JoNova

By Jo Nova

They really do want to turn men into women

The men are the climate vandals who carelessly wreck the Earth.  If they would just eat the tofu and drive less, the world would be a better place, eh, especially for bourgeois academic femmebots in London. This is the kind of junk research that Big Government funding feeds. Someone spent a lot of money, and nobody learnt a thing.

Naturally, The Guardian lapped it right up:

Ondine Berland, LSE Associate

Cars and meat are major factors driving a gender gap in greenhouse gas emissions, new research suggests.

Men emit 26% more planet-heating pollution than women from transport and food, according to a preprint study of 15,000 people in France. The gap shrinks to 18% after controlling for socioeconomic factors such as income and education.

But really the 26%-more-planet-polluting-men shrinks to a third once you account for men being, you know, bigger and more likely to travel further.

Eating red meat and driving cars explain almost all of the 6.5-9.5% difference in pollution that remains after also accounting for men eating more calories and travelling longer distances, the researchers said. They found no gender gap from flying.

The enemy of course, is “traditional gender norms”. Real men cause storms and floods. Toxic masculinity is raising Earth’s temperature:

Our results suggest that traditional gender norms, particularly those linking masculinity with red meat consumption and car use, play a significant role in shaping individual carbon footprints,” said Ondine Berland, an economist at the London School of Economics and Political Science and a co-author of the study.

From the paper, these genius economists think red meat consumption is just a male identity thing:

“Red meat and car — high-emission goods often associated with male identity — account for most of the residual, highlighting the role of gender differences in preferences in shaping disparities in carbon footprints.”

Where are words like body-fat, muscle percentage, basal metabolic rate, and bone mass?

Those words are not in this paper. The average man has 50% more muscle mass than the average woman (around 36kg compared to 23kg). He has 13 or 14 kilograms of bone, and she only has nine. All up, he has 15 to 20 kilograms of extra structural mass that needs constant repair and rebuilding. Is he supposed to turn into a girl to save the planet?

Women have a higher percentage of body fat which is metabolically comatose most of the day and also insulates them more from heat loss. Even at rest, skeletal muscle burns about three times as much energy as our fat does. A body with more muscle has a higher metabolic rate and needs more energy and more protein.

So the researchers big concession to men was to study carbon footprints and sometimes, occasionally even control for “calories”. Seriously? The hottest statistic in the abstract (and repeated in the press release) was that women emit 26% (!) less carbon than men in food and transport, but they admit this does not include “biological differences”.  They think there was something meaningful about a food statistic which treats men and women like they are supposed to be the same? Food? Any five year old at the family dinner table knows this is stupid.

It turns out the London School of Economics is also the London Preschool of biology.

All around the world men eat more meat than women — it’s not a cultural thing, it’s a human thing.

One study of 20,000 people from 23 nations found that men ate more meat than women nearly everywhere. And when men and women had more freedom and wealth to choose whatever they wanted, the gender gaps grew even larger. In poor countries, presumably, the men would like to eat more meat but can’t afford to. Does anyone care about those men?

Men are also more likely to be injured in sport and at work, and they take more risks. More to the point, they evolved to deal with risks and injuries, so it’s hardwired — the meat-eating men conquered the vegans and recovered faster after the battle.

The Guardian continues the cultural warfare, just so you know, the horrible types who use “soy boy” include JD Vance and a misogynist… (it’s not an accident those words appear in the same sentence).

The term “soy boy” has been used by far-right figures including the US vice-president, JD Vance, and the self-described misogynist influencer Andrew Tate to present progressive men as weak.

And just to twist the manipulative knife — the researchers say women find it easier to be climate goodie-goodies, while men are the selfish climate deniers, because they don’t want to give up their red meat to save the planet.

The French researchers suggested the gender differences in emissions could explain why women tend to be more concerned about the climate crisis, arguing the greater personal cost of reducing their emissions could cause men to avoid grappling with the reality of the climate emergency.

That’s how they wave away the fact that men are more skeptical. I say teenage girls are easily fooled and grown men are braver at standing up to ostracism and petty names. That’s why more men are skeptical…

The transport statistics are almost as silly as the food ones.  The biggest gender gap in male and female driving habits was not when men and women were single, but when they lived together and had children. When couples had kids, he drove more than his wife did. She was pushing a pram around while he went to work. That’s your big “gender gap”. A women with little kids is not driving less because she cares about climate change.

The Globalists use women to get to men

The truth is this whole work of cognitive vandalism was probably aimed at manipulating naive young women, not men. (Think of the saccharine flattery of how clever the girls are). The Blob likes to wind up those pretentious 20-something girls who’ll then rank the climate soy-boy above the strong man in the all important dating game. This leverages the pressure on men to play by the globalist rules. It twists the pecking order.

Real men probably don’t read the Guardian, but if they have to, some will ride a bike and eat fish to get laid.

It’s a death by a thousand cuts for free men.

Alarmists tell men they should eat,
A handful of bugs as a treat,
And for the planet to thrive,
They should all cease to drive,
Nor dine in or dine out on red meat.

     — Ruairi

REFERENCE

Ondine Berland, and Marion LeRoutier (2025) The gender gap in carbon footprints: determinants and implications, London School of Economics, Working paper 424, May 14, 2025

Image by Ivana Tomášková from Pixabay