(PDF) Reimagining Intersectionality in Environmental Education

Journal of Environmental Education Reimagining intersectionality in environmental and sustainability education: A critical literature review Journal: The Journal of Environmental Education Manuscript ID 02-17-075.R1 Manuscript Type: Special Issue Theoretical Perspective: Indigenous/Aboriginal, Feminism Methodology: Philosophical Un Discipline: Education, Social Sciences Education Areas of Expertise: Indigenous, Formal Education, Learning, Identity de Data Collection & Analysis Literature Review Methods: rR ev ie w ScholarOne, 375 Greenbrier Drive, Charlottesville, VA, 22901 Page 1 of 31 Journal of Environmental Education Reimagining intersectionality in environmental and sustainability education: A critical literature review Naomi Mumbi Maina-Okori1, School of Environment and Sustainability, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada, Jada Renee Koushik, School of Environment and Sustainability, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada & Alex Wilson, College of Education, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada Un Abstract We seek to understand how issues of intersectionality are addressed in environmental and de sustainability education (ESE) literature, focusing on how gender is discussed in relation rR to other social identities such as class, race, sexuality, and ability. Our analysis draws from feminist and decolonizing frameworks, and uses intersectionality to examine how ev ESE literature addresses issues as interconnected. Intersectional analysis originates from Black feminist perspectives on how social identities/subjectivities collide and collude to ie reproduce systemic and unique forms of oppression. This paper contributes to this critical w framework by incorporating considerations of Indigenous interconnectivity and land- based sovereignties. We begin this literature review by providing a background of intersectionality and interconnectivity from Black feminist and Indigenous knowledge systems, and describe how these frameworks inform our analysis. We then review existing ESE literature to critically examine how researchers have utilized feminist 1Contact Naomi Mumbi Maina-Okori [

, Sustainability Education Research Institute (SERI), University of Saskatchewan, Room 1235, Education Building, 28 Campus Drive, Saskatoon, SK, Canada, S7N 0X1] ScholarOne, 375 Greenbrier Drive, Charlottesville, VA, 22901 Journal of Environmental Education Page 2 of 31 2 perspectives to discuss gender in relation to class, race, sexuality, body size, and ability as well as species. This review seeks to disrupt marginalization and calls for the use of critical frameworks such as intersectionality to deconstruct and disrupt oppression in ESE. Keywords: environmental education, environmental and sustainability education, gender, interconnectivity, intersectionality This paper broadens the conception of intersectionality to view it as a coalescing Un and/or a fusing process and as an interconnected multi-directional crossroads. Intersectionality, a term that stemmed from Black feminist scholarship (Crenshaw, 1989), de has expanded beyond examining gender and other human social subjectivities (e.g., race, class, sexual orientation, ability) to include more-than-human beings. While this rR expansion brings important attention to parallels between the oppression of women and that of more-than-human beings, we argue that it, to some extent, minimizers the ev intended agenda and goals of Black feminists. ie Relatedly, Indigenous conceptions of interconnectivity view all parts of our w identity as inseparable and interconnected, such as our sexuality, sexual orientation, cultural alignment, heritage, lineage, gender, socioeconomic status, spirituality, and connection to the land (Wilson, 1996; Wilson, 2008). After reviewing ESE literature that uses an intersectional and/or interconnected lens, we make recommendations for deepening, broadening, or expanding approaches to ESE research. Our own experiences of interconnectivity have informed not only our analysis of the ESE literature, but also the discussions that have framed this work, thus this paper is located at the juncture of our experiences, perspectives, and lived intersectionalities. ScholarOne, 375 Greenbrier Drive, Charlottesville, VA, 22901 Page 3 of 31 Journal of Environmental Education 3 In the first section of the paper, we begin by introducing ourselves and how we became involved in intersectionality research. We then provide background on intersectionality, drawing from feminist, Black, and Indigenous knowledge systems. In the second section we present an analysis of how ESE has taken up intersectional issues of gender in relation to class, race, sexuality, body size, ability, and species. Our analysis shows that intersectional analyses in ESE have built on ecofeminism, queer pedagogy, Indigenous and decolonizing perspectives, land-based education, and biocentric ethics. The final section discusses how ESE has researched intersectionality itself and Un emphasizes the need for educators and researchers to be open to inviting and accepting invitation to dialogue and discuss their pedagogical biases and how they can be de addressed. rR Who We Are As intersectional researchers, it is important that we share the context of our ev research and the backgrounds that inform our understandings of intersectionality and interconnectivity. By sharing our stories we hope to connect with our readers and invite ie you to examine how your own background and experiences have shaped and continue to w shape your scholarship. My name is Naomi Mumbi Maina-Okori and I was born in the Kikuyu tribe in Kenya. I am currently a Ph.D. Candidate in the School of Environment and Sustainability at the University of Saskatchewan. I am confronted daily with multiple dilemmas of being a woman - a Black African woman from a “third world” country. Although I grew up in different parts of Kenya, I was oblivious to the many environmental and social issues that were facing my country and unaware of the interconnections between ScholarOne, 375 Greenbrier Drive, Charlottesville, VA, 22901 Journal of Environmental Education Page 4 of 31 4 colonialism, capitalism, and related social and environmental crises. While I partly attribute this naivety to my age at that time, it was supported by the colonial prescriptions of what was and continues to be taught in our schools, how it is taught, and why it is taught. Western ideologies have permeated much of my country since the colonial era, influencing people to depart from historically sustainable lifestyles to embody more individualistic and consumeristic tendencies and thus to contribute to unprecedented environmental and social chaos. Latterly, advocates like Wangari Maathai (2006) have Un promoted a strong decolonizing environmental movement in Kenya and other parts of the world. Maathai’s emphasis on the engagement of women in environmental and civic de reform sparked my interest in sustainability issues as a young adult, leading to my current rR engagement in ESE at the postsecondary level. My name is Jada Renee Koushik and I was born