Great to hear you will be researching such a great topic, Pam. For
general interest, I will pass along a related story I heard regarding
Cuban agriculture. Since the "fall of communism" Cuba has been cut off
from a supply of agro-chemical inputs (with the US blockage and all), so
the Cuban system has been more or less organic now for a couple of years
(I am told). The big news is that PRODUCTION HAS INCREASED since going
organic. Presumably, some other agronomy variable has increased to
compensate for the decrease in chemical inputs, such as LABOR. So don't
believe we can't produce food without chemicals. We must simply be
willing to spend more time (as a society) on the farm. I am...
joel.
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Nov 14 15:51:46 MST 1994
sendmail 4.1/UCSB-2.1-sun
Mon, 14 Nov 94 14:54:42 PST for [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Rachel Coles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: GNP etc
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 94 14:57:00 PST
Encoding: 10 TEXT
I dont know what Waring is doing now, but I did find two items in our
library's database by her: One entitled _If Women Counted_, published by
Harper and Row in 1988, and one entitled _Counting for Nothing_, published by
Port Nicholson Press, New Zealand, in 1988. Our library did not have either
book in, so I have yet to find out whether they are two different books or
the same book, different publisher/title.
Rachel Coles
University of California
Santa Barbara
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Nov 14 17:34:34 MST 1994
From: "LALONDE ROXANNE" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Organization: Dept. of Geography, Univ. of Alta.
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 1994 17:36:46 MDT
Subject: Re: Spirituality
Hi all!
I am so glad to see this subject showing up on ecofem again. Like
many of us on here, I see spirituality as central not only to
ecofeminism but also to resolving all of humankind's problems,
especially those involving our relationships with the rest of
creation.
I reinforce Moojan Momen's articulation of the levels of human
existence in terms of physical, mental, and spiritual. The diversity
of the human family is manifested at the physical and mental levels
and the unity of all of creation is at the spiritual level, (but the
truly exciting part is that unity is also manifested at the other
levels). It is at this level that the ecological principles of
interdependence and interconnectedness are the most profoundly
expressed.
> in my opinion, spirituality is at the core of ecofeminism. It
provides the
> starting point of equality and interconnectedness. From this basis, we can try
> to take the concerns of ecofeminism into the mental and physical spheres. It
> also provides a moderating influence upon our activities preventing the slide
> into extremism of all forms--it is all too easy for feminism to become a
> hatred of men.
In reinforcing Moojan's point, I would like to emphasize the role of
many aspects of human culture in promoting spirituality. Here in the
West, we have become very used to the secular deconstruction and
analysis of religious institutions and the backlash against religion
in the face of the revelations of tragic and deplorable conditions in
the past in particular organizations and institutions. Although I've
said this before, I feel compelled to repeat it: we must not throw
the baby out with the bath water. In condemning the practitioners
(fallible human beings) who have abused their power, we must not turn
away from the original source of our religious inspiration. To that
end, we don't have far to look in our search for religious
communities that foster harmony not only among all human beings but
with nonhuman creation as well. We also have wonderful examples of
more "connected" relations with the rest of nature in the traditions
of indigenous peoples all over the world.
I, too, am concerned with the man-bashing that can take place in
feminist circles. We need both the feminine and masculine principles
to be fostered if we are to find peace with ourselves. Women and men
are like the wings of a bird. It can't fly properly if either wing is
disabled. So, in the process of promoting the equality of the sexes,
we must foster respect for and understanding of both the yin and yang
in each of us. I get a little concerned when one of the men on this
group denigrates his own comments because he is a man. We need to
listen to each other with minds open to new ideas regardless of the
gender of the source. And we must be proud of who we are as members
of creation. We all have gifts to share, especially the men who are
sensitive to and interested in ecofeminist thinking. The truly
inspirational ideas that are contributed to this group will soar and
be carried beyond ecofem; the others will not be sustained beyond a
few go-rounds by a few interested debaters.
Just some thoughts to contribute to some of those "inspirational
ideas."
Roxanne
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Nov 14 18:26:07 MST 1994
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 1994 20:28:50 -0500
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christine June Cuomo)
Subject: unity, diversity, and other sports
(from Chris Cuomo-- I'll pay you five dollars if you don't call me Christine)
It's ironic that I finally decided to post something on the list, and that
Roxanne mentioned my piece in EE on the same day. Guess I'm in the fray...
The piece is "Unravelling the Problems in Ecofeminism," and it is in the
winter 92 issue of _Environmental Ethics_. I basically argue against
*unreflective* and *imprecise* calls for "unity" and "diversity" in
ecofeminist writings (there I draw mostly from Revweaving the World and
Healing the Wounds.
I'll quote myself, because why bother doing it again when I already puzzled
over how to construct these sentences? Scroll on if it gets too long, dear
reader...
"Like an unqualified feminist call for caring in ethics (against which I
also argue in this article), an unqualified call for diversity in
ecofeminism is uninformative, if not nonsensical. Diversity merely merely
means variety... Shiva and Plant (in HTW) seem to want to claim their own
voices, to give voice to the oppressed, and to value life-affirming
differences, rather than simply to endorse valuing diversity for its own
sake. If so, then thorough discussion is in order regarding which
differences are life-affirming, and what kinds of diversity are likely to
promote ecofeminist agendas. Talk of diversity in the abstract, and claims
that diversityis to be valued "above all else"(Plant) are uninformative and
lead to misunderstandings about the value and importance of *particular*
differences...
...(likewise) the meaning of "unity in diversity"(Plant) is unclear.
The intention seems to be to recommend unity of mind or goals. However, if
genuine diversity in perspectives is promoted, unity of mind or of goals
may be practically impossible. Even if some kind of unity is an
ecofeminist goal, or an ecological reality that begs acknowledgement,
ecofeminists must leave room for certain kinds of separation, difference,
and pluratily to avoid a tyranny of unity. To promote the health of a
group, species, or ecosystem, a conscious move away from ontological unity
and political solidarity is sometimes necessary. There are good and
healthy reasons for certain individuals, groups, or even species to seek
out separate space to heal, empower themselves, and avoid enemies."
So you get the gist-- I was arguing (and continue to long) for more precise
and careful ecofeminist theory and practice. I was *not* arguing that there
are not certain kinds of unity and diversity that are valuable, or
ethically important.
Chris Cuomo
Science and Technology Studies
Cornell University
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
