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.
__________________
Reach out.
|