What Should We Do To Effect Change?

[AmazonWoman1]

I was having a discussion with another person about how bad things appear lately & pondered but what do I do about it that will TRULY make a change.I am deeply concerned about the environment & the decreasing amount of species as well as the full out destruction of our oceans by using them as toilets & dumping sites as well as over fishing.The removal of the feminine characteristics from the balance of life has meant all out greed & looting of most countries resources without any healthy mining or eco controls or compensation occurring. I think it is due to the corruption & removal of the feminine from our societies & an over valuing of mens characteristics till they have become right to our detriment.By this I mean fairness ,compassion,kindness,loving,working for the good of the group.all of these things denote weakness.We now have rape camps in places.It is also cheaper to purchase a slave than it has EVER been.So I wanted to KNOW what exactly do we do to effect real change about these things?I thought that for the earth make her a entity like a corporation like they did with rights etc.Please share any & all ideas you have as I am truly serious.Thank you.

[traumaqueen]

...because I told you to, duh.

[meridiantoo]

Oh boy! I love this topic...

Where do you start?

1) I truly think the best way we bring about change is to change ourselves and set an example. Otherwise, we are hypocrites or worse.

“Be the change you want to see in the world.” ~ Gandhi

2) Eat sustainably.

3) Recycle, recycle, recycle.

4) Use buying power to it's fullest potential.

5) Make feminine not derogatory in your own world and mirror that to others.

Can't wait to see what others have to say!

[meridiantoo]

...because I told you to, duh.

You're always hilarious and well-timed!

:formalbow:

[meridiantoo]

6) If all else fails, kill off all the current politicians/corporate CEOs and start anew!

:getout:

[traumaqueen]

In my experience... as a 'volunteerer'... I never have learned how to say no... I've found most of us tend to get stuck somewhere between a - I see the need for and want to make change, stage and an I'm actually mobilizing for change stage. I think this is why Gandhi's approach was so accurate. We sometimes forget that within and at the end of every so called 'corrupt system' are human beings. These things we want to change are not untouchable entities that exist beyond our control, or beyond our day to day.

[AmazonWoman1]

In my experience... as a 'volunteerer'... I never have learned how to say no... I've found most of us tend to get stuck somewhere between a - I see the need for and want to make change, stage and an I'm actually mobilizing for change stage. I think this is why Gandhi's approach was so accurate. We sometimes forget that within and at the end of every so called 'corrupt system' are human beings. These things we want to change are not untouchable entities that exist beyond our control, or beyond our day to day.

So are you saying the best way to change things is to effect small changes & hope they spiral out?Won't the same problems just keep reoccurring over & over then & never cease?Is'nt that the definition of forced entropy?

[Teddybear]

I agree with a lot if what the op stated however I don't believe we have removed the feminine from our society. I think people have been told so much and by so many that showing those feelings towards things other then ppl is showing a weakness. I believe these aren't just feminine but HUMAN.

I will admit that prior to meeting ms cinn I didn't do all I could have to help the planet. She has me recycling and reusing things I would have never thought of.

I think we really need to look into technology that has been around for decades that can and DO HAVE trash to create electricity. There has been so much bad press because IMHO they pose a threat to the big power companies.

[Ginger]

It's new for me, this equating of "feminine" with eco-friendly.

I guess that means "masculine" is eco-harmful?

I don't think I accept that premise.

Who says "feminine" can't be greedy or destructive?

One early feminist writer, Robin Morgan (her poetry is laughably bad but she did make some brave points at the time), said that instead of seeing fucking as a kind of penetration, we should view it as "enclosure."

Extending that POV, feminine energy can enclose, contain, trap, and generally fuck up the environment just as effectively as masculine energy can drill, pierce, stab and otherwise damage the natural world.

Either style of "using" the environment for the user's best interest with disregard for the best interest of the environment is exploitive.

That said, I strongly support all the suggestions people have made so far in the thread: recycling, being conscious of our personal foot print, and so on.

