ABSTRACT
The goal of
this work is to describe the glance overview of ecofeminism, which is based
exclusively on literature reviews.
Keywords : ecofeminism; environmentalism; feminism;
 |
Maria Yuryevna Sharapova in Hacienda San Rafael Seville
on 23 July 2019
[Source: Twitter @MariaSharapova] |
A. INTRODUCTION
Ecofeminism
is a branch of feminism that sees environmentalism, and the relationship
between women and the earth, as foundational to its analysis and practice.
Ecofeminist thinkers draw on the concept of gender to analyse the relationships
between humans and the natural world.[1] The term was coined by the French
writer Françoise d'Eaubonne in her book Le Féminisme ou la Mort (1974).[2][3]
Ecofeminist theory asserts that a feminist perspective of ecology does not
place women in the dominant position of power, but rather calls for an
egalitarian, collaborative society in which there is no one dominant group.[4]
Today, there are several branches of ecofeminism, with varying approaches and
analyses, including liberal ecofeminism, spiritual/cultural ecofeminism, and
social/socialist ecofeminism (or materialist ecofeminism).[4] Interpretations
of ecofeminism and how it might be applied to social thought include
ecofeminist art, social justice and political philosophy, religion,
contemporary feminism, and poetry.
Ecofeminist
analysis explores the connections between women and nature in culture,
religion, literature and iconography, and addresses the parallels between the
oppression of nature and the oppression of women. These parallels include but
are not limited to seeing women and nature as property, seeing men as the
curators of culture and women as the curators of nature, and how men dominate
women and humans dominate nature. Ecofeminism emphasizes that both women and
nature must be respected. [5] Charlene Spretnak has offered one way of
categorizing ecofeminist work: 1) through the study of political theory as well
as history; 2) through the belief and study of nature-based religions; 3)
through environmentalism.[6]
According to
Françoise d'Eaubonne in her book Le Féminisme ou la Mort (1974),
ecofeminism relates the oppression and domination of all marginalized groups
(women, people of color, children, the poor) to the oppression and domination
of nature (animals, land, water, air, etc.). In the book, the author argues
that oppression, domination, exploitation, and colonization from the Western
patriarchal society has directly caused irreversible environmental damage.[7]
Françoise d'Eaubonne was an activist and organizer, and her writing encouraged
the eradication of all social injustice, not just injustice against women and
the environment.[7]
This
tradition includes a number of influential texts including: Women and
Nature (Susan Griffin 1978), The Death of Nature (Carolyn
Merchant 1980) and Gyn/Ecology (Mary Daly 1978). These texts
helped to propel the association between domination by man on women and the
domination of culture on nature. From these texts feminist activism of the
1980s linked ideas of ecology and the environment. Movements such as the National
Toxics Campaign, Mothers of East Los Angeles (MELA), and Native Americans for a
Clean Environment (NACE) were led by women devoted to issues of human health
and environmental justice.[8] Writing in this circle discussed ecofeminism
drawing from Green Party politics, peace movements, and direct action
movements.[9]
Modern
ecofeminism, or feminist eco-criticism, eschews such essentialism and instead
focuses more on intersectional questions, such as how the nature-culture split
enables the oppression of female and nonhuman bodies. It is also an activist
and academic movement that sees critical connections between the exploitation
of nature and the domination over women both caused by men.
B. FRAMEWORK
OF ‘GENDERING NATURE’
One
interpretation of ecofeminist theory is that capitalism reflects only
paternalistic and patriarchal values. This notion implies that the effects of
capitalism have not also benefited women and have led to a harmful split
between nature and culture. In the 1970s, early ecofeminists discussed that the
split can only be healed by the feminine instinct for nurture and holistic
knowledge of nature's processes.
Several
feminists make the distinction that it is not because women are female or
"feminine" that they relate to nature, but because of their similar
states of oppression by the same male-dominant forces. The marginalization is
evident in the gendered language used to describe nature and the animalized
language used to describe women. Some discourses link women specifically to the
environment because of their traditional social role as a nurturer and
caregiver.[10] Ecofeminists following in this line of thought believe that
these connections are illustrated through the coherence of socially-labeled
values associated with 'femininity' such as nurturing, which are present both
among women and in nature.
