Greta Thunberg has quickly become one of the most famous people in the world. She is a teenage environmental activist, who has spoken around the world about the dangers of climate change. As a result of her popularity she has faced a very unique form of misogyny. Greta in many ways represents what the Kyriarchy hates most. Greta is young, a woman, and an environmentalist. I find that she faces this misogyny from both ends of the political spectrum. Those on the left, hold her up as a paragon who should lead a movement against climate change, whereas those on the right have a different kind of obsession with her, they view Greta as the embodiment of ignorance (for not attending school), socialism, and liberalism.
Today I’m going to look at and analyze an article about Ms. Thunberg, from the National Review (a right leaning publication that I have a love/hate relationship with) and is written by Rich Lowry.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/09/greta-thunberg-climate-activist-united-nations/
The National Review article is entitled “No, Don’t Listen to Greta Thunberg” and begins with the following “Greta Thunberg needs to get a grip”. This is remarkable (which I mean in the traditional sense of the word) to me for a number of reasons. 1. Rich Lowry is the editor of National Review, he is 51 years old, and has written 4 books. Yet he is so triggered by a teenager he has to not only write an article about her but begin it with “get a grip”. Throughout the article Thunberg is painted as an irrational, immature brat. Lowry uses some of Thunbergs own words in order to paint her this way, making numerous mentions of her “How Dare You” comment.
Lowry occasionally comes close to making a fair point though, I do agree with him That Greta is being used by those around her. The wealthy often invite her to speak, in my opinion usually for the purpose of virtue signalling and nothing more. They like having a young passionate speaker talk about an issue that they can pretend to care about. But that’s about as complementary of Lowry as I can be.
Not once does Lowry actually refute (or attempt to refute) any of the truths about climate change, global warming, deforestation. Instead he spends the article attacking Greta. This allows him to 1, prejudice the reader against climate issues without actually mentioning them directly, and 2. appeal to those that just wanna have a rebellious view.
I could not help but think about ecofeminism the entire time I was reading this, as it pretty much shows the way in which nature and misogyny are linked. The simplest definition of Ecofeminism that I can come up with is that, it is an ideology that believes that anti-nature, and anti-women views are linked, and the interests of both women and nature can easily advance each other. Ecofeminism purports that men (or at least men in power) view both women and nature as something that they are to control,destroy, protect,etc. Nature and women do not have their own autonomy.
At the center of Ecofeminism are Warrens 8 connection between women and nature which are as follows:
1. Historical: Ecofeminists believe that domination of women and men stem from the same events.
2. Conceptual: Women and nature are valued similarly.
3. Empirical and Experimental: There are cultural and spiritual links between nature and women.
4. Symbolic Connections: The Patriarchy justifies the oppression of both women and nature.
5. Epistemological Connections
6. Political Connections
7. Ethical Connections
8. Theoretical Connections.
I personally find the symbolic connections to be the most interesting. Particularly when it comes to language. The ways in which nature is described and women are described have a lot of layover. For example we describe both as fertile, in the case of nature it refers to land in which crops can be grown, and in the case of women, it is used to describe women that are ripe (another example) for pregnancy and child rearing. To me the language that we use is the best argument for how men view both nature and women as something to be used.
The way the right is always villainizing Thunberg can pretty much be described as sickening. Republican men such as my father are regularly posting images on social media making fun of everything about this child, from her appearance to her beliefs. One I recall mentioned that he wished he could refuse to go to work and support his family just because he didn’t feel like it. They completely overlook that she is boycotting high school. She is not getting paid to go, and by choosing not to go, she is working on developing her education in other ways as well as working on her career, which would then support her family if she chooses to have one some day.
Greta is a child, one who we must look at as a child. Teenagers are rash human beings who are deeply passionate about the things they believe in. Isn’t Thunberg just behaving as a typical teenager while building a career for herself at the same time?
Thank you for the response Klera. Why do you think they villainize Thunberg so much? Republican values of small government and fiscal conservatism have little to do with Thunberg, why do you think so many of them have such a visceral reaction to her. The anecdote you gave, leads me to believe that at least some of them view her as lazy, and feel like they work a lot harder than other people. Would love to hear some of your thoughts on this.
