Ecofeminism web perspective challenges the prevailing Western mindset that views nature and society through hierarchical, mixed views. Ynestra King says that “life on earth is an interconnected web, not a hierarchy,” emphasizing “there is no basic natural order instead, human imposed hierarchies are projected onto nature to justify social domination”. This viewpoint highlights the deep connection of ecological damage with the oppression faced by populations at risk, particularly women. Ecofeminism argues for recognizing all life forms as part of a complex interdependent network where dominating nature cannot be separated from women and other historically disadvantaged groups. By rejecting ideas of human supremacy over nature and opposing hierarchical systems, ecofeminism advocates for coexistence based on mutual respect among all living entities.
This viewpoint closely aligns with the principle of intersectionality, which emphasizes how various forms of laws like sexism, racism, and environmental exploitation connect and rise each other. Ecofeminists contend that hierarchical systems in human societies are mirrored onto nature, proving both ecological destruction and social inequality. King states that “ecofeminist theory seeks to show the connections between all forms of domination including the domination of nonhuman nature and stresses that ecofeminist practice is inherently antihierarchical”. Intersectionality sheds light on how women’s oppression particularly among women of color and Indigenous women is frequently linked to environmental injustices such as land dispossession, pollution, and resource extraction. By identifying these links, ecofeminism aims to dismantle power structures exploiting both humans and nature.
From an ecological viewpoint, the web perspective is essential as it highlights diversity and ecological balance. King warns against “environmental simplification,” arguing that “biological simplification, the wiping out of whole species corresponds to reducing human diversity into uniform workers or homogenizing taste and culture through mass consumer markets”. This remark emphasizes how the exploitation of nature by capitalists also destroys biological and cultural diversity, leading to a society where profit-driven interests are becoming more and more dominant. Ecofeminists advocate for a decentralized global movement “founded on common interests while celebrates diversity and opposes all forms of domination and violence”. Promoting solutions that are both socially equitable and environmentally sustainable. This approach ensures that preserving the environment aligns with protecting human rights and maintaining cultural diversity.
Essentially, by challenging the standard separation of nature and culture, the ecofeminist viewpoint presents a revolutionary vision for both ecological sustainability and society. It calls for fundamental restructuring human interactions based on feminist and ecological principles. Adrienne Rich supports this idea, asserting that “when we speak of transformation, we speak more accurately out of the vision of a process which will leave neither surfaces nor depths unchanged, which enters society at the most essential level of the subjugation of women and nature by men”. This suggests that social justice efforts are linked to environmental solutions since resolving ecological issues requires taking down oppressive systems that take advantage of both people and the environment. By merging intersectionality with ecological awareness, ecofeminism lays out a pathway toward a more Fair and sustainable future.
King: The Ecology of Feminism And …, nr15s.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/ecofeminism.pdf.
Project MUSE Redirecting. (n.d.). https://muse-jhu-edu.libproxy.umassd.edu/article/660551
Overall great blog very detailed – I want to touch base on when you said “Ecofeminism argues for recognizing all life forms as part of a complex interdependent network where dominating nature cannot be separated from women and other historically disadvantaged groups.“ because by acknowledging that all life forms exist within a complex, interdependent network, ecofeminism gives the idea that we must respect and care for both the natural world and the diverse groups of people who inhabit it. Ecofeminism highlights the idea that the way we treat nature reflects on people’s attitudes towards women and other historically disadvantaged groups. Many cultures have viewed nature as something to be controlled and exploited. This has shaped societal attitudes that devalue women and minorities viewing them as inferior or subordinate. Which shows us a cycle of domination that not only harms the environment but also exacerbates social inequities. By recognizing these connections ecofeminists give us a more holistic approach to both environmental and social issues while also encouraging a shift in perspective that values all forms of life. Also when you said “Essentially, by challenging the standard separation of nature and culture, the ecofeminist viewpoint presents a revolutionary vision for both ecological sustainability and society.” This view argues that society often views nature and women as inferior to men, leading to exploitation and degradation of both. By questioning these distinctions, ecofeminism gives us a revolutionary look that can shape our approach to ecological sustainability and social issues. This relationship comes from patriarchal structures that place humans above nature which lef to harmful practices such as environmental degradation and the subjugation of marginalized groups. For example how industries that exploit natural resources like deforestation and mining, often disproportionately affect women and indigenous populations who are usually the caretakers and leaders of their environments and household.
Hello Karlens,
Thank you for sharing.
You wrote, “ecofeminists contend that hierarchical systems in human societies are mirrored onto nature, proving both ecological destruction and social inequality” (Pierre). This is something which has come up throughout our readings in this class. Kings states, women’s relationship with nature “has more to do with their role in society,’ than ‘biological connection” (i.e., the influence of patriarchy) (76). Meanwhile, Adams details the visual comparison of women to animals/meat. As Adams explains it, women become something for men to consume; because this is “part of the structure of our culture…we fail to notice that women are also being exploited.” Ascribing human hierarchy to nature is a comparison Allison makes through her storytelling as well; in one passage, she writes, “By the time I understood that I was queer, that habit of hiding was deeply set in me, so deeply that it was not a choice but an instinct.” The human hierarchy she highlights (heterosexuality vs. queerness) is compared to the animal/natural hierarchy of predator/prey. In a world where LGBTQ+ identities were(are) less accepted, heteronormativity was(is) reinforced, and queer individuals felt(feel) the need to hide to be safe. For women, queer people, and nature, this inequality throughout life can be draining; “the fact is that dealing with oppressive systems from the underside, regardless of the strategy, is physically and psychologically taxing” (Tatum).
In my experience (as a queer woman*), I’ve found an increase in anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric (in particular, the assumption of my identity being “unnatural”) to leave me feeling stressed and down; therefore, although I want to remain informed, I’ve had to limit my media intake.
Even so, this similarity of hierarchal occurrence does not mean the oppressions are the same; therefore, we cannot merely develop one solution. Hence, the value in intersectional ecofeminism is as you described, to ensure “preserving the environment aligns with protecting human rights and maintaining cultural diversity” (Pierre). As a process for improving all life, we must challenge hierarchal thinking in society (calling it out whenever we see it) and encouraging greater diversity (social/natural) by shifting focus to frequently overlooked communities, as opposed to maintaining outdated bias.
Piper
Work Cited
Adams, Carol J. “The Pornography of Meat.” Continuum International Publishing, London, 1990, p. 27. University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth, myCourses, WGS 307-7101: Ecofeminism: Philosophy & Practice – On-Line (2025 Spring CE1). Accessed 27 March 2025.
Allison, Dorothy. “A Question of Class.” History is a Weapon, n.d. Online. historyisaweapon.com/defcon1/skinall.html. Accessed 27 March 2025.
Kings, A.E. “Intersectionality and the Changing Face of Ecofeminism.” Ethics & the Environment, Volume 22, Number 1, Spring 2017, pp. 63-87 (Article); Indiana University Press; Project Muse, University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth.
muse-jhu-edu.libproxy.umassd.edu/article/660551. Accessed 27 March 2025.
Tatum, Beverly Daniel. “The Complexity of Identity: ‘Who Am I?’” Readings for Diversity and Social Justice: An Anthology on Racism, Sexism, Anti-Semitism, Heterosexism, Classism and Ableism; Results, PDF. Adams, M., Blumenfeld, W. J., Hackman, H. W., Zuniga, X., Peters, M. L. (Eds.), Fourth Edition (pp. 9-14). New York: Routledge, 2000. results.org/wp-content/uploads/Chapter-The-Complexity-of-Identity.pdf. Accessed 27 March 2025.
Great post. I like how you mention the importance of balance and diversity in ecology, which is emphasized by taking and intersectional perspective. Quick note – intersectionality doesn’t just ask us to consider laws that discriminate, but all societal norms and practices. There are many informal but impactful ways people suffer disadvantage based on aspects of their identity.