Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-c9gpj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-13T18:54:38.398Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

3 - Gender, Eco-Feminism and the Environment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

By
Val Plumwood
Edited by
Robert White
Val Plumwood
Affiliation:
Australian National University
Robert White
Affiliation:
University of Tasmania
Get access

Summary

Eco-feminism has several major aims. One project is to connect feminist and ecological perspectives, thought and movements, developing ‘a feminism that is ecological and an ecology that is feminist’, in Ynestra King's (1989) words. Eco-feminist thinking grew from criticism of sexism in the green movement and lack of ecological consciousness in the women's movement into a critique opposing all forms of oppression. Eco-feminist thinkers have also explored conceptual and cultural connections between women and nature, and applied feminist power analyses to problems in environmental philosophy.

Much feminist and eco-feminist philosophical critique has focused on mind/body dualism and the denial of embodiment as the key background for the environmental failure of Western culture. Early eco-feminism challenged dualised conceptions of spirit as transcendent male deity and developed alternative eco-feminist philosophies and spiritualities of embodiment and immanence (Ruether 1975; King 1981; Spretnak 1982). Contemporary ecological feminism often draws on an analysis of mind/body, spirit/matter and male/female dualisms or deep conceptual splits to understand the contribution of gender to the forms of culture and economic rationality that bring contemporary societies into ecological danger zones – the ecological crisis.

BACKGROUND TO THE ISSUES

Eco-feminist historical scholars Rosemary Ruether (1975) and Carolyn Merchant (1980) and others established major conceptual connections between women and nature in Western culture. Women in this culture have been historically associated with the supposedly ‘lower’ order of nature, with animality, materiality and physicality, and men with the contrasting ‘higher’ order of mind, reason and culture.

Type
Chapter
Information
Controversies in Environmental Sociology , pp. 43 - 60
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adams, C. J. 1990, The Sexual Politics of Meat: A feminist-vegetarian critical theory, New York: Continuum
Adams, C. 1993, ‘The feminist traffic in animals’. In G. Gaard (ed.) Eco-feminism, Philadelphia PA: Temple University Press
Adams, C. J. 1994, Neither Man nor Beast: Feminism and the Defense of Animals, New York: Continuum
Adams, C. 2003, The Pornography of Meat, New York: Continuum
Carlassare, E. 1994, ‘Essentialism in ecofeminist discourse’. In C. Merchant (ed.) Ecology: Key concepts in critical theory, Atlantic Highlands NJ: Humanities Press
Collard, A. with J. Contrucci 1989, Rape of the Wild: Man's violence against animals and the earth, Bloomington IN: Indiana University Press
Daly, M. 1978, Gyn/Ecology: The metaethics of radical feminism, London: Women's Press
Eaton, D. 2002, ‘Incorporating the other: Val Plumwood's integration of ethical frameworks’, Ethics and the Environment 7(2): 153–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hay, P. 2002, Main Currents of Environmental Thought, Sydney: University of New South Wales University Press
King, Y. 1981, ‘Feminism and Revolt’, Heresies 4(1): 12–26Google Scholar
Lloyd, G. 1984, The Man of Reason, London: Methuen
Luke, B. 1995, ‘Solidarity across diversity: a pluralistic rapprochement of environmentalism and animal liberation’, Social Theory and Practice 21(2); also in R. S. Gottlieb 1997 (ed.) The Ecological Community, London: Routledge, pp. 333–58
Mellor, M. 1997, Feminism and Ecology, Cambridge: Polity Press
Merchant, C. 1980, The Death of Nature, London: Wildwood House
Merchant, C. 2003, Reinventing Eden: The fate of nature in Western culture, New York: Routledge
Midgley, M. 1983, Animals and Why They Matter, Athens GA: University of Georgia Press
Mies, M., and V. Shiva 1993, Ecofeminism, London: Zed Books
Moriarty, P. V., and Woods, M. 1997, ‘Hunting≠Predation’, Environmental Ethics 19 (Winter): 391–404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicholson, L. 1986, Gender and History: The limits of social theory in the age of the family, New York: Columbia University Press
Plumwood, V. 1993, Feminism and the Mastery of Nature, London: Routledge
Plumwood, V. 1998, ‘Paths beyond human-centredness: lessons from liberation struggles’. In A. Weston (ed.) An Invitation to Environmental Philosophy, Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 69–106
Plumwood, V. 2000, ‘Integrating ethical frameworks for animals, humans and nature: a critical feminist eco-socialist analysis’, Ethics and the Environment 5(3): 1–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plumwood, V. 2002, Environmental Culture: The ecological crisis of reason, London: Routledge
Ruether, R. 1975, New Woman, New Earth, Minneapolis MN: Seabury
Shiva, V. 1994, ‘The Seed and the Earth’. In V. Shiva and M. Mies (eds) Close to Home: Women reconnect ecology, health and development, London: Earthscan
Spelman, E. 1988, The Inessential Woman, Boston MA: Beacon
Spretnak, C. 1982, The Politics of Women's Spirituality, New York: Doubleday
Stepan, N. L. 1993, ‘Race and gender: the role of analogy in science’. In S. Harding (ed.) The Racial Economy of Science, Indianapolis IN: Indiana University Press, pp. 359–76
Sturgeon, N. 1997, Ecofeminist Natures: Race, gender, feminist theory and political action, New York: Routledge
Warren, K. J. 1990, ‘The power and promise of ecological feminism’, Environmental Ethics 12(2): 121–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warren, K. J. 2000, Ecofeminist Philosophy: A Western perspective on what it is and why it matters, New York: Rowman & Littlefield
Weston, A. 1996, ‘Self-validating reduction: toward a theory of environmental devaluation’, Environmental Ethics 18: 115–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weston, A. 2004, ‘Multi-centrism: a manifesto’, Environmental Ethics 26(1): 25–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×