Salon Magazine has posted an article that is so angry woke it would get an A+ in a college freshman writing lab. The article is titled, “Misogyny, meet hypocrisy: Climate deniers go after AOC, Greta Thunberg with sexist attacks”. The AOC is, of course, freshman congresscritter Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. The Thunberg is Greta Thunberg, a sixteen year old climate change activist who yachted to America, no lie. Victory Girls’ Lisa Carr wrote about Thunberg a couple of weeks ago. Read it here.

The author of this article, Amanda Marcotte, has a permanent knot in her knickers from her Trump Derangement Syndrome. She wrote a book “Troll Nation: How the Right Became Trump-Worshipping Monsters Set on Rat-F*cking Liberals, America, and Truth Itself”, which tells you just what a sexual intellectual the woman is. The subtitle for her “Misogyny” article today is: “Climate skeptics don’t have science, morality or simple decency on their side — so they’re leaning into sexism”. Oh, girlfriend, you are wrong on all four counts.

Now, I am officially able to clapback at Salon Magazine and writer Marcotte because I am a female. I am happily and joyfully female. I also love logic.

So, what has tightened the knot in Marcotte’s knickers? This tweeted video from Media Research Center:

WATCH: This time on "Shallow Thoughts, with @AOC," the New York socialist says coastal cities will be underwater due to climate change, and we face "death" if we don't spend trillions of dollars to address it. pic.twitter.com/hQycZQwaQ4

— MRCTV.org (@mrctv) August 29, 2019

Salon Magazine believes that is misogynistic and hypocritical. From the article:

It’s equally clear that Media Research Center doesn’t expect its conservative audience to actually listen to what she’s saying. Instead, sexist stereotypes are doing the heavy lifting here. Ocasio-Cortez is young, female and pretty, and as such, the target audience for this video is predisposed to think of her as a bimbo, and is ready to write off anything she says as dumb lady yapping, without bothering to absorb the actual contents of her speech.

Here is the Thunberg part from the Salon Magazine article:

Earlier this week, Ocasio-Cortez tweeted out a warm welcome to Greta Thunberg, the 16-year-old Swedish climate activist, who arrived in New York Wednesday for a speech at the United Nations.

Unfortunately, Thunberg was also greeted by a wave of misogynist nastiness, largely coming from allegedly grown men in both Europe and the United States. The attacks on Thunberg were in the same vein as those on Ocasio-Cortez, accusing her of being too stupid to know what she’s talking about and denying that her voice is one worth honoring. A writer for the conservative Washington Examiner claimed that Thunberg is a victim of “child abuse” and that her mother “pimps their kid out,” explicitly drawing a line between forced sex work and climate activism.

Just so you know, I don’t know if either of these women is stupid in the intellectual capacity area. I do know that they are woefully uninformed and lack intellectual curiosity. Just like author Marcotte herself. This are the next paragraphs in her article:

These kinds attacks have no basis in fact. Thunberg’s views on climate change align with those of better than 97% of climate scientists. Thunberg is no helpless puppet, but a sharp and remarkably passionate young person who has sparked an international youth movement of climate activism with millions of participants. In order to give weight to these attacks, these critics rely on stereotypes painting women, especially young women, as infantile and idiotic. Without this kind of misogyny, they’d have nothing.

“While these examples might feel like mere coincidence to some,” Martin Gelin at the New Republic argues, “the idea that white men would lead the attacks on Greta Thunberg is consistent with a growing body of research linking gender reactionaries to climate-denialism.”

First of all, if there are no genders, seventy-five genders or only the two, lack of facts and data should always be called out. The two females could be of the male persuasion. If your feelings get hurt because you get called out, time to go back where you came from. Did I trigger you there?

Second, those of us who actually use our brains, agree that the climate changes. The climate has always and will always change. It’s called science. We disagree with the notion of human-made climate change.

Third, 97% of climate scientists are 100% wrong. That is not my idea. That is from a 2015 article in Forbes Magazine. You can read it here.

Fourth, that big old sun and the Earth’s orbit mostly decide the climate (there are other factors). NASA may sing the song of whichever political argument will get them more funding, but for forty years they have been studying the sun and it’s affects on the Earth’s climate. The article here is a little on the nerdy-side. If you have the intellectual curiosity of a petunia, you’ll find it interesting.

Here is the final paragraph from Salon Magazine:

But no matter who the right attacks, the premise remains the same: Environmentalists are female and/or effeminate, and therefore can be dismissed out of hand as stupid or crazy or driven by irrational emotion — in other words, not worth listening to. Women are so worthless in their eyes, it appears, that no amount of evidence will ever make women’s arguments hold merit.

Call the whambulance! At least Marcotte got that A+ from the freshman writing lab.

Photo Composite: Greta Thunberg by Anders Hellberg/Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license.cropped/mixed. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Official Congressional Portrait Public Domain