Vandana
Shiva says that women have a special connection to the environment through
their daily interactions and this connection has been ignored. According to
Shiva, women in subsistence economies who produce "wealth in partnership
with nature, have been experts in their own right of holistic and ecological
knowledge of nature's processes". She makes the point that "these
alternative modes of knowing, which are oriented to the social benefits and
sustenance needs are not recognized by the capitalist reductionist paradigm,
because it fails to perceive the interconnectedness of nature, or the
connection of women's lives, work and knowledge with the creation of wealth
(23)".[11] Shiva blames this failure on the Western patriarchal
perceptions of development and progress. According to Shiva, patriarchy has
labeled women, nature, and other groups not growing the economy as
"unproductive".[12]
In the 1993
essay entitled "Ecofeminism: Toward Global Justice and Planetary
Health" authors Greta Gaard and Lori Gruen outline what they call the
"ecofeminist framework". The essay provides a wealth of data and
statistics in addition to outlining the theoretical aspects of the ecofeminist
critique. The framework described is intended to establish ways of viewing and
understanding our current global situations so that we are better understand
how we arrived at this point and what may be done to ameliorate the ills.
Gaard and
Gruen argue that there are four sides to this framework:
1. The mechanistic materialist model of the universe
that resulted from the scientific revolution and the subsequent reduction of
all things into mere resources to be optimized, dead inert matter to be used.
2. The rise of patriarchal religions
and their establishment of gender hierarchies along with their denial of
immanent divinity.
3. Self and other
dualisms and the inherent power and domination ethic it entails.
4. Capitalism and its
claimed intrinsic need for the exploitation, destruction and
instrumentalization of animals, earth and people for the sole purpose of
creating wealth.
They hold
that these four factors have brought us to what ecofeminists see as a "separation
between nature and culture" that is for them the root source of our
planetary ills.[13]
C. A
MAP OF CONCEPTS
1. MODERN
SCIENCE AND ECOFEMINISM
In Ecofeminism (1993)
authors Vandana Shiva and Maria Mies ponder modern science and its acceptance
as a universal and value-free system. They view the dominant stream of modern
science not as objective science but as a projection of Western men's
values.[14] The privilege of determining what is considered scientific
knowledge and its usage has been controlled by men, and for the most part of
history restricted to men. Bondi and Miles list examples including the
medicalization of childbirth and the industrialization of plant
reproduction.[14] Bondi argues that the medicalization of childbirth has
marginalized midwife knowledge and changed the natural process of childbirth
into a procedure dependent on specialized technologies and appropriated
expertise. A common claim within ecofeminist literature is that patriarchal
structures justify their dominance through binary opposition, these include but
are not limited to: heaven/earth, mind/body, male/female, human/animal,
spirit/matter, culture/nature and white/non-white.[15] Oppression, according to
them, is reinforced by assuming truth in these binaries, which factuality they
challenge, and instilling them as 'marvelous to behold' through what they
consider to be religious and scientific constructs.[15]
2. VEGETARIAN
ECOFEMINISM
The
application of ecofeminism to animal rights has established vegetarian
ecofeminism, which asserts that "omitting the oppression of animals from
feminist and ecofeminist analyses […] is inconsistent with the activist and
philosophical foundations of both feminism (as a "movement to end all
forms of oppression") and ecofeminism."[16] It puts into practice
"the personal is political," as many ecofeminists believe that
"meat-eating is a form of patriarchal domination…that suggests a link
between male violence and a meat-based diet."[16] During a 1995 interview
with On the Issues, Carol J. Adams stated, "Manhood is constructed in our
culture in part by access to meat-eating and control of other bodies, whether
it's women or animals".[17] According to Adams, "We cannot work for
justice and challenge the oppression of nature without understanding that the
most frequent way we interact with nature is by eating animals".[17]
Vegetarian ecofeminism combines sympathy with the analysis of culture and
politics to refine a system of ethics and action.[16]
3. MATERIALIST
ECOFEMINISM
Ecofeminism
as materialist is another common dimension ecofeminism. A materialist view
connects some institutions such as labor, power, and property as the source of
domination over women and nature. There are connections made between these subjects
because of the values of production and reproduction.[18] This dimension of
ecofeminism may also be referred to as "social feminism,"
"socialist ecofeminism," or "Marxist ecofeminism."
