Well, I was going to include one half of "ecofeminism" as an example of why the "Environmental Movement" has gone astray, but someone always thinks I dismiss all of ecofeminism, which I do not. I do dismiss that part that says that women, because of their reproductive status, have a "better" view of environmental problems. I do agree, however, that all policy, especially in the US has been and is dominated by too narrow of a cultural focus. I believe that there are only 4 or 5 Senators who are not white male millionaires. Of that I consider being a millionaire the biggest obstacle to clear thinking.
Here in Central America most drivers are males and you can see examples of testosterone poisoning every day.
I´ll give your posts the attention they deserve next week,
Regards,
Steven
Q. How do you make God laugh?
A. You tell Her your plans.
2nd corollary to Murphy´s Law
----- Original Message -----
From: Jennifer Simon <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Saturday, February 5, 2005 9:47 am
Subject: Re: Death of Environmentalism was Greens Oppose Sealing
> The entirety of the post was the article. As a white woman, it
> would be rather
> disingenuous of me to claim that white folks are incapable of credible
> analysis. However, while the article may take that view a step
> too far, I do
> believe that any group of people who have been comfortably settled
> within the
> power structure without challenge tend to get a little tunnel
> visioned. Just
> another consideration, of course.
>
> Quoting STEVEN BISSELL <[log in to unmask]>:
>
> > Jenniver,
> > Interesting post. I´ll try to give it more time next week. One
> quote got my
> > attention however.
> > "The paper -- based on interviews with 25 leaders in the mainstream
> > environmental movement (nearly all of them, like S&N, white
> meen) --"
> > Does this imply that white men are incapable of credible
> analysis? That is a
> > very strange sort of sexist/racist thinking IMHO. Not sure if
> that is your
> > quote Jennifer or the article.
> > Steven
> >
> >
|