and raised in Detroit, Michigan. ev As a female African-American Ph.D. Candidate at a Canadian prairie university, I am intimately acquainted with questions surrounding gender, race, and privilege. I situate ie myself with other racialized minority groups that have experienced the negative effects of w colonialism (e.g., through slavery, seizure of land and resources, cultural assimilation and appropriation) and it is only through the sacrifices and industriousness of my maternal family that I am able to pursue doctoral studies in ESE. As a small child I marvelled at the beauty of nature and the interconnectedness of life, and first experienced a connection to land through exploring the urban and rural areas of Michigan. As a young adult, I was awoken to the disparities in access to environmental services, education, health care, and resource allocation experienced by ScholarOne, 375 Greenbrier Drive, Charlottesville, VA, 22901 Page 5 of 31 Journal of Environmental Education 5 women, minorities, and Indigenous peoples around the world. While developing a critical awareness, I began to explore the concept of intersectionality and examine how inequitable policies and practices can impact approaches to sustainability by prescribing how we imagine ourselves, one another, and the lands that we inhabit. My name is Alex Wilson. I am from the Opaskwayak Cree Nation, a territory that spans a large space of land running along the Saskatchewan River. My family has lived in this area for over 10,000 years, and the place where I grew up is known as Pamuskatapan. Our family name or “clan,” which was passed through my Un grandmother’s genealogy, is Wassenas or “emanating light from within.” In our language, Neyonawak, our family is then directly related to anything to do with de light. This genealogy is archived in oral tradition and retold when I introduce myself or rR on celebratory or ceremonial occasions. As part of our responsibility to our family lineage, we are charged with protecting not only the area where our family home is ev located, but also the broader Saskatchewan River Delta. In that sense, caring for and protecting the land and water is also part of our genealogy. ie Three years ago, the Indigenous-led movement Idle No More excited me, along w with many others, as we expanded our understandings and practices of land protection. Working as an organizer with Idle No More, I reflected on how gender and sexual diversity, as manifested in the movement’s focus on body sovereignty and gender self- determination, is necessarily a part of environmental action and discussion. I am also a professor of Educational Foundations and Director of the Aboriginal Education Research Centre at the University of Saskatchewan and am honoured to focus my research on intersectionality and land-based pedagogy. ScholarOne, 375 Greenbrier Drive, Charlottesville, VA, 22901 Journal of Environmental Education Page 6 of 31 6 Conceptualizing Intersectionality and Interconnectivity Legal scholar Kimberlé Crenshaw (1989) coined the term intersectionality in reference to Black women’s experiences with the legal system where multiple forms of oppression overlap and reveal themselves in judicial prejudice. Feminist scholars have since applied the concept more broadly; Leslie McCall (2005), for example, defines intersectionality as the “relationships among multiple dimensions and modalities of social relations and subject formations” (p. 1771) while Kathy Davis (2008) describes intersectionality as the: Un interaction of multiple identities and experiences of exclusion and subordination…the interaction between gender, race, and other de categories of difference in individual lives, social practices, rR institutional arrangements, and cultural ideologies and the outcomes of these interactions in terms of power. (p. 68) ev Scholars have used the tenets of intersectionality to advocate for an integrated consideration of issues rather than a single-axis or single-issue based analysis (Crenshaw, ie 1989). w Relatedly, interconnectivity views all parts of our multiple subjectivities as tied closely together. The term affirms that all parts of our identity are inseparable and interconnected, such as our sexuality, sexual orientation, cultural alignment, heritage, lineage, gender, socioeconomic status, spirituality, and connection to the land (Wilson, 1996, 2008). A contemporary example of an interconnected framework is the term “Two- Spirit” that arose in the 1990s in response to often overwhelmingly oppressive governmental policies that led to the marginalization of lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, and ScholarOne, 375 Greenbrier Drive, Charlottesville, VA, 22901 Page 7 of 31 Journal of Environmental Education 7 gender questioning (LGBTQ) Indigenous peoples (Wilson, 1996). Rather than discrete identity threads “meeting” at intersectional points, interconnectivity views all aspects of individual or community identities as ever-present. Indigenous knowledge systems are rooted in the concept of relationality. For over 50,000 years Indigenous nations in North America have had intimate and vibrant relationships with the land, including water, plants, animals, birds, and all living things (Wilson, 2015). This coexistence has also been referred to as relationality, the recognition “that we, the land, the water, and all living creatures are related and, as relatives, we are Un meant to love and care for each other” (Wilson, 2015, p. 255). Within some Indigenous knowledge systems there are understandings that we are only here because of the land de and our connection to the land. Megan Bang, Lawrence Curley, Adam Kessel, Ananda rR Marin, Eli Suzukovich, and George Strack (2014) summarize this philosophy by articulating that “land is, therefore we are” (p. 45). ev There is an increasingly large body of literature engaging intersectionality and interconnectivity to examine and question issues of identity and social justice across the ie disciplines of law, psychology, social work, and health and wellness (e.g., Collins, 1998; w Davis, 2008; Hancock, 2007; Shields, 2008). Drawing from both feminist intersectionality and Indigenous interconnectivity, our analysis in this paper is focused on how ESE literature has taken up issues of gender in relation to class, race/ethnicity, sexuality, and ability amongst other categories. We use the terms intersectionality and interconnectivity interchangeably in this paper to depict both the relatedness and the fluidity of multiple subjectivities and social constructs. Intersectionality in Environmental and Sustainability Education ScholarOne, 375 Greenbrier Drive, Charlottesville, VA, 22901 Journal of Environmental Education Page 8 of 31 8 One of the intersectional issues that ESE literature has sought to address is that of the field’s exclusion of the voices of women and non-Western peoples. Addressing the marginalization of women’s voices, Annette Gough (2013) has advocated eloquently for an interconnected examination of the multiple subjectivities in ESE: …we have culturally, racially, socioeconomically, and sexually (and so on) different people with fragmented identities whose experiences