How can ecofeminism create a more inclusive and community driven

environmental movement?

Grace Frideger

Senior Project Advisor: John Fisher

Abstract
When considering the biggest issues facing our world today, climate change and the effects it
will have are at the forefront. Living in an increasingly populated world, the effects of
environmental changes will only increase. It is for this reason that our current environmental
movement must be shifted towards a more inclusive and representational movement. The way in
which this switch can occur is through the theory and practices of ecofeminism. Ecofeminism is
a movement which aims to acknowledge the origins of environmental degradation and
domination and use this awareness to create a more complete, and effective environmental ethic.
Ecofeminism has come to identify the intersectionality that exists between women and oppressed
groups and the interconnection that we all share with our environment. In its aims to be a more
inclusive and socially aware movement, ecofeminism utilizes grassroot activism to give voice
and influence to oppressed groups. It is through an acknowledgement of the interconnectedness
of humanity and the environment that ecofeminism can create an inclusive and influential
environmental movement.

12​th​ Grade Humanities

Animas High School
February 23, 2018
1
 Part 1: Introduction

I do not believe in Gaia. This paper is not rooted in some spiritual connection to Gaia,

where women have a sacred connection to nature and are somehow more spiritually entitled to

our Earth. No, it would be unproductive and truthfully unjust to make this assumption for fear of

creating a sense of ‘other’ that would only exacerbate an already problematic divide. Instead, this

paper urges its reader to consider the parallels between the domination of nature and the

domination of women and other oppressed groups that exist. This idea is central to the theory of

ecofeminism. However, it is not my intent to write an angry or divisive paper that focuses on this

connection alone. At its heart, this is a hopeful paper. It is not my prerogative to say that all

environmental degradation has been inflicted by the patriarchy or capitalism or both, but it is

within my right, as a citizen of this Earth, to make the claim that through our anthropocentric and

preservationist environmental ethics, we have inflicted great harm and caused irreversible

damage to our climates, ecosystems, and environment. The environmental problems that ​we​ face,

we inclusive of humans and nature, can often feel threatening. It is of utmost importance to

acknowledge the role we play in protecting the Earth in a way that reflects our responsibility,

connection, and accountability for these environmental struggles that we currently face.

The mainstream environmental movement that exists in the United States is rooted in

protection of wild spaces, in conservation and preservation of places accessible by few. These

2
efforts, while hugely important in their own right, almost disregard the environmental problems

that exist in communities, in urban areas, and/or in less grandiose places. The mainstream

environmental movement excludes people of color, people of lower socioeconomic class and

classically women. With the severity of our environmental problems and the growing awareness

of the impact these have on humanity, it must be made clear that our need, as Earth dwellers, to

change, or rather, expand upon our efforts in protecting our environments is of utmost

importance. We are in need of a movement that is inclusive of all groups, cognisant of all

environmental problems, and a movement that is an agent for change. This movement is already

in existence and is capable of creating a new relationship with our environment. This movement

is ecofeminism. Ecofeminism can and will open the protection of our environment to all parties,

in the interest of all parties, including the interest of the Earth. Ecofeminism can create an

interdependent ethic and sense of place in order to establish a more inclusive and socially aware

environmental movement.

Part II: Historical Context/Background

The environmental movement took shape in the 1970s as the mistreatment of the natural

world was brought into the public eye. The exposure of the more unsettling treatment towards

the nonhuman world was encapsulated in factory farming, deforestation, man-made toxic

3
chemicals, and pernicious landfills (Feminist Environmental Theory). A growing consciousness

of the harm inflicted upon the nonhuman world spurred an environmental consciousness to

emerge and the environmental movement to take shape. The movement went in the direction of

conservation and preservation that was exclusive and led by white, dominant males. The

mainstream environmental ethic, however noble, was utterly anthropocentric. An anthropocentric

environmental ethic is one that regards humankind to be of pinnacle importance to all other

things and disregards the balance it provides (Snyder 64, 65).The mainstream environmental

movement, while working to protect and conserve our natural world, was doing so for the gain of

humanity. In this movement of environmentalism, most activist groups devoted their attention to

the preservation of beautiful natural landscapes, such as Yosemite and the Grand Canyon. While

these places are entirely worthy of protection, they are protected in order to be preserved for the

enjoyment of humans. The driving force behind early conservation efforts was to protect the land

for the sake of human enjoyment, while the protection of the organisms, animals, and ecosystems

were not of central importance (Potts 107)​. ​This ethic created a movement that largely ignored

urbanized areas and led to a rift between nature and the city, creating a ‘nature good, city bad’

mentality that largely excluded populated areas from the movement. The exclusion and near

anger towards more populated areas led to the exclusion of urban communities, many of which

were of lower income, from the environmental movement. The places conserved by the

