Guest essay by Eric Worrall
According to former President of the Republic of Ireland and former UN commissioner Mary Robinson, more feminism will solve the climate crisis.
Climate change a ‘man-made problem with a feminist solution’ says Robinson
Zoe Tabary
JUNE 19, 2018LONDON, June 18 (Thomson Reuters Foundation) – Women must be at the heart of climate action if the world is to limit the deadly impact of disasters such as floods, former Irish president and U.N. rights commissioner Mary Robinson said on Monday.
…
“Climate change is a man-made problem and must have a feminist solution,” she said at a meeting of climate experts at London’s Marshall Institute for Philanthropy and Entrepreneurship.
“Feminism doesn’t mean excluding men, it’s about being more inclusive of women and -in this case – acknowledging the role they can play in tackling climate change.”
…
What can I say – somehow I always knew men would get the blame…
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Okay, does this mean a moratorium on clear cutting American forests for UK wood pellets…in the name of feminism?
“Climate change is a man-made problem and must have a feminist solution,….”
What a smug and matronizingly sexist hypothesis that is……
Getting rid of all males would reduce CO2 emissions.
I guess the CO2 of the decomposing bodies is natural so the global rise in CO2 will not accelerate.
Ideally, the CO2 and CH4 would be sequestered in the ground.
Not to mention our lovable pull-my-pinkie emissions typically comprising of 59 percent nitrogen, 21 percent hydrogen, 9 percent carbon dioxide, 7 percent methane and 4 percent oxygen.
If I remember correctly, women fought for the right to drive cars.
Silly rabbit, sexism is for men. Just like how racism is for white people. 😐
Ireland’s solution, under feminist leadership, is the wicked solution, the final solution, Choice and sequestration, of lives deemed unworthy or inconvenient. In the interest of human rights and scientific integrity, the feminists should be seen and not heard, or perhaps heard and ridiculed.
Start with clear cutting all forests in Ireland to feed UK power plants with wood pellets in place of American forests.
If this lady ever understands this has been an academic & political fraud (doubtful), the sound of her pulling her head out of her ass will be deafening.
Actually, she may have a point. Ten thousand years of patriarchy has brought us where we are. More gender balance in making decisions might be helpful. It is not about blaming the men. It is about evolving from patriarchy to partnership.
And precisely where do you think we are?
I look around me and I see a world where life spans have increased by amounts unimaginable 1000 years ago. Where thanks to technology in western countries, even the poor live better than did the kings of yore.
I see people enjoying a rich and varied diet, all year round.
I see people with the free time and money to vacation all over the world.
So precisely what are the so called evils of this patriarchy that infests your nightmares?
If you want to claim it’s wars, I counter with Margret Thatcher, Golda Meir and Indira Ghandi.
HOLD IT RIGHT THERE LUIS GUTIERREZ !!!!
Actually, she may have a point. Ten thousand years of patriarchy has brought us where we are. More gender balance in making decisions might be helpful. It is not about blaming the men. It is about evolving from patriarchy to partnership.
No ! No ! No ! Really ! And Really No !
But the editing function cut me off !!
Damn it…….
MODERATOR……CAN YOU PLEASE REMOVE THESE 3 POSTS !!!
They do NOT convey what I mean and just block up the thread !
Thanks , Trevor.
Cue Monty Python’s ” What have the Romans [men] ever done for us”.
Of course it will be feminism to fix the problem – I always knew this would be the case. At least it will be an entity that is expressed as being female – Mother Nature.
After you get that cleaned up, clean the bathroom and then get supper cooked.
Yeah, one year while planning our annual vacation my wife told me she wants to go somewhere she has never been before, I said “How about the kitchen”. The gash over my eye healed in about 3 weeks.
lol!
If the entire Internet stopped giving oxygen and daylight to the absurd bloviatings of idiots, and no one consequently paid them any attention, they might just shut up and disappear. Of course, then we’d quickly run out of stuff to read . . . /sarc.
Politics is the art of looking for problems, finding them everywhere, diagnosing them incorrectly and then applying the wrong remedies. -Groucho Marx
Yes SMC………………BUT his RELATIVE………..Karl
took him seriously and KILLED about 60 million Russians
and his mate Mao killed about 100 million Chinese
and Pol Pot killed about 30% of the Cambodians …………..
so while a joke is a joke…….you have to be careful who you share it with !
My daughter took a course in Deep Ecology at a Catholic college more than 10 years ago. Interestingly, while they covered several ecological theories , the one they emphasized the most was the role of patriarchy in the destruction of the environment. Ecofeminism has been alive and flourishing for quite some time at least as far back as the early 80s. http://www.wloe.org/what-is-ecofeminism.76.0.html
One of the principle aims of Progressives is to make the current situation unstable and perceived to be untenable. Then they can roll in their intellectual solution.
As the Communist Party, as well as Sol Alinsky, proposed one way to do this is to drive wedges into an otherwise content community. Any potential difference is ripe for exploitation (race, gender, nationality). Unfortunately this tactic has been very successful.
In my opinion, Progressives have taken this to the next step, COMBINING grievances (e.g. climate change and minority injustice). Just look at the signage at current protests for confirmation.
Except that in reality the poor and non-whites have much more to lose from CACA than does the developed West and the rich within it.
What’s “deep ecology”?
What you find at the bottom of caves?
I am currently debating whether I should roll on the floor laughing or just puke. The fact that such a statement was made with a straight face almost leaves me speechless.
Let me see if I can get this right….she is suggesting that men should get out of the way so women can fix the problem. In other words, because men caused the problem, all the scientists, engineers and smart people who are men should not be involved in fixing it.
You know, if I thought Climate Change was a problem I would do whatever I could, get whatever help I could and embrace any incremental change I could to get as much accomplished that I could.
To me this is just proof that even the nutwagons in charge don’t really believe the clap trap they are trying to pass off on those they consider ignorant.
Mother earth is going through menopause and is having a hot flush.
La coddled feminist is in lala land.
Women are noteworthy for socially-responsible solutions to intractable problems. Take Elizabeth Holmes, for example…
Today, glaciers as phallic symbols still allow Arctic wave motion to rock your boat, at least your small dinghy.
Not all women are feminists. Not all feminists are female. All feminists are chauvinists. This is about a political ideology progressing the minority good.
Socialis/feminisim/environmentalism is the thing with feathers
That perches in the soul,
And sings the tune–without the words, …
Yet, always, it asked unquestioned allegiance from me.
(Apologies to Dot)
“Feminism doesn’t mean excluding men, it’s about being more inclusive of women and -in this case – acknowledging the role they can play in tackling climate change.”
The word, “tackling” is very masculine, I think. Also, whenever I see the word, “inclusive”, with respect to race, gender, nationality, etc., I run the other way. A great wrong here is to ASSUME that the phrase, “climate change” AUTOMATICALLY means, “humyn-caused climate change”, which is a forced assumption via context. Please do NOT “include” women in this forced assumption, since to do so is the equivalent of raping a woman’s mind with propagandized verbiage. Again, a very traditionally masculine tactic.
Given that the real solution they want to “climate change” is to reduce the human population, she’s right.
“Andrew Cooke
I am currently debating whether I should roll on the floor laughing or just puke”
Just laugh. Mary Robinson is very light in the brains department.
SUGGESTION: First puke, and then roll in it on the floor laughing — it’s THAT sick AND funny, at the same time.
I would expect a sharp lawyer to understand the difference between correlation and causation.
I would expect an honest prosecutor to carefully cross examine contradictory witnesses to determine who is telling the truth – even when the outcome is not what that prosecutor expects.
I would expect someone concerned with justice to recognize that there is ample clear evidence of scientific fraud in the peer review system.
How can a competent lawyer or barrister be so confident in her climate alarmism that she is willing to ignore these three issues so that she can simply keep plugging her political ideology?
Agenda.
Next question?
Let the broads build the walls to prevent flooding – problem solved.
Well I for one am perfectly willing to take responsibility for my contribution to the current catastrophic weather I am presently enjoying on a sunny day drive to the coast.
And please explain to me exactly what the difference is between a male scientist and a female scientist? And please forget the answers of female intuition and being in tune to more of their feelings. And besides since it is a non problem how are more females going to better solve a non problem?
As a GROUP females may be more “feeling” than men. But the intersection of the two sets of bell curves leave a huge percent of women that are “rational” thinkers.
Once a woman declares for “science” or “math” over the more empathetic roles of doctor or HR Supervisor her inclination has been revealed.
I do believe in the maternal instinct, and if “female intuition” is an aspect of that, I’m all in.
I grew up in Eastern Europe and the women in our extended family included engineers, a lab researcher, an electrician, a radiologist and a crane operator. All cold, sharp and rational with work stuff, but unabashedly into mothering and frilly, girly stuff on their own time. It was the post-War shortage of men, not idealism that got them into the professions.