According to Carolyn Merchant, "Social ecofeminism advocates the liberation
of women through overturning economic and social hierarchies that turn all
aspects of life into a market society that today even invades the
womb".[4] Ecofeminism in this sense seeks to eliminate social hierarchies
which favor the production of commodities (dominated by men) over biological
and social reproduction.
4. SPIRITUAL
ECOFEMINISM/CULTURAL ECOFEMINISM
Spiritual
ecofeminism is another branch of ecofeminism, and it is popular among
ecofeminist authors such as Starhawk, Riane Eisler, Carol J. Adams, and more.
Starhawk calls this an earth-based spirituality, which recognizes that the
Earth is alive, that we are interconnected, as well as a community.[19]
Spiritual ecofeminism is not linked to one specific religion, but is centered around
values of caring, compassion, and non-violence.[20] Often, ecofeminists refer
to more ancient traditions, such as the worship of Gaia, the Goddess of nature
and spirituality (also known as Mother Earth).[20] Wicca and Paganism are
particularly influential to spiritual ecofeminism. Most Wicca covens
demonstrate a deep respect for nature, a feminine outlook, and an aim to
establish strong community values.[21] In her book Radical Ecology,
Carolyn Merchant refers to spiritual ecofeminism as "cultural ecofeminism."
According to Merchant, cultural ecofeminism, "celebrates the relationship
between women and nature through the revival of ancient rituals centered on
goddess worship, the moon, animals, and the female reproductive system."
[4] In this sense, cultural ecofeminists tend to value intuition, an ethic of
caring, and human-nature interrelationships.[4]
D. FROM
CONCEPTS TO CONCRETE
Women
participated in the environmental movements, specifically preservation and
conservation beginning in the late nineteenth century and continuing into the
early twentieth century.[22] In northern India in 1973, women took part in the
Chipko movement to protect forests from deforestation. Non-violent protest
tactics were used to occupy trees so that loggers could not cut them down.[7]
In Kenya in
1977, the Green Belt Movement was initiated by environmental and political
activist Professor Wangari Maathai. It is rural tree planting program led by
women, which Maathai designed to help prevent desertification in the area. The
program created a 'green belt' of at least 1,000 trees around villages, and
gave participants the ability to take charge in their communities. In later
years, the Green Belt Movement was an advocate for informing and empowering
citizens through seminars for civic and environmental education, as well as
holding national leaders accountable for their actions and instilling agency in
citizens.[23] The work of the Greenbelt Movement continues today.
In 1978 in
New York, mother and environmentalist Lois Gibbs led her community in protest
after discovering that their entire neighborhood, Love Canal, was built on top
of a toxic dump site. The toxins in the ground were causing illness among
children and reproductive issues among women, as well as birth defects in
babies born to pregnant women exposed to the toxins. The Love Canal movement
eventually led to the evacuation and relocation of nearly 800 families by the
federal government.[24]
In 1980 and
1981, members of such a conference organized a peaceful protest at the
Pentagon. Women stood, hand in hand, demanding equal rights (including social,
economic, and reproductive rights) as well as an end to militaristic actions
taken by the government and exploitation of the community (people and the
environment). This movement is known as the Women's Pentagon Actions.[9]
In 1985, the
Akwesasne Mother's Milk Project was launched by Katsi Cook. This study was
funded by the government, and investigated how the higher level of contaminants
in water near the Mohawk reservation impacted babies. It revealed that through
breast milk, Mohawk children were being exposed to 200% more toxins than
children not on the reservation. Toxins contaminate water all over the world,
but to due environmental racism, certain subversive groups are exposed to a
much higher amount.[25]
The Greening
of Harlem Coalition is another example of an ecofeminist movement. In 1989,
Bernadette Cozart founded the coalition, which is responsible for many urban
gardens around Harlem. Cozart's goal is to turn vacant lots into community
gardens.[26] This is economically beneficial, and also provides a way for very
urban communities to be in touch with nature and each other. The majority of
people interested in this project (as noted in 1990) were women. Through these
gardens, they were able to participate in and become leaders of their
communities. Urban greening exists in other places as well. Beginning in 1994,
a group of African-American women in Detroit have developed city gardens, and
call themselves the Gardening Angels. Similar garden movements have been
occurring globally.[27]
The
development of vegetarian ecofeminism can be traced to the mid-80s and 90s,
where it first appeared in writing. However, the roots of a vegetarian
ecofeminist view can be traced back further by looking at sympathy for
non-humans and counterculture movements of the 1960s and 1970s.[16] At the
culmination of the decade ecofeminism had spread to both coasts and articulated
an intersectional analysis of women and the environment. Eventually,
challenging ideas of environmental classism and racism, resisting toxic dumping
and other threats to the impoverished.[28]
In the 1980s
and 1990s some began to see the advancing theories in ecofeminism as
essentialist. Through analysis done by post structural and third wave feminists
it was argued that ecofeminism equated women with nature. This dichotomy is
dangerous because it groups all women into one category and enforces the very
societal norms that feminism is trying to break. Out of this critique rose the
anti-essentialist argument. Ecofeminist and author Noel Sturgeon says in an
interview that what anti-essentialists are critiquing is a strategy used to
mobilize large and diverse groups of both theorists and activists.[29]
Coming out
of the 90s, ecofeminism met a lot of criticism from anti-essentialist feminism,
which heavily critiqued what they viewed as essentialism. The essentialist view
saw ecofeminism as reinforcing and growing patriarchal dominance and norms.[18]
Feminist thought surrounding ecofeminism grew in some areas as it was
criticized; vegetarian ecofeminism contributed intersectional analysis; and ecofeminisms
that analyzed animal rights, labor rights and activisms as they could draw
lines among oppressed groups. To some, the inclusion of non-human animals also
became to be viewed as essentialist. According to ecofeminist and author
Charlene Spretnak, modern ecofeminism is concerned about a variety of issues,
including reproductive technology, equal pay and equal rights, toxic poisoning,
Third World development, and more.[6]
Ecofeminism
as it propelled into the 21st century became aware of the criticisms, and in
response ecofeminists with a materialist lens began doing research and renaming
the topic, i.e. queer ecologies, global feminist environmental justice, and
gender and the environment.[28]
Beginning in
the late 20th century, women worked in efforts to protect wildlife, food, air
and water.[30] These efforts depended largely on new developments in the
environmental movement from influential writers, such as Henry David Thoreau,
Aldo Leopold, John Muir, and Rachel Carson.[31][32] Fundamental examples of
women's efforts in the 20th century are the books Silent Spring by Rachel
Carson and Refuge by Terry Tempest Williams. These works truly opened
American's eyes to the environmental harm they were perpetuating, and created a
platform for change.
Ecofeminist
author Karren Warren lists Aldo Leopold's essay "Land Ethic" (1949)
as a fundamental work to the ecofeminist conception, as Leopold was the first
to pen an ethic for the land which understands all non-human parts of that
community (animals, plants, land, air, water) as equal to and in a relationship
with humans. This inclusive understanding of the environment launched the
modern preservation movement and illustrated how issues can be viewed through a
framework of caring.[7]
Susan A.
