A totally ridiculous story graced the front page of the Washington Post on Monday: Apparently more energy-efficient light bulbs would be flying off the shelves if only women weren't such hypocrites. You've got to read to the second page to get anything resembling actual data:
A Washington Post-ABC News poll released last week showed that while women are more likely than men to say they are "very willing" to change behavior to help the environment, they are less likely to have CFL bulbs at home. Wal-Mart company research shows a similar "disconnect" between the pro-environmental attitudes of women shoppers and their in-store purchases of CFL bulbs. [...]Utility company surveys show the same gender-based bulb-buying pattern in the Pacific Northwest, which has the highest CFL market share in the nation, about 11 percent. Men have been aware of CFLs longer than women, have bought them earlier and have installed more of them in the house than women, according to surveys that the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance has been conducting since 2004.
That's interesting. But most of the article reads like a '50s sitcom script rather than truly exploring reasons for this beyond the aesthetic. (Are women buying fewer fluorescent bulbs because of the up-front expense? Are they less aware of exactly how much less energy these bulbs consume?) I'd also be interested in reading some legitimate research on the "eco-gender gap": how men and women differ in their implementation of environmentally friendly lifestyle changes. I'm not looking for an eco-battle of the sexes or anything, but a serious investigation. Without the stupid "wife test" anecdotes.
Related: The Ms. cover story this month is about women leaders in the environmental movement.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Dim bulbs.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/5202
I generally buy the cheapest bulbs they have because I have to worry about getting out of the store on the money I have in my pocket right now. Future savings are no help with that.
In other news, living paycheck-to-paycheck sucks rocks.
Right, Kimmy, that's exactly what I wish this article would have addressed.
haha! If they wanna talk about wastefulness, maybe they should conduct a study on the average consumption of paper plates and plastic cutlery used by bachlors...
I wonder why they asked this question in the first place based on gender? Was it a statistic they stumbled upon in a larger study? Or did they set out to ask whether men or women were more environmentally conscious shoppers, and what was effecting their choices?
Wouldn't it make more sense to ask based on factors like income and education, geographic location and political affiliation? Just wondering . . .
Yes, it's another rousing game of "What can't we blame on women?!"
I wonder how many of those men carried their lightbulbs home in their canvas shopping bags instead of plastic?
Aside from the overtly sexist tone of the article, it would be nice if they threw in some general statistics, since the entire article is based on these secret statistics. Do 11% of women buy CFL bulbs compared to 13% of men, or 2% of women compared to 98% of men? Or is there no real gender difference at all?
This article looks just like industry group copy. A lingering way of thinking is that women are the "gatekeepers" of domestic good purchasing -- women buy most domestic goods, and even if they don't, they decide what products are acceptable or not. Since (under this model) women decide what products are purchased, marketers try to shame women into thinking that if they don't buy their specific products, they're not providing the best for their family (or the earth, in this case). The "man vs. woman" tactic is a very common form of this -- "men understand our product is the best, why don't you, you silly woman?!"
Oh noes! Women don't buy the nice light bulbs! THE EARTH IS DOOMED!
Orange forbid anyone ever mention that men are probably more likely do buy nasty gas guzzling SUVs or Hummers with lower mileage per gallon just to "look cool. " Or commute alone ridiculous distances to a cubicle job in a gigantic Chevy truck, while cheating in the carpool lane to boot.
But noooo, it's the wimminz and them lightbulbs ruining the environment.
I see several things wrong, one most already pointed out. If you are living paycheck to paycheck are you...
A. going to buy a lightbub for $4 or...
B. buy a lightbulb and a gallon of milk for $4.
Also, how many guys actually admit to buying the household stuffs even when they do? I'd say not nearly all of them since that is 'sissy woman work' and it is more likely that the men who are buying the CFL are in a higher income bracket to begin with.
I suppose my failure to use fluorescent light bulbs completely negates my switching from oil to gas for heat and hot water, buying the energy-saver washer and dryer, putting up that vinyl siding or replacing all those windows.
