Busy day at the Briggs compound, and I only have time to tell you, with regret, that the feminists are at it again. Turns out there is a journal, and I promise this is true, called Australian Feminist Studies. And in this journal is a peer-reviewed—what is a peer here? angry unnaturally colored hair she beasts?—a paper titled “A Climate of Misogyny: Gender, Politics of Ignorance, and Climate Change Denial – An Interview with Katharine Hayhoe” by Sophie Bjork-James and Josef Barla.
Thanks for the laugh. You are behind the times, current meaning of 'research' is 'whatever I feel ...right now (what I felt in the past doesn't matter'. Thanks for your willingness to take one for the team and read this dross.
You would think all these respected academics dedicating their careers to studying White Nationalism and Christian Extremism would know more about the subject than the average anonymous frog, but nope.
"Hayhoe!" Isn't that what Ed McMahon used to yell when Johnny Carson made a joke? Katharine Hayhoe (and the entire feminist universe that worships Moloch and hates white people) is also a joke.
Glaciers are key icons of climate change and global environmental change. However, the relationships among gender, science, and glaciers – particularly related to epistemological questions about the production of glaciological knowledge – remain understudied.
This paper thus proposes a feminist glaciology framework with four key components: 1) knowledge producers; (2) gendered science and knowledge; (3) systems of scientific domination; and (4) alternative representations of glaciers.
Merging feminist postcolonial science studies and feminist political ecology, the feminist glaciology framework generates robust analysis of gender, power, and epistemologies in dynamic social-ecological systems, thereby leading to more just and equitable science and human-ice interactions.
Anyway, she says “research has shown”—research!—“that climate denial is not exclusively but predominately a male-dominated area and it is usually older White men”.
Climate denial is not “predominately” anything because “predominately” is not a word. It’s predominantly midwits like her who think it is.
The wonderful thing is, these brain bamboozled harridans are killing themselves, via lack of progeny, off. We can be grateful for small favors.
I appreciate you taking the time to read and report on this paper. Thank you for your service.
I wonder if at the start of each class her students chant: "Hey ho, let's go!"
Thanks for the laugh. You are behind the times, current meaning of 'research' is 'whatever I feel ...right now (what I felt in the past doesn't matter'. Thanks for your willingness to take one for the team and read this dross.
You would think all these respected academics dedicating their careers to studying White Nationalism and Christian Extremism would know more about the subject than the average anonymous frog, but nope.
"Hayhoe!" Isn't that what Ed McMahon used to yell when Johnny Carson made a joke? Katharine Hayhoe (and the entire feminist universe that worships Moloch and hates white people) is also a joke.
As feminist-hysteria antidote a prescribe a one hour dose of Camille Paglia rant weekly. Very refreshing.
'climate denial is not exclusively but predominately a male-dominated area and it is usually older White men”
Yep:
Environmental knowledge is inversely associated with climate change anxiety
https://bit.ly/3BJMwAZ
Acitvism makes depressed people feel better:
Climate change anxiety and mental health: Environmental activism as buffer
https://bit.ly/41ZyWDW
Peer reviewed!
While young middle class consumers join orgs like XR because they feel guilty:
Climate Activism Has a Cult Problem
https://bit.ly/3ZFec3h
As their parents seek differentiation:
Climate Activism Isn't About the Planet. It's About the Boredom of the Bourgeoisie
https://bit.ly/3iMrE61
Feminists DO produce highly entertaining stuff:
Glaciers, gender, and science: A feminist glaciology framework for global environmental change research
https://bit.ly/3JvopKi
Abstract
Glaciers are key icons of climate change and global environmental change. However, the relationships among gender, science, and glaciers – particularly related to epistemological questions about the production of glaciological knowledge – remain understudied.
This paper thus proposes a feminist glaciology framework with four key components: 1) knowledge producers; (2) gendered science and knowledge; (3) systems of scientific domination; and (4) alternative representations of glaciers.
Merging feminist postcolonial science studies and feminist political ecology, the feminist glaciology framework generates robust analysis of gender, power, and epistemologies in dynamic social-ecological systems, thereby leading to more just and equitable science and human-ice interactions.
IF YOU'RE HAVING TROUBLE COMMENTING, SUBSTACK SCREWED SOMETHING UP.
IT SHOULD BE FIXED. MY APOLOGIES.
EVERYBODY SHOULD BE ABLE TO COMMENT NOW. IF NOT, PLEASE LEAVE ME A MESSAGE.
Anyway, she says “research has shown”—research!—“that climate denial is not exclusively but predominately a male-dominated area and it is usually older White men”.
Climate denial is not “predominately” anything because “predominately” is not a word. It’s predominantly midwits like her who think it is.