Justification of multiple ecofeminist perspectives: Diversity really matters

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.26881/bp.2019.2.05

Keywords:

dualism, essentialism, constructionism, ecofeminism

Abstract

Ecofeminism has grown, developed and transformed itself as a theory and made progress to encompass many different philosophical stances today. Cultural, social and radical ecofeminism are just some of the forms that ecofeminism can currently take. All of these sources of knowledge have contributed immensely to ecofeminist thought in general, although they have often been confronted by and supportive of different epistemologies. For instance, cultural ecofeminists have been accused of being essentialist. On the other hand, social ecofeminists relying on constructionism, as opposed to essentialism, have fiercely attacked capitalism as well as other isms (like classism, racism, sexism) aiming at the pillars of power upon which patriarchal society is constructed. This paper will try to reconcile the said opposing ecofeminist theories and highlight their importance in the development of ecofeminist perspectives. It will give an overview of ecofeminist viewpoints and show how they can be complementary.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Barker, Gordon, Katherine Morris (2005). Descartes’s Dualism. London: Routledge.

Carlassare, Elizabeth (1994). “Essentialism in ecofeminist discourse”. In: Carolyn Merchant (ed.). Ecology. New York: Humanities Press, 220-234.

Gaard, Greta (1997). “Toward a queer ecofeminism”. Hypatia 12/1: 137-155.

Gaard, Greta (2011). “Eco-feminism revisited: Rejecting essentialism and re-placing species in a material feminist environmentalism”. Feminist Formations 23/2: 26-53.

Kemmerer, Lisa (2013). “Ecofeminism, women, environment, animals”. DEP 23: 66-73.

King, Ynestra (1989). “Healing the wounds: feminism, ecology, and nature/culture dualism”. In: Alison M. Jaggar and Susan Bordo (eds.). Gender/body/knowledge. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 115-141.

Klages, Mary (2013). “The ‘Structural Study of Myth’ and other structuralist ideas”. Available at ˂http://www.colorado.edu/English/engl2010mk/levistrauss.2001.htm>. Accessed 3.7.2018.

Klein, Sarah (2000). Kate Chopin’s Ecofeminism. Available at ˂https://www.womenwriters.net>. Accessed 15.06.2018.

Madsen, Deborah (2000). Feminist Theory and Literary Practice. London: Pluto Press.

Merchant, Carolyn (1995). Earthcare: Women and the Environment. New York: Routledge.

Mies, Maria, Vandana Shiva (1993). Ecofeminism. Halifax, Nova Scotia: Fernwood Publications.

Robinson, Howard (2003). “Dualism”. In: Edward N. Zalta (ed.). The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Available at <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2017/entries/dualism/>. Accessed 7.07.2018.

Sandilands, Catriona (1999). The Good-Natured Feminist: Ecofeminism and the Quest for Democracy. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Starhawk (1999). The Spiral Dance: A Rebirth of the Ancient Religion of the Great Goddess. New York: Harper One.

Warren, Karen (1997). Ecofeminism: Women, Culture, Nature. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.

Warren, Karen (1996). Ecological Feminist Philosophies. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.

Downloads

Published

2019-06-20

How to Cite

Milosevic, D. (2019). Justification of multiple ecofeminist perspectives: Diversity really matters. Beyond Philology An International Journal of Linguistics, Literary Studies and English Language Teaching, (16/2), 77–93. https://doi.org/10.26881/bp.2019.2.05

Issue

Section

Articles