and understandings can only be constituted through the lenses of subjectivity. Given there is growing recognition that there is no one way of looking at the world, no “one true story,” Un rather a multiplicity of stories, then we should look at a multiplicity of strategies for policies, pedagogies, and research in environmental education. (p. 376) de Within these multiplicities, more scholars in the field of ESE are engaging with rR interconnective frameworks to underscore alternative knowledges in ESE research, including the oft missed voices of women, people with disabilities, sexual minorities, ev Indigenous communities, and others. In the following section we highlight some of the scholarly, practice-based, and self-reflective literature that has engaged with these ie matters, and include sections on ecofeminism, queer pedagogy, Indigenous and w decolonizing perspectives, land-based education, and biocentric ethics. Ecofeminism. Ecofeminism recognizes and makes linkages between the oppression of women and the exploitation of nature and suggests that while women are often more likely to be involved in environmental protection, they are underrepresented in decision-making processes (Gardner & Riley, 2007; Quigley, Che, Achieng, & Liaram, 2017; Sakellari & Skanavis, 2013; Skanavis & Sakellari, 2012; Whitehouse, 2014). While ecofeminism ScholarOne, 375 Greenbrier Drive, Charlottesville, VA, 22901 Page 9 of 31 Journal of Environmental Education 9 draws from multiple feminisms and provides a strong analytical framework to disrupt patriarchal oppression of women and nature, this framework nonetheless has been critiqued for some proponents’ essentialization of women and romanticization of nature (Blake, 2007; Henderson, 1997). Recently, Laura Piersol and Nora Timmerman (2017) note that the critiques launched against ecofeminism have resulted in the silencing of certain voices and the creation of dualistic perspectives within the field, yet argue that ecofeminism can provide a framework for challenging discourses that perpetuate women’s oppression as well as hierarchical relationships in social and environmental Un issues in ESE (Fahs, 2015; A. Gough, 2004; Harvester & Blenkinsop, 2011; C. Russell & Bell, 1996). Because ecofeminism focuses on the relationship between gender and de ecological justice, Lara Harvester and Sean Blenkinsop (2011) argue that it provides an rR adequate intersectional framework for analysis. They contend that an ecofeminist framework: ev Includes working for non-hierarchical relationships that recognize our interdependency, a commitment to cultural and biological diversity, a desire to ie end oppression of any kind, and a willingness to analyze the logic of domination w and its material and behavioural effects on human relationships and human interactions with the more-than-human world. (p. 123) This framework commits to addressing both social and environmental issues as interconnected, and promises to recognize, empower, and liberate marginalized perspectives, including those of more-than-human beings in the process of analysis. Queer pedagogy. A queer pedagogy calls for deeper examination of dominant identities within ESE ScholarOne, 375 Greenbrier Drive, Charlottesville, VA, 22901 Journal of Environmental Education Page 10 of 31 10 research, thereby troubling heteronormative assumptions about identities and allowing for better inclusion of all voices (C. Russell et al., 2002; J. Russell, 2013). Constance Russell, Tema Sarick, and Jacqueline Kennelly (2002) identify arenas where heterosexual dominance is particularly prevalent in the field. For example, in outdoor education they observe how women who wanted to participate in this historically male-dominated field were often intimidated by what is referred to as “lesbian baiting,” that is, the labeling of women as lesbians regardless of their sexual orientation in efforts to “discredit them, provoke denials, or encourage adoption of more traditional norms” (C. Russell et al., Un 2002, p. 59). Failure to address such aggressions perpetuates oppression and forces women and men toward “socially acceptable” categories and roles. It also raises de important questions about who is able to access the outdoors, not only in terms of gender rR but also related to physical (dis)ability and affordability. Queer pedagogy demands an analysis of the interconnections of social and ev environmental issues. ESE scholars taking up queer pedagogy have critiqued the continued relegation of sexuality and queer issues to the “other” category in discussions ie of justice and general silence in the field related to LGBTQ content (Adsit-Morris & w Gough, 2017; Bazzul & Santavicca, 2017; N. Gough et al., 2003; J. Russell, 2013). Earlier, C. Russell et al. (2002) argued for more than simply adding LGBTQ content to ESE, instead recognizing that queer pedagogy calls for deeper engagement that involves “problematizing heteronormativity, essentialized identities, and the heterosexualization” (p. 54) of ESE theories and practices. A queer pedagogy thus can disrupt expectations around gender, ability, and socioeconomic status, and allow for more authentic expressions of environmental educators and learners (Hauk, 2016). Further, in addition to ScholarOne, 375 Greenbrier Drive, Charlottesville, VA, 22901 Page 11 of 31 Journal of Environmental Education 11 challenging the oppression of specific individuals, queer pedagogy can also oppose global forces of capitalism and neoliberalism by revealing and unsettling dominant social and economic systems of value (Adsit-Morris & Gough, 2017; J. Russell, 2013). For example, in response to C. Russell et al’s (2002) call to queer environmental education, Chessa Adsit-Morris and Noel Gough (2017) offer the idea of performing a queer tango to “touch, to invite, to dance with diverse and sometimes contradictory motions, ideas and philosophies with the hope of forging new alliances, assemblages, and practices” (p. 72) within the ESE field. These alliances and collective imaginaries, they argue, can Un invigorate the field and create new possibilities to teaching and researching in ESE. Indigenous and decolonizing perspectives. de Based on Indigenous knowledge systems, self and land reveal an embodied rR framework in which pedagogy is intricately connected to place, which includes not only geographic territory but also the inhabitants of that territory, including human and other- ev than-human selves (Tuck, McKenzie, & McCoy, 2014; Wane & Chandler, 2002). Gregory Lowan (2009) uses a decolonizing Indigenous education lens to examine ie embodiment of self in land-based cultures, noting how cultural benchmarks such as w language, names, and others are based on specific geographical locals, and Alexa Scully (2012) and Elizabeth Henry (2015) each examine how Indigenous place-based education can help learners reflect on the histories of their neighbourhoods to foster better relations with Indigenous peoples and the land. Several pre-colonial Indigenous societies were matriarchal, with women as providers and keepers of Indigenous knowledge (Quigley et al., 2017; Wane & Chandler, 2002). In Kenya, for example, these matriarchal