My lamps don't emit that weird buzzing noise, so clearly I'm not environmentally conscious AT ALL.
Worse, I don't shop at Wal-Mart, on account of their nasty employee policies.
My shame is great.
Another potential explaination would be that most building maintainence people and construction workers are men. Large buildings and new facilities are more likely to have policies in place that require more efficient bulbs and they buy them in much larger quantities than someone purchasing for their home. I specify them in all the buildings that I design but it's usually men who actually purchase and install them.
Well, there's also the fact that more women suffer from migraines (or at least know they suffer from migraines), CFL's cause migraines, and, speaking as a migraine sufferer-cum-green freak, the tiny amount of electricity saved is not worth being out of commission for an extra day or four per month. (I'd be willing to bet that more women than men turn down the thermostat, which saves a lot more energy.)
Whatever!
We are not about to turn environmentalism into a battle of the sexes.
And Kimmy makes a very valid point. Women make less money, so couldn't this lack of pricy, advanced technology be construed as the result of society that won't let us catch up with men?
Bearcat has the credited response from me as well.
If I remember correctly, 4/5 migraine sufferers are women. I'm pretty sure CFL lights are the most common trigger; I think the AMS II said that around 50% of those who've had to miss work because of migraines did so because they were triggered by their employment's fluroescent lights.
And it's not just an abstract consideration, either. I'm a 1L in law school this year, and I've only been going to class every other day because the school's fluroescent lights give me migraines.
It's easy to buy expensive light bulbs when you make $1.30 for every $1 that a woman makes. But ya don't see the Washington Post mentioning THAT, now do you?
Moreover, it would never be that, say, CFLs contain mercury and women don't want highly breakable objects with mercury in their homes, now would it? Nooo... we're just too stupid to care about the environment.
I will propose a better study: compare the amount of meat that men and women eat and compare the increased amount of energy it takes to feed a man (between growing the feed, feeding the cattle, environmental effects of all that methane, and shipping).
Something tells me that the lightbulbs don't cancel out a 16-oz Porterhouse steak. ;)
Bearcat, I actually leave my heating/cooling system off as often as I can (like for the last three or four weeks) and just suffer a bit from the heat or the cold. Although I have to admit that I'm not trying to save the environment. I'm trying to save my electricity bill.
i thought migrains were triggered by the flickering of the bulb.
i think that it depends on traditional fluroescent vs CFLs. i know that the long tubes (traditional fluroescent lights) have always had that issue. however, i thought that most of the CFLs eliminated that problem. something to do with the ballast.
most public/business buildings use the traditional fluroescent bulbs, while the CFLs are used in the home. CFLs don't hum (at least mine don't).
I third Bearcat's comments about the headaches. Fluourescent lights hurt my eyes and make it hard for me to read. If I spend too much time under them, I will get migraines, and that goes for a male migraine sufferer I know as well. They're just freakin' unbearable and I'd rather light candles than curse the lightbulbs.
On the other hand, last time I needed to buy a flashlight, I was able to buy an LED bulb that emits a pleasing blue-white light (and is powered by shaking it!) and will probably last for years. Why can't I buy an LED bulb for my fixtures at home?
here in the NW it couldn't possible have anything to do with the fact that the only stores that carried them for years and years were hardware and home improvement stores, could it? Our power co-op gave them away at community fairs to give people a chance to try them. Then when they wanted to buy more it took years to get the grocery stores(where most people buy lightbulbs) to carry them.
Also I think changing the lamp harp and lighting fixtures to acommodate the larger size is generally considered a boy thing.
Orange forbid anyone ever mention that men are probably more likely do buy nasty gas guzzling SUVs or Hummers with lower mileage per gallon just to "look cool. " Or commute alone ridiculous distances to a cubicle job in a gigantic Chevy truck, while cheating in the carpool lane to boot.
Really, I see mostly women in those, horrible, evil, gas guzzling monsters! I'm one of them! I do buy the environmentally sound lightbulbs, though, so does that make me okay?
How dare someone buy a car that appeals to their sense of aesthetics, or that more than two people can fit into! THOSE MONSTERS.