4
mainstream environmental movement were not accessible to these lower income urban groups,

leading to an increasing exclusive conservation movement. This left the less desirable

environmental issues such as landfills, toxic waste sites unmanaged and unimportant in the

exclusionary and preservationist environmental movement. This anthropocentric ethic led to an

ethic that gladly disregarded indigenous peoples, people of lower income, minorities and often

women ( Potts 107-112, Kirk 4-8​).

Ecofeminism also emerged in the 1970s as a response to the elitist, anthropocentric

environmental movement. Ecofeminism believed the mainstream movement was largely based

on exploitation and domination, a realization hard for the predominantly male-led environmental

movement to acknowledge. In its early days, ecofeminism was based more on “woman-nature

connections” and did not become an actual philosophical position until the 1980s and 90s

(Feminist Environmental Theory). Ecofeminism is rooted in the belief that the domination and

exploitation of the environment is one in the same with the way in which women have been

dominated and oppressed by our Patriarchal society. When discussing the unjustified oppression

of women in conjunction with the domination of nature, it is essential to understand the

distinction between oppression and exploitation. Ecofeminist philosophy concedes that only

rational, sentient beings can be oppressed. In accordance with this definition, rocks, trees, rivers

5
and most all nature cannot be ‘oppressed’ but rather ‘exploited’. Exploitation is equally as

harmful as oppression and both are forms of domination (Feminist Environmental Theory).

Western society has created a power structure that places humans above the non-human

world, very similar to the power structure that has contributed to colonization, globalization,

racism, sexism, and inequality (Leppänen 38, 39) . The power structure that has arisen can be

traced back to many factors. Some have made the claim that this power structure has arisen

because of our patriarchal society that has come to shape and define western culture. When the

term “patriarchy” is used in this paper, it is meant to reflect the power employed by the dominant

group over the subservient group. This sometimes may mean men over women, but it can also

mean humans over the environment, women over minorities, or men over minorities.The

patriarchy should be seen as referring to power, not gender. For power is what drives the

patriarchy, not gender alone (Leppänen 39). Our patriarchal society employs the concept of

‘logic of domination’ that contributes to the idea of power being the driving force behind our

society. The ‘logic of domination’ implies that “superiority justifies subordination” and that this

grants the moral justification to dominate the less capable, less powerful, and irrational being, or

environment (Feminist Environmental Theory).

Ecofeminist philosophy also suggests that the origin of our oppressive and dominative

6
society has arisen and persisted through value dualisms. These dualisms assign a higher value to

that which has higher influence, such as men versus women, culture versus nature, which leads

to the perceived idea that men are superior to women and culture superior to nature (Feminist

Environmental Theory). Val Plumwood, a renowned Ecofeminist philosopher, references the

role of dualisms in her philosophical explanations of ecofeminism. She explains the

reason/nature dualism:

“Everything on the ‘superior’ side can be represented as forms of reason, and virtually

everything on the underside can be represented as forms of nature”. Rationality justifies

the superiority of men (human). Men are rational (mind) against the pure matter (body) of

women and nature, and everything that is irrational is devalued and to be kept under

control ( Lam 102) (qtd Lam 44).

This dualism is the rationale that has influenced and provoked the historical treatment of

women, other oppressed groups, and the nonhuman world. While we have made great strides in

improving the treatment of oppressed peoples and the non-human world, our society is deeply

defined by a dualism that supports oppression of the weaker parties, both human and natural

(Leppänen 41-43).

Ecofeminism was created with the belief that a there was a reasonable connection

between the exploitation of women and the environment, one that was not acknowledged in

popularized environmental ethics. Ecofeminism originated with the ambition of creating an

7
alternative to the simplistic, anthropocentric ethics. Because of its normative approach, creating

ethics that are rooted in the norms of society and our behavior, it aims to provide alternative

ways to treat the environment that are more attuned to all groups. Many different alternatives

have been proposed throughout the course of ecofeminism, leading to a frequent critique

claiming it is as being too broad, with too many interpretations, thus weakening the

effectiveness of the theory. While this may be true, the breadth of interpretations allows for the

ethics behind ecofeminism to be applied in different ways and through different critiques.Among

other interpretations that were proposed, one, in particular, has been of most sound defense and

with the most potential to foster an ethic that will lead to social inclusion and actionable change:

Intersectional Ecofeminism.

