Appeal for Inclusivity in the Theory of Ecofeminism and Gloria
Anzaldua’s Borderlands
Dr. Jasleen Kaur Nanda
Assistant Professor
Department of English
GSSDGS Khalsa College
Patiala, Punjab, India
Abstract:
All feminists are committed to exposing and
eliminating sexism and many feminists have critiqued that sexism is intimately
connected to other ‘isms of domination’ like racism, classism, and
heterosexism. Ecofeminists extended this analysis to ‘naturism’ i.e., the
unjustified exploitation of the natural environment. Val Plumwood, an
ecofeminist, has critiqued that when the four pillars of liberation, those
concerned with gender, race, class, and nature stand together; structure of
oppression can be shaken. The ecofeminists identify patriarchy as the main
cause of ecological destruction and women's oppression. The division of society
into hierarchical dualisms like culture/nature, reason/nature, male/female,
reason/emotion, human/nature, civilised/primitive, attributing more value to
the former, also becomes a major factor in the domination of both women and
nature. According to ecological feminists, important connections exist between
the treatment of women and other oppressed people on one hand and the treatment
of nonhuman nature on the other. Ecofeminism is a theory grounded on the
structure of domination that exists not only in relation to humans but also in
relation to nature. Gloria Anzaldua, an American author, raises her
liberated voice through mode of writing and speaks for the rights of Chicanos,
lesbians, women, and nature, in her book Borderlands/La
Frontera: The New Mestiza (1987). Anzaldua highlights the hybrid
existence of Chicanos and Latinos, and how they suffer due to mestiza
consciousness. Anzaldua writes about Mexican culture in which women are
suppressed. She gives importance to the formation of a new consciousness in
which there is tolerance among all human beings irrespective of their race,
gender and ethnicity, envisioning a better, ecologically stable and egalitarian
society.
Keywords: Inclusivity, mestiza consciousness, women
of color, egalitarianism
Gloria Anzaldua makes an appeal for inclusivity in Borderlands:
La Frontera The New Mestiza; inclusivity in terms of languages, races,
gender as well as cultures. Beginning her work from historical perspective,
Anzaldua focuses on the illegal invasion of Texas by U.S. forces in 1800s. In
1846, U.S. troops occupied Mexico's large area, which is now Texas, New Mexico,
Arizona, Colorado and California. Many Chicanos migrated to Mexico, leaving
their lands in U.S. occupied territory, while many others stayed behind and protested
against this uprooting. “Race hatred had finally fomented into an all-out war”
(8). Anzaldua highlights the imbalance of nature created by Anglo agribusiness
corporations, who cheated small Chicano landowners. “Later the Anglos brought
in huge machines and root plows and had the Mexicans scrape the land clean of
natural vegetation” (9).
Anzaldua brings to light the sufferings of Mexican
women who migrate from Mexico to U.S. in search of work and are exploited by
employers. Many such women are forced to live in unhygienic and
life-threatening conditions. “Isolated and worried about her family back home,
afraid of being caught and deported, living with as many as fifteen people in
one room, the Mexicana suffers serious health problems” (12).Gloria
Anzaldua negates her Mexican culture also, in which women are the 'Other'
and rules are dictated by men. “ Woman is the stranger, the other. She is man's
recognized nightmarish pieces, his Shadow-Beast” (17). There is zero tolerance
towards homosexuals in Mexican culture. Homosexuals are even burned and beaten
and 'being different' is considered a crime.
Anzaldua lays emphasis on the plight of women of
color living in America. A woman of color finds it an unsafe place to live.
“Woman does not feel safe when her own culture, and white culture, are critical
of her; when the males of all races hunt her as prey” (20). Anzaldua writes
about her aspirations as a woman of color living in America. She wants to
balance her identity with all three cultures, White, Mexican and Indian. She
wants to discover herself and set her own rules of life.
For 300 years she was invisible, she was not heard.
Many times she wished to speak, to act, to protest, to challenge. The odds were
heavily against her. She hid her feelings; she hid her truths; she concealed
her fire; but she kept stroking the inner flame. (23)
Anzaldua writes about the state of mind of
Chicanos, who blame themselves for being hybrid and they even hate and
terrorize themselves. As a Chicano living in America, Anzaldua feels like an
alien in new territory. “No, it isn't enough that she is female- a second-class
member of a conquered people who are taught to believe they are inferior
because they have indigenous blood, believe in the supernatural and speak a
deficient language” (48-9). When Anzaldua was in school, she remembers being
beaten by an American teacher for speaking in her native Spanish language. Her
mother scolded her for speaking English like a Mexican. All Chicano students
studying in Pan American University were required to take two speech classes every
week. Why couldn't Chicanos exercise the liberty to speak in their own native
style? Why couldn't they feel their existence as that of equal citizens? Gloria
Anzaldua gives the tyranny of language, the name of 'linguistic terrorism'.
