Changing the conversation on climate change to reflect women’s perspectives

A curious comment from Climate Change Minister James Shaw:

NZ climate change ambassador Jo Tyndall & I got the chance to talk with fmr Irish President Mary Robinson & a room full of inspiring women about changing the conversation on climate change to reflect women’s perspectives.

Hard to guess how that might work, or work out.

But one thing I think is certain – women’s perspectives on climate change are going to be as diverse as men’s perspectives. It is not an us versus them sort of issue, and I don’t think it should be played that way.

I have just asked one woman what her perspective and it’s actually quite similar to mine.

86 Comments

  1. Kitty Catkin

     /  September 13, 2018

    Was this story put out on the first of April ? Please say that it WAS.

    James Shaw has far too much time on his hands.

    • Gezza

       /  September 13, 2018

      Far too many women telling him what to say and do, I reckon.

      • Gezza

         /  September 13, 2018

        Poor old wotsisface just shaved his beard off and keeps his head down these days.

        • Gezza

           /  September 13, 2018

          *Gareth Hughes
          Probably thinks it best he keeps quiet and he won’t get bossed around so much, I imagine.

          • Gezza

             /  September 13, 2018

            Poor bugger didn’t even get in the magazine cover shoot with the other girls.

  2. robertguyton

     /  September 13, 2018

    “I have just asked one woman what her perspective and it’s actually quite similar to mine.”
    I can’t believe you wrote that, Pete…
    I am doubled over…
    Really!!!???

    • It’s obviously a complex issue, but the more we talked the more we agreed on.

      Are you doubled over with what Shaw wrote?

      Can you explain how ‘women’s perspective’ might differ from ‘men’s perspective’?

      • artcroft

         /  September 13, 2018

        I think it falls into the category of putting women on a pedestool and making then angelic creatures of deeper spiritual worth etc… I imagine it works in well with James inferority complex.

        • It probably got some claps at a women’s event.

        • robertguyton

           /  September 13, 2018

          James recognises the status of women in regard the health of the planet, art croft, where you have no idea at all. In any case, “pedestool”? Is that some kind of…infantile poop? It reads that way.

        • robertguyton

           /  September 13, 2018

          Smarmy, Pete.

          • Gezza

             /  September 13, 2018

            No it’s not. It’s what would have happened.
            You’re back to being the 10 year old smart-arse I see, robert.

        • robertguyton

           /  September 13, 2018

          Here’s what James said:
          “NZ climate change ambassador Jo Tyndall & I got the chance to talk with fmr Irish President Mary Robinson & a room full of inspiring women about changing the conversation on climate change to reflect women’s perspectives.”
          Here’s what artecroft said:
          “… putting women on a pedestool and making then angelic creatures of deeper spiritual worth…” – surely, Pete, you can see that one of those commenters is…emotionally overheated.

          • I see one as pandering to a crowd without giving much thought to the meaning of what he says.

            • robertguyton

               /  September 13, 2018

              James knows what he is talking about, Pete. You don’t.

            • The man is an expert on women’s perspectives?

            • Gezza

               /  September 13, 2018

              You are talking with someone who thinks business suits and watches are “repulsive” PG. Don’t expect too much sanity from him.

            • robertguyton

               /  September 13, 2018

              “The man is an expert on women’s perspectives?”
              Are you?
              James said:
              ” I got the chance to talk with fmr Irish President Mary Robinson & a room full of inspiring women about changing the conversation on climate change to reflect women’s perspectives.”
              What is it in there that made you hit the panic button, Pete?

            • Gezza

               /  September 13, 2018

              WTF’s the matter with you, guyton? It’s a simple enuf post about a dubious proposition from Shaw women’s perspectives on climate change are different from men’s because they’re women not men.

              The only one panicking is you?

              Fuck knows why?

      • robertguyton

         /  September 13, 2018

        Yes. Women give birth to young humans, men don’t. That’s a profound difference of perspective, Pete. I’m surprised you hadn’t noticed that difference. Being givers of birth and primary nurturers, women have a perspective that is different than mens, one based on experience and culture; culture that goes back eons. Their essential relationship to Mother Earth is different to that of males, Pete, though doubtless you’ll argue the toss till the cows come home but if you can’t “get” that, it won’t be worth continuing the discussion.

        • Alan Wilkinson

           /  September 13, 2018

          B.s.

          • robertguyton

             /  September 13, 2018

            Devastating reposte, Alan. I’m lost for words from the depth and power of your comment.

          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  September 13, 2018

            I only had two words for the utter twaddle you spouted. Some women are maternal and some aren’t. Some are earth mothers and some are as far from that as you can get. Apart from all that climate change is an extremely complex issue on which uninformed lay opinion is absolutely worthless.

            • robertguyton

               /  September 13, 2018

              “uninformed lay opinion” = women in general.
              There ya go, womes of the world, Alan’s Proclamation – you are … worthless. Pete’s backing you, Alan! Go, you good things!!

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  September 13, 2018

              More b.s. What are you smoking?

            • robertguyton

               /  September 13, 2018

              That sort of ad hom comment is as stupid as asking, Alan; what are you drinking???” I’d never do it.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  September 14, 2018

              Well, stop acting as though you are smoking it.

        • You’re generalising a heck of a lot there Robert.

          I don’t think women will have have any more experience and culture related to combating the effects of climate change than men.

          “Their essential relationship to Mother Earth is different to that of males”

          So you think that say Aborigine men have a different essential relationship with nature than Aborigine women?

          • robertguyton

             /  September 13, 2018

            You don’t think women…blah, blah, blah…
            Run this discussion by your wife, Pete, if you are married, and let us know what she says.

            • I have a lot more discussions with women than with men in my life Robert, in my private life and at work.

              You really seem to not cope well with someone with different ideas – or different perspectives. Seems to be a bit of a Green thing – can’t abide by ideas outside their world view.

            • robertguyton

               /  September 13, 2018

              Wonderful, Pete; put your idea to those women you spend so much time with and get back to us with their assessment of your claims. Looking forward to that – tomorrow? Please?

            • Gezza

               /  September 13, 2018

              Are you speaking as a woman robert? Or are you speaking as a man who thinks he knows what women should think?

            • Corky

               /  September 13, 2018

              ”Seems to be a bit of a Green thing – can’t abide by ideas outside their world view.”

              Damn fine hit.

            • robertguyton

               /  September 13, 2018

              Pete’s claims are bordering on idiotic, Corky, and you’re drawn to them like a moth to a flame…

            • Gezza

               /  September 13, 2018

              There is absolutely nothing PG has said yet that amounts to a claim, let alone one bordering on idiotic, birdnester. The only idiotic posts here so far are yours. And they’re childishly stupid, to boot.

            • Corky

               /  September 13, 2018

              Well, what can I say? Apparently I can’t spell, have poor grammar, poor logic, am confused, poor memory, racist, Muslim hater, tin foil hat beliefs, a cloud buster that doesn’t work and an Alcatel phone that isn’t an Alcatel
              phone.

              You can’t expect too much from me, Robert.

            • Gezza

               /  September 13, 2018

              Had to give you an uptick for that one, Corks.
              Sorry.

            • robertguyton

               /  September 13, 2018

              Corky; don’t feel bad. I quite like your work, only here, like Pete, you’re in over your head. Let this one go, mate. Pete’s dug the hole, step back and let him flail about. I reckon your cloud buster claims are as sound as most claims made on this blog 🙂

            • Gezza

               /  September 13, 2018

              What malicious arsehole downticked me for giving
              Corky an uptick?? 😡

        • artcroft

           /  September 13, 2018

          My thanks for proof reading my post and proving my point.

          • robertguyton

             /  September 13, 2018

            Your “point”, artcroft, is de minumus. Even if “proved” it’s of no consequence or interest to anyone bar you and … Pete.

            • artcroft

               /  September 13, 2018

              In what way is it de minimus? You seem to favour women’s perspective/experience over mens. Is that true?

            • robertguyton

               /  September 13, 2018

              Your “point” about “making women angelic creatures” is too daft to debate, art croft; let it go. Women’s perspective regarding the health of the planet is more valuable than mens’, yes. Because, wombs, gestation, birth, nurturing, child-raising. Yes.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  September 14, 2018

              Some women have abortions and kill unborn babies. Some women abuse children. A woman sold her 15 year old daughter to the highest bidder, another woman did a sex act with her baby son and sold the video for perverts to drool over.

              Being ‘cloven, not crested’ as Elizabeth I famously said, makes not a blind bit of difference to a relationship with the earth. It’s very patronising to generalise about half the human race as if they were not individuals.

        • Missy

           /  September 14, 2018

          What f***ing paternalistic nonsense Robert. But hey do go on as I am sure as white (probably middle class) males you and James Shaw know and understand women’s perspective so well.

          This identity politics BS is as bad as racism. You subscribe a view and traits to a group of people, based on how they look or what their sexual identity is, and treat everyone you put in that group as if they are homogenous with the same view. It is paternalistic and arrogant, and infantilises the group by inferring the individuals you associate with it can’t think for themselves.

