See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/344898206

An Overview of Ecofeminism: Women, Nature and Hierarchies

Article in the Journal of Academic Social Sciences · September 2020

DOI: 10.29228/JASSS.45458

CITATIONS READS
11 9,985

1 author:

Yıldız Merve Öztürk

İzmir Demokrasi Üniversitesi
2 PUBLICATIONS 11 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Yıldız Merve Öztürk on 27 October 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 The Journal of Academic Social Science Studies
Yıl: 13 - Sayı: 81 , s. 705-714, Güz 2020

An Overview of Ecofeminism: Women, Nature and Hierarchies

Yıldız Merve Öztürk

ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1052-9536
Kırgızistan Türkiye Manas Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İngiliz Dili ve Edebiyatı Anabilim Dalı Tezli
Yüksek Lisans Öğrencisi, Bişkek – KIRGIZİSTAN

Makale Geçmişi
Geliş: 23.07.2020
Kabul: 08.09.2020
On-line Yayın: 30.09.2020
Anahtar Kelimeler
Ekofeminizm
Kadın
Doğa
Eril-Merkezcilik
Toplumsal Hiyerarşi
Araştırma Makalesi
DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.29228/JASSS.45458
Öz
Ekofeminizm, kadınların ve doğanın eril-egemen toplumda nesnelleştirilmelerinden
dolayı çevre ve kadın meselelerinin birbiriyle bağlantılı olduğunu iddia eden
disiplinler arası eleştirel bir teoridir. Bu teoriye göre, sistem eril-merkezli bir
hiyerarşi ve dualiteler oluşturarak toplumda eşitsizlik yaratır ve erkeklere üstünlük
sağlar. Diğer yandan, bu hiyerarşi ve ikilikler eril olmayan varlıkların üzerinde baskı
kurmak ve onları ötekileştirmek için kullanılır. Böylelikle, eril-egemen hiyerarşik
düzende, erkek/kadın, kültür/doğa, insan/doğa, beyaz/siyah, bilinç/bilinçdışı,
mantık/duygu, ruh/beden gibi dualiteler meydana gelir ve birinci olan ikinciye
hükmeder. Yani, bu düzende erkek kadından, kültür doğadan ve mantık duygudan
daha üstündür. Ayrıca, erkek kadından üstün sayıldığı için tüm baskın özellikler
erkeklere atfedilir ve alt özellikler kadınlarla ilişkilendirilir. Bu şekilde, erkek
kültürü, bilinci, mantığı ve ruhu sembolize ederken, kadın doğayı, bilinçsizliği,
duyguyu ve vücudu temsil eder. Bu durumda, eril-egemen toplumda kadın ve doğa
birbirilerine yakın olurlar ve benzer şekilde kavramsallaştırılırlar. Bu yakınlığa sebep
veren temel faktör, hem doğanın hem de kadınların üreyebilme ve yaratabilme
kabiliyetleri olmasıdır. Mesela, kadınlar insanları dünyaya getirirken, doğa da
kaynaklarıyla yeryüzünde yaşamın sürekliliğini sağlar. Bir diğer faktör ise, ikisinin
de toplumda pasif rol alması ve bağımlı olmasıdır. Kadınlar doğurganlıkları
nedeniyle domestik yaşam sürmeye zorlanırlar ve pasifleşirler. Ekonomik
özgürlüklerini elde edemeyen kadınlar erkeklere bağımlı olurlar. Diğer yandan, doğa
da tabiatı gereği aktif bir varlık değildir. Doğa hareket edemediği ve konuşamadığı
için insanlara bağımlı bir pozisyonu olur. Kadın ile doğa arasındaki bu bağ
kadınların doğurganlığını doğallaştırırken, doğanın verimliliğini ise kadınlaştırır.
Örneğin, kadının doğaya daha yakın olması durumu onun üreyebilme özelliğinin
doğal bir durum olarak algılanmasını sağlar ve annelik kadının en doğal vazifesi
olarak resmedilir. Buna ek olarak, kadınların biyolojik yapıları yüzünden domestik
hayat yaşamaları da doğal algılanır. Böylelikle, kadınların toplumsal kimlik
edinememeleri ve erkeğe bağımlı olmaları normalize edilir, kadınlar toplumda obje
olarak var olurlar. Diğer yandan, doğa da eril-merkezli sistemde tıpkı bir anne
üretkenliği ve cömertliğiyle öne çıkar. Doğa yenilenebilir kaynaklarıyla ataerkil
sisteme hizmet eder. Böylelikle, sistem doğayı bolluk, sonsuz kaynak ve gücünü
sağlayan bir obje olarak algılar. Sonuç olarak, hem kadınlar hem de doğa eril-egemen
toplumda nesnelleştirilir ve sömürülür. Sistem kadınların doğa ile yakınlığını onları
toplumdan dışlamak için öne sürer. Bu çalışma, eril-merkezli hiyerarşinin ve
dualitelerin erkekleri yüceltirken eril olmayanları nasıl ezdiğine ışık tutar; kadınlarla
doğanın neden yakın algılandığını açıklar. Ayrıca çalışma bu bağın kadınları ve
doğayı ötekileştirerek onları yakın bir şekilde kavramsallaştırdığını gösterir.
Ardından çalışmada Âdem ile Havva’nın anlatısına değinilerek erkek/kadın,
kültür/doğa ve insan/doğa hiyerarşileri örneklendirilir ve bu anlatıda doğayla kadına
karşı baskıcı tavır açığa çıkarılır. Sonuç olarak, çalışma eril-merkezli toplumda aynı
muamele gördükleri için çevre ve kadın meselelerinin birbiriyle ilişkili olduğunu
savunan ekofeminist teori üzerine geniş bir perspektif sunar.

Atıf Bilgisi / Reference Information

Öztürk, Y. M. (2020). An Overview of Ecofeminism: Women, Nature and Hierarchies. Jass Studies-The
Journal of Academic Social Science Studies, Number: 81, Autumn, p. 705-714.
 The Journal of Academic Social Science Studies
Year: 13 - Number: 81 , p. 705-714, Autumn 2020

Ekofeminizme Genel Bir Bakış: Kadınlar, Doğa ve Hiyerarşiler

Yıldız Merve Öztürk

Kyrgyzstan Turkey Manas University, Institute of Social Sciences, English Language and Literature,
Thesis Master Student, Bishkek – KYRGYZTAN

Artcile History Abstract

Ecofeminism is an interdisciplinary critical theory which claims that environmental
and women's issues are interconnected because of the objectification of women and
Submitted: 23.07.2020 nature in a male-dominant society. According to this theory, the system forms a
Accepted: 08.09.2020 male-centred hierarchy and dualities, creating inequality in society and providing the
superiority for men. On the other hand, the hierarchy and dualities are used to exert
Published Online: 30.09.2020
pressure on non-male beings and marginalize them. Thus, in the male-dominant
hierarchical order dualities such as male/female, culture/nature, human/nature,
white/black, unconscious/unconscious, logic/emotion, soul/body occur, and former
Key Words dominates the latter. That is, in this order, man is superior to woman, culture is
superior to nature, and logic is to emotion. Also, since the man is considered superior
Ecofeminism to the woman, all the superior features are attributed to the male and the inferior
features are associated with the female. In this way, while man symbolizes culture,
Woman
consciousness, logic and spirit, woman represents nature, unconsciousness, emotion
Nature and body. In this case, women and nature become close to each other in a male-
dominant society and are similarly conceptualized. The main factor causing this
Androcentrism bond is the ability of both nature and women to reproduce and create. For example,
while women bring humans into the world, nature ensures the continuity of life on
Social Hierarchy earth with natural resources. Another factor is that both of them have a passive role
in society and are dependent. Women are pushed to live a domestic life and become
passive due to their fertility. Women who cannot achieve their economic freedom
become dependent on men. On the other hand, nature is not an active being
intrinsically. Since nature cannot move and speak, it has a position that is dependent
on humans. The bond between woman and nature naturalizes the fertility of women
and feminizes the fruitfulness of nature. For example, the fact that the woman is
closer to nature ensures that her reproducibility is perceived as a natural condition,
and motherhood is portrayed as the woman's most natural duty. Besides, it is natural
for women to be domestic because of their biological structure. Thus, the fact that
women cannot acquire social identity and depend on men is normalied, and women
exist as objects in society. On the other hand, nature stands out in the male-centred
Research Article system with its productivity and generosity, just like a mother. Nature serves the
patriarchal system with its renewable resources. Thus, the system perceives nature as
an object that provides abundance, infinite resources and power. As a result, both
women and nature are objectified and exploited in the masculine-dominated society.
The system puts forward women's closeness with nature to exclude them from
society. This study sheds light on how the male-centred hierarchy and dualities crush
non-male beings while glorifying men; explains why nature and women are
perceived closer to each other. The study also shows that this link by marginalizing
them conceptualizes women and nature closely. Then in the study, the hierarchy of
men/women, culture/nature and human/nature is exemplified by mentioning the
narrative of Adam and Eve, and in this narrative, oppressive attitude towards
women and nature is revealed. As a result, the study provides a broad perspective on
DOI: ecofeminist theory, which advocates that environmental and women's issues are
interrelated as they are treated the same in the male-centred society.
http://dx.doi.org/10.29228/JASSS.45458
 Yıldız Merve Öztürk