Part III: Research and Analysis

Intersectional Ecofeminism

While ecofeminism is historically more focused on the oppression of women in

conjunction with the exploitation of nature, it has begun to open up to focus on more than just

the factor of gender when considering the role of oppression. Intersectionality allows

ecofeminism to embrace the varied experiences of living in a patriarchal society when one is not

in the place of power. The inclusion of other oppressive factors, race, ethnicity, and class expand

ecofeminism to encompass these factors, shifting the focus from a purely gender-based

movement to a broader, more inclusive movement. The intersectional scope that is applied to

ecofeminism has larger effects on the meaning of feminism itself. When using intersectionality

in conjunction with ecofeminism, the definition of feminism changes to a slightly different and

8
more inclusive definition. When the term Intersectional Ecofeminism is used, ‘feminism’ is

meant to mean the equality of all people regardless of gender, race, ethnicity, or socioeconomic

status (Kings 64-80). Intersectional Ecofeminism is where this paper will focus.

Intersectionality gives more depth to the experience of being a woman or an oppressed

person in Western society. It acknowledges that a person’s experience is largely impacted by

many factors and that one alone cannot be representative of the oppression or discrimination that

is experienced. Intersectionality is to say that one’s oppression is interconnected between

influences of gender, race, and class. Intersectionality, as identified by Leslie McCall, the author

of “The Complexity of Intersectionality”, makes the claim that intersectionality is based on an

intracatagorcial understanding of social categorization. Intracatagorical can only be explained by

defining two other terms: anticategorical and intercatagorical. An anticategorical approach seeks

to deconstruct and eliminate social categorization. McCall argues that this is an extreme view

that is seemingly unrealistic and unproductive in addressing the problems that are caused by

categorization. An intercategorical approach to intersectionality acknowledges and uses

established social categories to address the inequalities and discriminations in order for them to

be examined and researched. Pulling from these definitions, the intracateorical focuses not on

eliminating the categorization, nor defining it, but instead on focusing on social groups that are

found at the “neglected points of intersection” (Kings 67) (qtd. 1774). An intracategorical

intersectionality is then able to approach the many factors: gender, race and class, and how they

lead to oppression and exploitation.

Underrepresentation of Groups

9
 Intersectional Ecofeminism can be used to acknowledge the women that exist at these

“neglected points of intersection”. These intersection points are meant to represent women who

experience oppression through more factors than gender, factors such as race, class, and

ethnicity. Because of these factors that are often not represented, these women receive less

representation thaa a white woman would receives. Research discussed in the works

Ecofeminism: Women, Animals and Nature​ and ​Ecofeminism: Feminist Intersections with Other

Animals and the Earth​, examines the relation of gender, class, and race in connection to one’s

experience in their environment. Research has shown that women, and specifically poor and of

rural location, experience the brunt of environmental degradation and change. Examples of this

heightened impact include things such as further travel to collect food and water, higher risk of

reproductive/fertility problems from limited access to clean water and nutritious food, and a

greater likelihood of death in an ecological disaster than men in the same situation (Kings 73)

(qtd. UN 2009). Environmental instability affects women that are largely dependent on the

environment to conduct daily life. This direct connection is most common in developing

countries (Kings 75).

However, the increased impact of environmental problems applies to people of lower

socioeconomic class in the United States just as commonly. Many people of a lower

socioeconomic class are often victim to environmental problems, yet are given little support by

the mainstream environmental movement. The lack of focus on these issues by the mainstream

movement is rooted in the preservationist ethic, focused primarily on wild spaces, which in turn

gives little attention to the environment that so commonly exists around the “neglected points of

intersection”. The Navajo Nation, home to some 250,000 people in Utah, New Mexico, and

10
Arizona, has experienced first hand the environmental harm that is experienced by an

underrepresented community. Heavy uranium mining in the second half of the 20th century has

led to dangerous levels of uranium, causing heightened rates of kidney failure and cancer among

the people of the Navajo Nation. While there is no longer heavy uranium mining, babies being

born now are testing positive for traces of uranium. A Navajo woman, whose baby contracted

uranium poisoning from drinking tap water in her baby formula, asked during an interview with

NPR, "Why isn't there more of an outrage? Why isn't there more of a community sense of what

the heck is going on? How did this happen? Why is this still occurring? Why hasn't anything

been done?" (Morales) (qtd. Welch). This outrage is reasonable, considering Uranium mining in

this area stopped nearly 20 years previously. For another example, take Flint, Michigan. In 2014

the city began to use the Flint River as a source of water. The improperly treated water from the

river began to erode the pipes, causing lead and iron to enter the water. Government officials,

while aware of the contamination, openly expressed to the city of Flint that the water was safe to

consume. The people of Flint were outraged and professed their distrust and anger towards their

government. In an interview with NPR, Sandra Westin, a native to Flint, said "It does remind

me, we are the expendables," and added the point that this was only able to happen because Flint

is a poor and a largely African American city (Yu & Shapiro).

These examples, along with many others, are testaments to the lack of representation or

power that is given to oppressed groups. The mainstream preservationist movement disregards

these struggles concerning these less classic environmental issues. The ability for minorities in

the mainstream movement to effect change in cases of urban environmentalism is slim to none.

In a report published by Green 2.0 that was completed shortly after the water crisis in Flint, over

11
300 hundred environmental organizations were surveyed about their staff diversity. The results

exposed that only 16 percent of staffers were people of color (Miller) (qtd. Green 2.0). Because

the mainstream movement does not provide the representation or opportunity to include these

oppressed groups and issues, these groups are left without fair representation. It is for these

reasons that ecofeminism is the useful alternative best suited to give voice to these issues. This

exclusionary and dominative model that excludes oppressed groups is the very reason

ecofeminism exists and is needed (Faber & Kreig 279-283). The problems are local, and they fall

upon the community, and frequently the women of the community, to fight for their

environmental rights. Ecofeminism provides the framework of inclusive, community-run,

grassroot activism that can lead to change in the community, and the strengthening of our

environment as a whole. If members of the Navajo Nation, or citizens of Flint, Michigan, use

ecofeminism to create and give voice to their struggles, they can embrace their connection to the

environment and to their fellow man to address the problems that would otherwise not be

addressed.

Practical Connections Between Women and the Environment

When looking at ecofeminism as the far-reaching movement, to say that women are

biologically and spiritually connected to the environment is harmful to its effectiveness. Though,

it must be noted that a woman’s connection to her environment is rooted in practicality. In

developing countries, it is more out of necessity that women are tied to the protection of

resources due to their reliance on these factors to support their family. But in relation to the

environmental issues that frequently affect underrepresented groups here in the United States, it

12
very often falls upon the women of the community, as those quotes gave voice to, to address

these issues. This may be because they are frequently more involved with the factors affecting

their living situations and families and they are more attuned to the factors affecting their

community. This being said, we must keep in mind that the roles women play are reliant on

many more factors, specifically class and race. To say that gender is the driving force behind the

necessity to protect the environment goes against what ecofeminism has come to mean. (Kings

74-77). Ecofeminism should not be focused solely on gender but rather acknowledge that

women are often first to pay and respond, to environmental issues. It is to say that the definition

of women should not be a simple one but instead should take a largely intersectional view to

include other equally influential categories that contribute to the experiences of women and

oppressed groups at large. The combination of all of these factors leads to the practical

connection shared between women and the environment.

Ecofeminism has evolved into a movement geared towards actionable change. Because of

this focus on ensuring it has practical applications and not simply theoretical implications,

several interpretations of the theory that had traction in the earlier days of ecofeminism have

been ruled out. A notable ecofeminist,​ ​Elin Wagner, proposed the idea of the return to a society

run by the matriarchy. She believes this is the most effective way to return our society to its

natural state. Because Wagner fails to explicitly define the concept of the matriarchy and place it

in context, one must infer through the help of other ecofeminists what Wagner meant when

referring to the matriarch. Presumably, she was referring to Indo-European tribes around 4500

B.C who were more matrifocal in the way that women had more influence, clout, and power.