Mann, an eco-feminist and professor of sociological and feminist theory,
considers the roles women played in these activisms to be the starter for
ecofeminism in later centuries. Mann associates the beginning of ecofeminism
not with feminists but with women of different race and class backgrounds who
made connections among gender, race, class and environmental issues. This ideal
is upheld through the notion that in activist and theory circles marginalized
groups must be included in the discussion. In early environmental and women's
movements, issues of varying races and classes were often separated.[33]
E. MAJOR
CRITIQUES
The major
criticism of ecofeminism is that it is essentialist.[34] The ascribed
essentialism appears in two main areas:
1. Ecofeminism demonstrates an adherence to the strict
dichotomy, among others, between men and women. Some ecofeminist critiques note
that the dichotomy between women and men and nature and culture creates a
dualism that is too stringent and focused on the differences of women and men.
In this sense, ecofeminism too strongly correlates the social status of women
with the social status of nature, rather than the non-essentialist view that
women along with nature both have masculine and feminine qualities, and that
just like feminine qualities have often been seen as less worthy, nature is
also seen as having lesser value than culture.[35]
2. A divergent view
regarding participation in oppressive structures. As opposed to radical and
liberation-based feminist movements, mainstream feminism which is most tightly
bound with hegemonic social status strives to promote equality within the
existing social and political structure,[36] such as making it possible for
women to occupy positions of power in business, industry and politics, using
direct involvement as the main tactic for achieving pay equity and influence.
In contrast, many ecofeminists oppose active engagement in these areas, as
these are the very structures that the movement intends to dismantle.[35]
Social
ecologist and feminist Janet Biehl has criticized ecofeminism for focusing too
much on a mystical connection between women and nature and not enough on the
actual conditions of women.[37] She has also stated that rather than being a
forward-moving theory, ecofeminism is an anti-progressive movement for
women.[37] Rosemary Radford Ruether also critiques this focus on mysticism over
work that focuses on helping women, but argues that spirituality and activism
can be combined effectively in ecofeminism.[38] A. E. Kings has criticized
ecofeminism for limiting itself to focusing only on gender and the environment,
and neglecting to take an intersectional approach. Kings says that ecofeminists
claim to be intersectional, however have fallen short on their commitment until
recently.[39]
F. CONCLUSION
In the
1970s, Indian villagers had founded the Chipko movement, a protest against
deforestation, a copy of an ecofeminist action before the letter. Another
important date is that of a conference entitled "Ecofeminism and Life on
Earth" in the United States in March 1980 after the Three Mile Island
Nuclear Accident in 1979. Those present had adopted a report manifesto. between
the ecological movements and the women's movements, between the destruction of
nature, militarism, the discriminations and domination undergone by women.
Ecofeminism
is a philosophy, an ethic and a movement born of the conjunction and union of
feminist and ecological currents of thought. According to this movement,
notably championed by Vandana Shiva, who founded a sanctuary of wild and
agro-biodiversity in India, where women have an essential place, there are
similarities and common causes of domination and women's oppression and
non-respect of nature, which contribute to environmental destruction.
The term
"ecofeminism" seems to have been published for the first time in 1974
by a French feminist, Françoise d'Eaubonne, in a book entitled "Feminism
or death" but her principles have already been stated in 62 by Rachel
Carson, in her Silent spring (silent spring) which, by its impact, contributed
to the prohibition of DDT in the United States, and it is first and foremost in
the English-speaking world that this concept has developed.
A common
critique of ecofeminism is that the connection it promotes between women and
nature is a form of essentialism. Traditional feminism is concerned, for
example, that ecofeminism can restore women's confinement to the natural world
through patriarchy cunning [insufficient source].
In 2019
ecofeminism is more and more present in society. In Greta Thunberg's various
climate marches many young girls have taken the initiative to put a feminist
touch on their placard: "lick clitos, not monsanto's ass", "fuck
us, not the climate" or "My planet, my cat, save the wetlands",
this slogan evoking the buffers whose components pollute the planet as much as
our body. When giving part of her Freedom to Care award, Greta Thunberg
identifies the association as supporting "the women and girls in the global
South face the effects of rising temperatures and climate change".