          Your posts on yhis topic are sexist, paternalistic and arrogant. Accept that women are individuals and are as capable as men of having a variety of different perspectives on topics, sorry if that messes with your 19th century views that women are all the same and should think like you and James Shaw tell us to.

          • Blazer

             /  September 14, 2018

            well said the Kiwi womens Rugby League team are tough,wouldn’t like to be tackled by any of..them.

            • Gezza

               /  September 14, 2018

              I’d pay money to see that I think. How much would you want Blaze?

  3. Corky

     /  September 13, 2018

    James Shaw was pitched to the general public as a Greenie who had experience in the real world; someone with his feet planted firmly on the ground.

    Well, it he’s the sane side of the Greens, what are the wackos like. Oh, that’s Marama Davidson, the one who misspoke on 1080. 😃

    I know the feeling, lady 😃

    • robertguyton

       /  September 13, 2018

      Judith Collins! speaking on behalf of all women!!!
      Help me, Jesus!

      • Unlike you she didn’t try to speak on behalf of all women. She said “many women”.

        • robertguyton

           /  September 13, 2018

          I’ve no interest in anything a woman nicknamed “Crusher” has to say, Pete. Why the hell are you citing her in this discussion? Shows your lack of meaningful connection with the issue: Crusher Collins, for goodness sake! You what???

          • Gezza

             /  September 13, 2018

            If you’ve no interest why the hell are you even brain farting about it?

          • I agree with anyone who I think makes sense, or adds a worthwhile perspective to a discussion.

            • robertguyton

               /  September 13, 2018

              Some advice, Pete: take notice of the views of people whose behaviour and history show they deserve respect. Now, consider “Crusher” and her history…
              Geddit?

            • Gezza

               /  September 13, 2018

              Help me, Jesus!

              Got no show, robert.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  September 13, 2018

              Silly advice. Respect doesn’t transfer from one point to another, Dame Salmond being a typical example. She manages to spout complete drivel outside her field of ecpertise.

            • robertguyton

               /  September 13, 2018

              What a strange night! Alan suggest we don’t credit respected women with views outside of their specialist area…supporting my comments about “Crusher” Collins! When she’s not talking about boy-racers, ignore her! (When she is talking about boy-racers, ignore her!).

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  September 13, 2018

              Still b.s. Robert. As PG said, consider views and contributions on their merits, not on your prejudices about their author.

            • robertguyton

               /  September 13, 2018

              “consider views and contributions on their merits, not on your prejudices about their author.”
              Hilarious, Alan. Are you saying your prejudices about James Shaw didn’t influence your comments about his statement? It did Pete’s, and everyone else who commented here.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  September 13, 2018

              @Robert, it wasn’t Shaw – it was his last four words sending my crap detector off scale.

          • Missy

             /  September 14, 2018

            You have no interest in what she says? Is that because she doesn’t fit into your idea of how women should think but is an individual, and is pointing out that not all women think the same?

        • Gezza

           /  September 13, 2018

          I think he’s a bit illiterate tbh.
          He’s certainly not one to take up time with reading for comprehension.

  4. Griff.

     /  September 13, 2018

    Meh
    Woman as a rule think slightly differently than men do .
    Does not mean you dont get hunter killer woman and nurturing men it ‘just means the Normal distribution for some factors of the human condition is different for each sex.
    This may be a factor in how the climate change conversation is perceived by each sex.
    I could see that for a male discussion around economic effects may be more important while a woman may respond more to the impact on future generations.

    • robertguyton

       /  September 13, 2018

      Outrageous suggestion, Griff! Women think differently to men – James Shaw said he’d taken the chance to gain some perspective outside of that his gender offers, and Pete & Co went full froth! Now you’re here, going all “James Shaw” on them! Prepare to be demeaned!

      • Gezza

         /  September 13, 2018

        The National Party and Labour Party and NZF all have female members and MPs.
        They all take account of what men and women think & get their perspectives, of necessity. Climate change isn’t something that anyone expects the extreme green feminist left party to have some sudden different female only perspective on, FFS.

        And that’s another thing ! 😡 Where is their transgender and gender fluid audience??
        Why aren’t their views being reported?? Are the Greens only interested in the CISgender female & lesbian perspective on Climate Change??

        Should be bloody ashamed of themselves. Bigots.

      • Griff.

         /  September 13, 2018

        You think I really care?
        Some ideas get some wound up.
        Sexual differences are one of these ideas that get reactions.
        It is actually quite funny that conservatives are trying to claim that there is no difference between the sexes .