INTRODUCTION
Ecofeminism is a political, philosophical and social movement, and according to this
movement, women and nature are exploited by the male-dominant system. Thus, this critical theory
claims that environmental problems and women’s issues are interrelated. That is, as the patriarchal
order continues to exploit nature, discrimination against women will also endure. Similarly, as long as
the sex segregation persists, the exploitation of nature will continue. As a term, ecofeminism was first
coined in 1974 by the French thinker Françoise d'Eaubonne. According to this theory, white Western
patriarchal societies create a male-centred culture, and through this culture impose social hierarchies
and dualities. The hierarchies and dualities give superiority to men while subduing non-male beings.
For example, dualities such as men/women, white/black, culture/nature, West/East, strong/weak,
soul/body, mind/emotion are put forward to create hierarchies in western societies. These dualities
create an unequal order in society, and impose a superior/inferior relationship. Thus, while the former
is dominant, the latter is subordinate. Just as Pelin Kümbet notifies, in this system, the former asserts
control over the latter; therefore, the latter is discriminated and underestimated (2012:172). In this case,
for example, white people have superior positions, while black people have inferior positions. Also,
while the East is represented as a barbarian and uncivilized, the West symbolizes civilization and
enlightenment. Edward Said underlines that East is inferior, ignorant, and the West is superior, logical,
civilized and philanthropic (1977:301). In this way, the hierarchical orders that generalize binary
concepts enable men to be the primary sex while making women the second sex in the words of De
Beauvoir. Similarly, this order also causes culture to overpower nature. Therefore, since culture,
intelligence and powerfulness are considered as superior features, they represent men. On the other
hand, nature, emotions and powerlessness are perceived as inferior properties, and they are ascribed to
707 women. Belonging to the same subcategory creates a link between women and nature. However, this
situation also conceptualizes them similarly in a male-centred society. Therefore, in male-dominant
societies, women and nature exist as inferior and subordinate beings. The system oppresses both of
them simultaneously. Thus, women's issues and environmental problems become interrelated, and
ecofeminists aim to liberate women and nature from the oppression of the male-dominance. Kümbet
mentions that if the male-hegemony ends discriminating each creature, the harmony and peace in the
societies may reoccur, which are essential for a more democratic world (Kümbet, 2012:185). On the
other hand, Serpil Oppermann clarifies that ecological studies aim to destroy the beliefs that are against
the living and non-living beings, and to create an ecocentric point of view (2012:15). Consequently, since
gender inequalities and environmental problems are interrelated issues, ecofeminism by drawing
attention on women and nature, aims to free them from the oppression of the male-dominance.
As social irregularities like exploitation of women and nature are interdependent, the types of
oppression are also interrelated. For example, Karen Warren remarks that one form of inequality can
help to find another sort of imbalance like sexism, racism, classism, colonialism, ageism, which are the
different examples of abuse (2000:1). Therefore, the male-dominant system generalizes the relationship
between oppressor and oppressed through hierarchies; hence, ecofeminists handle all these forms of
inequalities. It means that minorities and non-male beings like women; people of colour, poor people,
people with disabilities, animals and children are oppressed by the male-dominant system and
ecofeminists seek to liberate them from the oppression. In a male-centred order men dominate over
women because of women’s reproductive system. Thus, women cannot be independent and they
become men’s domestic slaves. As Sherry Ortner notifies, since women give birth, they are supposed to
be at home and do the cooking and cleaning (1996:34). Just as Rosemary Radford Ruether mentions,
women “are isolated, sedentary, caring for children, cooking food (2015:15). Therefore, in the male-
centred society, the system affirms women’s exclusion, and reinforces the dominance of men.
 An Overview of Ecofeminism: Women, Nature and Hierarchies

