ramblings from anyssa | updated irregularly | also available as a print zine
I wrote this piece in 2022 as a way to articulate a sort of personal manifesto. I don’t love the title, as I’ve moved away from referring to myself as non-binary (in favor of genderqueer), but I just couldn’t come up with another phrase that worked grammatically and conveyed what I wanted it to convey. There’s a little section in the middle where I go into my thinking about the name, but even at the time, I wasn’t fully satisfied. Nevertheless, I do this it’s a fairly accurate overview of how I think about the world. I didn’t make much of an effort to justify my claims, which were mostly self-evident to me and were based on such a variety of sources that it became impossible to cite (aside from the theoretical context sections). I chose this piece to kick off my blog because it felt like a good foundation for any musings to come.
Eco-nbism (pronounced eco-enby-ism) is an ideology/framework that seeks to dismantle dualities and hierarchies and replace them with liberatory relationships. Beginning from an understanding that all oppression is linked, eco-nbism rejects clear categories and instead values diversity as a network of equal and interconnected parts.
Ecofeminism is a broad set of theories that examine the relationship between women and the environment/nature. Though different sects disagree on why and how women and nature have been linked within the patriarchy and what to do about it, each agrees that there are ideological connections between the oppression of women and the destruction of the environment. Plumwood argues that the mechanism of this oppression is by establishing, reinforcing, naturalizing (make invisible), and linking dualities that are placed in conflict for dominance (with a clear winner). On one side of the duality is the “masculine:” reason, production, the mind, and the human, whereas the “feminine” is associated with emotion, reproduction and subsistence, the body, and the nonhuman—altogether constituting “nature.” (Plumwood 1993, 19–44) Other structures besides culture-nature and male-female fit within this duality, though ecofeminism centers gender as its primary lens.
In contrast, the Afrocentric ecowomanism described by Riley more thoroughly integrates intersectionality into its framework. The core of Afrocentric ecowomanism is understanding and articulating “the interconnectedness of the degradation of people of color, women, and the environment.” Ecowomanism also seeks to transcend dualities by drawing from precolonial African spiritual concepts. (Riley 2004, 423–425)
Gaard brings queer sexualities and genders into the conversation by highlighting another duality: reason and the erotic (which includes sexuality, sensuality, spontaneity, passion, and pleasure). Gaard argues that the root of queerphobia is erotophobia, which is “so strong that only one form of sexuality is overtly allowed, only in one position, and only in the context of certain legal, religious, and social sanctions.” (Gaard 2004, 25) Rooted in Christianity, this erotophobia was used as instrument of colonialism and genocide, especially targeting queer people and tolerant/diverse communities. Gaard argues that an ecofeminist society must include liberating the erotic and embracing its diversity. (Gaard 2004, 21–42)
Though Gaard integrates sexuality and binary transgender identities into ecofeminism, she does not mention nonbinary genders. Though this may be primarily because of the time it was written, it does point towards a pattern of relying on dualisms within ecofeminist theory even when attempting to dispute them.
Stepping away from derivatives of ecofeminism, queer ecology instead traces its roots from queer theory and ecology. Morton argues that ecological and queer theory are both centered on diversity, intimacy, and permeable/nonexistent boundaries. (Morton 2010, 273–282)
Morton begins by arguing that (capital-N) Nature, as a binary opposite to humans, is a fantasy, maintained through violence. Echoing the linkages between binaries that have been stated above, he is more explicit about denouncing them—not only are the binaries used to oppress people (and non-people), but their constructions are oppressive and incorrect in and of themselves. The hard boundaries that we put on ecology, concepts like individual, species, human, and even life are not accurate to how the world actually works. Individuals cannot be truly self-sufficient, therefore individuals don’t really exist. The species categories obscure the fact that all life-beings are both familiar and strange, sharing and swapping DNA. Beings like viruses and synthetic beings (made of silicon, rather than carbon) exist in a middle space between life and nonlife. Rather than hierarchy or web, Morton proposes a mesh of all life-forms, liquid and blurred. (Morton 2010, 273–282)
The response to the segregation pushed by these homophobic Nature-constructing ideologies, she argues, is to embrace intimacy. This begins by acknowledging the intimacy with other beings that already exists, then to lean into it, letting desire and pleasure more openly shape our experiences. Both ecology and queer theory acknowledge this, so the separation between them also dissolves, creating queer ecology. (Morton 2010, 273–282)
Why eco-nbism? Why not queer ecofeminism or queer ecology, terms that already exist, or even queer environmentalism?
