On Ecofeminism's Ideal World

Warren’s argument is vulnerable because of her shallow explanations of the most radical parts of her essay, mainly the plausibility of the mind transformation, and of the world without social domination.


Similarly to White’s argument, Warren’s solution to the nature and woman “problem” is a new “religion”, Warren devotes a lot of her theory on this new mental state that replaces the conqueror mentality with a “loving perception”. The revamped mind that Warren argues is necessary for an ecofeminist world requires the refusal of all social distinctions that lead to social domination such as race, gender, and class. She does not say how this mental state would be achieved, as if the whole change is either effortless or requires a miracle. Her dependence on a giant conversion in terms of Western philosophy hurts her argument. I do not understand why she neglects to exemplify how such a mental transformation could take place.


Another issue left cold is the rejection of the conqueror mentality. Warren’s answer to the outcome of humanity without the arrogant mentality is an integral part of the ecofeminist world, but why? What if people desired to conquer the problem of gender inequality or the subordination of nature? Her lone example of the society without domination is Native American Sioux tribe, whose treatment of nature is assumed to be extended to women of that society. One example does not extend her argument far however, and leaves the possibilities either a “cut and paste” version of our society, or something new.