Say, What If Toxic Masculinity Is The Reason For ‘Climate Change’ Or Something?

Yet another screed that shows that this whole thing has nothing to do with science and everything to do with hardcore leftist politics

Carolyn Centento Milton is really reaching for the crazy with this article

When a person walks out of the grocery store holding an eco-friendly canvas bag instead of a plastic bag, what gender do you think they are? Most likely, your unconscious bias answers that they are female. This is the type of answer Dr. Aaron Brough of Utah State University is trying to get to the bottom of through his research.

Brough co-authored a paper with professors from four other universities to understand how gender norms affect sustainable decision making. They report data from seven experiments that included over 2,000 participants from the US and China. What they found was remarkable.

They found that both men and women associated doing something good for the environment with being “more feminine.” And when men’s gender identity was threatened, they tried to reassert their masculinity through environmentally damaging choices. The report states that “men may be motivated to avoid or even oppose green behaviors in order to safeguard their gender identity.” This unearths a deeply held unconscious bias that Brough and team call the “Green-Feminine Stereotype.” Once this unconscious bias is revealed, it has the potential to help society shift our increasingly precarious relationship with the environment for the better. If it remains hidden, it has the potential to greatly damage our environment permanently. (snip)

Another experiment took the idea further and applied the concept of the “Green-Feminine Stereotype” to product and brand selection. Male participants were exposed to one of two Walmart gift cards—one that used more comically feminine design elements like pink and floral, selected to threaten masculine stereotypes, or another gift card that was designed to not threaten masculinity. The men were then asked to make a series of choices between green and non-green products to purchase. Men who were shown the “gender threat” gift card chose more non-green products than men shown the other gift card. That means that when men felt emasculated, they asserted their masculinity and safeguarded their gender by making choices that would ultimately harm the environment.

In other words, men are men, women are women. Get over, unhinged Warmists.

The more interesting opportunity seems to be in exposing the toxicity present within the unconscious bias that acting green is a feminine and therefore weaker or negative thing. Exposing the fact that our society creates a toxic hierarchy around femininity as a lesser thing. Brough himself cited gender research around “gender incongruence” and the great penalties that men (and women) face when they don’t fit stereotypical gender norms. Research suggests that men experience greater psychological damage or face harsher consequences when associated with feminine qualities. As a society, we are beginning to address these problems with corporate unconscious bias training, exposure and conversation. But when it comes to our environment, our toxic masculinity is greatly affecting our shared environment for the worse.

Brough sums it up nicely, “We need to overcome our unhealthy judgements of gender incongruence. And men need to be confident in their self-identity and decide to live a sustainable lifestyle without caring what other people think.” Let’s begin the conversation to start overriding our natural judgements. Our future depends on it.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

8 Responses to “Say, What If Toxic Masculinity Is The Reason For ‘Climate Change’ Or Something?”

  1. Bill Bear says:

    Three days ago, Porter Good demanded:

    “No more epithets.”

    This was not, of course, meant to apply to Porter Good himself.

    “really reaching for the crazy”

    “unhinged Warmists”

    moonbat image

    So much for being adult.

  2. Kye says:

    Why an ungrateful, obnoxious, insulting person such as you is still permitted comment privileges is beyond my understanding. You will never even TRY to get along with the rest of us and will not be happy until you drive us away from Pirates Cove all together.

  3. Bill Bear says:


    I wonder what it is in relation to this blog that Kye thinks I should be grateful for.

    “will not be happy until you drive us away from Pirates Cove all together”

    I have made no attempt to drive anyone away. I have expressed my thoughts and beliefs, as every other commenter here does.

    Now, if Kye finds it intolerable that opinions other than those that mesh perfectly with his own are expressed, I would suggest that what will drive Kye away is his own inability to accept the fact that not everyone thinks exactly as he does.

    • The Neon Madman says:

      “I wonder what it is in relation to this blog that Kye thinks I should be grateful for.”

      The fact that Teach allows you to post at all, for a start. His patience and tolerance greatly exceed mine. Your posts are distasteful and generally attack not only other commenters, but our host as well. If you were a visitor in my house, you would have politely been asked to leave quite some time ago.

      That’s all I have to say. DNFTT.

  4. Liljeffyatemypuppy says:

    “Toxic Stupidity.”

  5. Kye says:

    He really does posses overwhelming toxic stupidity.

  6. alanstorm says:

    Read the article at Forbes. It was evidently meant to be published on April 1st.

  7. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    NB: The study itself was conducted guys, led by Dr. Aaron Brough. I can’t help but notice that no one questioned the quality of Dr. Brough’s work.

    Guys, guys, guys… Teach operates a belligerence site – not quite hate, but certainly not a place for reasoned discussion. Each of his posts contain mockery and ridicule and name-calling of those with whom he has political or social disagreements. Warmists and crazies and moonbats, oh my! But just because he calls people names doesn’t mean that YOU can. It’s his site to control.

    Anyway, here’s a brief summary of Dr. Brough’s research:

    and the abstract from the research article:

    Why are men less likely than women to embrace environmentally friendly products and behaviors? Whereas prior research attributes this gender gap in sustainable consumption to personality differences between the sexes, we propose that it may also partially stem from a prevalent association between green behavior and femininity, and a corresponding stereotype (held by both men and women) that green consumers are more feminine. Building on prior findings that men tend to be more concerned than women with gender-identity maintenance, we argue that this green-feminine stereotype may motivate men to avoid green behaviors in order to preserve a macho image. A series of seven studies provides evidence that the concepts of greenness and femininity are cognitively linked and shows that, accordingly, consumers who engage in green behaviors are stereotyped by others as more feminine and even perceive themselves as more feminine. Further, men’s willingness to engage in green behaviors can be influenced by threatening or affirming their masculinity, as well as by using masculine rather than conventional green branding. Together, these findings bridge literatures on identity and environmental sustainability and introduce the notion that due to the green-feminine stereotype, gender-identity maintenance can influence men’s likelihood of adopting green behaviors.

    And as a sop to my ‘friends’ here, one of the authors of the paper is David Gal. Get it? “Gal”. A man named Gal published a paper on toxic masculinity. Carry on.

Pirate's Cove