I chose eco-nbism because I wanted to explicitly link and contrast it to ecofeminism and ecowomanism. It also serves the purpose of rejecting binaries in the name itself. In its oppositional definition, it leaves flexibility for what replaces it. Nonbinary isn’t a singular, “third” gender, but rather a multitude of gender identities including genderqueer, agender, and even genderfluid identities. Similarly, eco-nbism leaves the door open for a multitude of approaches to replacing the current system.
Colonialism, racial capitalism, and the patriarchy are linked both in ideological root and in function. Each system is so reinforcing and reliant on each other that to try to distinguish between them is often against the point. The mechanisms and purpose of each is to build and enforce hierarchies in order to exploit, control, and extract from those that are lower on the pyramid in order to enrich those at the top. Because these systems of oppression are so intertwined it is impossible to make progress towards one without working towards them all. By the same token, working towards dismantling one axis of oppression influences the fight against all of them.
****The degradation of the environment is an outcome of each of these systems, as well as a tool used by them (ex. environmental racism). In fact, the construction of nature or the environment as a concept at all is a result of these hierarchies. Who is human (noun category) and what is human (adjective category) is socially constructed in opposition to the “less-than-human” (people who are deemed less than, such as people of color, women, disabled people, etc.) and nonhuman (other living and nonliving things). Capitalism and colonialism view the world as a set of resources (including labor) that are waiting to be extracted and made human. Where/who these ‘resources’ come from is labeled as ‘nature’ and othered.
As such, solidarity work and coalition building become a necessary part of dismantling and replacing colonialism, racial capitalism, and the patriarchy. Movements and communities must work in parallel and collaboration not just because it is necessary for numbers and no one can work on everything, but because building relationships across movements makes the movements stronger. Incorporating disability and economic justice can make other movements more accessible. Queer and Black activists have a historical basis for keeping themselves as safe as possible while engaging in the risky activities that are necessary for change. These are just a few examples of ways that movements can learn from each other and grow through connection.
On the other hand, these relationships are not without conflict. Movements are made up of people and every person has their own set of identities that are privileged and oppressed. Organizations and communities must be held accountable for the harm they cause in order to move forward.
Though oppression is specific and even connected, similar experiences cannot be viewed as interchangeable. Tuck and Yang point this out in relation to decolonization specifically; their “ethic of incommensurability” recognizes that decolonization is a project distinct and sovereign from other movement work. Though strategic collaborations may be made, these are temporary and fraught. (Tuck and Yang 2012, 28–29) Conflict will not be only among people; it will also be between the goals of different movements, and this must be acknowledged.
The primary call to action of eco-nbism is to reject binaries and categorization with clear delineations. This a critical step in breaking apart the ideological hierarchies that racial capitalism, etc. are based on. It is also necessary because these categorizations are not true.
Fungi are a great illustration of the ways that binaries and categorization begin to break down when they’re applied to the ‘natural’ world. Already breaking the plant/animal binary, fungi are fluid, ephemeral, transformative, and deeply interconnected. In their article about the queerness of mycology, Kaishian and Djoulakian state “declaring units of fungi feels forced and coercive because their fluid, indeterminate biology clashes radically with such abrupt and linear constructions. Clean taxonomic and population units deny the messiness of fungal biology—almost always embedded, connected, and dynamic.” (Kaishian and Djoulakian 2020, 8) Fungi don’t fit in boxes—they cross boundaries, sometimes literally, when they become incorporated into plant root systems. Fungi dissolve the boundaries between human and nature, self and other, because they perform critical functions in our bodies (a mycobiome similar to the microbiome). For this, they are marginalized within science and society more broadly. Like humans that don’t fit within society’s neat boxes, fungi are at a greater risk of extinction due to their lack of conformity. (Kaishian and Djoulakian 2020, 1–26)
The boundaries of social categories are even less based in reality than the problematic taxonomies of science. Though people can be categorized by certain groupings of bodily characteristics and histories (ex. sex/gender and race), there have always been people who don’t fit within these neat categories (ex. intersex and nonbinary people, and mixed/multiracial people). The characteristics that are chosen are political; they are chosen for a purpose. And more often than not, that purpose is to make one category of people less ‘valuable’ than the other.