[Gráinne]

I'm really uncomfortable with the dividing up of "masculine" and "feminine" characteristics. One isn't all bad all the time, or all good all the time.

Instead of making it about gender characteristics, which is a mightly slippery slope, let's work for the empowerment of all peoples, especially women and children. As for the environment, there are many groups out there working for just those things you mentioned.

[meridiantoo]

It's new for me, this equating of "feminine" with eco-friendly.

I guess that means "masculine" is eco-harmful?

I don't think I accept that premise.

Who says "feminine" can't be greedy or destructive?



I totally agree, but I think our society has accepted a norm for what "masculine" and "feminine" entail, based largely on male-dominant premises that undermine the feminine aspects of life as something separate and weak. What truly encompasses masculine, at least in my mind, is not so defined by those norms. I think it depends on whose definitions you embrace. But, I think feminine can be just as destructive, definitely.

[AmazonWoman1]

I totally agree, but I think our society has accepted a norm for what "masculine" and "feminine" entail, based largely on male-dominant premises that undermine the feminine aspects of life as something separate and weak. What truly encompasses masculine, at least in my mind, is not so defined by those norms. I think it depends on whose definitions you embrace. But, I think feminine can be just as destructive, definitely.

I myself do not believe in the concepts named masculine & feminine truly saying anything about the nature of things.I have never seen genitals on a so called mens watch nor woman's.I was trying to show how languaging characteristics labeled as so called feminine & then minimizing them causes them to be seen as negative & therefore in our mythology they are deprecated until they are punished.The same way as when we wanted to kill the Vietnamese peoples we called them names like "gook" etc to seperate them from us & to thereby make the different person acceptable to murder.The concepts of nurturing compassion etc seem to have been made negative to the point that there appears to be open war on women about birth control & rape.Some countries now regularly set up rape camps.America has never had a female leader while others have for decades.I think this trend of devaluing anything seen as feminine to where pussy & cunt are seen as offensive swear words has serious implications.Once those things have occurred the behavior changes towards people appearing to possess those characteristics.Women got the right to vote nearly 100 years after blacks & they were slaves.History repeated itself when a black male was made president over a white female.When you do that you unbalance the equation tremendously.Male/ female energy is supposed to balance each other.Neither is better nor worse.They just are.The fact it has become so unbalanced is the problem.Entitlement comes from the unbalancing.If a person is entitled they are not fair.Corruption is about someone believing they have a right to more.I wonder what would make this truth more apparent to people.Simple things like why do women have to shave?Why do women pay more at the dry cleaner or hairdresser to get services when a male pays less for the same services?Sine rape is so prevalent why isn't it being reported?Mythology becomes action.How do we change the mythology before it destroys our way of life.I am not trying to man bash etc.We all live or die here together.And in the end no one gets off this planet alive*S*

[meridiantoo]

Mythology becomes action.How do we change the mythology before it destroys our way of life.I am not trying to man bash etc.We all live or die here together.And in the end no one gets off this planet alive*S*

Excellent post! :goodscore:

Mythology is action.

I'm not male/masculine/gender bashing either. It's what our society has deemed as masculine/powerful/acceptable that's the problem.

Great thread!

[Ginger]

I think whether we like it or not, the application of "masculine" and "feminine" dynamics is going to creep into eco-topics of discussion.

That said, I've been lectured by friends in academia on the evils of "essentialism," and I "get" how uncool it is to stereotype around gender.

On the other hand, in the context of environmentalism, if, for example, there is a male-dominated industry doing the damage, it's hard not to attribute some kind of male energy (and class dominance!) as being part of the equation.

(Good grief I'm all over the place...)

That said, obviously like others have said, the movement to clean up and protect the earth is a movement comprised of people from all walks of life and identifications, though damage to the earth affects men and women differently overall, if you look at the demographics of who is affected by failing economies.