And don't even get me started on the meat comment.
For "progressive" feminists, you guys sure do cling to a lot of stereotypes.
well, one: i don't and won't shop at wal-mart, for reasons that need not be spoken. so that the sample was pulled from there immediately doesn't represent me.
two: my apartment has a lotta natural light, so my very cheap bulbs end up lasting a long time (i have changed one bulb (which was here when i got here) in the living room and one in the bathroom since moving here in august), which is eco-friendly in a conservational sense.
and for whatever it's worth: my car comfortably seats four, five if we're friendly, and is pretty gosh darn fuel efficient.
pearl, it's mostly men who drive Hummers. This is not a scientific report but a personal observation.
Men consume over 100 grams of protein per day; women consume about 60 grams of protein daily. Considering that most protein is from meat, we can safely assume that men consume more than women (even accounting for differing sizes and nutritional needs).
In case you missed it, Pearl, the point was to be just as inane as this article in comparing which gender "does more" for the environment.
I'm using CFLs now.
14 mph. Wow:
"Moreover, it would never be that, say, CFLs contain mercury and women don't want highly breakable objects with mercury in their homes, now would it?"
Actually, regular lightbulbs contain dangerous things too, and the coal it takes to produce electricity will ultimately release /more/ mercury into the environment if you're using less-efficient lightbulbs as opposed to CFLs. If CFLs are disposed of properly, you have no problem.
Sorry folks, I'm an Environmental Studies major here. I agree that dividing a study by gender like this seems rather pointless, but I'm not going to use this as an opportunity to take a jab at the env't.
CFLs do make a pretty big difference when they are used on a wide scale. They can save you a substantial amount of money too.
Also the meat comparison isn't so terribly innane, either. The modern fuel industry results in tons of greenhouse gas pollution for the reasons someone named above. The total amount of fossil fuel pollution do to food production is actually greater than the total that can be attributed to home electricity use.
And hey, if you want to tie all this into feminism, check out Ecofeminism. It is the philosophy that the way western civilization treats the env't is similarly exploitative philosophically and realistically to the way it treats women. Also women in many developing countries are the ones whose life quality is affected most by decreasing environmental quality.
oops... I meant to say that "The modern food industry results in tons of greenhouse gas pollution for the reasons someone named above. The total amount of fossil fuel pollution do to food production is actually greater than the total that can be attributed to home electricity use."
The comments here are brilliant...Some of you should fire off a letter to the Washington Post (especially considering how they and the NYT have been on some sort of anti-woman bender for a while now). Their e-mail and information about writing to them are here:
Letters must be exclusive to The Washington Post, and must include the writer's home address and home and business telephone numbers. Because of space limitations, those published are subject to abridgment. Although we are unable to acknowledge those letters we cannot publish, we appreciate the interest and value the views of those who take the time to send us their comments.
Letters via E-Mail:
The e-mail address is letters@washpost.com. Do not send attachments; they will not be read.
The mercury issue is a distraction. The maximum allowable mercury in a can of tuna is higher than the amount of mercury in a typical CFL.
Could be that in families that don't use the bulbs, women do all the shopping.
I mentioned mercury for the simple reason that it is a reasonably valid explanation for someone's refusal to purchase the bulbs. (There was a family in Maine that spent $2,000 cleaning up a mercury spill after breaking a CFL.)
The environmental effects of eating meat are pretty horrific, we can agree. It is inane to break it down by gender, as if those evil men are out to destroy the planet when they go to Ruth Chris.
I use energy efficient bulbs but I admit, it was a HUGE chunk out of my income. I'm a starving artist & my income is super low--if I had a family to support I definitely would have bought what was cheap & spent the rest on food etc.
About once a year, I've noticed that some stores sell energy efficient bulbs for really cheap--I bought about 3 for $5 each. Look out for that.
As an artist, I really like the light from efficient bulbs better than standard light bulbs.
I have started having migraines lately, I wonder if my switch in lightbulbs is causing them.
