Feminism is Like Global Warming

Watching Sean Hannity smile and nod on Fox News Monday night while Newt Gingrich attempted to brush off presidential candidate Mike Huckabee's defense of a convicted (and brutal) rapist, I was further stunned that in the next breath, he began promoting Gingrich's Rediscovering God in America book and documentary. An ironic juxtaposition.

I flipped to another channel to watch coverage of Al Gore and an IPCC scientist accepting the Nobel Peace Prize. Finally, our dying planet getting some recognition. This lead me to an odd thought: feminism and global warming are really similar. Yes, this sounds weird, but hear me out.

In the Genesis creation story, after God gave Adam dominion over the earth, he eventually also told man to rule over woman.

With 92 percent of Americans telling the World Values Survey they believe in God, it's no surprise that media and critics represent feminism and global warming in a fundamentally similar way. Sometimes opinions about important issues are more formed by the terminology (or ideology) representing them, than the issues themselves.

Global warming and feminism have been marginalized or sensationalized in the media.

In the interest of fairness, members of the media will often try to represent "both sides" of an argument -- even if one of these sides represents the fringe. Or worse yet, if neither side represents any majority. Sometimes this practice rustles up the most arcane and unreputable viewpoints. It also marginalizes what's really going on.

Take for instance the global warming "debate." A 2006 study by University of California researcher Naomi Oreskes in the prestigious journal, Science, couldn't find a single peer-reviewed article going against the concept that the globe is warming and that humans play a role. Yet a recent Time magazine poll found that just over half (56 percent) of Americans think that average global temperatures are rising -- but that they also believe scientists are still divided on the issue! What gives? Could it be the media's incessant drive to be 'fair and balanced' has actually created public confusion on the issue?

Another way to unwittingly marginalize issues is via euphemisms. The term "global warming" seems almost charming. Same goes for "climate change." It sounds like a simple adjustment of the thermostat might clear up the problem. A growing number of the scientific community feel that global warming and climate change don't define what's really happening to our planet -- which is in fact, climate disruption.

Alternatively, sensationalizing stories about climate or women's issues is also a common habit which contributes to making them surreal to the public. Just like sex sells, so does sexism. Why settle for sensible remarks when you could have scandalous verbal jousting? It makes for a more attention-grabbing interview to get Crossfire-style comments from radical feminists or unabashed misogynists (yes, you Pat Buchanan).

Climate disruption and feminism are misrepresented by far-right conservatives who hate them both.

Rush Limbaugh has said "Feminism was established to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream."

Pat Robertson's contribution to the conversation: "Feminism is a socialist, anti-family, political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians."

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that paying heed to people like Limbaugh or Robertson won't benefit one's intellectual capacity. Unfortunately, these ideas have actually made it into popular opinion regarding feminism. Because of malicious stances like these, women and men today often feel that identifying as a feminist means hating men. Or that adding women means removing men. But serious researchers are taking a look into feminism and turning these misconceptions on their head. A recent Rutgers University study of heterosexual couples found that "having a feminist partner was linked to healthier heterosexual relationships for women. Men with feminist partners also reported both more stable relationships and greater sexual satisfaction."

The Fawcett Society, a UK-based organization, has launched a project to give the general public a more accurate picture of feminists (which are simply people believing social, political and other rights of women are equal to those of men). They've published a photo gallery featuring politicians, actors, authors and businesspeople wearing "This is What a Feminist Looks Like" t-shirts. Sound similar to Al Gore becoming the face of global climate change?

And now that it's become clear there is a serious problem in our climate system, die-hard dissenters simply change the argument... They say it could have nothing to do with human activity.

Apparently worshipping the sand in which his head is stuck, good 'ol Rush Limbaugh said, "The global warming people essentially are atheists. You cannot believe in the God of Creation and believe [in] manmade global warming. You just can't. You might run around and say, 'I don't want to destroy God's creation.' God's laughing at you. You can't! He could, but you can't. You can't create it; you can't destroy it."

Extremists like Limbaugh have had a lot to do with many in Middle America dragging their feet on the issue. Afraid of being labeled a radical tree-hugger or an atheist, people have long resisted taking a common sense approach to caring for our planet.

Even when an Evangelical Climate Initiative was formed in 2006, 22 prominent religious leaders tried to shoot it down with a joint letter saying "Global warming is not a consensus issue." This was accompanied by a report styled to represent a National Academy of Sciences (NAS) publication along with a petition. The NAS promptly issued a statement that the "petition has nothing to do with the National Academy of Sciences and the manuscript was not published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences or in any other peer-reviewed journal."

