Printable View
the system of which she is a part makes $ driving our consumption patterns. the system says we are supposed to follow her lead, if we shouldn't follow their lead, why do we care at all other than as entertainment?Quote:
Originally Posted by Buster Highmen
All I'm saying is that because she's a she, she become a target more readily due to misogyny.Quote:
Originally Posted by dunfree
I'm not trying to argue that the eco skiterrati are conveying a mixed message if not outright hypocrisy.
the system of which they are a part makes $ driving our consumption patterns. the system says we are supposed to follow their lead, if we shouldn't, why do we care at all
Yes, but where' s the equivalent Jeremy Jones hate if those are the principles?
There's something about the way I look at life that requires some acceptance of contradiction. Knowing that I'm contributing to AGW, doing dinky little things to compensate, but basically contributing while acknowledging. It's easier to blame than it is to acknowledge.
FWIW Jeremy has gotten shit in multiple threads, not just one. This was one for the ages, 5 years on:
Back to CG: what fraction of the hate starts from this thread? It ain't zero.Quote:
Originally Posted by raisingarizona13
The problem isn't limited to the eco skiterrati, of course, the whole message that we are running out of time is significantly undercut whenever the person saying it seems not to actually believe it enough to act like it. For that matter, it's also undercut when geoengineering is dismissed out of hand since, of course, humans won't take extinction without first trying that. So either we believe the models or we don't and it continues to seem like a lot of the people saying they believe really don't.
Tl/dr: +1 to Bromo
scoring? really? jeez.specifically for their
I'm not disagreeing with those principles as long as they're applied in a genderless, or even personless mien.
I think we agree that CG has been singled out as a function of her gender, despite the fact that she deserves the critique with the rest of the ecorati, especially Hollywood.
There's JJ, Townsend, MikeD, most of the Sally team, most of whom are guys. I'm sure they get shit too, but do they actually have a thread hip-ocrisy
Greenwash is expensive.Quote:
Originally Posted by #######
No. I was just agreeing with...in particular, this:Quote:
Originally Posted by Buster Highmen
Quote:
If your private life conflicts with your intellectual opinion, it cancels your intellectual ideas, not your private life
it's much easier for a man to get a pass to talk about a line on "the brothel" than a womanQuote:
Originally Posted by Buster Highmen
I can't respond to some alias's pm, so:
I don't hold much against people posting here.
It's just that if the principle espoused concerning the hypocrisy of supporting the AGW theory while being a skier has any substance, I'll first hold myself up to that standard rather than point fingers at some obnoxious girl.
Live internally first, glass houses and all that.
Yeah, it's a matter of degree and sex, but what I can do starts with me.
Oh good lord. One can criticize CG’ choices versus her public stances without it necessarily having misogynist roots.
All these advertising models/action sports stars who are espousing climate action while jetting around the world and riding in helos are hypocritical at some level.
‘YOU, people other than myself, have to make sacrifices to stop global warming’
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
I'm pretty tired of the skiers flying on planes so they're hypocritical argument... not to say I haven't cringed on occasion. But still, that shit is a drop in the bucket and misses the point. Here...
Attachment 294578
Humans are hypocrites, myself included. We all have the right to judge people and I judge people on how they judge other people. In the world of social media, I'm told, eyeballs equal success. Do want you want but I don't have the time for it, I'm too busy taking my single use plastics to the recycling center in my 15mpg super duty.
Yes, of course one can criticize anyone, male or female, without it having misogynistic roots. Except we don't have threads devoted to those other action sports stars and their hypocrisy. Why is that? You're fooling yourself if you don't think it has something to do with her gender.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kinnikinnick
This.Quote:
Originally Posted by TahoeJ
Targeting people who are advocating for change just because they aren’t 1,000% carbon free is just playing into the hands of the polluters who want nothing done.
No matter how many skiers give up cars and planes, the ONLY way to stop it is through massively deploying governmental resources across the globe, which means politicians need to feel the pressure for their voters. Advocacy, social media, flying to events, and celebrity involvement are big components to that.
I’m not downplaying individual changes in lifestyle, but if the power grid and all new cars turned renewable, then the rest of it wouldn’t really matter.
Single use plastics and straws aren’t great, but there is no way a straw in Vail ends up in the ocean. Spending time fighting about that stuff distracts from the bigger battle.
Maybe once we save the fucking World we can turn on each other and decide who was core enough. Until then I’m going to focus my anger elsewhere.
Core’r than you, dude
She took a helicopter to do some wedding photos! Can we just agree how stupid that was.
Here's the thing...if you want to espouse environmentalism and carbon reduction and stopping global warming ad nauseum, then you CANT TAKE A HELICOPTER TO DO SOME WEDDING PHOTOS!
Yeah, but all that means is that the US collectively drives a lot more than it flies. It doesn't mean that for an individual's choices, flying has a smaller footprint than driving.Quote:
Originally Posted by TahoeJ
Like, at least rescue a pine marten or something.
now that takes dedication. those fuckers are mean. rescuing a pine martin is not just lazy insta-activism.Quote:
Originally Posted by AdironRider
Not a high barQuote:
Originally Posted by Self Jupiter
I mean, if I could I take a helicopter ride to take photos I would. Maybe it’s bad for the image, but that put less carbon into the air than a day of heli skiing or a flight across country.Quote:
Originally Posted by RonMexico
You guys are brutal... This isn't a one-for-one proposition. It's not like she had a day of heli skiing planned, but decided to use the helicopter for wedding photos instead.Quote:
Originally Posted by Supermoon
I would love to take a helicopter ride and absolutely would given the opportunity. But if I made my living off of espousing environmental causes and how important it is to limit our carbon footprint, then you better believe I wouldn't be flying somewhere (whether in a helicopter or plane - near of far) to take my wedding photos. The city park / pond / lake down the street would certainly suffice.
It's the total lack of self awareness and accountability in these instances - and always being able to make excuses for your own actions when called out on your bullshit - that makes me frustrated.
Why is that not OK but heliskiing is OK?Quote:
Originally Posted by RonMexico
She’s a professional skier, not a pro climate activist.Quote:
Originally Posted by RonMexico
She’s a professional skier, and a climate activist. She seems to be giving both her best. Nobody’s perfect.
Huh? Sounds like more thoughtless hypocrisy. An environmentalist who expects to have the right to speak up about carbon pollution should live on a path, not a street. If they live on a street they forfeit their right to speak out no?Quote:
Originally Posted by RonMexico
That street to the probably fake pond took an enormous amount of CO2 to produce and destroyed plants and the soil beneath them that sequester carbon and the non porous surface results in runoff into the lake which results in methane production.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/release...0326081426.htm
Purity is tough when we all live glass houses instead of mud huts.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
And no one is asking her to be but ffs she could have a little self awareness.Quote:
Originally Posted by Self Jupiter
She climbed Everest so take a hike in your wedding dress for the pictures.
Didn't JJ do 3 films involving self propulsion in response to criticism? Suddenly dude is legit and has license to speak out? Nope the guys throwing stones just lowered the bar some more and kept at.Quote:
Originally Posted by concretejungle
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
I think the heli for wedding photos is a bad look. No question about that from me.
I also understand that this is a collective action problem and by far the most effective thing one can do on a individual level to fix it is to work on the politics. For example, POW AF spent a fair amount of money against some of the biggest climate deniers in Congress last cycle. Townsend was knocking on doors for Jessica Morse in our district.
In the long run, that kind of stuff is more effective than becoming an ascetic hermit and using rocks for tools.
There's a lot of stuff posted on this forum on this topic that reminds me of this...
Attachment 294610
And this (the original)...
Attachment 294611
Maybe low key, but still definitely an element of it. Not saying POW is above critique, but some of the critiques have logical holes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RonMexico
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheFugitive
Quote:
Originally Posted by RonMexico
Quote:
Originally Posted by RonMexico
EGGZACKLY! Self Awareness Hello!Quote:
Originally Posted by concretejungle
I sure won't be buying any granola from a company that spancers CG!
I wanted to rethink buying Patagucci because they spancer her too...
Their shit is so dope though, especially the FitzroyTrout Trucker Cap, that I couldn't not give them my freedom dollars.
What were we arguing about again?
Oh yeah.
We are all sexists, except those of us that aren't.
So don't criticize someone who makes a living off of public image.
And doing more cool shit than you do.
If they sit down to pee.
It could never be about the substance of what they are bringing or how they bring it.