I love that you chose Greta for your post. Being a liberal, I see her as a beacon of reason and pragmatism, a desperately needed voice in the midst of misinformation. While there may be misogyny on both conservative and liberal sides, I have yet to see it from the liberal side. Essentially, the extreme right are the climate deniers and the most inclined to exhibit distrust and hatred toward her. The fact that she’s a teenager is mostly irrelevant to her activism (she has actually done her research), except that she is one of millions who will remain during the demise of the planet if we don’t turn it around. Her age and sex also make her an easy target for misogynist rhetoric, exemplified in the white male privilege of Rich Lowry, the writer of the article in your post. Young women are often in the cross hairs of patriarchal oppression because, for the most part, they’re easy prey. They aren’t equipped with the armor necessary to fend off and/or ignore those attacks, yet that’s included in her activism. She seems, at her age, to understand all the implications of her actions.
https://www.ted.com/talks/greta_thunberg_the_disarming_case_to_act_right_now_on_climate_change?utm_source=tedcomshare&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=tedspread
In the above TEDxStockholm video, Greta describes her Asperger Syndrome characteristics. My daughter also has Asperger’s and the traits seem spot on. They view the world as black and white, and speak only when necessary. I recall many, many situations that became teaching moments where my daughter and I would discuss the possible nuances of the issues at hand. It was a long, arduous eighteen years but ones I cherish because it allowed me to see my daughter clearly, within her own parameters. Greta is very much like my daughter. If Rich Lowry had watched the TEDtalk video and conducted any honest research whatsoever on his subject matter, he wouldn’t have been able to justify what he wrote. It appears he’s writing exclusively for his base.
In terms of Warren’s 8 woman-nature connections, Greta is intertwined with the 4th connection – symbolically and spiritually – with nature. She is creating a spiritual movement by making herself a figurehead for climate control. From the age of 8, she has been pushing her way through irrationality, apathy and complacency to bring forth the larger picture. That picture is the ultimate destruction of Earth by human hands. And she states that we have all that we need to reverse that destruction, all the tools, the knowledge and able bodies. Her parents say this is her own activism and not what they wanted for her. Fortunately, for all of us, she has chosen this path for herself. Let’s hope that Greta’s activism will continue to dismantle the symbolic negativism that is often linked with nature and women. She’s too young to be called fertile, p^ssycat, bitch, virgin, fallow and other such deeply misogynistic terms. Or at least let’s hope that is the case.
“Instead of hope, look for action. Then, and only then, hope will come” (Thunberg).
^disclaimer: this word was not allowed, so it was changed with ^
Hi Nick,
Great blog. I cannot understand how grown middle aged men , many of whom have children and grandchildren can justify calling Greta names. I see it on social media (Facebook, Twitter) all the time. Young people are passionate about climate change, especially here in Europe. I’ve witnessed marches in Germany, Scotland, Copenhagen and have watched coverage of kids marching in London, as well as Ireland.
My stepfather calls Greta a whiny bitch which is totally offensive to me. He wants to ignore global warming because he doesn’t agree that global warming exists. It’s crazy, to me how grown men and women who are somewhat intelligent can ignore science and say that this call to action is nothing more than a bunch of entitled and whiny kids.
Hi Nick,
I would like to elaborate on my previous post. A heated argument arose on the topic of Greta and global warming while I was responding to your blog last week and I was unable to comment in length. My Mothers’ husband was very sternly telling us at breakfast what he thought of Greta and her call to action. He called her derogatory names and I found it quite offensive. In response, I tried my best to explain to him why young people around the world, like Greta, feel so passionate about climate change and global warming.
I explained how the industrial revolution started a movement of technology and capitalism which has taken a toll on our environment. I wanted him to understand that it has taken science years of study to measure the effects of technology on our oceans, our food sources, our climate and so on. It’s easy for a 75-year-old man who has a very serious case of diabetes to throw his hands in the air and say “its not my problem”, or “Global warming is a myth”. he will likely be dead in 15 years.
I wanted to express to him how important this issue is to our younger generations in their teens and twenties. They have inherited earth with oceans too warm for entire species of fish to survive. where fish are contaminated with plastic in their stomachs and we are eating these plastic fish essentially. I find it rather curious that he could state no facts of why he believes global warming is a myth. He just argued that it wasn’t true. He used that typically misogynistic name “bitch” to describe her. A tact used historically by men when they feel threatened by a female.
I’ve seen her called a child and a whiny brat on Twitter and Facebook, almost always by white middle-aged conservative men. another tactic used to silence or completely discredit her.
As I read some more about this reaction to Greta among conservatives, I’ve come to realize that men and women who support capitalism fear her message because ultimately it threatens their potential wealth and livelihood. so much of the world has become greed focused that we convince ourselves that science is wrong. All in the name of capitalist greed. The article below gives some good insight into why some men fear Greta.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/long_reads/women/greta-thunberg-climate-change-crisis-strike-austism-misogyny-protest-speech-a9127971.html
Thanks for the reply and for sharing that story. As a person who leans to the right politically (though the way Americans in particulars view the political spectrum is in my opinion screwy, and thus many consider me a lefty) I don’t really understand how a lot of the people that complain that those on the left are snowflakes who are easily offended, are so angered by a teenager.