This won’t be the first time or the last that the so-called ivory tower academics attempt to push their agenda, whatever it may be, or whoever may be funding it, on the public. You may remember some of the stellar research that has been presented in the past, paid for by you and a highly interested company.
Just missing the last flight to Oslo were scientists who suggested that if you happen to suffer a traumatic brain injury, don’t be surprised if you experience headaches as a result. Other scholarly papers being reviewed by the Nobel committee include breakthrough findings like knee surgery may interfere with your jogging, or alcohol has been found to relax people at parties, and the odds-on favorite, there are multiple causes of death in very old people.
The latest insidious academic twist involves the social sciences of our day. After all, the hard sciences have been virtually erased from college campuses so the playing field can be leveled for affirmative action. But I digress. Remember, these benign studies may have vast economic reach as well. You get a “two-for-one” in the latest example of academia shoving its socialist agenda down your throat.
As proposed by Dr. (one can only wonder what the Ph.D. is for) Aaron Brough, in breath-taking fashion, “What If “Toxic Masculinity” Is the Reason for Climate Change?” Yes, you read that correctly. Dr. Brough was skillful enough to work in two major liberal talking points, “Toxic Masculinity,” and “Climate Change.”
In regard to the latter, the few lemmings that remember history will know that there have been five ice ages. All of which came and went without man nor beast ever being on the planet. Look it up. Regarding the former, one can only wonder what happened to Dr. Brough as a youth that led him down this path of self-hatred.
Why else would a man put forth a thesis denigrating his masculinity as toxic? Perhaps a bad marriage, childhood abuse or the like. One can only speculate.
The study by Brough (I can’t call him doctor anymore) is the latest veiled attempt to de-ball men in society. That’s right. I said it. It began in Western Europe, particularly Germany and the U.K., where the men have allowed their culture and heritage to be put on the back burner by those who would rather see Sharia Law imposed and their loss of sovereignty in the same breath.
The research at hand is that men cause climate change. If you have ever been in a port-0-potty at a sporting event, you have seen empirical evidence received by means of the senses that the climate has indeed been changed. I digress again.
Anyone with a high school statistics background knows that data can be manipulated to favor your outcome or thesis. In the pinnacle paper, we are observing here, Brough and his team from four other universities, all brand names I’m sure, asked both men and women to recall a time when they did something good or bad for the environment. Those who recalled having done something good for the environment rated themselves as more “feminine” than those who recalled having done something bad to the environment. Case closed.
I could continue to cite examples of gender identities allegedly playing a role in our life as humans on this planet, but no need. If I had more energy, I would mock this paper more, but you get my point. I hate to keep referring to the sacred “brown-shirt” playbook, but millennials only have the memory capacity of a snapchat post, so it is worth repeating.
Brough’s study is just another chapter in the many colors of class warfare, in this case, male v. female, that attempt to tear it all down, man. Brough is either a knowledgeable accomplice or a willing pawn. It doesn’t really matter which.