Climate change is a feminist issue - article in the Ecologist

[ArabellaScott]

theecologist.org/2021/sep/14/climate-migration-feminist-issue?fbclid=IwAR26BhJb21yQ9tQX4fMkjaI1uJaMvHLKvDlle_-dEd4OKPmO7BtVn4Ta16Q

Short article, but an interesting point - especially considering climate migrants:

'Women in all their diversities are disproportionately affected due to existing structural and systemic inequalities. Six out of 10 of the poorest people in the world are women.

They bear the brunt of unpaid care work, and earn less than men for work of equal value.

And despite many advances on gender equality initiatives globally, many disparities remain both in developing and developed countries because of ingrained government policies, economic constraints and social norms.

Women continue to have limited access to resources, rights, mobility, and their voices are muted in shaping decisions and influencing policy.

Women are hit by a triple whammy when disasters strike. Already poor and marginalized, more women than men lose their lives not due to physical differences but to social and traditional constructs such as restrictive clothing, being the designated caregiver in the family, or restrained mobility without the company of a male relative'

Climate change disproportionately affects women's health.

This is a nicely done mapping to show some differences by sex (more data needed) and an acknowledgement of the paucity of data for gender.

It's interesting as a readable overview. It isn't an academic publication and it doesn't make the sort of analyses that would be expected in that.

www.carbonbrief.org/mapped-how-climate-change-disproportionately-affects-womens-health?

Thanks, Em. Interesting, if pretty depressing.

I didn't realise something as simple as temperature could have an effect on developing babies/foetuses.

I suppose that map shows some examples of how both sex and gender can disproportionately affect women.

'A study finding New Zealand's 2004 floods led to a "substantial" increase in domestic violence cases.'

Thanks for sharing. My 13 year old daughter is really interested in how climate change affects women and just did a poster about it for geography (proud mum moment!). I'll share the article with her.

I attended a seminar a while back that covered the impact of heat stress on factory-farmed meat. E.g., climate change would mean that the densely packed barns of chickens (say) would cost a lot of money to cool to/maintain at a temperature that would sufficiently lower the temperature to prevent heat stress to the meat (affects taste, texture and keeping quality).

It also affects cattle (both dairy and beef):

academic.oup.com/af/article/9/1/39/5145101

www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09291016.2018.1548870?journalCode=nbrr20

The impacts of climate change on the risk of infection, access to health care are, and will be, profound. As it progresses, population displacements etc. will create additional problems in containing pandemics or the impact of endemic diseases (particularly if microbial stewardship is not enough to reduce the risk of future antibiotic failures).

I'm a ray of sunshine and tremendous fun in any social setting.

I couldn't view the maps on my phone so will take a look later. It says the report focused on gender as a social construct not biological sex. How did they do that when drawing on published data?

In my comment, I should have used the phrase 'gender identity' because in my mind I was acknowledging Van Daalen's remark about transgender or non-binary people.

Some of the consequences of behavioural differences on outcomes by sex are probably well described as gender differences, if that makes sense. E.g. they link to this report (I would write "sex differences" where they've used "gender differences"):

In the United States, the vulnerability of males to heat wave deaths is attributed in part to the social isolation that many elderly men experience. As Eric Klinenberg notes in his study of the 1995 Chicago heat wave, while elderly women were more likely than elderly men to live alone, they were much more likely than men to have active social connections, which were likely protective during the heat event (409). In Europe, the high number of elderly women living alone (410), as well as social isolation among these individuals (411), have been cited as contributors to the high rate of deaths among elderly women. Some literature speculates that physiological differences between males and females in their capacity to regulate high temperatures are at least partially responsible for gender differences in heat-related mortality (412), though the reported geographic variability of heat-related mortality trends suggests that gendered living and livelihood patterns, access to medical treatment, and local climatic factors likely matter more than innate sex differences.

wedo.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/GGCA-RP-FINAL.pdf

How did they do that when drawing on published data?

I am going to go out on a limb and say that they ignored any data that was collated according to biological sex and just passed the findings through the Great Gender Colluder.

Horrible article. It just trots out the usual Marxist rubbish with a dash of open all borders and demand reparations crap. It never states how climate change is actually a feminist issue. Everything it lists about the oppression of women existed before the climate crisis and would exist even if we didn’t have one to contend with. There is no correlation shown in the article at all, which means that none of their “key considerations” would actually do anything for feminism at all.

[quote EmbarrassingAdmissions]Climate change disproportionately affects women's health.

This is a nicely done mapping to show some differences by sex (more data needed) and an acknowledgement of the paucity of data for gender.

It's interesting as a readable overview. It isn't an academic publication and it doesn't make the sort of analyses that would be expected in that.

www.carbonbrief.org/mapped-how-climate-change-disproportionately-affects-womens-health?[/quote]
I checked this out too and all it shows is that impacts on women are studied more often than men following climate events. You click on the actual studies and only a very few are actually studying and comparing both men and women. To make the conclusion, women are disproportionately affected, only those studies that looked at both men and women should be included.

Not read it or posts

Framing it as a feminist issue. Means that it is not a societal issue or one that men should worry about.

Climate change affects women more. Great.

Feminist issue? Niche. Women's problem they need to sort it.

Risky.

What is eco-feminism and how could it relate to architecture? This conversation will use this question as a starting point to further explore co-housing as a possible model for eco-feminist practice in architecture, addressing the role architects can play in creating low impact and gender-equal homes.

The decisions we make about how to live, clean, and eat at home can have significant impacts on our individual carbon footprints. Can living communally further lower our environmental impact whilst additionally subverting traditional gender roles through the sharing of domestic labour and care?

Join us for this multi-disciplinary conversation between a panel of architects, developers, and academics to discuss the eco-feminist opportunities that communal living models offer.

www.architecture.com/whats-on/co-housing-an-eco-feminist-model-for-architecture

It seems that the idea that feminism is focused on women and girls is really bothersome.

Feminism is supposed to prioritise things that plenty of orgs exist for already. And only address the current massive issues worldwide when other problems are dealt with.

Women are supposed to be caring and put others first, after all. Selfish to do otherwise.