Some ecofeminists, Wagner among them, believe that because of this matrilineal focus, these

13
tribes are said to have been more peaceful and free of modern forms of oppression. It is then said

that the matriarch eliminated the oppression, violence, and inequality, that are generated by the

patriarchy. (Lahar 33) (qtd. Eisler 29). Wagner’s idea, based on questionable interpretations of

archaeological findings, does not align with the current views of ecofeminism. This theory was

created in the early days of ecofeminism and clearly shows its mark of time. It does not help to

further the impact of the movement, nor does it expand outside purely gender-based motivations

to create a movement that is applicable to our current environmental issues and the communities

that experience them (Leppänen 42).

Another interpretation is the ‘elimination of self’. This interpretation suggests that if an

‘elimination of self’ can be realized, a more thoughtful and egalitarian ethic will be formed

between humans and the natural world, one devoid of a power structure. This theory is meant to

create a dynamic between humans and nature that is completely equal, one where dualisms and

the logic of domination do not exist. The interpretation suggests that this can be achieved by

realizing your complete connection to the to your surrounding environment and instead of

interacting with it, disrupt it as much as possible. This interpretation requires a shift so large in

the way we as humans have evolved that it is not feasible. This can be implemented on a smaller,

less extreme scale, such as leave no trace, but a complete removal is not achievable. Both of

these interpretations fail to do something that is very important in the movement of ecofeminism.

These fail to create movements that are accessible and lead to action. They are extreme to the

point where they lose effectiveness. Ecofeminism must work around the current system in place

and work to implement change in sustainable and inclusionary ways. (Lam 114-117).

Interconnection to the Environment

14
 Another pillar of the ecofeminist theory is the connection that exists between humanity

and the environment. The claim that the environment is similarly susceptible to the agents of

domination that our patriarchal society operates upon is essential to acknowledge in order to

recognize the shared connection we share with the Earth. We have spent centuries creating a land

ethic that separates humanity from the environment. Western society, with its preservationist

view of the land, has failed to realize the interconnection between humans and nature.

We have spent centuries establishing and strengthening the power of humanity, of the

“cultural machine” over the environment, turning the environment into ‘other’. The mainstream

environmental movement established in the 1970s centered around a preservationist ethic, led by

organizations such as Earth First! and the Sierra Club. Strong advocates such as Edward Abbey,

and Henry David Thoreau, were vocal in the movement. However, they did not protect for the

sake of nature, but for the sake of personal gain. Spaces were kept pristine in order to provide an

escape for humans, not to honor the balance that nature provided. The preservationist movement

did not view the protection of our natural spaces as important because of our interconnection

with nature, but rather as their escape from the urbanized world. Abbey, a renowned

conservationist and vocal player in the 20th century environmental movement is quoted as

saying:

It is quite false to say that I am a writer whose primary and exclusive concern is

‘wilderness preservation’ … If my books have a common theme, it would be something

like human freedom in an industrial society; wilderness is merely one among many

means towards that end … The subject, quite plainly, is again, as in my other books,

15
 personal liberty versus the modern industrial, military state (Potts 107) (81).

The preservationist ethic is the reason for the ‘other’ concept that has been assigned in relation to

nature. Abbey, known for his racist and sexist leanings, assigns the concept of ‘other’ to the

environment, while assigning this same concept to many people outside the mainstream

movement. He uses his power as a dominant, white male to assert the claim that the protection of

the environment is for his personal gain and that he is at liberty to do what he sees fit. What this

exposes is his privilege to use his power over nature and other groups. He is capable of

participating in the mainstream movement because he is in the place of power. For those that are

not male, white, or economically sound, the ability to participate in the movement is not an

option. In this way, the concept of ‘other’ is not only applied to nature but also to people outside

of the patriarchy. It is because of this that issues like uranium mining in the Navajo Nation or

water quality in Flint are not acknowledged by the mainstream movement. This sense of ‘other’

in regards to the natural world has also removed the idea of interconnection between humanity

and the environment. One must only look at the increasingly alarming changes in our climate to

understand that what happens to the environment will inevitably have an effect on humanity

(Leppänen 43, 44). With our increasing population and ever advancing technological abilities,

our impact on the environment is becoming more extreme and resulting in more impactful

changes that are influential on the humans who inhabit the changing environment. What the

mainstream environmental movement, originating from sentiments similar to Abbey’s, does not

do, is done by ecofeminism. As a response to this ‘other’ mentality, ecofeminism has asserted the

connection between humans and the environment to be symbiotic. We can not exist without the

environment, nor can it without us. This way of thinking shifts the concept of nature from an

16
abstract ‘other’ to an influential player in our society (Leppänen 42-45). This interconnection

then also recognizes that urban environmental problems are as much part of the slew of

environmental issues as the protection of beautiful places.