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Adib Rifqi
Setiawan dedicated this work to Nurhayati Sri Hardini as known as N.H. Dini,
Siti Musdah Mulia, Airin Rachmi Diany, Grace Natalie Louisa, Nong Darol
Mahmada, and Surotul Ilmiyah of their amazing inspiring & motivating myself
nor for their endless shaping my mindset about and attitude toward women. Let
me say today, “Happy birthday Airin...”
 |
Airin Rachmi Diany [Personal Collection]
|
WORK CITED
[1]
MacGregor, Sherilyn. (2006). Beyond mothering earth: ecological
citizenship and the politics of care, p. 286. Vancouver: UBC Press.
[2]
Merchant, Carolyn. (1992). Chapter 8, p. 184. In Radical ecology: the
search for a livable world. New York: Routledge, 1992.
[3] Warren,
Karen. (2002, September). Karen Warren's Ecofeminism. Ethics & the
Environment, 7: 12.
[4]
Merchant, Carolyn (2005). Ecofeminism, pp. 193-221. In Radical Ecology.
Routledge.
[5] Adams,
Carol (2007). Ecofeminism and the Sacred, p. 1-8. Continuum.
[6]
Spretnak, Charlene. (1990). Ecofeminism: Our Roots and Flowering p. 3-14.
In Reweaving the World: The Emergence of Feminism. Sierra Club
Books.
[7] Warren,
Karen J. (2000). Ecofeminist Philosophy: A Western Perspective on What It Is
and Why It Matters. Lanham, Maryland: Roman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
[8]
Merchant, Carolyn. (2005). Radical Ecology, p. 169-173. Routledge.
[9] Lamar,
Stephanie. (1991). Ecofeminist Theory and Grassroots Politics. Hypatia,
6 (1): 28–45. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111%2Fj.1527-2001.1991.tb00207.x
[10]
Stoddart, Mark; Tindall, D. B. (2011). Ecofeminism, Hegemonic Masculinity, And
Environmental Movement Participation In British Columbia, Canada, 1998-2007:
"Women Always Clean Up The Mess". Sociological Spectrum,
31 (3): 342–368. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080%2F02732173.2011.557065
[11] Shiva,
Vandana. (1988). Staying alive: women, ecology and development.
London: Zed Books.
[12] Shiva,
Vandana. (1990). Development as a New Project of Western Patriarchy, p.
189-200. Reweaving the World: The Emergence of Feminism. Sierra
Club Books.
[13] Gaard,
Greta and, Gruen, Lori. (1993). Ecofeminism: Toward Global Justice and
Planetary Health. Society and Nature, 2: 1–35.
[14] Mies,
Maria; Vandana Shiva. (1993). Ecofeminism, p. 24. Halifax, N.S. :
Fernwood Publications.
[15] Laura
Hobgood-Oster. (2012). Ecofeminism: Historic and International
Evolution. University of Florida. URL: http://users.clas.ufl.edu/bron/PDF--Christianity/Hobgood-Oster--Ecofeminism-International%20Evolution.pdf#targetText=Ecofeminism%3A%20Historic%20and%20International%20Evolution&targetText=The%20term%20was%20introduced%20by,general%20category%20of%20deep%20ecology.
[16] Gaard,
Greta Claire. (2002). Vegetarian ecofeminism: A review essay. Frontiers:
A Journal of Women Studies, 23 (2).
[17] Adams,
Carol J. (1995). Do Feminists Need to Liberate Animals, Too?. CarolJAdams.com.
URL: https://caroljadams.com/new-page-2
[18] Zein,
Laila Fariha; Setiawan, Adib Rifqi. (2019). Konsep Dasar Seksualitas. INA-rxiv.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.31227/osf.io/jq6ue
[19] Starhawk.
(1990). Power, Authority, and Mystery: Ecofeminism and Earth-based
Spirituality, p. 73-86. In Reweaving the World: The Emergence of
Ecofeminism. Sierra Club Books.