While teaching High School English to Chicano students, she was expected to
teach only American and English literature. She was not allowed to teach
Chicano literature. She also had to take her stand firmly when she wanted to
take up Chicano literature as an area of focus for PhD. “Yet the struggle of
identities continues, the struggle of borders is our reality still” (63).
Anzaldua highlights the dominance of Western
culture and art. She writes that “Ethnocentrism is the tyranny of Western
aesthetics” (68). She proposes an approach towards a new consciousness, to be
adopted both by the dominant culture and the oppressed culture. Anzaldua quotes
a Mexican philosopher, Jose Vascoceles, who envisaged a cosmic race, a fifth
race, embracing the four major races of the world. He proposed a theory of
inclusivity, against the politics of racial purity. Anzaldua writes that hybrid
races, instead of being considered as inferior, should be accepted as having a
rich gene pool. The hybrids are in the process of constructing a new mestiza
consciousness.
Because I, a mestiza,
continually walk out of one culture
and into another,
because I am in all cultures at the same
time, (77)
The new consciousness in mestiza seeks to
develop tolerance for co-existence and this can be achieved by accepting plural
personality and intermixing of cultures. “That focal point or fulcrum, that
juncture where the mestiza stands, is where phenomena tend to collide. It is
where the possibility of uniting all that is separate occurs” (79). The new
mestiza consciousness breaks down the subject-object duality; the dualities of
whites and colored, males and females. This is the struggle that needs to be
pursued to end violence based on different kinds of discrimination.
Anzaldua writes that the mestiza have to begin a
new journey and the first step of the journey is the refusal to become a
sacrificial goat. She comments that she belongs to all countries, all cultures,
and all races. As a feminist, she challenges the male dominated beliefs. She
wants to be a participant of the formation of new culture and new value system
that belongs to the planet Earth and connects the whole humanity and nature.
“This step is a conscious rupture with all oppressive traditions of all
cultures and religions” (82). Anzaldua appeals for adopting new perspectives
toward the dark-skinned, women and the queers.
Deliberating on the ‘macho’ image of a man,
Anzaldua writes that women are considered inferior when false egoism forces men
to disrespect women. Women must stop tolerating male hatred and violence. There
is a need of new masculinity that repudiates the false macho image. The
misconception among men that being tender is a sign of weakness, must be
deconstructed. Equality of women,
queers, hybrid races and nature, is the foundation of progress and only mutual
respect and inclusivity is the solution to put an end to violence.
Ecofeminism is a movement that brings attention to
the ‘logic of domination’ behind every kind of oppression, and how women can be
agents of positive change. Francoise d'Eaubonne introduced the term ecofeminisme
in 1974 to bring attention to women’s potential for bringing about an
ecological revolution. She raised many ecofeminist issues like the crisis of
modernity, patriarchy as the main oppressor, and the ability of women for being
the agents of change. She emphasized upon the woman-nature affinity as a source
of strength needed to make the world peaceful and harmonious. She also proposed
the need for a new global movement of feminists that draws upon feminine power,
in order to overcome the ecological crisis and to eradicate the systems of male
dominance that gave rise to it. Ecofeminism has gained international
recognition in the last thirty years as a grassroots movement. Ecofeminist
philosophers are of the view that there are important connections between the
domination of women (and other human subordinates) and the domination of
nature.
Ynestra King defines that “Ecofeminism is
potentially a global movement that is founded on common interests yet celebrates
diversity and opposes all forms of domination and violence...” (Lahar 1).
Ecofeminists have argued that women's movement and the ecology movement are
mutually reinforcing and together they can develop practices and views which
are not based on models of domination. One of the pioneering ecofeminists was
Rosemary Radford Ruether and she wrote in New Woman/New Earth (1975)
that there can be no liberation for women and no solution for ecological crisis
if model of domination persists in society. Feminists and environmentalists
should unite their demands to envision a radical reshaping of the agenda of
peace.
Deborah Slicer, in her article “Wrongs of Passage:
Three Challenges to the Maturing of Ecofeminism,” writes about the androcentric
bias attitude of the writers of environmental philosophy who have omitted the
issues that are of special concern to women and their subordination. Violence
against women, rape, pornography, and environmental hazards damaging to women's
reproductive lives, are the issues not mentioned deliberately by the biased
male writers. Slicer is of the opinion that environmental philosophy when
collaborates with feminism, holds a better perspective of covering wide range
of issues related to environment. She writes, “... in order to be feminist, an
environmental philosophy must, at the very least, acknowledge, condemn, and
expunge androcentrism from its own critical analyses and revisionary theories
and incorporate analyses of other oppressed peoples into their analysis of
oppressed nature” (Slicer 39).
The 'ecofeminist framework' includes development of
liberation theory that is capable of addressing the interconnection of all
forms of domination, focusing especially on race, class, gender, and
environment issues. Val Plumwood argues that the hope for peace in the world
lies in having a complete and connected understanding of the web of domination.
She writes that “The formulation of a theoretical framework which takes account
of the oppression of women in the context of a multiplicity of oppressions has
been a major concern of many feminist theorists in the last decade” (Plumwood
72). This project has been undertaken by ecofeminists with the vision of a
better, ecologically stable, and egalitarian society.
In 1962, Rachel Carson, a marine biologist and
scientific journalist, initiated her efforts to save the environment from the
harmful effects of pesticides and herbicides. She published her warnings in her
book Silent Spring (1962). She wrote about her utmost concern for birds
and animals which were suffering due to the accumulation of harmful chemicals
in the food chain. This was the beginning of an ecofeminist political movement
that was to take its actual form later in criticism and activism.
The 'Chipko' movement was a movement that gave
worldwide publicity to the women of Garhwal Himalayas, belonging to the village
of Reni. They hugged the trees in 1974 as a protest against the people who
wanted to cut them. This particular action by those women inspired Vandana
Shiva to set up ‘Foundation for Science, Technology and Natural Resource
Policy’. Since then, she has promoted her ecofeminist concerns and she is of
the firm opinion that the poor rural women are closely linked to the natural
world for their daily needs. She emphasizes upon the importance of the
political role of women in making the policies of environment.
Ecofeminism is a contemporary political movement
based on the theory that the ideologies which authorize injustices based on
gender, race, and class are related to the ideologies which sanction the
exploitation and degradation of the environment. The ecofeminist movement arose
in the United States primarily out of a movement against nuclear power and
nuclear weapons. A thought-provoking event was the conference on “Women and
Life on Earth: A Conference on Ecofeminism in the Eighties” at Amherst,
Massachusetts in March 1980. Six hundred women who attended the conference were
fearful about the future due to the ecological imbalance.
In 1984, a group called DAWN (Development
Alternatives with Women for a New Era), comprising twenty-two activists,
researchers, and policy makers from Africa, Asia, and Latin America, met at
Bangalore to prepare a report on the position of women in the South. They concluded
after the survey that women's position had worsened, their work burden had
increased, and environmental degradation was affecting them badly. Women's
social and economic marginalization along with the environmental crisis was
reducing the basic means of survival for poor women. Loss of fertile land and
tree-felling were also the factors that were playing role in paralysing rural
women.
James P. Sterba has highlighted some important
aspects of society that need attention by the theorists and activists in order
to radically restructure a gender-free society. The first fundamental change
needed is regarding the education of children in a family. The children,
irrespective of their sex, must be subjected to same type of upbringing.
Secondly, to achieve global peace, violence against women must be put to an
end. The inequalities suffered by women in their families and in the economic
sphere become a major source of structural violence against them. The same
traits that foster violence against women happen to be the cause of violence at
other levels.
Understanding the origin of dualism brings a
broader perspective to the analysis of social dysfunction and formation of
political agenda. Val Plumwood sees the origin of dualism with the Greeks,
particularly Plato. Women were not part of the world of ideas in Greek culture
and they were separated by associating them with household activities only. The
society gave more value to the life of fighting wars and dying gloriously in
battle. Such a society conceptualized dualism as inseparable part of their
basic ideologies. In present time, science and technology have extended the
dualistic thinking by controlling the rhythm of nature. Many projects are
accomplished at the cost of nature by giving less preference to the natural
phenomena. This has been the cause of environmental imbalance and destruction.
Plumwood's political vision is to dismantle the
processes that create dualisms. Women, men, and nature are socially structured
through dualisms. Catriona Sandilands argues, “It is only through
deconstructing the dualisms themselves that a future harmony can be reached...”
(Sandilands 145). Ecofeminists are trying to find the ways that would bring
humanity back to equality-based paradigms and to the path of ecological
balance. Due to less importance given to nature by humans, earth is rapidly on
the path of destruction. Forests, soils, water, and air have been subjected to
polluting elements. The forests are disappearing at a fast rate and along with
them is disappearing the diversity of life they support. Vandana Shiva claims,
“The violenceto nature, which seems intrinsic to the dominant development
model, is also associated with violence to women who depend on nature for
drawing sustenance for themselves, their families, their societies” (Shiva
xvi). The need of the hour is to nurture and actively participate in the
formation of egalitarian and ecologically balanced global policies. Dr. Wangari
Muta Maathai was the first African woman and the first environmentalist to win
the Nobel Peace Prize in 2004. While working for the National Council of Women
in 1976, she introduced the practice of planting trees to conserve the
environment. She has helped women plant more than 30 million trees and runs an
organization named Green Belt Movement.
Karen J. Warren, an ecofeminist, opposes
hierarchical thinking based on class, race, age, sexual preference or any kind
of power-over relationship. She highlights five inter-related characteristics
of an ‘oppressive patriarchal conceptual framework’: 1) value-hierarchical
thinking (Up- Down relationship); 2) value dualisms (either-or thinking); 3)
power-over relationship; 4) conceptions of privilege; 5) logic of domination
(superiority justifies subordination). Ecofeminists critique that the
domination of nature by human beings is guided by patriarchal world view, the
same world view that justifies the domination of women. Rape, sexual
harassment, spouse-beating, and pornography are practices that are the outcome
of patriarchy.
Karen J. Warren argues in her article “Toward an
Ecofeminist Peace Politics” that the connections of violence lie ultimately in
patriarchy. She proposes ecofeminist peace politics for uprooting patriarchal
practices and to envision peace in the world. She suggests that this theory of
peace politics should be built like sewing a quilt to get a multi-layered
theory with various patches. This theory proposes various guidelines and
primarily aims at the development of anti-patriarchal philosophies and
practices, Warren writes, “... an ecofeminist peace politics quilt collectively
represents and records the stories of people of different ages, ethnicities,
affectional orientations, race and gender identities, and class backgrounds
committed to nonviolence...” (Warren 186).Warren clarifies that the agenda of
ecofeminist peace politics makes a central place for values of care, love,
friendship, and trust in human relationships and human- nature relationship. By
repudiating dualisms and hierarchy, it aims at promoting anti- domination
practices. Working against various activities connected to sexual assault,
racism, toxic dumping etc., becomes a part of ecofeminist peace agenda. Warren
argues that the creation of hierarchies and violence are inter-connected.
Hence, ecofeminist peace politics opposes unjustified systems of dominance and
subordination related to 'value-hierarchies. It also stresses upon valuing the
perspectives of local and indigenous people.
Karen Warren proposes to develop analyses of
violence and nonviolence. She refers to various kinds of violence like violence
against self, violence against others, violence against earth, and systemic or
economic violence. Warren argues that patriarchy underlies all such kinds of
violence. Ecofeminists envision the kind of society that complies with the
agenda of ecofeminist peace politics. “An ecofeminist society would be
egalitarian and ecologically sustainable. There would be no sexual/gender
division of labour, and any necessary work would be integrated with all aspects
of communal life” (Mellor 69). The aim of this politics is to break apart the
dualisms and hierarchical structures in order to bring balance in human
relationships. Murray Bookchin, a social ecologist, has also given his
viewpoints regarding ways to maintain balance in society. He is of the opinion
that domination of nature by man stems from the domination of human by human.
The solution lies in having an egalitarian and eco-friendly society. Bookchin
proposes to create a harmonious society in which people do not cross ecological
boundaries and repudiate the domination of humans by humans. Vandana Shiva lays
emphasis upon ‘feminine principle’ that should serve as the principle of
activity and creativity in both women and men. This principle is based on
inclusiveness and includes nature as a living entity, women as productive, and
men as relocating their activities to create life-enhancing societies. The
recovery of this principle is needed for a non-patriarchal, non-gendered, and
non- violent society.
Works
Cited
Anzaldua, Gloria. Borderlands
La Frontera. San Francisco: Aunt Lute Books, 1987. Print.
Lahar, Stephanie. “Ecofeminist
Theory and Grassroots Politics.” Ecological Feminist Philosophies. Ed.
Karen J. Warren. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1996. 1-18. Print.
Mellor, Mary. Feminism
& Ecology. U.K: Polity Press, 1997. Print.
Plumwood, Val. “The
Ecopolitics Debate and the Politics of Nature.”Ecological Feminism. Ed.
Karen J. Warren. London: Routledge, 1994, 64-87. Print.
Sandilands, Catriona. The
Good-Natured Feminist. London: University of Minnesota Press, 1999.
Print.
Shiva, Vandana. Staying
Alive: Women, Ecology and Survival in India. London: Zed Books Ltd., 1988.
Print.
Slicer, Deborah. “Wrongs of
Passage: Three Challenges to the Maturing of Ecofeminism.”Ecological
Feminism. Ed. Karen J. Warren. London: Routledge, 1994, 29-41. Print.
Warren, Karen J. “Toward an
Ecofeminist Peace Politics.”Ecological Feminism. Ed. Karen J. Warren.
London: Routledge, 1994. 179-99. Print.