societies were dismantled by colonial ScholarOne, 375 Greenbrier Drive, Charlottesville, VA, 22901 Journal of Environmental Education Page 12 of 31 12 structures that shifted gender roles with women confined to their homes and men moving to the cities to look for paid work (Maathai, 2006; Quigley et al., 2017). Despite the pervasive and destructive impacts of colonial practices, many women remain in tune with nature and have formed some of the strongest environmental grassroots movements in the world (Li, 2007; Wane & Chandler, 2002). While not advocating a hierarchal gender dualism that privileges women, Huey-li Li (2007) nonetheless argues that women’s organizing: serves as a starting point from which women undertake the educational task of Un transforming ecologically uncongenial cultural practices. The women-led indigenous grassroots environmental movements in the Third World especially de assume this educational task without any reservations. (p. 367) rR As another example of the power of women’s organizing, as Alex indicated above, Idle No More is an international movement that is led by Indigenous women and aims to bring ev attention to issues related to land, body sovereignty, and gender self-determination (The Kino-nda-niimi Collective, 2014). The histories, knowledge, and experiences of ie Indigenous peoples, including women, need to be incorporated in teaching and research w in ESE. To fail to do so is unjust, but also risky and myopic (Wane & Chandler, 2002). In further considering colonial impacts on communities, environmental justice scholars have decried the incommensurate location of toxins and other environmental hazards in low-income neighborhoods of color in North America (Agyeman, Bullard, & Evans, 2002; Bullard, 1990). In its nascent stage, environmental justice referred to mobilization in response to the siting of hazardous waste facilities in low-income, racialized communities (Brulle & Pellow, 2006); as a result, disproportionate burdens ScholarOne, 375 Greenbrier Drive, Charlottesville, VA, 22901 Page 13 of 31 Journal of Environmental Education 13 affected some groups more than others while environmental benefits (e.g., parks, green spaces) were also disproportionately collected (Bullard, 1990; Gosine & Teelucksingh, 2008; Haluza-DeLay, 2013; Koushik, 2016). Work in environmental justice has expanded to consider broader, intersectional concepts such as who is welcomed and feels safe on the land based on gender, sexuality, race, ability, or other social categories (McKenzie, Koushik, Haluza-DeLay, Chin, & Corwin, 2017). Some scholars have suggested that, in order to address these environmental injustices, people of color (including women of color) need to be included in decision-making processes (Foster, Un 1998). Land-based education. de Examining the histories of space and the continuing negative impacts of rR colonization on colonized peoples can help to reveal their influence on ESE discourses, and indeed on our daily lives (Engel-Di Mauro & Carroll, 2014; Kayira, 2015; Tuck et ev al., 2014). Land-based education emphasizes the need to situate ESE within students’ surroundings, holding explicit conversations on the oppressions that have been located in ie those places (Engel-Di Mauro & Carroll, 2014; Tuck et al., 2014). As Njoki Wane and w Deborah Chandler (2002) illustrate, African women (and other Indigenous women) often are in tune with their land through knowledge that has been passed down through several generations, and they argue that such Indigenous knowledge should be taught in schools. Further, they purport that students should learn about the contradictory nature of Western and Indigenous knowledge systems and how the two can be reconciled to contribute to sustainable practices (Wane & Chandler, 2002). This reconciliation can be described as a “two-world” pedagogical approach, inclusive of (but not limited to) Two-Eyed Seeing, ScholarOne, 375 Greenbrier Drive, Charlottesville, VA, 22901 Journal of Environmental Education Page 14 of 31 14 integrative science, ecological mètissage, and Native science, which embraces connectedness (Knapp, 2013). These approaches seek to look beyond the borders of Indigenous knowledge systems and Western worldviews, and aim to bridge these seemingly incommensurable ways of knowing (Hatcher, Bartlett, Marshall, & Marshall, 2009; Kapyrka & Dockstator, 2012; McKeon, 2012). From a colonial perspective, land and the colonized (mostly Indigenous peoples) are considered to be part of nature and consequently objects and commodities of capitalism (Engel-Di Mauro & Carroll, 2014). In postcolonial contexts, ESE makes Un visible and addresses (mostly) settler colonial assumptions that are inherent in the field as a legacy of its birth in the Western academy (Tuck et al., 2014). While postcolonial and de Indigenous scholars have critiqued colonial perspectives in ESE, Salvatore Engel-Di rR Mauro and Karanja Carroll (2014) argue that they have not gone far enough. By failing to include land as a main issue, “[t]hese alternative approaches remain partially mired in ev reproductions of settler colonial understandings” (p. 72). As an alternative, they suggest drawing from an African-centered approach to place that “promotes an integrative view ie of nature and people that stresses interrelation and interconnection with the land and its w histories” (p. 79). To dismantle colonial epistemologies in ESE in Africa, Jean Kayira (2015) suggests drawing from traditional knowledge derived from Ubuntu, a Sub-Saharan African concept rooted in human interconnections with nature. In North and South American contexts, Indigenous conceptions of a holistic relationship with nature encompass the relations presented in the critical frameworks presented by Kayira (2015). Addressing issues of colonialism through Indigenous conceptions helps to examine the ScholarOne, 375 Greenbrier Drive, Charlottesville, VA, 22901 Page 15 of 31 Journal of Environmental Education 15 root causes of both land appropriation by settler colonialists in North America (Simpson, 2014; Tuck et al, 2014) and the devaluing of traditional knowledge by Western science in Southern Africa (Kayira, 2015; Shava, 2013). Biocentric ethics. Inclusive approaches to disrupting the nature/culture divide that is propagated by colonial legacies are critical in addressing environmental problems. Biocentric ethics is one such approach that calls for the re-imagining of a common world that pays attention to the relationships and coexistence of humans and more-than-human species (Fawcett, Un 2013; Fawcett, Bell & Russell, 2002; Pacini-Ketchabaw & Nxumalo, 2015; Pacini- Ketchabaw & Taylor, 2015). In relation to education, Leesa Fawcett (2005) explains that de teaching and learning from the environment involves learning with all the senses and rR fostering a deep understanding of the lives of other animals. She calls for a biocentric ethic that values and sees humans as part of the natural world rather than more typical ev ethical approaches that separate the two. Similarly, Richard Kahn and Brandy Humes (2009) advocate for a “total liberation pedagogy” (p. 181) that works within and against ie the intersection