![]() ![]() ![]() We find, further, that analysts' gender/women conflation hinders redress of women's injuries by camouflaging men's blameworthiness and offering solutions that often increase women's duties. We note that researchers' focus on women's suffering diverts attention from a thorough examination of the mechanisms and consequences of men's domination of climate change research and policy. While this assessment is accurate on its face, it leads to solutions that address the problem (women's troubles), not its causes (men's greater responsibilities and failures relating to climate change). In this Perspective, we argue that much climate change research conflates “gender” with “women.” We ask, what are the consequences of this conflation, and what do we learn when we follow sociologist George Homan's classical command to “bring men back in” to our analysis of the gendered dimensions of climate change? We find, first, that scholarship on gender and climate change tends to depict women mainly as victims of the uneven impacts of climate change. Department of Sociology, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS, United States. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |