict in the East and the West. In this article, he refers to American environmentalism as “deep ecology”, a modern theory founded by Arne Naess. Guha’s argues that based on a comparison of the concepts of deep ecology and other cultural environmentalisms, deep ecology is strictly rooted in American culture and thus, leads to negative social consequences when it is applied to the Third World. This argument will be achieved by first defining deep ecology and its principles.

She argues that human culture’s universal devaluation of nature and the association within all cultures of women with nature is the clue to the problem. Culture is the tool through which humans are able to ‘transcend the givens of natural existence, bend them to its purposes, control them in its interests’ and it is this ‘human ability to act upon and regulate, rather than passively move with and be moved by’ nature which Ortner considers evidence that humankind regards itself as inherently superior to our natural surroundings. She admits that this opposition is not equally clear in all societies but maintains that the universal presence of ritual practices is evidence of human awareness of our ability to manipulate the natural world. Further, woman is in all cultures viewed as closer to nature than man, Ortner postulates, due to her physiology, the social roles she is confined to as a result of her physiology and the psyche she develops through living her social role.

One common perception of nature is that it is something raw, untouched by human civilization. This point of view suggests that humans are completely separated by nature and that our cultures and technologies are in some way unnatural. However, I believe that not only are we a part of nature, but our cultures are also deeply entwined with how we view nature. In this paper, I will review Emily Martin’s The Egg and the Sperm: How Science Has Constructed a Romance Based on Stereotypical Male-Female Roles as well as Michael Pollen’s Why ‘Natural’ Doesn’t Mean Anything Anymore in order to examine how nature, culture, and power relate with each other. Martin asserts that gender stereotypes affect biologists’ description of the natural world, particularly in the human reproduction process. Pollen makes a case that nature in fact lacks any meaning yet is often used as strong rhetoric. I argue that nature is constructed through cultural values and is used for rhetorical purposes, which shows that people manipulate facts in order to gain authority.

The Western world is the dominant society with specific parameters for modernity, which understands nature-people relationships from a perspective that is grounded on human domination over the environment. Nature is regarded as a provider of resources (e.g. oil, timber, cupper, rubber, etc.) for the profit and greed of a market-based economy that seeks infinite development. Consequently, the human-nature relationships are subject-object, implying

There is an unwritten sense that the bond between man and nature is predestined. Humans may have a physical relationship with each other, but the connection with nature begins at birth. However, continuous advancements in technology, as time passes, weakens the bond between humans and nature. People have become fixated on technology and checking social media, so much that they lose touch with nature. Even though humans only need water, food, and shelter to survive, humanity has an ever growing need to innovate and improve man’s living conditions. Humans tend to think of nature as responsible for providing for humans, instead of vice versa. Today’s society lives in the fast lane, where instead of being able to enjoy leisure

Never in the history of the human species have we been in such a rapidly changing environment. Since the beginning of the industrial revolution, we have been making social, economical, scientific, and environmental changes and advancements at an unprecedented rate. Societal advancements, while much appreciated by the average Joe, have been detrimental to our environment. Every days forests are cut, rivers polluted, and once ecologically important areas are cemented over to compensate for our rapidly growing population. As the status of our natural world becomes more critical by the year it is important that we look at the driving factors and reasons for this destruction of the natural world. While pollutants and globalization are the driving

3 d) In the past the man made nature-destroying factors as DDT and acid rain made people believe that nature was sick in some way, but other areas were hopefully untainted by such illness. In the past the faith of natures essential strength convinced people that nature was not terminally ill. It is possible for man to decrease or stop acid rain. Unfortunately today "faith" is lost. Now people believe that nature will not survive the new global pollution. People have changed the atmosphere, which creates change in weather, leading to everything becoming artificial in the wilderness.

The people nowadays also abuse on what nature can provide to them. People are influenced by the western Culture, Man is more powerful and can have dominion over nature and that nature as they see become merely an instrument to satisfy human needs and wants. This kind of thinking or we can say attitude towards nature is called the “Anthropocentric Attitude”. Man reduce the value of nature as it is and it’s important because nature has made all things specifically for the sake of man and that the value of non-human things in nature is merely instrumental. An opposite thinking would be the Eastern Culture, for they value nature very well and they treat nature being one with them. This thinking or attitude is known as “Ecocentric

Ecofeminism is a multicultural perspective on the interconnectedness of social systems of domination and the domination of non-human nature. It recognizes the cultural and political links between ecology and

Miyazaki’s Nausicaa: Valley of the Wind, through analysis, show how themes, characters, and the narrative created represent ideas that push back against androcentric ideas around nature, encompassing an ecofeminist lense. Different versions of this can be seen by comparing Kushana and Nausicaa, the two woman in power, and the themes around this.

White’s thesis in The Historical Roots of our Ecological Crisis states that in order to confront the expanding environmental crises, humans must begin to analyze and alter their treatment and attitudes towards nature. The slow destruction of the environment derives from the Western scientific and technological advancements made since the Medieval time period. “What people do about their ecology depends on what they think about themselves in relation to things around them” (RON p.7). Technology and science alone will not be able to save humans until we adjust the way of thinking and suppress the old ideas of humans power above nature. Instead, we need to learn how to think of ourselves as being

The decline of the environment due to natural and human exertion is known as the degradation of the environment. The natural weather occurrences such as heavy rain, flooding, storms, earthquakes, volcanoes etc. are not administered under human control. These meteorological phenomenon’s wreak devastation on the environment from time to time causing the land to become unsuitable to cultivate. On this subject matter, the human population does not contain the power to stop the wrath of Mother Nature. Rather, we are forced to sit back and watch. Nevertheless, humans engage in a crucial role towards the degradation of the environment in which we live in. Unavoidably, the degradation of the environment is a rising and utmost worldwide subject. I accept that the root cause to environmental degradation is the excessive use of resources on our land utilized by the processes under capitalism. As Jensen wrote in Endgame, “The global industrial economy is the engine for massive environmental degradation and massive human and (nonhuman) impoverishment.

In the book, Susan Griffin, compares women and earth to man. She sheds light on feminism, female oppression, destruction of nature, and lastly the inequality that exist between men and women. The principal focus of the book is to show the connection between women and nature, and the disparities between men and nature. After years of conducting research she concludes that women and men inequality, science, language, and tradition have shape men masculinity as the ultimate power, drawing a line between man and nature.