Of course eventually, everyone will be affected by a dying earth, some just sooner than others.

I work on the same floor as a sustainability team, four men and two women, and I respect them each individually and as a unit and they all care deeply about our impact on the environment. They also strike me as a group not affected the toxins of sexism that make my environment a place where I have to tread cautiously and often keep my opinions to myself, so as to not set off hostile, sexist comments and other ugly behaviors.

On a related note, personally it always bugged me when people talked of "mother" earth (Alice Walker included), but it's human nature to personify things so we can understand them.

Gender is a valid facet of the environmental discussion, though it helps me personally to feel more hopeful when I think about and hear of the little practical things people can do to keep the planet healthier.

[meridiantoo]

On a related note, personally it always bugged me when people talked of "mother" earth (Alice Walker included), but it's human nature to personify things so we can understand them.

Love this statement, so true.

[meridiantoo]

I know I'm going to step on some toes when I say this, so I apologize in advance.

It seems that it is masculine-centered norms that are destroying our earth, not to the exclusion of the feminine participating in that destruction, but I think by far, it's masculine-dominant thinking, as our society has defined it, that contributes the most to how we live.

So, how do we (especially as lesbians/Trans/Queer/Non-bio male) address a straight white bio-male dominated societal mentality?

1) I try to look at what we can personally do first, and that illuminates to me to focus on raising boys. Mothers in our society help to form the very disgusting gender-bashing and idea that males are the entitled sex and deserve different/biased treatment. I see it all the time in parent/child dynamics.

2) I think we have to get bolder in our (the GLTB community) views and work through action.

3) For God's sake, VOTE!

This is where I get stumped and would love to hear what others have to say.

[Ginger]

I know I'm going to step on some toes when I say this, so I apologize in advance.

It seems that it is masculine-centered norms that are destroying our earth, not to the exclusion of the feminine participating in that destruction, but I think by far, it's masculine-dominant thinking, as our society has defined it, that contributes the most to how we live.

So, how do we (especially as lesbians/Trans/Queer/Non-bio male) address a straight white bio-male dominated societal mentality?

1) I try to look at what we can personally do first, and that illuminates to me to focus on raising boys. Mothers in our society help to form the very disgusting gender-bashing and idea that males are the entitled sex and deserve different/biased treatment. I see it all the time in parent/child dynamics.

2) I think we have to get bolder in our (the GLTB community) views and work through action.

3) For God's sake, VOTE!

This is where I get stumped and would love to hear what others have to say.

Well I'm not a mom and I had a really hard time being a stepmom (my partner didn't want me to use that word, but I don't know what else to call it except I was that lady that lived in the house for a while).

So my views on raising boys are based on 1) my own miserable experience of living with a boy for over two years; and 2) my observations of lesbian moms—I'm thinking of five women whose homes I've been in and whose kids I've met.

I'm mulling over whether they raised entitled brats or responsible non-sexist men.

But you know what, the mom is not the only factor in how a kid turns out, powerful as moms are. Society and culture and peers and the economy and DNA are such huge factors in a kid's development. The mom does her best, is a huge, huge influence—but the kid also lives in a big world outside the family.

You're right, we can do our best to raise nice humans. But we're not totally to "blame" if they don't turn out that way, IMO.

(Said the non-parenting femme, who was a miserable failure as a "stepmom.")

[meridiantoo]

Well I'm not a mom and I had a really hard time being a stepmom (my partner didn't want me to use that word, but I don't know what else to call it except I was that lady that lived in the house for a while).

So my views on raising boys are based on 1) my own miserable experience of living with a boy for over two years; and 2) my observations of lesbian moms—I'm thinking of five women whose homes I've been in and whose kids I've met.

I'm mulling over whether they raised entitled brats or responsible non-sexist men.

But you know what, the mom is not the whole equation. Society and culture and peers and the economy and their own DNA is such a huge factor in a kid's development. The mom does her best, is a huge, huge influence—but the kid also lives in a big world outside the family.