We can no longer afford to see the environment as ‘other’ or operate on a preservationist

framework, as this is harmful to both parties involved and will only result in more severe

consequences. Ecofeminism historically stresses the connection that women and the

environment share, but Intersectional Ecofeminism creates an ethic that emphasizes the

connection that all of humanity has in conjunction to the environment. Intersectional

Ecofeminism fosters this idea of an interconnection by turning environmentalism into an issue

reflective of all people. It stresses that environmental problems are human problems, and it is

therefore in the best interest of both humans and the environment to establish an ethic that

reflects this shared connection between groups and the environment.

Connection of Ecofeminism to Other Movements

Intersectional Ecofeminism, with its devotion to the intersectional connection of

oppressed peoples, and its acknowledgement of the interconnection between humanity and the

environment, has allowed the movement to provide resources to other movements. Social work

in recent years has discovered the movement of ecofeminism and likened the theories of

ecofeminism to the philosophy behind social work. Social work, much like ecofeminism, deals

with the injustice that occurs when value dualisms and the “logic of domination’ are at play.

While social work and ecofeminism are slightly geared in different directions, they both give

voice to underrepresented peoples through the agents of community and activism. Ecofeminism

17
has led social work to reconsider the way in which the practice stresses the importance of the

environment. This new practice is called Ecosocial Work,working to impress upon the people

helped by social work that an interconnection between them and their environment does exists,

making the environment an accessible and important factor to consider, regardless of gender,

race or class (Norton 301-305). Other movements that relate more closely to the goals of

ecofeminism are coming into existence. Movements focused on Indigenous peoples, Hispanics

,and African Americans that are similarly geared towards giving voice to oppressed and

underrepresented groups are forming. These movements, along with Ecofeminism, understand

that our central environment holds our culture, history and identity. Intersectional Ecofeminism

can pull upon these shared beliefs to form a stronger, wider movement that is geared towards the

empowerment of underrepresented groups.

Sense of Place

This newly found existence of the environment in all aspects of life can lead to an

understanding and realization of a sense of place. The awareness of your place in a the context of

you environment and the mutual support that is shared between you and your environment is

considered one’s sense of place. A sense of place is of utmost importance in realizing the

connection that exists between the human and the non human world. This sense of place can

then be used to create a community where all understand the interconnection to their

environment. When a community is cognizant of their dependence to the place they reside, it

reinforces the idea that there is no ‘other’, and is something should affect their environment, it is

in their best interest to respond accordingly. The sense of place that creates strong communities

in turn leads to the ability to implement grassroot efforts, giving representation to issues not

18
represented by the mainstream environmental movement (Lam 114-116). As with the other

movements that give voice to oppressed peoples, the grassroot model of which ecofeminism is

based upon, can only be effective if a community is there to support the movement (Norton

304-306). Ecofeminism ecourages women and others to find their sense of place within their

environment in order to implement the change that is needed.

It must be said however that ecofeminism still has its weaknesses that must be given

more attention to address its weakest spots. The biggest critique of ecofeminism is the broadness

of the theory. Because it began in the 1970s and has been interpreted by many different

philosophers and groups, the idea of ecofeminism is varied. This large variation can be seen as

overly broad which results in a less clear direction and a theory that is hard to define and justify.

This is a valid critique that must be acknowledged. However, I suggest that the focus of the

ecofeminism movement is not placed on its theory and philosophy but instead on its ability to

provide compelling environmental practices that are inclusive, socially aware and community

driven. Ecofeminism, in all of its broadness, provides a platform for the domination of the

environment and oppression of women and underrepresented groups to be recognized and

provided with the representation and power to address the environmental problems that exist in

their communities. Ecofeminism is the next step towards an environmentally conscious world.

Grassroot Activism

The implementation of grassroot activism is the most effective way in which the

ecofeminist movement can affect real change. Women are commonly at the forefront of these

movements, not because they are more connected but because they are very commonly of central

importance to maintaining the community in which they live. Pulling from the journal

19
Ecofeminism and Chicano Environmental Struggles: Bridges across Race and Gender​, the role

that women play in grassroot activism is explained:

Worldwide, compared to men, women disproportionately are involved in campaigning

around environmental issues at a grassroots level. I do not see women as somehow closer

to nature than men, as is sometimes argued, or as having an essentially nurturing, caring

nature. Rather, I see women’s environmental activism as an extension of their roles as

daughters, sisters, wives, and mothers, caring for families and communities (Kirk 3).