        “Whenever women have insisted on absolute equality with men, they have invariably wound up with the dirty end of the stick. What they are and what they can do makes them superior to men, and their proper tactic is to demand special privileges, all the traffic will bear. They should never settle merely for equality. For women, “equality” is a disaster.”

        ― Robert A. Heinlein

        • Gezza

           /  September 13, 2018

          Heinlein bothers me. Charles Manson was fascinated with his Stranger In A Strange Land and used it a lot to influence his groupie murderers.

          • Griff.

             /  September 13, 2018

            You think I really care?
            Heinlein wrote some quite interesting things,
            Some of which I dont agree with ,
            But he can make you think outside of your comfort zone. Like many good fantersy writers he was a good student of human nature .

            In the book time enough for love the main protagonist leaves a couple of notebooks behind.
            The ideas in these excerpts should be read by every one at lest once.

            Here are some .
            http://www.angelfire.com/or/sociologyshop/lazlong.html#inter

            Always store beer in a dark place.

            By the data to date, there is only one animal in the Galaxy dangerous to man–man himself. So he must supply his own indispensable competition. He has no enemy to help him.

            Men are more sentimental than women. It blurs their thinking.

            Certainly the game is rigged. Don’t let that stop you; if you don’t bet, you can’t win.

            Any priest or shaman must be presumed guilty until proved innocent.

            Always listen to experts. They’ll tell you what can’t be done and why. Then do it!

            Get a shot off fast. This upsets him long enough to let you make your second shot perfect.

            There is no conclusive evidence of life after death. But there is no evidence of any sort against it. Soon enough you will know. So why fret about it?

            If it can’t be expressed in figures, it is not science; it is opinion.

            It has long been known that one horse can run faster than another–but which one? Differences are crucial.

            places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!

            God is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent-it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks, please. Cash and in small bills.

            Courage is the compliment of fear. A man who is fearless cannot be courageous. (He is also a fool.)

            The two highest achievements of the human mind are the twin concepts of “loyalty” and “duty.” Whenever these twin concepts fall into disrepute–get out of there fast. You may possibly save yourself, but it is too late to save that society. It is doomed.

            People who go broke in a big way never miss any meals. It is the poor jerk who is shy half a slug who must tighten his belt.

            The truth of a proposition has nothing to do with it’s credibility. And vice versa.

            Anyone who cannot cope with mathematics is not fully human. At best he is a tolerable sub-human who has learned to wear shoes, bathe, and not make messes in the house.

            Moving parts in rubbing contact require lubrication to avoid excessive wear. Honorifics and formal politeness provide lubrication where people rub together. Often the very young, the untraveled, the naive, the unsophisticated deplore these formalities as “empty,” “meaningless,” or “dishonest,” and scorn to use them. No matter how “pure” their motives, they thereby throw sand into machinery that does not work too well at best.

            A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects!

            The more you love, the more you can love–and the more intensely you love. Nor is there any limit on how many you can love. If a person had Time Enough, he could Love all of the majority who are decent and just.

            Masturbation is cheap, clean, convenient, and free of any possibility of wrong-doing–and you don’t have to go home in the cold. But it’s lonely.

            Beware of altrusim. It is based on self-deception, the root of all evil.

            Don’t try to have the last word. You might get it.

            • Gezza

               /  September 13, 2018

              You think I really care?
              No. You’re an aspie, so your primary focus is most likely to be yourself and your own perspective. You won’t be good at perceiving others’. You would have to pretend to do so by mimicking what you understand it would be like.

              At least of those are wrong, but I can see why you’d like them.

              Ok? Try to stay cool before responding.

            • Gezza

               /  September 13, 2018

              *At least half of those are wrong

              Sorry – tired. Haven’t had dinner either, just remembered. I’d better go & put something in the microwave.Back later.

  5. artcroft

     /  September 13, 2018

    Robert you credit women with greater perspective than men regarding global worming, but then disregard any woman (Collins) you don’t agree with. The patriarchy strikes back! Time to REPENT of your SIN Robert.

    • robertguyton

       /  September 13, 2018

      Artcroft – Crusher Collins isn’t “women”, she’s “woman” singular. Even you, with you massive bias, would surely recognise the need for a spread of opinions. Crusher doesn’t speak for women. James Shaw at least spoke with a “room full” of inspiring women. Collins is at best, only a wardrobe-full.

  6. Rickmann

     /  September 14, 2018

    What a feminist crock ! Jeez. This is getting really boring. Way to go Judith.