You're right, we can do our best to raise nice humans. But we're not totally to "blame" if they don't turn out that way, IMO.

(Said the non-parenting femme, who was a miserable failure as a "stepmom.")


Well said.

I don't mean to imply it's all on the mom, but I think parents have to start there, where the mythology begins to form. I did make that statement biased toward those who identify as female/feminine, and I apologize. Fathers are just as needed/responsible and capable. And it takes a village to raise a child - so many influences and factors that contribute. But, I think parents have the most impact.

I see a trend with the Baby-Boomer generation that will dissolve as that group passes out of the "changers and money-makers" realm - the mentality that the father is bread-winner and the strong sex and the woman is the stay-at-home domestic goddess where she belongs. People now raise their daughters to be strong, independent, smart, and make good choices that affect their futures. This was not always so. But, no one seems to focus on the boys, other than to teach them to be a responsible, productive member of society as well as the usuals (protect and never hit women, women are the weaker of the of two sexes). I think the newer generations will see a more balanced view between the sexes just as they are more accepting of the GLTB community.

Just as an aside, if your partner did not even recognize you as a step-parent in the relationship (this is me speaking with no knowledge of your relationship nor any of the parameters) then it stands to reason that you would fail as a step-parent. You were set-up to fail. You cannot be an effective parent where the other parent/partner devalues your role, mirrors to the child that you are just a temporary, non-parental fixture, and I hope that you don't judge yourself so harshly for that. I've dated 2 women long-term with children (I do not have children of my own). I understand, or at least think I do, many of the facets of this, but I still think, in the end, if you are not given shared responsibility and parental role authority in the relationship, then you will not be anything other than "the current one my parent sleeps with". This is fine for some and best for temporary, passing relationships. This is a whole other topic and thread, but I wanted to say this to you because I struggled with feeling like a failure also until I understood better what was really happening.

[Arwen]

On a related note, personally it always bugged me when people talked of "mother" earth (Alice Walker included), but it's human nature to personify things so we can understand them.


Mother Earth, for me, is a living, breathing entity. She is part of my spiritual beliefs. Why would it bug you for someone to speak of their Deity?

Or do you not factor that in? I believe that is how Alice Walker uses the term as well. For me, Mother Earth is Gaia. Gaia is one of the many names of the Goddess. I also hold to the GreenMan as the living embodiment of the forest. He is the masculine soul.

But to the original poster (op)'s comment, I flat out do not think it is a feminine or a masculine problem. I think (and I know this will be twitchy for some) that it is the attitude of stewardship that some religions teach. That of humans being somehow superior and therefore "in charge" of nature.

We should, in my opinion, live in a partnership with nature not an attitude of ownership.

Can small things make a change? Yes. And, for me, they are far better than big splashy things. My turning off the water when I brush my teeth or wash my hands is a, you should pardon the pun, drop in the bucket, but it counts. More than that, it adds up.

I may not be able to do the twice a year "clean up the river" patrols, but by the Gods I can and do conserve the water I can touch.

I also recycle as much as possible.

YMMV of course. Each person can only do what they are called, moved to do. And that is the right thing for them.

Gender, for me, has no place in this discussion. Religion, though...religion certainly does. :D

By the way, I am in no way angry at IslandScout (I assume she knows that but will caveat this in case since we are still under a Mercury Retrograde.)

[meridiantoo]

Mother Earth, for me, is a living, breathing entity. She is part of my spiritual beliefs. Why would it bug you for someone to speak of their Deity?

Or do you not factor that in? I believe that is how Alice Walker uses the term as well. For me, Mother Earth is Gaia. Gaia is one of the many names of the Goddess. I also hold to the GreenMan as the living embodiment of the forest. He is the masculine soul.

But to the original poster (op)'s comment, I flat out do not think it is a feminine or a masculine problem. I think (and I know this will be twitchy for some) that it is the attitude of stewardship that some religions teach. That of humans being somehow superior and therefore "in charge" of nature.