Women are essential in creating and sustaining these community led, grassroot movements. They

do not have a deeper connection to the environment, but sometimes have a deeper connection to

the community that allows them to use their agency to rally their community. The grassroot

framework that is utilized by ecofeminism and other similar movements, allows for the theory of

ecofeminism to be translated into practical application. This grassroot model provides the power

to the oppressed in order to demand change and representation. When ecofeminism is expressed

through grassroot activism, it is political and it is practical.

popular and therefore would need to start from a grassroot level (Kings 73-77).

Ecofeminism, along with other oppressed environmental activists groups, rely heavily on

the utilization of community to affect change. Ecofeminism uses the grassroot model as its agent

to take stands on environmental issues that otherwise may not be addressed. Grassroot

movements, the use of people in a community or region to create and sustain a political

movement, are essential in the ability of Ecofeminism to be effective. Organizations like Great

Old Broads for the Wilderness, classic rooted in the theory of ecofeminism or the Southwest

20
Organizing Project, and Mothers of East Los Angeles all use grassroot movements to gain the

representation that is not given by outside sources ( Kirk 7, 8).

Ecofeminism was created with attention to theory, but has transitioned into a movement.

This movement is fueled by grassroot activism, granting power to the groups that do not have

bigger groups to sddressissue form them. The accessibility that grassroot action creates ensures

that ecofeminism continues to be intersectional, aware of the connections between differents

categories and the connection with the Earth. With the need for environmental protection as

important as the protection of underrepresented groups, ecofeminism is the movement that will

support a socially and environmentally conscious 21st century.

Part IV: Conclusions

The charged political climate is something that has had far-reaching effects on

environmental efforts. With recent actions taken by the current Trump administration, it can feel

that exclusion and power are the driving forces behind the mainstream environmental movement.

It was recently revealed that the reduction of Bears Ears National Monument and Grand

Staircase Escalante was carried out in order to potentially use the land for oil and gas extraction

(Lipton & Friedman). This makes it abundantly clear that our interests, as partners to the Earth,

are not being taken into consideration by this administration. This disregard shown towards the

fair treatment of our environments and the people which cherish them is clear. What becomes

equally clear because of this, is that a movement that is specifically geared towards the

21
protection against unequal representation and disregard for our connection with the environment

is needed.

Ecofeminism has a long-standing history of grassroot movements that have led to

sustainable and inclusive communities. This movement must be seen as a viable vehicle for

change. Evidence of the influence that grassroot ecofeminism can have lays within stories of

women and communities realizing a need and addressing that need with actions that may either

fix the issue or bring attention and resources to their aid. A woman by the name of Wangari

Maathai, with the help of the National Council of Women of Kenya (NCWK), created the Green

Belt Movement, a grassroot effort to improve the lives of her fellow Kenyan women. The

movement was initially centered around water accessibility but, with efforts made by Wangari

Maathai, the movement expanded to address the disempowerment of women and communities in

Kenya through seminars, protests, and an increased awareness of politics. This grassroot

movement has evolved into an international effort to embolden Kenyan communities, teach

about political agency and combat climate change on an international level (The Green Belt

Movement). The Green Belt Movement was started when this woman realized a need in her

community and used the power of organizations and communities to empower and provide so

many with the democratic and environmental agency to create change. The Green Belt

Movement embodies the possibilities of what grassroot ecofeminism can achieve and the impacts

that can be felt in communities and beyond.

The protection of our environment must be inclusionary, not because it should be, but

because it has to be.We are all interconnected to the environments in which we live and we must

come to realize that the interests of all, natural and social, lay in the responsible, inclusive

22
management and protection of our environment. Ecofeminism, with all of its different

interpretations, provides us with a framework to address the environmental issues we face

through grassroot level resistance. In the fight against Bear Ears, grassroot organizations such as

friends of Cedar Mesa and Protect Bears Ears, are leading the fight to protect these sacred lands

once again. In the Navajo Nation the Dine Water Rights Committee is fighting for justice and in

Flint, Flint Fwd, a grassroot organization, is giving voice to its peoples and environment.