These categories are also constructed in relation to each other. No one is a “woman” alone, they are an “Asian woman” or a “White woman.” Or rather, they are an “undocumented Asian woman” and on and on and on. Each person’s set of identities is a combination of intersections, and these intersections create what each axis means. What someone’s gender, sex, sexuality, race, ethnicity, culture, nation, citizenship, Indigeneity, disability, species, class, and/or age means depends one what every other one.
Though the majority of these categories were created for the express purpose of dividing and exploiting people, that doesn’t mean that they can’t be meaningful or even positive. In the world we live in, labels can be powerful tools for organizing and bringing about change. Rather than abolishing gender, for example (though there are arguments in support of this), we should instead incorporate fluidity and complexity into our understanding of them and divorce the differentiated values that have been historically attached to them.
Key to this practice is embracing and promoting diversity along every scale. In ecology, biodiversity includes genetic diversity within a population, species diversity within a community, niche/community diversity within an ecosystem, and a diversity of ecosystems/biomes within the whole biosphere. In agriculture, a nexus between ecology and human systems, agrobiodiversity includes genetic diversity, diversity of cultivars, diversity of species (including plants, fungi, and animals), diversity of practices within a farm, and diversity of systems. Agrobiodiversity isn’t just diversity for diversity’s sake, it’s critical for a resilient and place-specific food system. The desire for the most efficient, best system is what led to monocultures and our crumbling food system. (Thrupp 2000, 265–281)
Within the context of eco-nbism, multiscalar diversity begins at the individual level with what we usually think of diversity as, along the axes of culture/ethnicity, gender, neurodiversity, and even ideology/values (as long as it is not hateful). On this level would also be species and forms of knowledge.
Next is relational. Our current society tries to limit the types of relations we can have with each other by penalizing those that don’t follow the nuclear family or try to shift the power dynamics between employer and employee. Relational diversity would mean opening up the possibilities of relationships between people and the more than human. This could include non-conventional and multigenerational families, queerplatonic partnerships, and/or polyamory. It could also mean workplaces structured as co-ops and “business models” that aren’t strictly producer-consumer. Multiple forms of labor would be recognized as valuable. Perhaps most important would be opening up relationships with the land and the more-than-human to be reciprocal and respectful, rather than extractive and controlling.
Finally, the top level is structural. A multitude of systems are needed in order to adapt to each of their particular environments and community needs. A system that works well within one context may not work in another, and that is expected. Though global connectivity may be a good thing, it must not be associated with global homogeneity.
Truly embracing diversity requires letting go of the hierarchies of our current system. This process must include restitution and accountability, through practices like reparations when applicable.
We are reliant on other organisms to live, as other organisms are reliant on us. Humans are part of the ecosystems we live in. That means we can harm others, but it also means that we can positively impact the spaces we interact with. Fear and dismissal of this dependence is a core part of the patriarchal systems of exploitation that contribute to this harm. (Riley 2004, 416) Embracing and understanding this interdependence is necessary to counter it.
A step that individuals can take is to personally expand their circle of empathy to eventually include everyone from their in-group, to all people, to plants, animals, and fungi, to the microbiotic, and even to the nonliving components and whole Earth. After empathy comes care and consideration—letting potential impacts influence your behavior. Gratitude is a form of this as well. Finally, reciprocity is how this interconnectedness is truly acknowledged and appreciated. Sharing and accepting gifts is one way to frame interdependence.
Interconnectedness also becomes a part of movement work. Mutual aid is a form of resilience work that acknowledges that we all stand or fall together. Coalition building makes sense when it is understood that progress towards one cause helps all other causes.