We should, in my opinion, live in a partnership with nature not an attitude of ownership.

Can small things make a change? Yes. And, for me, they are far better than big splashy things. My turning off the water when I brush my teeth or wash my hands is a, you should pardon the pun, drop in the bucket, but it counts. More than that, it adds up.

I may not be able to do the twice a year "clean up the river" patrols, but by the Gods I can and do conserve the water I can touch.

I also recycle as much as possible.

YMMV of course. Each person can only do what they are called, moved to do. And that is the right thing for them.

Gender, for me, has no place in this discussion. Religion, though...religion certainly does. :D

By the way, I am in no way angry at IslandScout (I assume she knows that but will caveat this in case since we are still under a Mercury Retrograde.)


Love this post, Arwen!

The concept of stewardship is something I never considered, but I think exactly what we are talking about. Thank you for that perspective.

I think what we do on a personal level makes a huge difference, especially when combined with the same/similar actions of others.

[Ginger]

On a related note, personally it always bugged me when people talked of "mother" earth (Alice Walker included), but it's human nature to personify things so we can understand them.



[COLOR=Purple]
Mother Earth, for me, is a living, breathing entity. She is part of my spiritual beliefs. Why would it bug you for someone to speak of their Deity?

Or do you not factor that in? I believe that is how Alice Walker uses the term as well. For me, Mother Earth is Gaia. Gaia is one of the many names of the Goddess. I also hold to the GreenMan as the living embodiment of the forest. He is the masculine soul.

[/SIZE]


Hi, Arwen.

I didn't mean to denigrate anyone's beliefs, if that's what I did.

These words might have been better: I don't share the belief that the earth is a female being. I have very, very deep feelings and haunting sadness for the earth and for all living things and for the ecosystem I'm part of, but I don't relate to their personification.

I was too flip I guess.

Scout

[Ginger]

Just as an aside, if your partner did not even recognize you as a step-parent in the relationship (this is me speaking with no knowledge of your relationship nor any of the parameters) then it stands to reason that you would fail as a step-parent. You were set-up to fail. You cannot be an effective parent where the other parent/partner devalues your role, mirrors to the child that you are just a temporary, non-parental fixture, and I hope that you don't judge yourself so harshly for that.

Thanks for that validation. I failed for a lot of other reasons too, but yeah, you're dead-on right about that part. Sorry to derail. I'll stay on track now.

[Arwen]

Hi, Arwen.

I didn't mean to denigrate anyone's beliefs, if that's what I did.

These words might have been better: I don't share the belief that the earth is a female being. I have very, very deep feelings and haunting sadness for the earth and for all living things and for the ecosystem I'm part of, but I don't relate to their personification.

I was too flip I guess.

Scout

Flip, maybe,but not wrong since that is your perspective. I accept your viewpoint. Like I said, not angry with you in the least. :D Just curious.

[femmeInterrupted]

Wonderful thread, and I've really enjoyed reading all the responses.


Dominion over vs Stewardship of.

I don't believe it's possible to take gender out of the equation when deconstructing pertinent issues that deal with a Power Over/Power Under construct.

I believe we would be hard pressed to NOT include gender. In the case of issues surrounding our world/environment, it seems fairly clear from my own standpoint, that the ways of conceptualizing power (Power over) fits within a domination/power over relation to the land/earth/environment. More specifically, an unjust or subjection of power that falls under oppression/patriarchy.

If we consider the matter closer to home (North America) then a post-colonial framework is appropriate, and a gendered lens is essential when rethinking our position. In terms of Environmental Stewardship, First Nation's people have long been regarded as societies working with nature, not against it.

In pre-contact society, many First Nations ( in Eastern and Western Canada) had matriarchal structures. The balance was that Chiefs could still be male, but were chosen by clan Mothers, and equally, removed if they didn't like what the chief was doing.