Hmm. 80% of our lighting is CFL, my doing. I go and buy them at the big box hardware store when I am at the big box hardware store getting other things. The remaining bulbs either don't have a CFL option quite yet or are fixtures were going to totally replace soon. I just wish there were more LED bulb options easily available.
The whole green, energy efficient thing is my deal and I talk him into it.
Excuse me, I have a rain barrel to go finish.
Interesting. Meanwhile, I'm pushing for CFLs and my husband is the one going, "Oh, but they're so uuuuuuuugglllyyyyyy!!"
Of course, we don't shop at Wal-Mart either, so were not available to turn their pseudo-study on its ear. Sorry about that, y'all. We'll try to shop the Evil Empire more often. snort!
I hesitated to buy compact flourescent bulbs for a long time because I hate the tube flourescents, and assumed that the light from CFLs would appear the same. However, our hydro bill has been going through the roof, so we decided to give them a try, and actually... they're not bad. They don't make people look like zombies, and through a frosted-glass shade they look about the same. My migraines are not triggered by flourescent lighting, though, so I can't comment on that complaint.
This lightbulb thing is an issue in Ontario right now, because as well as encouraging people to buy the new bulbs with mail-out coupons, the Ontario Government is planning to ban the sale (though not possession) of incandescent bulbs by 2012.
Wal-Mart research??
Hmm... from a company that sends people undercover to
spy on and disrupt the activities of groups that oppose its policies. Yeah that's just what we need- more Wal-Mart research.
Natasha: I recall an episode of Mythbusters in which they compared the energy usage for various kinds of lightbulbs, and one of them was an LED bulb. It fit in a standard socket but was covered with lots of little LEDs. I heard that the only reason why those aren't common yet is because they haven't figured out how to get them to emit warm yellow light similar to an incandescent.
My husband and I live in the same house, and we both buy things for it. How many of the women who don't buy CFLs live in a house with a man who does buy them? Could it be because you usually see them in hardware stores, and not next to the incandescents at the grocery?
The $2000 CFL article was written by a guy who makes his bones by slamming environmentalism and global warming in every way shape or form.
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/05/compact_fluorescent_lights_are.php
yeah I gotta say, I live in Maine and never heard of that story. And we've got whole towns instituting CFLs in all their public buildings, with the benefit of saving tens of thousands of dollars every year or more.
Oh, I just got beat to it. I was going to link to the pharyngula thread.
The $2000 bill was accurate, but far beyond what was needed. It would cost a lot to call in professionals to clean up when my child throws up all over the bathroom, too. With a broken CFL, some paper towels, duct tape, and a ziploc bag would take care of it.
Interesting. It's been the opposite at my house. The husband has been pushing for CFLs and I've been resistant because the light from those suckers bother the heck out of me. He admitted that they bother him, too, but it might be worth a try.
I don't feel too horrible about the energy-wasting. We keep our lights off as much as possible, we're vegan, we recycle everything, grow our own veggies on our deck during the growing season, etc.
I feel that I am doing an obscene amount, so I can put off the CFLs for a while. Eventually I'll give them a try.
urthlvr: i thought migrains were triggered by the flickering of the bulb.
For some people, maybe. I still have problems with CFLs, and I think it has to do with the combination of the light's intensity and the color. It's why wearing tinted glasses helps a little.
This may count as a stupid wife test anecdote, but although I unscrewed most of the lightbulbs that came in our apartment's bathroom (there's like 6 above each mirror and one is plenty to light the whole room), we didn't actually switch to CFLs until a few years ago. I don't know if that was just because we didn't really buy lightbulbs for the first few years or what, but when I lived with my roommate (another woman) instead of my husband, we bought CFLs at IKEA because they were cheep! (like the budgie). If I had gone to [insert national chain hardware store here] for lightbulbs, I probably would've bought what seemed to be the best deal, without taking into account CFL-vs-incandescent. Although I heart LEDs...
I guess what I'm saying is, although I'm a geeky chick, my husband has his finger on the pulse of cool-advances-in-lighting-technology much more than I have. I don't know if that's a sex-linked trait, a failing of marketing, or what.