The Power and the Promise of Ecological Feminism - by Karen J. Warren

In the article titled “The Power and the Promise of Ecological Feminism”, Karen J. Warren argues that ecofeminism, the idea that there are important connections between the historical domination of women by men and the historical domination of non-human nature by human beings as a species, is an essential component of any adequate environmental ethic. I find this argument to be insufficient.

Although the oppressive conceptual framework that falsely justifies the subordination and unfair treatment of women and the framework that falsely justifies the subordination and unfair treatment of nature are both products of our patriarchal society (and are based on what Warren calls the logic of domination) and have historical connections to one another, the two problems do not necessarily need to be (and should possibly not be) acknowledged together, as one entity, in order for us to make attempts to solve each of them.

Sexism and naturism are two separate forms of oppression, despite the connections they may have to one another. In order to eliminate sexism in our society, patriarchy must end. In order to improve the condition of our environment, we must drastically change the way that we live in many ways, such as by reducing consumption and by reducing or eliminating our use of fossil fuels. A complex assemblage of forces is responsible for both our ecological crisis and for the presence of sexism in our society, and although there is likely some overlap of causes regarding each problem, the two problems are still separate from one another and must be dealt with in different ways.

Simply by changing our attitude toward nature and the way that we treat the environment, we may not be able to solve our current ecological crisis, due to the damage we have already caused. Moreover, changing the way we treat the environment- specifically, changing our attitude from one based on a desire to dominate nature to one based on a desire to protect and conserve natural resources, may not do anything at all to improve the condition of women in our society that is the result of patriarchy. Likewise, solving the problem of the oppression of women by men may not do anything at all to change our attitudes about or treatment of our environment; the two problems are separate.

In order to address both the oppression of nature and the oppression of women more effectively, Warren should have spent more time in her article attacking the patriarchy and some of the many factors contributing toward our environmental crisis (such as capitalism and our culture of consumption) instead of emphasizing the importance of recognizing the connections between naturism and sexism.