Even in Plains Nations, were societies tended to be patriarchal, the power differential was unimportant because women were respected and women's roles believed to be important to survival. Balance.

Gender inequality started creeping in the same time as the rape of north america began with the fur trade.
There is a parallel between not only this gender inequality, but colonization, the destruction of land/water/species and the advent of industry.

Sometimes I feel that we've internalized fears as women/feminists/lesbians about being seen 'man haters' etc.
Globally, our decision making power doesn't even register.
We hold bare percentages of the world's wealth/power. The issues that are contributing to the degradation of our enviroment are issues BECAUSE of male dominated systems of thinking/power/decision making.
This is what allows the disconnect. Without derailing this issue, ALL creatures get the shit end of the Patriarchy stick, boys and men included.

Of *course* there are men who are allies, who are globally conscious on all levels. Everybody loves David Suzuki! ;) But to not frame the discussion with some attention to gender leaves for me, not a lot of room for answers.
For me, there is no disconnecting any of it. Poverty. War. Pollution. Rape. Violence.

The OP used words like fairness, compassion, kindness, loving, collective work, etc. in describing the 'feminine'. These characteristics are heavily gendered. Women are expected to be compassionate and kind, etc. (and when not, are seen as flawed somehow) Men with those qualities are often derided for them, are seen as 'less than' a 'real man', and at the most misogynistic end, called 'pussies' or 'girls/women'. Of course, it's all a construct.

Anyways, that's my two.cents. (which will soon be a nickel, Canada has discontinued the penny!)

[meridiantoo]

Thanks for that validation. I failed for a lot of other reasons too, but yeah, you're dead-on right about that part. Sorry to derail. I'll stay on track now.

No worries with the derail part. I could have gone on and on, but I thought maybe it would best not to.

This would be a great thread to start, I think.

:bouquet:

[meridiantoo]

Wonderful thread, and I've really enjoyed reading all the responses.


Dominion over vs Stewardship of.

I don't believe it's possible to take gender out of the equation when deconstructing pertinent issues that deal with a Power Over/Power Under construct.

I believe we would be hard pressed to NOT include gender. In the case of issues surrounding our world/environment, it seems fairly clear from my own standpoint, that the ways of conceptualizing power (Power over) fits within a domination/power over relation to the land/earth/environment. More specifically, an unjust or subjection of power that falls under oppression/patriarchy.

If we consider the matter closer to home (North America) then a post-colonial framework is appropriate, and a gendered lens is essential when rethinking our position. In terms of Environmental Stewardship, First Nation's people have long been regarded as societies working with nature, not against it.

In pre-contact society, many First Nations ( in Eastern and Western Canada) had matriarchal structures. The balance was that Chiefs could still be male, but were chosen by clan Mothers, and equally, removed if they didn't like what the chief was doing.

Even in Plains Nations, were societies tended to be patriarchal, the power differential was unimportant because women were respected and women's roles believed to be important to survival. Balance.

Gender inequality started creeping in the same time as the rape of north america began with the fur trade.
There is a parallel between not only this gender inequality, but colonization, the destruction of land/water/species and the advent of industry.

Sometimes I feel that we've internalized fears as women/feminists/lesbians about being seen 'man haters' etc.
Globally, our decision making power doesn't even register.
We hold bare percentages of the world's wealth/power. The issues that are contributing to the degradation of our enviroment are issues BECAUSE of male dominated systems of thinking/power/decision making.
This is what allows the disconnect. Without derailing this issue, ALL creatures get the shit end of the Patriarchy stick, boys and men included.

Of *course* there are men who are allies, who are globally conscious on all levels. Everybody loves David Suzuki! ;) But to not frame the discussion with some attention to gender leaves for me, not a lot of room for answers.
For me, there is no disconnecting any of it. Poverty. War. Pollution. Rape. Violence.

