Everything is a gender equity issue. Who knew the climate was sexist?
“…women have good reason to be worried, given that climate change will affect women around the world the most. Climate change is often framed as an ecological disaster, less frequently as a key crisis for global gender equality.”
In the current climate men have shorter lifespans and higher suicide rates. The very caring women at “Women’s Agenda” don’t seem to care about that. Nevermind.
Why do women care more? They’re more obedient, less willing to take risks
Even the writers and editors of a “liberated” emancipated women’s magazine reveal more than they realize about their own belief. They’ve been told last year was the hottest year on record, and parts of the Great Barrier Reef are bleached. These things would happen no matter what caused climate change, but Annika Blau is an obedient woman and she believes that our power stations and cars cause the bleaching. Indeed she is so well trained, she is even convinced her position is “logical” and says so, without providing any logical reason that events which probably occurred hundreds of times before are proof of anything. (It’s been hotter for thousands of years of the Holocene, and the Great Barrier Reef survived. Wild climate swings are the norm, not evidence your car controls the climate.)
Women may well be more concerned about man-made climate-change. (But on a different study I suspect men might be more concerned about our civilization, our freedom and our quality of life, but who has asked that?).
“Do women care more than men about climate change?
According to the Garnaut Review of Australian attitudes to climate change, numerous studies show that women are more concerned about climate change than men. This is mirrored in the US.
Woman are more convinced than men that climate change is real, already happening, and caused by human activity.”
It’s not a sign that they “care more than men”. It’s a sign that they are less willing to take risks and speak against the current predominant meme. Who wants to be called a “denier”? As I’ve been pointing out for years, the reason there are not more women on the skeptical sensible side of the climate debate is because the belief is maintained with social pressure, not logic and reason. Where is the open debate and polite discussion that would allow women to be more involved in the decisions? Manners everyone — they were invented for a reason.
Climate care is coerced via namecalling and bullying
No wonder women are less willing to speak out. In an aggressive cultural climate, where universities train people to toss insults, those who don’t “believe” are exiled, sacked, abandoned, vilified, kicked out of institutes and risk their career. Sometimes their children are targeted too. Artistes raise funds to do fantasy videos of blowing up skeptical school children. Bullying is a fact of life in Western civilization and it works — even on female surgeons, surely the top of the pecking order. Friends and sometimes even family ostracize those who hold the less obedient opinion. What woman wouldn’t want to be compared to ISIS?
Contrast that with the saints who convince us to waste billions of dollars on Desal plants and windmills. Hello “Australian of the Year”. How about a Nobel Peace Prize?
Here’s a big clue:
“… women report less confidence in their understanding of climate science than men.”
Is that a good thing, or a bad thing? Women’s agenda doesn’t say and there is no suggestion that we should we help women to understand this issue, or get more confident. Presumably it’s better if they stay obediently in the dark?
Climate change is just basic physics, remember, so it’s no wonder that women “get it” faster than men. (‘Cos women are much more likely to be in a physics based career? O’yeah.)
Skeptics on the other hand are slow to “get” the physics because they are more likely to be engineers and geologists. Oh. See this survey of the most outspoken skeptics online — highly qualified in the hard sciences. But what skeptics are less likely to have, are degrees in psychology and gender equity studies. Check out the qualifications of readers at joannenova.com.au — that’s 400 people who can do maths.
Belief in the Climate Scare is not about science, it’s about politics and gender
Women are obedient:
Women are also more likely to support action on climate change, and adopt carbon-friendly behaviours themselves.
In the Garnaut Review, gender and political beliefs were the only two factors found to significantly influence attitudes (data on age, location and education level was inconclusive).
This is so lame. Even Women’s Agenda and the researchers say that women care more because they are taught too. Where the heck are the “feminists”. What an incredible put-down of women’s ability to think (and men too):
So why do women care more about climate change than men?
We can’t say for certain why women are more worried about climate change than men. But the researchers suggest it could be because women are socialised to be more empathetic and caring. In contrast, “boys learn that masculinity emphasises detachment, control and mastery”, which could be why men are more sceptical about climate change, more confident in their own opinions, and less alarmed.
As I said in 2009: Why don’t women want to face global bullies? I can’t imagine…
Most of the “blog war” is a testosterone driven point-scoring game. It’s not about figuring out whether the planet will warm, it’s about winning points in a mental rugby match where there are few gentlemen. Women prefer to achieve their aims through other mechanisms than a stand-up fight.
If the women writing “Women’s Agenda” had been socialized to understand logic and reason, they’d be fighting to make this debate more inclusive, to get women involved in the decision making, and to help women be more confident and informed on important issues worth billions of dollars.