Introduction
Centuries ago, men were given key roles in society, and the reason being that they were able to understand complex issues more than women. This argument tried to define the difference in the capabilities between the male and female sociological genders. Recent studies have been carried out with the results, clearly indicating that the position has not changed since. This paper will analyze a magazine article that maintains that position following a study that was conducted.
Women ‘More Likely Than Men To Agree With Science On Global Warming’
The article was written by McCright Anthony and appeared in the April 2010 issue of Population and Environmental Journal Magazine. The magazine was published by Liebert Inc Publishers. The writer relies on a recent study that had been conducted on gender and climate change. He argues that the study that women believed the scientific consensus more than their counterparts (Anthony 1).
He gives an explanation to this by quoting a sociologist in MSU’s department of Sociology in Lyman Briggs College, who states that men are more literate when it comes to understanding science. He supports his point by stating that even though the female gender tends to believe the scientific consensus more, the men, on the other hand, have a better understanding when it comes to the issues of global warming.
The writer contends that this study, which focuses on how gender perceives climate change, portrays women as being more naïve when it comes to understanding climate change. They end up relying more on science reasoning rather than their own individual reasoning. He argues that the findings of this research go further to reinforce past studies that have been conducted portraying women’s lack of confidence in comprehending the science.
This pattern, he says, is a reason why most women shy away from undertaking science careers (Anthony 3).
He further contends that it is important to understand how gender views and understands the environment in what he calls ‘the problematic environmental phenomenon facing humanity.’ (Anthony, 7). The writer also analyses the data that had been collected for eight years by the Gullups annual poll. The poll was said to ask simple and fair questions regarding climate change to test the knowledge and concern. He argues that climate change understanding is likely explained by what he calls ‘gender socialization.’ (Anthony, 9).
The article relates to the gender sociology course that is undertaking. It helps to explain how people perceive gender and, in particular, women. The writer being a ‘he’ can be said to be biased in his argument that women are not literate when it comes to understanding science consensus. He fails to give the exact statistics of the findings, and by this, we are working on his assumption of the results. He also fails to give the exact details of the research, such as who was conducting the research, who was being interviewed, did both genders lay in the same class, and so on. It would be unfair if most of the men interviewed were working class and the women homemakers.
Conclusion
The magazine appears to discriminate against women, and the writer does not shy away from this when he further states that other past researches had produced similar results. The writer, too, has failed to conduct his research well as the statistics of women undertaking the science careers are on the rise, and women are not shying away from this kind of career, as was the case in the past.
Works Cited
Anthony, McCright. “Women ‘More Likely Than Men To Agree With Science On Global Warming’” Population and Environmental Journal Magazine. 2010.