Facts are neither good nor bad. They just are.
Here comes a challenge. To find the facts, we have to wind a path avoiding the biases of Tucker Carlson, and then Justin Baragona, and then Carolyn Centeno Milton, and then the researchers themselves. Also mine.
Tucker Carlson: ‘How Did We Wind Up With a Country in Which Feminists Do Science?’ — Justin Baragona, The Daily Beast
Well, Carlson’s words kind of speak for themselves, and may not require elaboration. He believes feminists shouldn’t — shouldn’t — be “doing science.” Baragona says,
Carlson then highlighted a recent study that asks whether “toxic masculinity” is a driver behind climate change by arguing that “when men’s gender identity was threatened, they tried to reassert their masculinity through environmentally damaging choices.”
Baragona fails my criterion of quoting sources verbatim. Neither the phrase “environmentally damaging” nor the word “toxic” appears in the “report” linked to; namely, this one:
Does Unconscious Bias Affect Our Sustainable Lifestyle Choices? — Carolyn Centeno Milton, Forbes
In between her sentence fragments, Milton clearly concludes that manliness is anti-green, and therefore shameful. I’m surprised that this appeared in Forbes.
Advisory: Upon re-reading Milton’s article several times, I find that that remark on my part is not completely fair. I am letting it stand, however, given that many other readers will interpret it the same way. Tucker Carlson did.
What are the facts here? Experiments found that when men perceive affronts to their masculinity, they are prone to make anti-eco-friendly decisions. It’s cross-cultural: some experiments were done in the U.S., others in China.
Holy smokes, the “recent study” was originally published in 2016.
The facts as they are, are indisputable. What may be in dispute is how we should — should — feel about them. I see no need to regard masculinity as evil, or that males should be ashamed of their maleness.
Value judgments are decisions that this or that “should” be, or is good or evil, right or wrong. Whenever you see “should” — “should” — you’re dealing with a value judgment.
They’re inevitable —
Most of it has to do with what one personally happens to choose to like or dislike — things, events, ideas, people, propositions.
They’re not always choices.
I have remarked before that when I see a pretty woman, I’m prone to get a sweet taste in my mouth. I may have a choice about what I regard as pretty, but I have no choice about that automatic, physiological response.
The sight and smell of a field of flowering daffodils and tulips is prone to attract any observer; the person ill be drawn toward it. The sight and smell of a soiled diaper is prone to repulse any observer, to drive him or her away.
In preparing this post, I’ve read a lot about the feminist critique of science. This is primarily the work of women who are not scientists themselves. The few exceptions have committed themselves to ideology. Most of it strikes me as mumbo jumbo. What little of it I can understand seems to boil down to an insistence that value judgments should — should — count more than facts.
That won’t work.
— but they’re not the last word.
The facts don’t care about your feelings.
— Ben Shaprio
In the end, the facts, What Is, are what we must deal with.
No matter how much one dislikes it, the diaper must be changed. It must be dealt with.
Tucker Carlson dislikes the appearance that masculinity may be anti-green. So do I. It remains a fact for us to deal with.
Guinness To Stop Using Plastics In Multipacks — They’re replacing it with paper. I wonder how many men will find this an affront to their masculinity.