The petition was further found to include many fake names, or scientists with no background in climate science. But that didn't stop Pat Robertson's one million daily 700 Club viewers from watching it reported on as reputable and cited as a good reason to marginalize global warming.

Despite the lack of credibility, this propaganda eventually appeared in a fall 2007 journal published by the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons -- a pro-Ron Paul, anti-healthcare reform organization dedicated to defending the practice of free market private medicine. A pretty peculiar place for a paper on global warming, but no physical science journal would publish it. Afterall, that's what the good 'ol boys network is for, isn't it?

Anne Coulter, Michael Creighton, a Republican Senate Committee and others have misused scientist Peter Doran's research regarding Antarctic cooling to attempt at refuting the existence of climate disruption. Finally, this particular scientist to came out of the ivory tower and wrote a New York Times op-ed to correct the misuse.

Then several months ago, Pat Robertson became a self-proclaimed 'convert' to global warming theory. Unfortunately with the rapid consumption of earth's resources, this is like the church waiting 350 years to pardon Galileo.

Those living in large cities may not realize how prevalent dissent against both feminism and global warming are throughout Middle America. But the truth is, if men and women took a step back from the way control-mongers have defined these terms, the vast majority would realize they're both feminists and environmentalists.

And finally, both have become crucial issues during the '08 election.

Some analysts are declaring women the crux of the presidential election. And while the candidates scramble for their vote, they should not underestimate women's comprehension of the way climate disruption ties in with the US economy and security issues, among other things.

It's clear that no amount of marginalizing, or misrepresentation will make either feminism or climate disruption go away.

Follow Kim Mance on Twitter: www.twitter.com/kimmance

Comments

[philhubb]

While the comparison between feminism and global warming is mildly entertaining I'd take this opportunity to point out one huge difference.
The climate change phenomena has the ultimate capability of destroying all mammalian (including human and yes even middle class, white feminist) life on this planet.
And while both are currently back page stories, only one of them is destined for 'banner headline all day, everyday until the wheels fall off' status.
Take a guess at to which one.

[DavidByron]

Well. We have a few people making conflicting claims about feminism.

I'd like to ask those who pretend feminist are not anti-male whether they support well known anti-male discrimination by feminist groups and in feminist legislation. For example...­.

If you go to a feminist influenced domestic violence shelter they will refuse to give you help if you are a male victim (many will even refuse to help women with male children over a certain age). Like many feminist groups they practise sex segregation. This discrimination is against the US constitution but it is a practise supported universally by feminist groups. (I am unaware of any feminist group that has ever condemned this sexism)

Do those feminist here who pretend feminism is not sexist support that practise?

Again feminist groups lobbied to get laws passed that would give domestic violence shelters federal money but only if those shelters refused to serve any male victims of violence. As far as I know no feminist group has ever criticised this segregation approach, nor even insisted that some different money be put aside only for male victims of violence.

Do those feminist here who pretend feminism is not sexist support that practise?

As I said lower down anyone who wants real equality wouldn't touch feminism with a ten foot pole; people don't say feminists are sexist because they support women's rights but because they attack men's rights.

[ritamary]

To the comment that feminists hate men: I am a proud feminist and the mother of two sons (and a daughter). So I hate my own sons??? I am planning on voting for John Edwards in the primary. In the misogynist's sick, distorted universe shouldn't I be voting for Hillary? What nonsense. Stop stereotyping feminism.

[Qbear]

Without feminists
Women wouldn't have access to birth control information or a Right of Privacy.
Women wouldn't have reproductive choice
Women wouldn't be able to own their own property, or vote.
Women woudn't be able to divorce, without their husbands consent
Women wouldn't be on the Supreme Court, Secretary of State, Speaker of the House, or running for President.

[leftofnorth]

Wow. So many anti-woman postings have been made in response Ms. Mance's blog- and this is a left-leaning site! I'd hate to think of the misogyny you'd find at any site to the right of this one.
As far as I'm concerned, feminism means equality, and if you're not a feminist, you can't consider yourself a fully functioning human being. What is it about people being of equal worth no matter what they look like or what gender they are or what sexual orientation they have that is so hard to understand?

[WilliePilgrim]

Oh, I thought you meant that they were both ideals and therefore are not really representative of the way reality works...bu­t no, you mean that any criticism of either for any reason is heresy and deniers should be burned at the stake. I mean that metaphically, as I'm sure you meant most of your observations.
But this arguement does underscore a big problem...­it's hard to get research money for climate research if your research might not support the official version...­and then getting peer review is another matter. Hard to do with unpopular ideas...fo­r instance, how many papers were written in medical journals about how much more healthy for you butter is over margarine? Oh, none...but now we know that the hydrogenated oils are big killers...­jeeze, how can that be? If all the scientists who are allowed to research and publish..y­ou see where this goes, I'm sure.
So, let's listen carfully to those researchers who have alternate ideas...th­ey could be on to something, and no, I'm not advocating doing nothing and I am advocating getting china and the other coal burning nations to stop it now...and we'll help to keep your people from starving..­.and I'd buy it with something other than imaginary carbon credits...­the money we save by not wasting it on hairbrained antics designed to create simplistic solutions.