Ecofeminists aim to destroy the hierarchy between men and women and finalize women’s
marginalisation. Additionally, in underdeveloped countries, women and children are also oppressed by
the male-dominant system. For example, finding water is women’s and children’s duty in
underdeveloped countries. Warren remarks that African women and children walk long steeps to reach
the water (Warren, 2000:7). However, this is a difficult mission and performing this mission deteriorates
women’s and children’s health; they face challenging conditions while walking through the forests.
Therefore, women of colour and children are also abused in male-dominant societies. Thus,
ecofeminists also draw attention to women and children in the third world countries and intend to
liberate them from the oppression. On the other hand, the male-dominance also treats animals as
sources of money; they kill and commodify animals to gain power. Men hunt and kill animals in order
to make a profit. Thus, humans exploit animals because they perceive animals as inferior beings. In this
way, Greta Gaard suggests herbivorous diet. She also mentions that murdering animals and consuming
them is cannibalism (1993:299). Hence, consuming meat is another form of oppression because it
approves the superiority of humans over nature. Ecofeminists also fight against the system that treats
animals and nature as objects. Therefore, all the non-males and minorities like women, women of colour
or animals exist as commodities in the society. For example, Charlotte Perkins Gilman exemplifies in
Women and Economics the objectification of women and animals:
“The labor of women in the house, certainly, enables men to produce more wealth than they
otherwise could; and in this way women are economic factors in society. But so are horses. The labor of
horses enables men to produce more wealth than they otherwise could. The horse is an economic factor in
society. But the horse is not economically independent, nor is the woman.” (2018:10)
Women provide economic power to men by serving them in the domestic sphere. On the other
hand, horses also bring economic wealth to men by serving them in the public sphere. In this way, 708
Gilman demonstrates that in a male-centred society, both women and nature have close positions as
they exist as objects. In this way, the male-dominance oppresses non-male beings and minorities, and
treats them as objects. For this reason, women’s issues, exploitation of animals and other disparities like
ageism, classism etc. become interrelated as they represent the same kind of oppression done by the
male-hegemony. Just as Greg Garrard notes, dominance comes to the fore in terms of the
discriminations against class, species, race and gender (2004:26). Consequently, ecofeminism handles
not only nature's exploitation and female's subordination, but also issues such as class, race, gender and
age matters.
Social Hierarchies and Dualities
The dualistic concepts such as male/female, strong/weak, reason/emotion, mind/body or
culture/nature play an active role in shaping gender roles in male-dominant societies. In this system,
men have superior positions, and they represent culture, consciousness, intellect and power. However,
women are inferior, and they represent the opposite characteristics such as nature, unconsciousness,
body and weakness. Thus, men claim authority by obtaining these superior features and women
become subordinate beings in male-dominant system. In other words, these hierarchies cause men's
dominance over women. In this way, these hierarchies serve as vehicles to create a division between
genders. That is, womanhood and manhood become completely opposite concepts in gender-based
societies. For example, as women are perceived as inadequate beings, they are associated with
inferiority. However, women’s biological system is another factor that causes their inferiority and
subordination. Therefore, women stay at home, clean, cook and take care of the child. The system
causes women to become dependent beings. As Simone De Beauvoir states, women have to be obedient,
powerless, futile and passive (2011:402). Thus, they cannot acquire independent identities. They exist
 Yıldız Merve Öztürk