Ecofeminism is the connection between residents of the Navajo Nation and Flint Michigan, the

connection between people fighting for the protection of their environment and all that it

represents. It is ecofeminism that works to fight against the powers that divide us from each

other and our Earth. It is an agent for change because of grassroot activism and its ability to

connect oppressed groups of all kind. It is political, but not tied to a party and instead tied to

communities. This movement stands for the protection of our intersectional communities and

our interconnected Earth, and it stands to be for all.

Works Cited

"A Zen-Flavored Feminist Environmental Selfhood and Its Contemporary Implications." ​Ethics

& the Environment​, vol. 22, no. 2, Fall2017, pp. 99-123. EBSCO​host​,

search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=126396604&site=ehost-live.

Berger, Raymond M. and James J. Kelly. "Social Work in the Ecological Crisis." ​Social Work​,

vol. 38, no. 5, Sept. 1993, pp. 521-526. EBSCO​host​,

23
 search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=9312273330&site=ehost-liv

e.

Faber, Daniel R., and Eric J. Krieg. “Unequal Exposure to Ecological Hazards: Environmental

Injustices in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.” ​Environmental Health Perspectives​,

vol. 110, no. s2, 2001, pp. 277–288., doi:10.1289/ehp.02110s2277.

"Intersectionality and the Changing Face of Ecofeminism." ​Ethics & the Environment​, vol. 22,

no. 1, Spring2017, pp. 63-87. EBSCO​host​,

search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=123188814&site=ehost-live.

Kirk, Gwyn. “Ecofeminism and Chicano Environmental Struggles: Bridges across Gender and

Race” ​Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies​, vol. 18, no. 2, 1997, p. 2.,

doi:10.2307/3346962.

Lahar, Stephanie. “Ecofeminist Theory and Grassroots Politics.” ​Hypatia​, Wiley/Blackwell

(10.1111), 16 Dec. 2008,

onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1527-2001.1991.tb00207.x.

Leppänen, Katarina. "At Peace with Earth - Connecting Ecological Destruction and Patriarchal

Civilisation." ​Journal of Gender Studies​, vol. 13, no. 1, Mar. 2004, pp. 37-47.

EBSCO​host​, doi:10.1080/0958923032000184961.

Maathai, – Wangari. “The Green Belt Movement.” ​The Green Belt Movement​, 6 Mar. 2018,

www.greenbeltmovement.org/.

24
Morales, Laurel. “For The Navajo Nation, Uranium Mining's Deadly Legacy Lingers.” ​NPR​,

NPR, 10 Apr. 2016,

www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/04/10/473547227/for-the-navajo-nation-uraniu

m-minings-deadly-legacy-lingers.

Norton, Christine Lynn. "Social Work and the Environment: An Ecosocial Approach."

International Journal of Social Welfare​, vol. 21, no. 3, July 2012, pp. 299-308.

EBSCO​host​, doi:10.1111/j.1468-2397.2011.00853.x.

Pandey, Janak and Uday Jain. "Worldviews and Perceptions of Environmental Problems."

Psychological Studies​, vol. 62, no. 3, Sept. 2017, pp. 250-260. EBSCO​host​,

doi:10.1007/s12646-017-0409-7.

Potts, Michael. "Wildness and Wilderness: Anti-Pastoralism and the Problematic Politics of

Edward Abbey." ​Australian Literary Studies​, vol. 30, no. 2, June 2015, pp. 105-116.

EBSCO​host​,

search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=114935051&site=ehost-live.

Taylor, Dorceta E. ​The State of Diversity in Environmental Organizations: Mainstream NGOs,

Foundations & Government Agencies​. Green 2.0 , ​The State of Diversity in

Environmental Organizations: Mainstream NGOs, Foundations & Government Agencies​,

www.diversegreen.org/the-challenge/.

"The Darwinian Nihilist Critique of Environmental Ethics." ​Ethics & the Environment​, vol. 22,

no. 2, Fall2017, pp. 59-78. EBSCO​host​,

search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=126396606&site=ehost-live.

25
Warren, Karen J. “Feminist Environmental Philosophy.” ​Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy​,

Stanford University, 29 Aug. 2014,

plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminism-environmental/#KeyTerDis.

Yu, Mallory, and Ari Shapiro. “Flint Residents' Broken Faith: 'The People We Trusted Failed

Us'.” ​NPR​, NPR, 10 Feb. 2016,

www.npr.org/2016/02/10/466278433/flint-residents-broken-faith-the-people-we-trusted-f

ailed-us​.

26