[20] Eisler,
Riane. (1990). The Gaia Tradition & The Partnership Future: An Ecofeminist
Manifesto, p. 23-34. In Reweaving the World: The Emergence of
Ecofeminism. Sierra Club Books
[21] Merchant,
Carolyn. (2005). Spiritual Ecology, p 124-125. In Radical Ecology.
Routledge.
[22] Mann,
Susan A. (2011). Pioneers of U.S. Ecofeminism and Environmental Justice. Feminist
Formations, 23 (2): 1–25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353%2Fff.2011.0028
[23] The
Green Belt Movement. (Accessed August 25, 2016). Our History. GreenBeltMovement.org.
URL: http://www.greenbeltmovement.org/who-we-are/our-history
[24] Center
for Health, Environment, & Justice . (Accessed August 25, 2016). Love
Canal. CHEJ.Org. URL: http://chej.org/about-us/story/love-canal/
[25]
Doverspike, Nicole. (2012). Mother's Milk Project. English 487W Blog:
West of Everything. URL: http://www.personal.psu.edu/cjm5/blogs/english/2012/04/mothers-milk-project.html
[26]
Bernstein, Emily. (1993). Neighborhood Report: Harlem; Sowing a Future With
Green in It. The New York Times. URL: https://www.nytimes.com/1993/12/26/nyregion/neighborhood-report-harlem-sowing-a-future-with-green-in-it.html?scp=1&sq=Bernadette%20Cozart&st=cse
[27]
Hawthorne, Susan. (2002). Wild Politics: Feminism, Globalisation,
Bio/diversity. Melbourne: Spinifex Press.
[28] Gaard,
Greta. (2011). Ecofeminism Revisited: Rejecting Essentialism and Re-Placing
Species in a Material Feminist Environmentalism. Feminist Formations,
23(2): 26–53. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353%2Fff.2011.0017
[29]
Michiels, Nete. (2013). Social Movements And Feminism. Women &
Environments International Magazine, no. 92/93: 15-17.
[30]
Glazebrook, Trish. (2002). Karen Warren's Ecofeminism. Ethics & the
Environment, 7 (2): 12–27. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2979%2Fete.2002.7.2.12
[31]
Norlock, Kathryn J. (2011). Building Receptivity: Leopold's Land Ethic and
Critical Feminist Interpretation. Journal for the Study of Religion,
Nature and Culture, 5 (4): 491–509. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1558%2Fjsrnc.v5i4.491
[32] Seager,
Joni. (2003). Rachel Carson Died of Breast Cancer: The Coming of Age of
Feminist Environmentalism. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and
Society: 28 (3): 945–973. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086%2F345456
[33] Mann,
Susan A. (2011). Pioneers of U.S. Ecofeminism and Environmental Justice. Feminist
Formations, 23 (2): 1–25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353%2Fff.2011.0028
[34] Gaard,
Greta. (2011). Ecofeminism Revisited: Rejecting Essentialism and Re-Placing
Species in a Material Feminist Environmentalism. Feminist Formations,
23 (2): 26–53. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353%2Fff.2011.0017
[35] The
Green Fuse. (Accessed August 25, 2016) Ecofeminism Critique. TheGreenFuse.org.
URL: http://www.thegreenfuse.org/ecofemcrit.htm#root
[36] Hooks,
Bell. (1984). Feminist Theory: From Margin to Center. Cambridge:
South End Press. URL: https://diyworkshop.noblogs.org/files/2015/10/Bell_Hooks_Feminist_Theory_from_Margin_to_CenteBookZZ.org_.pdf
[37] Biehl,
Janet. (1991). Rethinking eco-feminist politics. Boston: South End
Press.
[38]
Ruether, Rosemary Radford. (2003). Ecofeminism and Globalizationp,
p. vii–xi. Oxford: Rowman and Littlefield.
[39] Kings,
A.E. (2017). Intersectionality and the Changing Face of Ecofeminism. Ethics
and the Environment, 22: 63–87. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2979%2Fethicsenviro.22.1.04