only as mothers, wives or daughters. On the other hand, men achieve dominance as they exist freely in
the outer world. In addition to their personal identities, men also acquire social identities. Hence, men
are powerful, autonomous and dominant. Therefore, by creating such a division, hierarchies polarize
women and men. Huey-li Li also mentions that men and women are polarised in order to enhance
men's hegemony, and women's "otherness" in the hierarchy (1993:288). Thus, while men are ultimately
superior beings, women exist as “others”. They become indescribable without men. De Beauvoir
mentions that women are nothing more than what men determine (2011:26). Women cannot have
identity without men. Consequently, in patriarchal societies, while men are perceived as primary
beings, women exist as secondary beings. Therefore, by creating a contrast between genders, the
hierarchies put forward the hegemony of men and “otherness” of women.
Although hierarchies and dualities are used to polarise genders, their main goal is not to create
conflict between genders, but to ensure men's dominance. This specific factor is the main objective in
the hierarchies in the male-centred system. As Val Plumwood remarks, superiority is the main
objective, and it makes the subcategory to be objectified (2017:77). Thus, while the hierarchies provide
dominance to the superior category, they also ensure the dependence of subcategory, because the
independence of subcategory endangers the superiority of the male-dominance. Hence, in the male-
centred societies, non-male beings which represent the inferior category exist as commodities. For
example, the male-dominance categorizes the non-male beings similarly, and women and nature belong
to the same subcategory in this system. By classifying them similarly, the system generalizes their
dependency and causes their discrimination. Hence, while the hierarchies provide authority to men,
they ostracize women and nature. That is, hierarchies affirm the exploitation of women and nature in
order to give supremacy to men. Thus, women and nature cannot have unique features or be
709 autonomous. In this way, the hierarchies demonstrate that achieving superiority is the main objective of
the male-dominant hierarchies. However, they also lead to the marginalisation of women and nature.
Therefore, the male-centred system uses hierarchies and dualistic concepts bring superiority to men
while subduing non-males.
Consequently, the hierarchies and dualities are the building blocks of male-centred societies as
they ensure the continuity of the male-dominance. However, the male-dominance has also dependency
on the women even if it claims to be superior. In other words, the superior category depends on the
inferior category. Because the subcategory cannot be inferior without an upper category, and the upper
category cannot achieve dominance without a subcategory. As Plumwood notifies, there cannot be a
master without the slave (2017:72). Thus, man cannot achieve superiority without an opposite concept,
like a woman. Also, culture cannot emerge without nature. Hence, the superiority of men is not
significant without women since hierarchies cannot exist without two different creatures. Therefore,
even though the men portray themselves as independent beings, they rely upon the inferiority of the
non-male creatures. As Plumwood stresses, there must be a category of subordinate beings, and
through them, the dominant group can be identified, and this leads to the constant state of hierarchical
order (2017:73). In this case, non-male creatures do not only reinforce male-dominance, but they also
ensure the existence of the hierarchical system by being an essential element of it. Thus, the contrast
concepts complement each other. The male-dominant system becomes the centre, and non-male beings
become attached to the centre. As a result, there is a close relationship between the oppressor and the
oppressed which ensures hierarchical order in male-dominant system.
Women’s Close Relationship with Nature
In male-dominant societies women and nature have close positions to each other, and this also
establishes a close relationship between them. Firstly, the fact that both women and nature reproduce is
 An Overview of Ecofeminism: Women, Nature and Hierarchies

the leading property that creates a link between them. In gender-based societies, women’s most
prominent feature is their fertility; women can reproduce and create a life, just like nature. For example,
women create humans; they raise children and feed them. Just as Roach highlights, women “are the life-
givers of the human species” (2003:40). A mother produces milk to her child and provides maintenance
to the family. For this reason, women are conceptualised as generous and compassionate creatures that
provide fruitfulness. Therefore, as Julia Kristeva states, motherhood is a cultural process (2016:47).
Culture naturalizes women’s identities as mothers and wives. Likewise, nature is just like a mother,
ensures the continuity of life on earth with its resources. Nature creates life and supplies products with
its generosity and abundance. It gives foods for living beings; it supplies air, and provides materials for
a living continuously. Thus, nature is mentioned as Mother Nature, motherland, or mother earth. As
Catherine Roach clarifies in Mother/Nature, Popular Culture and Environmental Ethics that nature
creates resources limitlessly and unrequitedly, it feeds and cares for the kids and humans (2003:68). The
system conceptualizes nature as a mother with infinite resources. In this way, the male-dominance
treats both women and nature as providers, and they both are compassionate and generous. For
example, Carl Gustav Jung highlights that mothers represent the elements that are associated with
fruitfulness and fertility, like arable fields, gardens, rocks, caves, trees or flowers (2015:121).
Additionally, Gaard exemplifies a situation that underlines the closeness between women and nature.
Gaard mentions that when people go to natural excursions, they throw coins to the pool, expecting that
it can realise their dreams (1993:302). People also tie rope to trees and make a wish with an expectation
that it will help. Humans expect that nature will relieve and provide fruitfulness, just like a mother. As
Sami Brisson remarks, nature protects her when she is mournful or exhausted; therefore, it symbolises
maternity (2017:15). Therefore, nature is perceived as a generous mother, while becoming a mothers is
seen as women’s natural duty. In human consciousness women and nature have a close bond thanks to 710
their reproductivity. As a result, reproductivity and generosity are other similar features that construct
a close relationship between women and nature.
Since both women and nature are inferior in the male-centred hierarchy, they have passive and
dependent roles. Women are passive and dependent because they are seen as incapable beings because
of their reproductivity, and it also prevents them from gaining financial freedom. Giving birth is seen as
their natural duty; therefore, the society generalises women’s dependency on men. On the other hand,
since nature is not an active being intrinsically, it cannot overpower humans. That is, humans are
intellectually more powerful than animals, and it causes a hierarchy between them and reinforces the
dependence of nature. For example, the male-authority consumes natural means swiftly and eradicates
them (Gaard, 2012:303). However, nature cannot react to these external factors. Thus, nature also
becomes prominent with its passivity and dependency. While women are dependent on men, nature is
dependent on humans. In this way, attributing similar characteristics to women and nature naturalizes
women, while feminizing nature. However, Greta Gaard states that linking feminine aspects to nature
ensures its subordination (1993:305). That is, ascribing feminine aspects like passivity and dependency
strengthens the subordination of nature. Gaard also remarks that attributing feminine features to nature
and trying to oppress it is a sign of racism (1993:305). Similarly, ascribing natural features to women is
also a sign of discrimination. Thus, thanks to these aspects, the male-centred system creates a closeness
between women and nature, which causes their marginalization. As a result, passivity and dependency
are seen as natural and feminine features, which establish a bond between women and nature. Thank to
this bond, women and nature have close positions in male-dominant societies.
As a result of close conceptualising of women and nature, nature becomes associated with
sexuality in male-dominant societies. Just as Gaard notifies, nature is represented as an object of desire
because it gains a feminine identity through statements such as “virgin forest”, “untouched land”
 Yıldız Merve Öztürk

