California doesn’t need Republican women like these three…

California feminists are very concerned with environmentalism.

This is Rachel Carson:

California has a regulatory environment for a reason.  Republican women who are running in our state do not care about California, or our history of conservation.   Carly Fiorina suggesting we drill off our coast?

Frankly the Republican Party is in the Dark Ages when it comes to environmental issues.  And Women’s Rights.  Why is that?

Here is Ecofeminism from the Wikipedia…

Ecofeminism is a social and political movement which points to the existence of considerable common ground between environmentalism and feminism,^[1] with some currents linking deep ecology and feminism.^[2] Ecofeminists argue that a strong parallel exists between the oppression and subordination of women in families and society and the degradation of nature through the construction of differences into conceptual binaries and ideological hierarchies that allow a systematic justification of domination (“power-over power”) by subjects classed into higher-ranking categories over objects classed into lower-ranking categories (e.g. man over woman, culture over nature, white over black). They also explore the intersectionality between sexism, the domination of nature, racism, speciesism, and other characteristics of social inequality. In some of their current work, ecofeminists argue that the capitalist and patriarchal systems that predominate throughout the world reveal a triple domination of the Global South (people who live in the Third World), women, and nature.^[3] This domination and exploitation of women, of poorly resourced peoples and of nature sits at the core of the ecofeminist analysis.

To most California feminists, the rape of the land and the rape of women’s rights are the same thing.

Why do Republicans seem to hold this worldview?

Anthropocentrism is a concept that human beings may regard themselves as the central and most significant entities in the universe, or that they assess reality through an exclusively human perspective.^[1] The term can be used interchangeably with humanocentrism, while the first concept can also be referred to as human supremacy. The views are especially associated with certain religious cultures.

Anthropocentrism has been posited by some environmentalists, in such books as Confessions of an Eco-Warrior by Dave Foreman and Green Rage by Christopher Manes, as the underlying (if unstated) reason why humanity dominates and sees the need to “develop” most of the Earth. Anthropocentrism has been identified by these writers and others as a root cause of the ecological crisis, human overpopulation, and the extinctions of many non-human species.

Headline of the moment: