Talk:Ecofeminism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article is part of WikiProject Gender Studies |
This WikiProject is aimed at improving the quality of articles dealing with gender studies, and at removing systematic gender bias from Wikipedia. |
Click here for details |
Contents |
[edit] What happened to this article?
See this previous version. Why was all of that removed? The main text now contains no links, and consists almost entirely of one big unattributed quote. This appears to have been done by one user who hasn't edited anything else. Should this article revert back a couple months? ~leif 10:59, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- A quick reading of the previous suggests a disorginized... well "load" is the word that comes to mind. (says an anonymous editor)
-
- Thanks to Wiki's editing and revisioning system, the old text still exists at that link in the history of the Eco-feminism article (which is now a hard redirect here). If someone wished and were willing to do the work, these two articles could be merged to here.
The current wiki entry on ecofeminism is very poor - its skewed toward american spiritual ecofeminism. readers are better off using www.ecofem.org for information. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 194.80.32.8 (talk • contribs) .
- Wiki articles, especially Wiki articles about hot political topics, and especially articles about hot political topics near-and-dear to lefties, tend to turn to shit over time. When the article is first created, it is often cogent and clear, but as information accretes onto the article, it becomes disjointed and chaotic. This is especially true with political articles where opponents keep lobbing in grenades, editing in a little dig here and a little "balance" there while the folks who actually care about the topic try to hold back the tide with the reverts and compensating edits.
- Eventually, the ony solution is a massive reworking of the article by a single editor (or a small cadre of similarly-minded editors). Maybe that time has come here? You know what they say: be bold!
- Atlant 14:01, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
- Do you think so? It does have some problems, and is a bit speculative. I think the "views on technology" is a bit moderate for many ecofeminists, and would be better to incorporate other viewpoints. I don't see the article as especially tinged towards "American spiritual ecofeminism". If anything, it could use much more content in that area, as well as in others. In particular, this article is lacking the ecofeminist viewpoints opposing development and production in general, which seems to me to be one of the philosophy's most fundamental tenets, if not necessarily shared by all ecofeminists. Sarge Baldy 21:11, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] The recent addition to "See also"
Someone added this under the "See also" header:
- EcoFeminism & Globalization: exploring culture, context and religion. Edited by Heather Eaton & Lois Ann Lorentzen
I certainly don't object to this being in the article but because it doesn't appear to be a Wikilink, it probably doesn't belong under the "See also" header, nor is it (yet) and "External link". Perhaps it should go under a new "Refernces" header instead? Would the editor who inserted it care to comment?
Atlant 20:58, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Authors
I hope you don't mind, I added my name to the list of authors. I have published writing on ecofeminism, and wrote a doctoral thesis on it too. I also do the web-site www.ecofem.org already listed on this wikipedia site. best wishes, Richard Twine.
- Umm, generally speaking, that isn't "done" on Wikipedia, but I'm not going to revert you. But please note that someone else may well do so.
- Atlant 14:57, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
mentioning it here was what most likely got it removed. 217.237.149.170 16:21, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Reverting a large deletion of text
ok I do it, and I have NPOV a little because there are several streams in ecofeminism- sorry for my english (I don't create a account). hope that page will be improved ! a+ --213.189.162.148 17:11, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] "southern people"
could someone explain what that is supposed to mean? thanks 217.237.149.162 16:19, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
- People in the Southern Hemisphere, basically meaning Africa, India, and other parts of southern Asia, as well as South America. Basically places that are growing a lot of food, and still have a healthy environment, but are said to be exploited by the North, meaning the developed (or overdeveloped, in the view of ecofeminists) countries.
- You might say that "Southern people" simply refers to people in developing countries, although ecofeminists hate that term for a number of reasons, one being that they believe development is impossible in these countries because development requires the exploitation of others and there's no one left for them to exploit- (this is what Maria Mies calls "the myth of catching-up development"), and thus it's seen as a pro-growth political term. Sarge Baldy 22:25, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Let us upgrade
For the year 2006-07, let us concentrate on upgrading the contents of this page as decided: Wales to upgrade quality of Wiki. Thanks. --Bhadani 00:08, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] POV
I just removed
"And some "spiritual" ecofeminists can't be accused of inconsistency: they have an epistemological analysis of the Enlightenment[1], want to place the spirituality in immanent world and then practice modern activism[2], discuss economical and political issues while working with the power of Great mother earth (metaphorically or magically according to their tendencies)."
I don't know how that could be encyclopedic, but in the event that someone can, and wishes to salvage it, I'll leave it here. Eirein 03:43, 4 December 2006 (UTC)