[DavidByron]

Feminism doesn't stand for equality at all. Feminists lobby (successfully) for discrimination against men. In that sense it is quite accurate to say feminists hate men. It's a political movement that targets people for victimisation on the basis of how they were born -- political hate.

Most people get this on an intuitive level which is why feminists have a reputation as "man haters". But just as with other political hate movements the reality is more complex than an emotion. This is a group with a deep seated prejudice against a minority group that they exhibit in terms of paranoia, lies, discrimination and getting laws passed to "protect" them. Ironically a lot of these people when they actually meet up with a member of the hated group have a dichotomy between what they think of as the stereotypical "evil man" who is in the "patriarchy" and always "oppressing women" and the actual men they meet in their every day lives who of course are not evil monsters.

Someone who really wants gender equality, or equality of any kind, wouldn't touch feminism with a ten foot pole.

[eshalom]

I'm just guessing that if the candidates in the general election are Huckabee and Clinton, the enlightened mainstream media, allied with a similarly enlightened blogosphere, led of course by the Huffington Post, will go all out in their support of Huckabee. After Huckabee's election, the country will no longer have to put up with that obnoxious minority constantly clamoring for equal rights for women and other minority groups and those who are foolishly worrying about the future of the planet earth.

[rwe]

You are correct Feminism has become like global warming and unfortunately it has in part itself to blame... Feminism and the feminist movement shuld have kept to its core ideology of women being every iota the human being as men and demanding and expecting the respect and the rights thereof. With that being said when NOW and NARAL and almost every other womens rights organizations refused to condemn Pres Clintons despicable treatment of subordinates even in the accusation of rape they relegated themselves to the level of the science fiction of global warming

[horseface]

PLEASE! When will we stop using a patriarchal tribal document written millenia ago, and written by goat herders, as the one and only source for our discussion of how the world works? Men saying that "feminism" has somehow ruined their lives is like Xians complaining that anyone who dares to examine their belief system is "attacking" them, as if a a handful of atheists and agnostics constitute some overwhelming army of "evil." Boo-Hoo!

As a species, we have enormous technical skill driven by brains incapable of maintaining clear thought and good judgement. Women have been persecuted since day one. HELPMATE translates to SLAVE. Are there female slaves in the world today? Yes, Dear. Any woman who submits to male crap (including Xianity) is simply not thinking.

P.S. Americans are so lazy that they refuse to actually think about anything: Global Warming? Too hard! Racism? Too Hard! Education? Too hard! Tell me what the Bible says.

[avergejoe]

Yea, sounds good - equal rights.

But in implementation and practice, 'feminism' was perhaps the most destructive force against human relationships.

[ScienceLady]

Elizabeth Stanton Cody and Susan B. Anthony were GREAT feminists.

[Purple Girl]

Earth Day & NOW- early '70's. these issues have been ACTIVELY ignored.
Common factor- both bear & sustain life.
It's not penis envy- it's life giving envy.
It must be conquered and controlled by those who do not possess the ability.
If you can't harness them then devalue & degrade them.
If religion had been deveolped by women- it would address the human condition and it's abiltiy to survive into the future (which means a sustainable environmen­t.)
THESE ARE THE LIFE ISSUES !!!
Perhaps now is the time to start having the effect that an 'overhalf the population of the world'group should have. We've never been in a position to bully, so we have learned better techniques to problem solving.
But let's not follow in the errors of our brothers- let's not just support people because they have a vagina.Nor deny them because they do not. It is not that only we can lead- it's just that I'd like US to set the tone and priorities.

[Pandu]

Concerning Pat Robertson's statement.­.. How does feminism destory capitalism? (The others are obvious.)

Concerning Limbaugh's statement, "...You can't create it; you can't destroy it." The issue isn't about destroying the world, it's about turning it into hell.

[texasyankee]

Qbear - have you ever read the account in Genesis about the creation of Adam and Eve? Clearly not. According to the story of creation God created Adam, found no suitable helper for him and then created woman (Eve) from the a bone in the rib of Adam "Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man". You may not agree with the creation account in the Bible, but at least you should be accurate with the telling of the account.