of all forms of oppression whether directed against humans, more-than- w human beings, or the natural environment generally. While they appreciate earlier intersectional work in ESE, they nonetheless critique the lack of focus on speciesism and argue for the inclusion of colonial histories and global forces in discussions of, for example, invasive species and ecological sustainability. Constance Russell and Keri Semenko (2016) are also concerned with speciesism and how it connects to other oppressions, focusing particularly on the interconnections of speciesism, sexism, and sizeism in environmental, interspecies, and social justice ScholarOne, 375 Greenbrier Drive, Charlottesville, VA, 22901 Journal of Environmental Education Page 16 of 31 16 education. They describe a “fat pedagogy” that draws from both ecofeminism and intersectional scholarship, moving beyond human-centered intersectional analysis by, for example, exploring how insults such as “cow” or “pig” directed at fat women reveal not only sexist and sizeist assumptions but also animals’ perceived inferiority to humans. Similarly interested in the connections between speciesism and sexism, Teresa Lloro- Bidart and Keri Semenko (2017) observe that environmental and animal-focused educators often must tackle emotionally challenging topics and they argue that women, in particular, often bear a heavier burden in addressing these. Noting the gendered demands Un on women educators and building on earlier writing in ESE on ethics of care, they advocate that educators need to seriously engage in self-care alongside the work they de already do in caring for both human and more-than-humans. A specific example of the rR sort of care Lloro-Bidart (2015) has been involved with can be found in a paper that describes her experience of looking after a kitten with physical challenges. Drawing on ev insights from ecofeminism and critical disability studies, she offers an intersectional analysis that makes clear connections between speciesism and ableism. ie In her review of environmental education research focused on the more-than- w human, Fawcett (2013) acknowledges the recent focus on biocentric research on children’s encounters with nature and argues for a shift away from anthropocentric approaches to biocentric and ecocentric ones. Examples of recent research that does just that problematizes the notion of children’s perceptions of nature as “innocent” and examines the colonial spaces in which animals and children interact (Nxumalo, 2015a; Pacini-Ketchabaw & Nxumalo, 2015; Pacini-Ketchabaw & Taylor, 2015). Further demonstrating the complexity of nature-child interactions, Fikile Nxumalo (2015b) ScholarOne, 375 Greenbrier Drive, Charlottesville, VA, 22901 Page 17 of 31 Journal of Environmental Education 17 explicates that “colonialism, racialization, whiteness, gender, and class” (p. 4) are ever present in children’s experiences in community gardens. Such research can be seen to heed Fawcett’s (2013) call for environmental education research to “refract the disillusion that makes human relationships with natures a-relational, disembodied matters of unjust resource allocation, so we can keep dreaming narratives of naturecultures” (p. 415). Deepening Intersectional Analyses in ESE The reviewed literature shows a growing focus on intersectional analyses in ESE. Un In the related area of outdoor experiential education, earlier work related to gender focused on the need to include women and their experiences, particularly in the areas of de women’s leadership (Allin, 2000; Gray, 2016; Humberstone, 2000), but there were also rR critiques related to the lack of attention to race or ethnicity (Henderson, 1997; Roberts & Henderson, 1997). Others working in outdoor experiential education expanded their ev analyses to include gender, race, sexuality, ability, and class (e.g., Barnfield & Humberstone, 2008; Humberstone & Pedersen, 2001; Warren, 1998; Warren, Roberts, ie Breunig, & Alvarez, 2014). Indeed, outdoor experiential educators laid an important w foundation for some of the work on queering environmental education (C. Russell et al, 2002). The early calls to queer environmental education (N. Gough, et al., 2003; C. Russell et al, 2002) recently have been taken up by various researchers (Adsit-Morris & Gough, 2017; Bazzul & Santavicca, 2017; Hauk, 2016; J. Russell, 2013). While some scholars looking to queer environmental education clearly sought to push beyond the human (C. Russell et al, 2002; J. Russell, 2013), other intersectional analyses in the field remained mostly human-centered. Early ecofeminist analyses in ScholarOne, 375 Greenbrier Drive, Charlottesville, VA, 22901 Journal of Environmental Education Page 18 of 31 18 ESE, particularly those whose work focused on human relationships with other animals, stand out for their insistence on examining the interlocking oppression of women and nature (Fawcett, 2000; Humes, 2008; Russell & Bell, 1996). This work has seen a recent resurgence with several ESE scholars examining the implications of the supposed separation of humans and other animals, including in colonial contexts (Lloro-Bidart, 2017; Nxumalo, 2015b; Piersol & Timmerman, 2017; Probyn-Rapsey, Donaldson, Ioannides, Lea, & Marsh, 2016; Quinn, 2013; C. Russell & Semenko, 2016). Moreover, researchers have critiqued the Cartesian dualistic ethos that continues to support Un mind/body, male/female, human/non-human, and nature/culture binaries that are based on colonial ideologies still evident today (Fawcett, 2013; Gough & Whitehouse, 2003; Li, de 2007; Lloro-Bidart, 2015). Further, feminist scholars working at the intersection of ESE rR and fat pedagogy have recently expanded intersectional analyses to explore the connections between sizeism and speciesism in another attempt to disrupt these dualisms ev and to decenter human experiences (Russell, Cameron, Socha, & McNinch, 2013; Russell & Semenko, 2016). ie Returning to Black feminist conceptualizations of intersectionality as a w framework that helps to examine the complex ways that multiple oppressions based on gender, race, class, sexuality, ability, and other human-centered categories produce unique experiences for different women, we note that these interconnected categories of oppression are still alive and well today. Indeed as Humes (2008) pointed out, failing to work against the multiple forms of human oppression can be seen as being complicit in this oppression. While we acknowledge and value current considerations and inclusion of the oppression of other animals and the more-than-human generally into intersectional ScholarOne, 375 Greenbrier Drive, Charlottesville, VA, 22901 Page 19 of 31 Journal of Environmental Education 19 analyses, we also argue that it is imperative to take a step back and examine to what extent environmental education has actually addressed social justice issues. We do not suggest abandoning the current trend towards expanded intersectional analyses, but we do encourage feminist and other scholars within the ESE field to evaluate what progress that has been made so far and how, in addition to taking up post- human and biocentric frameworks, we can continue to work