(1993:304). Gaard also clarifies that nature connotes desire because women are also associated with
passion in the Western culture (1993:305). However, women are treated as objects not only in Western
traditions, but in the most traditions of the world. Thus, women’s subordination, which is a general
state, causes their passivity. Also, the environment has a passive role due to its motionless and
dependent state. External factors, such as culture, modify and exploit nature. Therefore, the passivity of
nature is a factor that feminises and objectifies it. The phrases like "unspoiled forest" demonstrate that
nature is an object of desire. In this way, the definitions like "virgin", "untouched" or "unspoiled"
symbolise not only women’s representation as objects of desire, but also nature. Women and nature
serve cognitively as entities of passion. In this way, in male-dominant systems nature, women and
submission exist as unity in a patriarchal culture. Thus, in a male-superior system, the passivity causes
women and nature to exist as objects of desire, and it creates a close relationship between them.
Hierarchies as Cultural Vehicles
As a result of the male-centred hierarchies, the system allows the culture to overpower nature.
However, the system ignores the fact that nature is the essence of every living and non-living creature.
As Terry Eagleton states, although culture evolves from nature, people perceive culture as the opposite
of nature (2000:7). In addition to this, cultural vehicles which humans utilise to transfigure nature also
come from nature (Eagleton, 2000:8). Therefore, culture is a part of nature, and nature is the beginning
of the world, and culture/nature hierarchy is an artificial system created by humans. Nature is
independent intrinsically, and culture evolves, thanks to nature. As Lori Gruen points out, nature is also
intrinsically precious (1997:363). For example, if to analyse from the scientific perspective, Georges
Lemaître's the Big Bang demonstrates that the cosmos and environment are known to occur before all
belief systems, cultures and norms. Yuval Noah Harari exemplifies in his book Sapiens and the Brief
711 History of Humankind the steps of the genesis that emerge with the Big Bang theory. He mentions that
firstly the physical universe, secondarily, the substances and their transactions; thirdly the organisms
such as unicellulars, animals, humans and plants, and lastly the homo-sapiens along with history and
culture emerged (2019:19). Hence, first, the physical environment develops, then the cultural beliefs.
Also, in the Greek creation myth, there is emptiness before everything else, called Chaos. After the
Chaos, Gaia comes into existence, which symbolises the mother of land, or in other words, nature. In
this narrative, the humanity reaches civilisation when Prometheus gives fire to the human race. Thus,
even though nature is independent, humans use the richness of it; and they create the dominant human
culture and claim superiority over nature. For these reasons, even though culture has a more dominant
position, the dependency of nature to culture is a cultural process. Nature's subordination and the
hegemony of culture is a result of humankind's effort.
Similarly, although men and women are homo-sapiens, and they both have the same
fundamental capabilities, men dominate over women. However, Friedrich Engels mentions that
societies were not always male-centred; there existed matrilineal societies in prehistorical times
(2004:11). According to Engels, when men discovered how to use nature and sparked an agricultural
revolution in prehistory, they became wealthy and gained dominance. Hence, men’s discovery of the
environment caused the male-hegemony and led societies to be male-centred. Therefore, Engels asserts
that women’s subordination is an unnatural process done by men (2004:9). In this way, claiming that
matriarchal states also existed, Engels highlights that women can also have dominant positions in
society. This idea puts forward the belief that women are as powerful as men. Thus, the dominance of
men is a cultural and artificial process. Harari also believes that the division between women and men
is a cultural factor. However, Harari notifies that the cultural factors between genders emerge due to
biological factors (2019:154). Therefore, the inferiority and subordination of women to men is an indirect
situation; the system uses women's fertility as a weapon to subdue them. In this way, just like the
 An Overview of Ecofeminism: Women, Nature and Hierarchies