It could only be because they have tits and a cute smile that we are critical...
Back to the real issue...
Why does Brody have to LEAD Caroline down the trail to their awaiting chariot of privilege?
Have the fumes for the spent Jet-A made her too woozy to traverse the knife edge ridge in white satin high heels?
Of does he have some suppressed misogynist sexism that won't allow him to let her use her level 3 skills to get back to the choppah!?!?
Fuck that guy! I'm gonna unfollow him on instagram! That'll show him!
Attachment 294612
There may not be climate-change impact from some renewable sources of energy but there is most definitely environmental impact. Daming rivers, solar arrays take up tons of land, etc. etc. There's no free lunch. Really, this attitude is a gift to polluters because it's so transparently facile and false. Own your hyperconsumption and it's impacts, don't bullshit them away.Quote:
Originally Posted by Supermoon
No, it means there are bigger fish to fry. Airplane travel certainly doesn't help, but if we grounded all planes tomorrow it would make fuck all of a difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW
Individual actions give legitimacy to systemic movements.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
That was just a climate oriented reply, in response to a critique of the carbon output of a helicopter. I’m happy to discuss your idea about what to do for either our carbon output, environmental impacts, or your own personal lifestyle that makes you so perfect ecologically that you think you are in a place to critique others.Quote:
Originally Posted by dunfree
I’ve done plenty to reduce my footprint over the last few years, but I do it so I feel better about myself, not because I think my small changes will affect the global climate to any level. My time and money is best spent pressuring decision makers and supporting people, groups and yes, companies, that are working towards similar goals.
I don't disagree. That's why, say, Greta Thunberg's sailing to the United States was a good idea. Her flight over wouldn't have mattered, in the grand scheme of things, but she's setting a good example.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirby
I generally think the critique is overblown though. And especially when people use it as a convenient excuse to completely dismiss people out of hand.
Sent from my moto x4 using Tapatalk
True enough, but isn't the point of advocating to convince people who aren't already convinced? It is known that many such people are looking for convenient excuses, so offering them up is at best ineffectual and at worst actually provides the whataboutist with ammunition that helps them ignore more effective advocates. (If legislators won't listen to scientists, send in the outdoorsy!?! Meh.)Quote:
Originally Posted by LightRanger
OP claimed to be looking for hate-splainers, and none of this rises to that level. Borrowing from Buster, those concerned with hypocrisy have to start with own own. But the critique of her actions as they impact her effectiveness is still true as far as it goes.
True enough. But where do we draw the line? There's a lot of subjective grey area there.Quote:
Originally Posted by jono
Take Al Gore for example. Guy has been raising awareness about global warming for decades. Earth in the Balance was published in 1992. He's probably more responsible for raising climate change awareness than anybody. And he was doing it before most others except some scientists and a handful of enviro activists. To do that, he flew around the world a lot. I'm sure he's taken a lot of unnecessary flights for leisure too. He's a rich guy.
Does that mean he's a hypocrite? I mean, I guess. But I would argue he's done more good than ill. And I think the argument to make on that point is fairly easy, given the available evidence.
Like I said, the heli to the wedding photos is low-hanging fruit. But overall, I dunno, no matter what people do short of killing themselves to offset their carbon footprint, somebody is still going to criticize them for hypocrisy.
I guess my point is that I agree with Buster in that judging a person for hypocrisy seems hypocritical, but it doesn't stop me from seeing the pragmatic effect it has on their message. Same goes for CG, JJ, Gore...
As a member of the peanut gallery, more discussion of people who are trying to lead from the front seems helpful. Particularly those who are modeling and discovering better ways.
^^^ Yes. I agree with all of that for sure.
Many wetland systems are carbon sinks, and urban ponds can help with nutrient removal if properly designed which can limit things like nitrogen and phosphorous in larger water bodies and consequently reduce algal blooms. So your categorization of ponds is vague and off base IMO.Quote:
Originally Posted by uglymoney
edit to add: If you are talking about large parking lots with a large pond lacking vegetation as a stormwater basin then yes, that can be a problem. Although phosphorous may bind to sediment and be retained limiting effluent concentrations. The bottom line is design is all site specific. That's why I don't agree with the sweeping categorizations of "urban ponds" being bad for the environment and contributing to "greening" as the article states.