on disrupting oppression on the basis of gender, race, class, sexuality, ability, and size. As Humes (2008) put it, we need to be open to acknowledging and dialoguing about our “pedagogical blind spots” Un and how we can address them. For example, the authors of the editorial for the recent Journal of Environmental Education special issue on gender noted the absence of de contributions from authors from Africa and Central America (Gough, Russell, & rR Whitehouse, 2017), indicating that some scholars in the field are paying attention to the voices that remain on the margins of the field (Russell & Fawcett, 2013). A similar ev observation was made concerning the Australian Journal of Environmental Education, with Hilary Whitehouse (2014) noting that Australian Indigenous and international voices ie were not adequately represented in that journal. If environmental education is to move w gender from the margins to the center and truly engage in intersectional analyses that honour the history of the concept, we argue that the contributions of feminists from diverse backgrounds and from these regions are an absolute necessity. Conclusion We set out to examine how issues of intersectionality are addressed in ESE, focusing on how gender is discussed in relation to other social identities such as class, race, sexuality, and ability. As noted, several scholars draw on intersectional frameworks ScholarOne, 375 Greenbrier Drive, Charlottesville, VA, 22901 Journal of Environmental Education Page 20 of 31 20 to challenge dominant structures such as patriarchy, colonialism, capitalism, and anthropocentrism that reproduce inequality and contribute to continued environmental degradation. For the past three decades, feminist scholars have been vocal about the marginalization of women’s voices and the need for intersectional analyses in environmental education research (Gough, 2013). Moving these intersectional analyses from the margins is not about elevating them above all else (Engel-Di Mauro & Carroll, 2014), but rather about highlighting issues that are in alignment and complementary; such a move is not about competition but connection. Un In today’s society, regrettably, subjecting almost all transactions to a cost-benefit analysis and commodifying everything is the dominant way of thinking (Harvey, 2000). de Examining the interconnections of social, ecological, and economic issues can help to rR inform a critical and inclusive conceptualization of societal problems and to reveal just and sustainable solutions to these problems. Without such analyses, ESE runs the risk of ev perpetuating dominant ideologies and further marginalizing and silencing diverse voices and issues (Howard, 2008). Given that most environmental and social decision-making is ie economically driven, this could be a significant component of intersectionality in ESE w research in the future. Intersectional scholarship calls for a focus on social justice, individual and collective well-being, and issues of peace for all of us, human and more-than-human alike. As the challenges to global sustainability increase in complexity, the ability of individuals and communities to protect their livelihood will be challenged even more. Focusing on the interconnections between environment, social justice, and peace will provide perspectives and ideas to address these challenges, including the use of direct ScholarOne, 375 Greenbrier Drive, Charlottesville, VA, 22901 Page 21 of 31 Journal of Environmental Education 21 action through activism (Ceaser, 2015). Indeed, intersectional activist-oriented research can and will play a critical role in helping to develop strategies for students, educators, and community partners to gain agency in making a difference in their own and others’ lives (Li, 2007; Lousley, 1999; Ludlow, 2010; McKenzie, 2009). References Adsit-Morris, C., & Gough, N. (2017). It takes more than two to (multispecies) tango: Queering gender texts in environmental education. Journal of Environmental Education, 48(1), 67-78. Un Agyeman, J., Bullard, R.D., & Evans, B. (2002). Exploring the nexus: Bringing together sustainability, environmental justice and equity. Space and Polity, 6 (1), 77-90. de Allin, L. (2000). Women into outdoor education: Negotiating a male-gendered space: rR Issues of physicality. Her Outdoors: Challenge and Adventure in Gendered Open Spaces, 66, 51–68. ev Bang, M., Curley, L., Kessel, A., Marin, A., & Suzokovich, E., & Strack, G. (2014). Muskrat theories, tobacco in the streets, and living Chicago as Indigenous lands. ie Environmental Education Research, 20(1), 37-55. w Barnfield, D., & Humberstone, B. (2008). Speaking out: Perspectives of gay and lesbian practitioners in outdoor education in the UK. Journal of Adventure Education & Outdoor Learning, 8(1), 31-42. Bazzul, J., & Santavicca, N. (2017). Diagramming assemblages of sex/gender and sexuality as environmental education. Journal of Environmental Education, 48(1), 56-66. Blake, J. (2007). Missing links: Gender and education for sustainable development. ScholarOne, 375 Greenbrier Drive, Charlottesville, VA, 22901 Journal of Environmental Education Page 22 of 31 22 International Journal of Innovation and Sustainable Development, 2(3), 414-432. Brulle, R. J., & Pellow, D. N. (2006). Environmental justice: Human health and environmental inequalities. Annual Review of Public Health, 27, 103–124. Bullard, R. D. (1990). Ecological inequities and the new south: Black communities under siege. The Journal of Ethnic Studies, 17(4), 101-115. Ceaser, D. (2015). Significant life experiences and environmental justice: Positionality and the significance of negative social/environmental experiences. Environmental Education Research, 21(2), 205-220. Un Collins, P. H. (1998). It's all in the family: Intersections of gender, race, and nation. Hypatia, 13(3), 62-82. de Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A black feminist rR critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 1989(1), 139-167. ev Davis, K. (2008). Intersectionality as buzzword: A sociology of science perspective on what makes a feminist theory successful. Feminist Theory, 9(1), 67-85. ie Engel-Di Mauro, S., & Carroll, K. K. (2014). An African-centred approach to land w education. Environmental Education Research, 20(1), 70-81. Fahs, B. (2015). The weight of trash: Teaching sustainability and ecofeminism by asking undergraduates to carry around their own garbage. Radical Teacher, 102, 30-34. Fawcett, L. (2000). Ethical imagining: Ecofeminist possibilities and environmental learning. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 5(1), 134-149. Fawcett, L. (2005). Bioregional teaching: How to climb, eat, fall, and learn from porcupines. In P. Tripp & L. Muzzin (Eds.), Teaching as activism: Equity meets ScholarOne, 375 Greenbrier Drive, Charlottesville, VA, 22901 Page 23 of 31 Journal of Environmental Education 23 environmentalism (pp. 269-280). Montreal, QC: McGill-Queen’s University. Fawcett, L. (2013). Three degrees of separation: Accounting for naturecultures in environmental education research. In R. B. Stevenson, M. Brody, J. Dillon, & A. E. J. Wals (Eds.), International handbook of research on environmental education (pp. 409-417). New York, NY: Routledge. Fawcett, L., Bell, A.C., & Russell, C.L. (2002). Guiding our environmental praxis: Teaching for social and environmental justice. In W. Filho (Ed.), Teaching sustainability at universities: Towards curriculum greening (pp. 223-238). New Un York, NY: Peter Lang. Foster, S. (1998). Justice from the ground up: Distributive inequities, grassroots de resistance, and the transformative politics of the environmental justice movement. rR California Law Review, 86, 775-841. Gardner, C. V., & Riley, J. E. (2007). Breaking boundaries: Ecofeminism in the ev classroom. Radical Teacher, 78, 24-33. Gosine, A., & Teelucksingh, C. (2008). Environmental justice and racism in Canada: An ie introduction. Toronto, ON: Emond Montgomery Publications. w Gough, A. (2004). The contribution of ecofeminist perspectives to sustainability in higher education. In P. B. Corcoran, & A. E. J. Wals (Eds.), Higher education and the challenge of sustainability: Problemactics, promise, and practice (pp. 149-161). Dordrecht, NL: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Gough, A. (2013). Researching differently: Generating a gender agenda for research in environmental education. In R. S. Stevenson, M. Brody, J. Dillon, & A. E. J. Wals (Eds.), International handbook of research on environmental education (pp. 375- ScholarOne, 375 Greenbrier Drive, Charlottesville, VA, 22901 Journal of Environmental Education Page 24 of 31 24 383). New York, NY: Routledge. Gough, A., Russell, C., & Whitehouse, H. (2017). Introduction: Moving gender from margin to center in environmental education. Journal of Environmental Education, 48(1), 5-9. Gough, A., & Whitehouse, H. (2003). The “nature” of environmental education research from a feminist poststructuralist standpoint. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 8, 31-43. Gough, N., Gough, A., et al (2003). Tales from Camp Wilde: Queer(y)ing environmental Un education research. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 8, 44-66. Gray, T. (2016). The “F” word: Feminism in outdoor education. Journal of Outdoor and de Environmental Education, 19(2), 25-41. rR Haluza-DeLay, R. (2013). Education for environmental justice. In R. B. Stevenson, M. Brody, J. Dillon, & A. E. J. Wals (Eds.), International handbook of research on ev environmental education (pp. 394-403). New York, NY: Routledge. Hancock, A. M. (2007). When multiplication doesn't equal quick addition: Examining ie intersectionality as a research paradigm. Perspectives on Politics, 5(1), 63-79. w Harvester, L., & Blenkinsop, S. (2011). Environmental education and ecofeminist pedagogy: Bridging the environmental and the social. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 15, 120-134. Harvey, D. (2000). Spaces of hope. Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press. Hatcher, A., Bartlett, C., Marshall, M., & Marshall, A. (2009). Two-eyed seeing: A cross- cultural science journey. Green Teacher, 86, 3-6. Hauk, M. (2016). Queer Earth: Troubling dirt, humanness, gender assumptions, and ScholarOne, 375 Greenbrier Drive, Charlottesville, VA, 22901 Page 25 of 31 Journal of Environmental Education 25 binaries to nurture bioculturally responsive curricula. In V. E. Bloomfield & M. E. Fisher (Eds.), LGBTQ voices in education: Changing the culture of schooling (pp. 186-200). New York, NY: Routledge. Henderson, K. (1997). Ecofeminism and experiential education. Journal of Experiential Education, 20(3), 130-133. Henry, E. R. (2015). A search for decolonizing place-based pedagogies: An exploration of unheard histories in Kitsilano Vancouver, BC. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 19, 18-30. Un Howard, P. (2008). Ecology, phenomenology, and culture: Developing a language for sustainability. Diaspora, Indigenous, and Minority Education, 2, 302-310. de Humberstone, B. (2000). The “outdoor industry” as social and educational phenomena: rR Gender and outdoor adventure/education. Journal of Adventure Education & Outdoor Learning, 1(1), 21-35. ev Humberstone, B., & Pedersen, K. (2001). Gender, class and outdoor traditions in the UK and Norway. Sport, Education and Society, 6(1), 23-33. ie Humes, B. (2008). Moving toward a liberatory pedagogy for all species: Mapping the w need for dialogue between humane and anti-oppressive education. Green Theory & Praxis: The Journal of Ecopedagogy, 4(1), 65-85. Kahn, R., & Humes, B. (2009). Marching out from Ultima Thule: Critical counterstories of emancipatory educators working at the intersection of human rights, animal rights, and planetary sustainability. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 14, 179-195. Kapyrka, J., & Dockstator, M. (2012). Indigenous knowledges and western knowledges ScholarOne, 375 Greenbrier Drive, Charlottesville, VA, 22901 Journal of Environmental Education Page 26 of 31 26 in environmental education: Acknowledging the tensions for the benefits of a “two-worlds” approach. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 17, 97- 112. Kayira, J. (2015). (Re)creating spaces for uMunthu: Postcolonial theory and environmental education in southern Africa. Environmental Education Research, 21(1), 106-128. Knapp, C. E. (2013). Two-eyed seeing as a way of knowing. Green Teacher, 99, 31-34. Koushik, J. R. (2016). Considerations of place in sustainability education policy: How local Un contexts inform the engagement of sustainability in education policy enactment and practice. The Journal of Sustainability Education, 11. Retrieved from de http://www.journalofsustainabilityeducation.org/ rR Li, H. (2007). Ecofeminism as a pedagogical project: Women, nature, and education. Educational Theory, 57(3), 351-368. ev Lloro-Bidart, T. (2015). Culture as ability: Organizing enabling educative spaces for humans and animals. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 20, 92-107. ie Lloro-Bidart, T. (2017). A feminist posthumanist political ecology of education for w theorizing human-animal relations/relationships. Environmental Education Research, 23(1), 111-130. Lloro-Bidart, T., & Semenko, K. (2017). Toward a feminist ethic of self-care for environmental educators. Journal of Environmental Education, 48(1), 18-25. Lousley, C. (1999). (De)politicizing the environment club: Environmental discourse and the culture of schooling. Environmental Education Research, 5(3), 293-304. Lowan, G. (2009) Exploring place from an Aboriginal perspective: Considerations for ScholarOne, 375 Greenbrier Drive, Charlottesville, VA, 22901 Page 27 of 31 Journal of Environmental Education 27 outdoor and environmental education. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 14, 42-58. Lowan-Trudeau, G. (2013). Indigenous environmental education research in North America. In R. B. Stevenson, M. Brody, J. Dillon, & A. E. J. Wals (Eds.), International handbook of research on environmental education (pp. 404-408). New York, NY: Routledge. Ludlow, J. (2010). Ecofeminism and experiential learning: Taking the risks of activism seriously. Transformations: The Journal of Inclusive Scholarship and Pedagogy. Un 21(1), 42-59. Maathai, W. (2006). Unbowed: A memoir. New York, NY: Anchor Books. de McCall, L. (2005). The complexity of intersectionality. Signs, 30(3), 1771-1800. rR McKenzie, M. (2009). Pedagogical transgression: Intersubjective agency and action. In M. McKenzie, P. Hart, H. Bai, & B. Jickling (Eds.), Fields of green: Re-storying ev culture, environment and education (pp. 211-226). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press. ie McKenzie, M., Koushik, J. R., Haluza-DeLay, R., Chin, B., & Corwin, J. (2017). Environmental Justice. In Russ, A. and Krasny, M. (Eds.), Urban environmental w education review (pp. 59-67). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. McKeon, M. (2012). Two-eyed seeing into environmental education: Revealing its “natural” readiness to Indigenize. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 17, 131-147. Nxumalo, F. (2015a). Forest stories: Restorying encounters with “natural” places in early childhood education. In V. Pacini-Ketchabaw & A. Taylor (Eds.), Unsettling the colonial places and spaces of early childhood education (pp. 21-42). New York, ScholarOne, 375 Greenbrier Drive, Charlottesville, VA, 22901 Journal of Environmental Education Page 28 of 31 28 NY: Routledge. Nxumalo, F. (2015b). Touching place in childhood studies: Situated encounters with a community garden. In H. Skott-Myhre, V. Pacini-Ketchabaw, & K. Skott-Myhre (Eds.), Youth work, early education, and psychology: Liminal encounters (pp. 131-158). New York, NY: Palgrave-Macmillan. Pacini-Ketchabaw, V., & Nxumalo, F. (2015). Unruly raccoons and troubled educators: Nature/culture divides in a childcare centre. Environmental Humanities, 7, 151- 168. Un Pacini-Ketchabaw, V., & Taylor, A. (2015). Unsettling pedagogies through common world encounters: Grappling with (post) colonial legacies in Canadian forests and de Australian bushlands. In V. Pacini-Ketchabaw & A. Taylor (Eds.), Unsettling the rR colonialist places and spaces of early childhood education (pp. 43-62). New York, NY: Routledge. ev Piersol, L., & Timmerman, N. (2017). Reimagining environmental education within academia: Storytelling and dialogue as lived ecofeminist politics. Journal of ie Environmental Education, 48(1), 10-17. w Probyn-Rapsey, F., Donaldson, S., Ioannides, G., Lea, T., & Marsh, K. (2016). A sustainable campus: The Sydney Declaration on Interspecies Sustainability. Animal Studies Journal, 5(1), 110-151. Quigley, C. F., Che, S. M., Achieng, S., & Liaram, S. (2017). “Women and the environmental are together”: Using Participatory Rural Appraisal to examine gendered tensions about the environment. Environmental Education Research, 23(6), 773-796. ScholarOne, 375 Greenbrier Drive, Charlottesville, VA, 22901 Page 29 of 31 Journal of Environmental Education 29 Quinn, J. (2013). Theorising learning and nature: Post-human possibilities and problems. Gender and Education, 25(6), 738-753. Roberts, N., & Henderson, K. (1997). Women of color in the outdoors: Culture and meanings. Journal of Experiential Education, 20(3), 134-42. Russell, C., & Bell, A. (1996). A politicized ethic of care: Environmental education from an ecofeminist perspective. In K. Warren (Ed.), Women's voices in experiential education (pp. 172-181). Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt. Russell, C., Cameron, E., Socha, T., & McNinch, H. (2013). “Fatties cause global Un warming”: Fat pedagogy and environmental education. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 18, 27-45. de Russell, C., & Fawcett, L. (2013). Moving margins in environmental education. In R. rR Stevenson, M. Brody, J. Dillon, & A. Wals (Eds.), International handbook on environmental education research (pp. 365-374). New York, NY: Routledge. ev Russell, C., Sarick, T., & Kennelly, J. (2002). Queering environmental education. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 7(1), 54-66. ie Russell, C., & Semenko, K. (2016). We take “cow” as a compliment: Fattening humane, w environmental, and social justice education. In E. Cameron & C. Russell (Eds.), The fat pedagogy reader: Challenging weight-based oppression through critical education (pp. 211-220). New York, NY: Peter Lang. Russell, J. (2013). Whose better? [Re]orienting a queer ecopedagogy. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 18, 11-26. Sakellari, M., & Skanavis, C. (2013). Environmental behavior and gender: An emerging area of concern for environmental education research. Applied Environmental ScholarOne, 375 Greenbrier Drive, Charlottesville, VA, 22901 Journal of Environmental Education Page 30 of 31 30 Education & Communication, 12(2), 77-87. Scully, A. (2012). Decolonization, reinhabitation and reconciliation: Aboriginal and place-based education. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 17, 148- 158. Shava, S. (2013). The representation of Indigenous knowledges. In R. Stevenson, M. Brody, J. Dillon, & A. Wals (Eds.), International handbook of research on environmental education (pp. 384–393). New York, NY: Routledge. Shields, S. A. (2008). Gender: An intersectionality perspective. Sex Roles, 59(5/6), 301- Un 311. Simpson, L. B. (2014). Land as pedagogy: Nishnaabeg intelligence and rebellious de transformation. Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education & Society, 3(3). Retrieved rR from http://decolonization.org/index.php/des/index Skanavis, C., & Sakellari, M. (2012). Free-choice learning suited to women’s ev participation needs in environmental decision-making processes. Environmental Education Research, 18(1), 1-17. ie The Kino-nda-niimi Collective (Eds.). (2014). The winter we danced: Voices from the w past, the future, and the Idle No More movement. Winnipeg, MB: ARP Books. Tuck, E., McKenzie, M., & McCoy, K. (2014). Land education: Indigenous, post- colonial, and decolonizing perspectives on place and environmental education research. Environmental Education Research, 20(4), 1-23. Wane, N., & Chandler, D.J. (2002). African women, cultural knowledge, and environmental education with a focus on Kenya’s Indigenous women. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 7(1), 86-98. ScholarOne, 375 Greenbrier Drive, Charlottesville, VA, 22901 Page 31 of 31 Journal of Environmental Education 31 Warren, K. (1998). A call for race, gender, and class sensitive facilitation in outdoor experiential education. Journal of Experiential Education, 21(1), 21-25. Warren, K., Roberts, N. S., Breunig, M., & Alvarez, M. (2014). Social justice in outdoor experiential education: A state of knowledge review. Journal of Experiential Education, 37(1), 89-103. Whitehouse, H. (2014). Gender and other forms of difference/diversity. Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 30(1), 149-150. Wilson, A. (1996). How we find ourselves: Identity development and two spirit people. Un Harvard Educational Review, 66(2), 303-318. Wilson, A. (2008). N'tacinowin inna nah': Our coming in stories. Canadian Woman de Studies, 26(3/4), 193-199. rR Wilson, A. (2015). A steadily beating heart: Resistance, persistence and resurgence. In E. Coburn (Ed.), More will sing their way to freedom: Indigenous resistance and ev resurgence (pp. 255-264). Winnipeg, MB: Fernwood Press. ie w ScholarOne, 375 Greenbrier Drive, Charlottesville, VA, 22901