culture/nature hierarchy, men/women hierarchy is also a cultural condition generated by the male-
dominance. While the male-centred system subdues nature to culture, it also causes women’s
submission to men. As a result, although the male-centred systems put forward inequalities, nature is
not dependent on culture, and men and women are equals naturally.
The narrative of Adam and Eve is a palpable example of the emergence of hierarchies like
men/women, human/nature and culture/nature. The story reveals the man/woman, culture/nature and
human/nature dualities, by highlighting the unequal relationship between them. In the first narrative,
God creates nature, and then, Adam and Eve. Later, God orders man and woman to dominate over the
animals, waters, air and each living being in the world. Here, Adam and Eve appear in the story
simultaneously, and they subdue nature. According to Carolyn Merchant, there exists equality between
the two sexes in the first narrative (2003:22). Besides, Merchant also states that this narrative describes
nature as a dreamlike land, and that the animals and plants are magnificent (2003:17). Thus, although
nature occurs before anything else, Adam and Eve oppress nature. In addition to this, in the second
narrative, after creating nature, God first creates Adam, lets him rule over the animals and land. After
realizing that Adam is lonely, God makes a female companion for him out of his rib bone. Therefore,
there is gender equality in the first narrative; however, in the second narrative, the equality is
destroyed. Also, in both narratives, there is a human/nature hierarchy, as humans overpower the
environment. In this way, Adam dominates over Eve and nature; he is the authority in the garden. Just
as Merchant remarks, as a man, Adam is the representation of the Father, the Lord, dominance, order
and republic in the Genesis (2013:21). On the other hand, Eve is the representation of submission and
inferiority because she communicates with the serpent that tricks her. Thus, in the creation myth Eve
allegorically symbolises the garden and nature, and she is inferior to Adam (Merchant, 2003:21). As
Elmas Şahin also remarks, women’s subordination to men and their sin occurs with the emergence of 712
humankind (2015:85). As a result, the narratives impose both man/woman and human/nature
hierarchies. Adam subjugates Eve, and humankind overpowers nature. Therefore, the creation myth is
an example of how the hierarchies become a part of the Western male-dominant culture.
In addition to these hierarchies, the story also uncovers the culture/nature hierarchy. When
Adam and Eve eat the forbidden fruit, they suddenly experience a change. God acknowledges that
Adam and Eve have explored insufficiency (Ruether, 2005:116). Adam and Eve realize that their natures
are different from each other. They eat the forbidden fruit because of Eve. Since Eve, as Susan Griffin
states, is “the Devil's Gateway”, and that “sin and afterwards death came into the world because Eve
consorted with the devil in the body of a serpent” (1979:9) God punishes Eve more severely. God
augments her childbearing pain, and orders Adam to rule over her. Hence, due to Eve's curiosity and
her closeness to nature, God puts forward inequality between genders. Therefore, the forbidden fruit
causes the hierarchical order between Adam and Eve; however, it also gives rise to the culture/nature
hierarchy. The fruit causes the transition from naturalness to civilisation. After eating the fruit, Adam
and Eve obtain a new belief, custom and social behaviour. They start acting differently and cover
themselves with the leaves, which symbolise the exploit of nature for the cultural improvement. Thus,
the fruit represents the emergence of culture by using natural resources. This enlightenment drags
Adam and Eve to oppressing naturality, and assuming new behaviours. Besides, after the realisation,
Adam and Eve begin realising each other's differences. Therefore, the fruit which leads to the
emergence of culture causes the polarisation between the genders. As a result, the story conveys the
message that men should not comply with nature and women because they are inferior to them. The
story also underlines that humans use nature in order to shape the culture. Therefore, the narrative puts
forward also the dominance of culture over nature. Consequently, by emphasising women's closeness
to nature, the narratives expose man/woman, human/nature and culture/nature hierarchies.
 Yıldız Merve Öztürk

