Ecofeminism, drawing upon Laura Hobgood-Oster’s observations in Ecofeminism: Historical and International Evaluation, is a global concept stemming from a shift in dualities over millenia (2). Over time, traditional hierarchies such as sun/moon, heaven/hell, and man/woman came to symbolize a superior-inferior relationship and promote oppression of the “inferior” subject. Human/nature became another hierarchy to exploit, leading to the degradation of our planet and widespread biodiversity crises within ecosystems. Ecofeminists argue that the oppression of nature mirrors the oppression exhibited in other hierarchies, like the oppression of women in a male-dominated society.
These arguments are based on the following ideas, as stated by Ynestra King in her essay The Ecology of the Feminist and the Feminism of Ecology:
– Western industrial civilization is harmful to nature and reinforces the subjugation of women
– Life is an interconnected web, not a hierarchy.
– A healthy ecosystem needs biodiversity to survive.
– Survival of humanity depends on a renewed understanding of the relationship between all species and nature.
The connection between our treatment of women and our treatment of nature cannot be denied. Nature in itself is life-giving, providing food, shelter, and clean air. Women give life through fertility, childbirth, and caregiving. The life-giving features of women and nature, if they were to cease to exist tomorrow, would signal the imminent end of mankind and life on earth. Humans need women to perpetuate their species, just like humans need nature to perpetuate their existence. Despite this inherent and hugely important link, women and nature are treated with disrespect, and given less-than-ideal conditions to survive.
A reflection of our poor treatment of the Earth appears as low biodiversity. This issue refers to a decline in the variety of different species in an ecosystem. Low biodiversity can impact the health and stability of an ecosystem since different species perform different functions, like filtering the air and water, or providing nutrients to the soil. The consequences of failing to resolve low biodiversity include lower productivity, biomass, and food availability, rapid spread of diseases, poor air and water quality, and infertile soil.
Biodiversity is usually on full display in ecosystems such as wetlands and vernal pools. Within such environments, plant, animal, and microbial species live in harmony with one another, providing essential services like water filtration, habitats, and food sources. Unfortunately, rapid development of land to create housing and commercial structures for humans has deteriorated biodiversity in these ecosystems. When their habitat is destroyed, plants are killed, and animals are forced to migrate to find new food sources and breeding grounds. If they can’t find a suitable habitat, they die. This issue has led to mass extinction of vertebrate species; since the 16th century, over 680 species have gone extinct directly due to human development (United Nations, 2019). Many more are predicted to do so in the future if we don’t fundamentally change our relationship with the natural environment. We must maintain the earth as a healthy whole rather than assigning rank to each piece and prioritizing only the highest held.
Works Cited:
Hobgood-Oster, Laura. (2002). “Ecofeminism: Historical and International Evolution”.
King, Ynestra. (2019). “The Ecology of Ecofeminism & the Feminism of Ecology”. Libcom.
United Nations (2019). “UN Report: Nature’s Dangerous Decline ‘Unprecedented,’ Species
Extinction Rates ‘Accelerating’” UN.org. Retrieved February 4th, 2025 from
https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/blog/2019/05/nature-decline
unprecedented-report/
Hi Jessica,
Thank you for sharing.
You wrote, “Humans need women to perpetuate their species, just like humans need nature to perpetuate their existence.” I acknowledge the truth of this statement. Respectfully, however, I am reminded of the statement, “There is no natural hierarchy; human hierarchy is projected onto nature and then used to justify social domination” (King). I wonder if this thinking is essentialist, limiting women to their reproductive capability (and nature to how it can benefit humanity) rather than respecting their innate value. As noted in our learning module, “environmentalism aims to make the planet suitable for long-term human use: we preserve it for our needs” (McHenry). According to Ynestra King, “the survival of the species necessitates a renewed understanding of our relationship to nature, of our own bodily nature and of nonhuman nature around us; it necessitates a challenging of the nature-culture dualism and a corresponding radical restructuring of human society according to feminist and ecological principles.” While I agree that both nature and women are essential to humanity’s continued survival, I believe equality and respect for both women and nature requires society “to value inclusivity and difference” (Hobgood-Oster 6). We should value all people (and nature) equally, rather than having to prove one’s worth through what they can provide society. Everyone (regardless of gender; men/women/non-binary/gender-diverse) should be treated with respect, as kindness improves quality of life. Further, while nature provides a lot to support human life, we should not take it for granted and need to recognize our ecosystem requires balance to maintain support for all species, which offer overall health benefits in return (i.e., disease resistance, food security).
I agree with your consideration of urban development reducing biodiversity. King wrote, “we need a decentralized global movement that is founded on common interests yet celebrates diversity and opposes all forms of domination and violence.” If we make choices which benefit all people, as well as the environment, we prolong (and improve) social and environmental health.
Piper
Work Cited
King, Ynestra. “The Ecology of Feminism and the Feminism of Ecology.” University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth, myCourses, WGS 307-7101: Ecofeminism: Philosophy & Practice – On-Line (2025 Spring CE1), Week 2 Learning Module: What is Ecofeminism?, Ecofeminist Principles. 1989, 2025. umassd.umassonline.net/ultra/courses/_36339_1/cl/outline. Accessed 28 January 2025.
McHenry, Kristen Abatsis, Dr. “Week 2 Learning Module: Ecofeminism Background-Extended Version of Week One.” University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth, myCourses, WGS 307-7101: Ecofeminism: Philosophy & Practice – On-Line (2025 Spring CE1). n.d. umassd.umassonline.net/. Accessed 5 February 2025.
Hi Piper! Thank you for this incredibly insightful comment. I apologize for lending the impression that I think humans have a hierarchy over nature; it was my intention to express the relationship with nature and humanity as a circle, or interwoven web, as noted in our readings, rather than a human-first ranked relationship. I think I could have better phrased “despite this hugely important work,” since it legitimizes respect due to women for their contribution to human society. Laura Hobgood-Oster discussed the importance in fertility that older civilizations placed in their earth gods and goddesses in “Ecofeminism: Historical and International Evolution”, and it was from this stripped, primitive context I was drawing a connection. However, this viewpoint lives little room for nuances like kindness and quality of life, as you pointed out. I appreciate the nudge.
– Jessica
Wow, you made your weekend so beautiful!! Wonderful message we all need to be Thankful For God’s Love And Forgiveness. Thank You.
https://www.myeasymusic.ir/
Your discussion of biodiversity loss through an ecofeminist perspective is insightful, especially in how you connect it to patriarchal domination. The link between nature’s ability to sustain life and women’s roles is a key idea in ecofeminism. However, some scholars, like Hobgood-Oster, caution against defining women too closely by this connection, as it can unintentionally reinforce traditional gender roles rather than dismantle them. Ecofeminism must recognize women’s historical relationship with nature while ensuring that this association does not limit their identity to caregiving and reproduction. Your point about urban development harming ecosystems also ties into ecofeminist critiques of capitalism. Ruether argues that patriarchal societies treat land as something to control instead of a living system to protect. Since many grassroots environmental movements are led by women, ecofeminist principles could provide a foundation for more sustainable city planning. Policies informed by ecofeminism could shift priorities away from profit-driven development toward environmental protection and community well-being.