The OP used words like fairness, compassion, kindness, loving, collective work, etc. in describing the 'feminine'. These characteristics are heavily gendered. Women are expected to be compassionate and kind, etc. (and when not, are seen as flawed somehow) Men with those qualities are often derided for them, are seen as 'less than' a 'real man', and at the most misogynistic end, called 'pussies' or 'girls/women'. Of course, it's all a construct.

Anyways, that's my two.cents. (which will soon be a nickel, Canada has discontinued the penny!)



I loved this post. But, I see it from both standpoints. On the one hand, I can see how it is a purely stewardship issue as both males/masculine and females/feminine are stewards in their individual lives and as a whole in society. Regardless of our place in life or level of power, we are stewards over something, even if only over our own lives/paths. Both sexes/qualities can be stewards and the frame of mind for stewardship is much different than that of power over something with the connotations of abuse and neglect. You can teach/apply this concept to both, and it already is taught, in my experience, in the Christian/formal church setting. I grew up listening to sermons on stewardship. Nonprofits operate on the premise of stewardship. I think our greed and looting of this land are extensions from life in Europe, the natural course of history and industrialization, and a sad, but real part of human nature. This way of life started long before European people came to this continent.

The idea that women should be demure and diligent to care for men and children is a *gulp* Christian concept, further perverted by greed, selfishness, and the need to feel powerful. It is imbedded in this world's frame and will be here as long as Christianity is, in some form.

There have been matriarchal societies that were not feminine in the judao-Christian definition of female-like, even in the pagan/Eastern philosophy sense of what female means. So, this is hard to use as a point, for me.

On the other hand, I think for our society as it stands now, it is about power and how that has ravaged our Earth and will continue to do so. And that power is attributed to males at this point, which cannot be denied or averted.

Love this thread - I hope more people get into it.

[AmazonWoman1]

I know I'm going to step on some toes when I say this, so I apologize in advance.

It seems that it is masculine-centered norms that are destroying our earth, not to the exclusion of the feminine participating in that destruction, but I think by far, it's masculine-dominant thinking, as our society has defined it, that contributes the most to how we live.

So, how do we (especially as lesbians/Trans/Queer/Non-bio male) address a straight white bio-male dominated societal mentality?

1) I try to look at what we can personally do first, and that illuminates to me to focus on raising boys. Mothers in our society help to form the very disgusting gender-bashing and idea that males are the entitled sex and deserve different/biased treatment. I see it all the time in parent/child dynamics.

2) I think we have to get bolder in our (the GLTB community) views and work through action.

3) For God's sake, VOTE!

This is where I get stumped and would love to hear what others have to say.

That teaching of entitlement to small boys does bring about the thinking that is destroying Everything.Even Ensler has planned an earth day to tie it inhttp://www.care2.com/causes/eve-ensler-goes-ecofeminist.html

I just really want to know how do we break the chains of this mindset to become more aware & less unhappy.

[AmazonWoman1]

Wonderful thread, and I've really enjoyed reading all the responses.


Dominion over vs Stewardship of.

I don't believe it's possible to take gender out of the equation when deconstructing pertinent issues that deal with a Power Over/Power Under construct.

I believe we would be hard pressed to NOT include gender. In the case of issues surrounding our world/environment, it seems fairly clear from my own standpoint, that the ways of conceptualizing power (Power over) fits within a domination/power over relation to the land/earth/environment. More specifically, an unjust or subjection of power that falls under oppression/patriarchy.

If we consider the matter closer to home (North America) then a post-colonial framework is appropriate, and a gendered lens is essential when rethinking our position. In terms of Environmental Stewardship, First Nation's people have long been regarded as societies working with nature, not against it.

In pre-contact society, many First Nations ( in Eastern and Western Canada) had matriarchal structures. The balance was that Chiefs could still be male, but were chosen by clan Mothers, and equally, removed if they didn't like what the chief was doing.