Conclusion
Ecofeminism is an interdisciplinary theory that reveals that patriarchal societies objectify
women and nature and gain power. According to this theory, dualities and hierarchies are the most
prominent features of male-dominated societies. Thanks to these hierarchies and dualistic concepts, the
male-domination maintains its strength and objectifies the non-males. The system gives superiority to
concepts such as men, culture and intellect, and lets them to overpower women, nature and emotions.
As a result of this hierarchical order, woman, “whose voice is a hissing serpent” (Griffin, 1979:8) and
nature lose their intrinsic values. Women become tools to reproduce and serve to reinforce the male-
centred system. Therefore, the only duty of women is considered as reproducing, bringing humans to
the society and feeding them; and the woman is prevented from being free and independent. Similarly,
the male-dominant system exploits nature to be more authoritative. The system commodifies animals,
murders them to make a profit, and exploits the natural resources relentlessly. In this way, by putting
forward their superiority, men destroy both the social and natural balance. Consequently, in a system
where the male-centred society objectifies nature and women, they have a close relationship. Besides,
since according to ecofeminists, all types of oppression are interconnected, the environment will
continue to be exploited as long as women are marginalized in society. More, inequalities created using
factors such as race, class, religion, gender, age will also maintain as long as other forms of oppression
exist. As a result, by shedding light on the exclusion of women and the exploitation of nature,
ecofeminists aim to annihilate hierarchies and dualities and restore the harmony in the societies.
References
Beauvoir S.D. (2011). The Second Sex. New York: Vintage Books. (26-402).
Brisson, S. (2017). Women's Connectedness to Nature: An Ecofeminist Exploration (Honors Thesis).
713 USA: Regis University. “https://epublications.regis.edu/theses/846”
Eagleton, T. (2000). The Idea of Culture. USA: Blackwell Publishing. (1-123)
Engels, F. (2004). The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State. Australia: Resistance Books.
(1-154)
Gaard, G. (1993). Ecofeminism and Native American Cultures: Pushing the Limits of Cultural
Imperialism? Ecofeminism, Women, Animals, Nature. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
(295-315).
Garrard, G. (2004). Ecocriticism. London and New York: Routledge. (1-203).
Gilman, C. P. (2018). Women and Economics. Global Grey. “globalgreyebooks.com”
Griffin, S. (1979). The Roaring Inside Her. USA: Harper & Row Publishers. (1-145).
Gruen, L. (1997). Revaluing Nature. Warren, K. (ed.) Ecofeminism, Women, Culture, Nature.
Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press. (356-374)
Harari, Y. N. (2019). Hayvanlardan Tanrılara: Sapiens, İnsan Türünün Kısa Bir Tarihi. İstanbul: Kolektif
Kitap. (1-409).
Jung, C. G. (2015). Feminen & Dişilliğin Farklı Yüzleri (2nd ed.). Istanbul: Pinhan Yayıncılık. (115-142).
Kristeva, J. (2016). Simone de Beauvoir Aramızda. İstanbul: Sel Yayıncılık. (1-118).
Kümbet, P. (2012). Ekofeminizm: Kadın, Kimlik, Doğa, Oppermann, S. (ed.) Ekoeleştiri, Çevre ve
Edebiyat. Ankara: Phoenix Yayınları. (171-206)
LIi H. (1993) A Crosscultural Critique of Ecofeminism. Gaard, G. (ed.) Ecofeminism, Women, Animals,
Nature. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. (277-294)
Merchant, C. (2003). Reinventing Eden, The Fate of Nature in Western Culture. New York & London:
Routledge. (1-230)
Plumwood, V. (2017). Feminizm ve Doğaya Hükmetmek. (2nd ed.). Istanbul: Metis Yayınları. (1-197).
Roach, C. M. (2003). Mother/Nature, Popular Culture and Environmental Ethics. USA: Indiana
 An Overview of Ecofeminism: Women, Nature and Hierarchies

University Press. (1-215)

Ruether, R. R. (2005). Goddessess and the Divine Feminine. California: University of California Press.
(1-359).
Warren, K. (2000). Ecofeminist Philosophy, A Western Perspective on what it is and why it matters.
USA: Rowman & Littlefield. (1-254)
Said, E. (1977). Orientalism. London: Penguin Books. (1-365).
Şahin, E. (2015). Fall of Women in British Literature and Turkish Literature of 19th Century: A
Comparative Approach. The Journal of Academic Social Science Studies. 31, (83-97).
http://dx.doi.org/10.9761/JASSS2652

714

View publication stats