This research indicates that there are many ways that pro-environmental engagement and climate change beliefs are gendered beyond mere gender differences in pro-environmental behaviors and beliefs. People accurately anticipate that gender role incongruent engagement will be stigmatizing and impression management concerns can shape engagment. The gendered nature of environmental behaviors are particularly problematic for men, but anticipated and actual negative consequences are not unique to men; in fact, the negative consequences for environmental engagement can be derived from other sources than gender role incongruency of the behavior. Furthermore, men’s and women’s pro-environmental behaviors do not consistently conform to gender roles, even when men’s (or women’s) gender identity is threatened.

I Gendered nature of pro-environmental engagement and climate change beliefs

            Pro-environmental behaviors are often gender neutral (e.g. turning off lights) or feminine (e.g., recycling), but may also consistent of behaviors that are expected more of men than women (e.g., car maintenance) or more than women than men (e.g. by organic food; Vescio, Swim, Dahl, & Johnson, unpublished manuscript). Also demonstrating gender role expectations, it is expected that men (vs. women) will frame arguments for climate change in terms of science and leadership, whereas women (vs. men) will frame arguments in terms ethics and justice (Swim, Vescio, Dahl, & Zawadzki, 2018). People who use stereotypically feminine emotions (fear and sadness) or masculine emotions (anger) when describing the need to address climate change are described with feminine attributes (e.g., caring) or masculine attributes (e.g., strong), respectively (Bloodhart, Swim, & Dicicco, 2019) and , those woncerned about climate change are thought to be more likely to be women than men (Swim & Geiger, 2018). Yet, it is also notable that impressions of those most concerned about climate change (i.e., alarmed) are actually  associated with both masculine and feminine traits. 

II Expected and Actual Stigmatization of pro-environmental engagement and climate change beliefs

Consistent with the notion that it can be stigmatizing to engage in gender role-incongruent behavior, particularly for men, men anticipated that they would be more uncomfortable doing gender-role incongruent than congruent behaviors (Vescio, et al, unpublished manuscript) and would be more angry if required to engage in the gender-role incongruent than congruent pro-environmental behaviors (Swim, unpublished data). Men, but not women, also anticipated more negative consequences for selecting gender role incongruent arguments for climate change policies (Swim, Vescio, et al, 2018). Men expected to be more likely to be perceived to have negative feminine stereotypical qualities (e.g., whiney), expressed fear of being mistaken as gay, and anticipated that their same sex friends would also be seen as gay (Curtesy stigma, Swim, Gillis, & Hamaty, 2019).  Actual stigmatization also occurred, primarily among men and men avoided people with gender inconsistent environmental behavior, particularly women. Interestingly,  stigmatization was not a function of expressing gender role incongruent beliefs. Rather, stigmatization appears to result from assimilation to expectations about groups (Swim, under review). 

III Shaping engagement.

            Consistent with the notion that there is social pressures to conform to gender role congruent behaviors influence pro-environmental engagement, men (vs. women) were more willing to  engage in gender role incongruent pro-environmental behaviors and less willing to use role incongruent frames to discuss policy preferences rearding climate change and these preferences were associated with men’s anticipated discomfort with doing so (Dahl et al, unpublished manuscript) and fear of being associated with negative feminine qualities if they did so (Swim, Vescio, et al. 2018). Men were also less willing to identify as being alarmed by climate change when they thought that most alarmed people were women (Swim, 2018). Consistent with other research, men whose masculinity was threatened expressed less empathy and perspective taking, as well as more anger, guilt, and shame  (Vescio, Gallegos, & Schermerhorn, 2019). Anger, in turn, was subsequently associated with endorsing more anti-environmental attitudes, (Laubach, Vescio, Ratcliff, & Gallegos, 2016).

However, contrary to predictions neither gender nor gender identity threat increased the likelihood that women or men would engage in simulated behaviors that could create a climate change tipping point even though engaging in this behavior was associated more with men than women (Swim & Geiger, unpublished data).  Gender identity threat also did not influence men’s or women’s tendency to avoid associating with women or men with interest in gender role incongruent behaviors (Swim, Gillis, Hammity, under review). Finally, contrary to predictions, ascribing  more socially valued masculine (vs. feminine) traits to climate change opinion groups influenced willingness to take part in collective action consistent with the groups views, and these relations were not moderated by participant gender (Geiger & Swim, 2018).

Last Modified: 10/28/2019
Modified by: Theresa Vescio