Now that the core tenets of eco-nbism have been laid out, what do we do about it? One model for large-scale change is the Block-Build-Be framework, which acknowledges the different roles that are necessary to make up a movement. (Mahon 2018)
First is “block,” which is about reducing harm. (Mahon 2018) Within this context, this would be dismantling the interlocking structures of oppression. Oppression is ideological, institutional (or structural/organizational), interpersonal, and internalized. Ideologically, eco-nbism rejects binaries and hierarchies, as detailed above. Along the institutional scale, this would include work like abolition and decolonization. It could mean working either within the system (policy) or outside of it (direct action). Interpersonally, it would involve disengaging from exploitative or toxic relationships and holding each other accountable for prejudice. Finally, it means unlearning the internalized messages of capitalism, racism etc.
“Build” is what it sounds like—building alternatives to the current system. (Mahon 2018) Rather than a framework of solutions, alternatives emphasize exploration with the expectation of trade-offs, rather than finding one best option. We do not limit ourselves by what has been done before, though we can learn from it.
Working from bottom to top, build begins with what we internalize. What we can build is limited by our imagination, and what we can imagine is limited only by that we internalize as impossible. Releasing those limits and incorporating our values is the core of this level of building. On the interpersonal level, this is where the relational diversity explored above comes in. Building diverse relationships means that one can end without it all crumbling down. We can’t get all our needs from one place, so having a rich network is healthy. Next is institutional/structural/organizational, which is where the majority of the work within the “build” role is. This is where the tangible work is done. Collaborators and communities experiment and create models of alternatives, which are refined and spread, adapting to each specific context. Last is ideological, which is what the majority of this essay has been focused on.
The last component is “be.” This is how we take care of ourselves and each other while we do the hard (but hopefully satisfying) work detailed above. (Mahon 2018) The duality model devalues this work, so truly valuing it counters this mindset. (Plumwood 1993) This is where subsistence, healing, intimacy, and pleasure happens.
I hope that this is just the beginning of eco-nbism. Though I’ve built on other people’s ideas, the next step would be for others to build on top of these. I view collaboration as critical to eco-nbism, so it's somewhat ironic to be writing this paper alone. Nevertheless, this can act as a starting point (or a turning point?) for future engagement with these ideas bundled together in this way.
At the core of eco-nbism is hope. The world is unjust and structures of power are very good at keeping themselves going. But change is inevitable and more importantly, it is necessary. It is possible to rebuild our relationships with the land and each other, even if it takes generations. We owe it to ourselves to try.
this piece is available in issue one of the hybrid vigor zine: request a copy in the form below
References
Gaard, Greta. 2004. “Toward a Queer Ecofeminism.” In New Perspectives on Environmental Justice: Gender, Sexuality, and Activism, edited by Rachel Stein, 21–42. Piscataway, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press.
Kaishian, Patricia, and Hasmik Djoulakian. 2020. “The Science Underground: Mycology as a Queer Discipline.” Catalyst: Feminism, Theory, Technoscience 6, no. 2 (November): 1–26. https://doi.org/10.28968/cftt.v6i2.33523.
Mahon, Annie. 2018. “How to (Block, Build,) Be.” Raw Mindfulness. https://www.rawmindfulness.com/thoughts/how-to-block-build-be.
Morton, Timothy. 2010. “Guest Column: Queer Ecology.” PMLA/Publications of the Modern Language Association of America 125, no. 2 (March): 273–282. https://doi.org/10.1632/pmla.2010.125.2.273.
Plumwood, Val. 1993. Feminism and the mastery of nature. London: Routledge.
Riley, Shamara S. 2004. “Ecology is a Sistah's Issue Too: the Politics of Emergent Afrocentric Ecowomanism.” In This Sacred Earth: Religion, Nature, Environment, edited by Roger S. Gottlieb, 412–427. New York: Routledge.
Thrupp, Lori A. 2000. “Linking Agricultural Biodiversity and Food Security: The Valuable Role of Sustainable Agriculture.” International Affairs 76, no. 2 (April): 265-281. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2626366.
Tuck, Eve, and K. Wayne Yang. 2012. “Decolonization is not a metaphor.” Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education & Society 1 (1): 1–40. https://doi.org/10.25058/20112742.n38.04.