Even in Plains Nations, were societies tended to be patriarchal, the power differential was unimportant because women were respected and women's roles believed to be important to survival. Balance.

Gender inequality started creeping in the same time as the rape of north america began with the fur trade.
There is a parallel between not only this gender inequality, but colonization, the destruction of land/water/species and the advent of industry.

Sometimes I feel that we've internalized fears as women/feminists/lesbians about being seen 'man haters' etc.
Globally, our decision making power doesn't even register.
We hold bare percentages of the world's wealth/power. The issues that are contributing to the degradation of our enviroment are issues BECAUSE of male dominated systems of thinking/power/decision making.
This is what allows the disconnect. Without derailing this issue, ALL creatures get the shit end of the Patriarchy stick, boys and men included.

Of *course* there are men who are allies, who are globally conscious on all levels. Everybody loves David Suzuki! ;) But to not frame the discussion with some attention to gender leaves for me, not a lot of room for answers.
For me, there is no disconnecting any of it. Poverty. War. Pollution. Rape. Violence.

The OP used words like fairness, compassion, kindness, loving, collective work, etc. in describing the 'feminine'. These characteristics are heavily gendered. Women are expected to be compassionate and kind, etc. (and when not, are seen as flawed somehow) Men with those qualities are often derided for them, are seen as 'less than' a 'real man', and at the most misogynistic end, called 'pussies' or 'girls/women'. Of course, it's all a construct.

Anyways, that's my two.cents. (which will soon be a nickel, Canada has discontinued the penny!)



I so wish I could have said all that in such a clear concise way.Thank you*S*

[meridiantoo]

I just really want to know how do we break the chains of this mindset to become more aware & less unhappy.

I think the root of it is capitalism, I really do. It's the foundation of our socio-political structure that is to blame. But, how can this be changed? :deepthoughts:

[femmeInterrupted]

This just came across my path. Thought of this conversation.

http://dgrnewsservice.org/2013/03/01/derrick-jensen-the-age-of-the-sociopath/

[meridiantoo]

Great article. :goodpost:


Quoting from the above article: "Humans don’t destroy landbases. Civilized humans destroy landbases, and they have been doing so since the beginning of civilization." ~ Derrick Jensen

It seems this revolves around the transition from agrarian to civilized societies. When people are in touch with the earth, literally and thus psychologically, they lose respect for and connection with the land, I think.

Our focus changed when industrialization spread here and that changed the "American Dream" concept from owning your own land and living off of its bounty to how much money can I make to place myself in a higher socio-economic bracket.

However, the rape and pillaging of the land that happens is not a recent development. It merely changed from women/animals/whomever is considered an enemy (less than myself) as the main target to land as the main target. I think of the Roman Empire and their barbaric society. I think of Lord/Feudal systems in Europe and I am not convinced that it is a purely "type of man" problem as much as it is a "human man" problem. While these are examples of civilized societies, there is recorded evidence of the same type of behavior/mentality since recorded history began. We just did not have the tools/weapons of mass destruction/capability to induce such catastrophic damage on such a large scale in such a short time period.

This leads me back to the idea of stewardship that Arwen introduced. I think this still applies as the best answer, but it still seems to me that the more masculine/male/yang characteristics/qualities are the overall perpetrators in the destruction of land/people/animals.

Thoughts? Opinions? Perspectives?

[Bad_boi]

We need to be the POSITIVE change we want to see.

What I constantly see that drives me crazy is when people shame those who are ignorant. We need to EDUCATE instead of make people feel bad. If something offends you say so. However if you treat people poorly because of their shortcomings it does not make them want to listen. Saying: "Please do not say "X" because it is hurtful and offensive". Is a LOT more effective than going on a rant and calling someone names.

[ClassyStud]

Changing back to "What should we do to Effect Change?"

I am seriously thinking of moving at least for a few months to see if its what I want. Wondering what the planet thinks. Is this this a good way to spawn change in ones life or do your troubles follow you as the saying goes?