In the light of this post from The Intersection, I wanted to write for a little bit on the way that environmentalism interacts with the culture war generally, and the gender edge of it particularly.
Environmentalism has been decisively coded female/feminine in the current debate. Not exclusively, of course, but the right wing climate change deniers are engaged in a consistent pattern of trying to tie conservationism to being unmanly. There's a few avenues of this, and they're all out there, in full force.
The first one is the oldest: the Nanny State fears. Whenever you hear a politico throw that phrase around, they're engaging a little bit of Freudian messaging. They want to try to convince you that the government is going to turn into your nagging mother, and if you don't reject it, you're going to be stuck back in 3rd grade again. It's explicitly gendered language here, and there's a reason why "libertarians" argue against a "nanny state" rather than a "paternalistic state," even though bans on smoking and such are equally described by both. Here's an example:
Then, various political leaders announce that the planet is in imminent danger of total destruction, and they demand the nanny-state government protect us.
Secondly, there are claims that conserving anything is a little bit gay, the ever-popular second-fork of gender politics. Men, you can be a real man, a woman, or a homosexual, and that's what environmentalists supposedly are in the right-wing world view. It means you might drive a little Prius instead of a big ugly Hummer, and it takes being a swishy metrosexual to care about greening your home. Just ask Al Gore:
Ann Coulter, on Hardball:
COULTER: He may not be gay, but Al Gore, total fag.
And similarly, there's something just plain emasculating about saving energy, for some reason. If you're not just called a woman or a fag by a right wing commentor, maybe they'll just imply that you're missing something between your legs. Look to Charles Krauthammer here:
Environmentalists are Gaia's priests, instructing us in her proper service and casting out those who refuse to genuflect. (See Newsweek above.) And having proclaimed the ultimate commandment -- carbon chastity -- they are preparing the supporting canonical legislation that will tell you how much you can travel, what kind of light you will read by, and at what temperature you may set your bedroom thermostat.
He kind of ties it all together there, doesn't he? You've gotta be a Gaia-worshipping moon maiden to even consider environmentalism, for one thing. Then of course, there's the intrusive nanny state telling you what you can do in your own home. And finally, there's that word "chastity" about carbon, turning your environmental efforts into some kind of nut-shrinking abstention. Chastity's not manly, it's something for nuns (priests usually get the world celibacy tossed around, though their vows are for both), and seems to hint that the men involved have something distorted about their sexuality.
This is why there's a gender gap presented on the issue folks.