New research shows men are less likely to buy products labelled "environmentally-friendly" and more likely to donate to environmental groups with masculine logos. It's a no-brainer, writes Ben Pobjie. We need to make recycling bins more phallic and rename wind farms "fight clubs".

I do not know if the average Australian understands just how hard it is, in 2016, to be an environmentally conscious man who is also committed to maintaining a strong and unshakeable sense of masculinity.

Do you understand what it is like to desperately want to join the fight against the degradation of our natural world, but to be hamstrung by the need to minimise the ever-present risk that I could slip into unmanliness?

A new study published in the Journal of Consumer Research — Is Eco-Friendly Unmanly? The Green-Feminine Stereotype and Its Effect on Sustainable Consumption — has found that men shy away from environmentally responsible activity due to fear of its effect on their gender identity.

Men see the purchasing of green products and the performance of green practices as feminine, and are hence less likely to engage in them, for fear of having their masculinity diminished.

I wish I could make people understand. I wish I could make people see that, when I litter, I am not doing it out of reckless disregard for the future of the human race.

I am not hurling my burger wrappers and Coke bottles into the street with any kind of gay abandon.

Indeed, I do it with a heavy heart, because I know only too well of the waterways that will be choked, the wildernesses that will be despoiled, the animals that may be exterminated, by my destructive-yet-attractively-decisive abuse of nature.

Recycling does not a manly man make

But what choice do I have, when I know that if I am seen not littering, onlookers might question my manhood?

What would you do, if confronted with that awful choice — to toss your waste into a designated receptacle, or dispatch it to the four winds with a throaty chuckle — while feeling the eyes of the public upon you?

All those silently judgmental watchers ready, as soon as you put your rubbish in the bin, to text all their friends and loved ones, "OMG you won't believe what a gigantic girlie-man I just saw!"

That tension, multiplied by about a hundred, is what I feel every single day.

Want more "green" men? Rename wind farms "fight clubs". ( Pexels.com )

Because of course I want to recycle, of course I want to reduce my carbon footprint, of course I want to donate large portions of my income to environmental activist organisations.

But the minute I do any of these things, I will be labelled, by both my personal circle of acquaintances and society at large, a sissy. And that is something I simply cannot countenance.

It is a problem that we need to acknowledge in our community.

Everyone knows environmentalism is for girls

The movement does not even try to hide this: think of all the times that Greens MPs have publicly demanded action on climate change, always emphasising the soft, effeminate nature of emissions trading schemes.

Remember the notorious Greenpeace slogan, still in use today: "Be A Woman: Save The Planet."

I have felt the pain personally. Once, several years ago, I weakened, and in my genuine desire to secure a clean and liveable planet for my children and, to a lesser extent, my children's children, I donated $20 to a fund to help save koalas from extinction.

I knew as soon as I had done it that I had made a mistake, and my fears were confirmed: when I got home from work my wife took one look at me and asked me why my penis was suddenly so much smaller.

All around the world, millions of men are facing this dilemma: we love the planet, but we also love our healthy testosterone levels, and as things currently stand, we cannot have both.

So clearly we need change. This new study offers the opportunity to make that change happen.

Let's look at the findings

Firstly, researchers have discovered that men are more likely to donate to environmental charities with overtly masculine logos.

So there is an opening right there: how many environmental organisations do you know with overtly masculine logos?

Less Greens, more bow-hunting. ( Supplied: NSW Greens )

Sure, there is Pollution Punchers, but that is about it. Imagine the millions that would flow into green coffers, if we just macho-ed up the logos a bit.

Would it kill Greenpeace to change its logo to something manlier? Like a picture of a bear carrying the bloodied corpse of an oil executive in its jaws.

And do you not think Sea Shepherd would find itself a lot better resourced if it were renamed Sea Kickboxer?

Hell, the Greens themselves would see both their fundraising and their vote skyrocket if their marketing materials had a stronger bow-hunting theme.

The study also found that men are less likely to buy products that are labelled as environmentally-friendly.

Now, this is an absolute no-brainer...

We just have to stop labelling products as environmentally-friendly.

Take dolphin-safe tuna: I do not buy it because I am afraid it might make me grow breasts.

But if it were labelled "dolphin-packed tuna"? I could not get enough! Label it "tuna that doesn't contain dolphin but while we were catching them we killed a bunch of dolphins just for fun", and most men would eat little else.

So the course is clear: stop labelling green products as "green".

If a product is palm-oil-free, place a prominent sticker on it with the names of all the orangutans that died to make it.

If an appliance is energy-efficient, slap it with a "this machine kills coral reefs" label.

There are loads of ways we can help the average man resolve the contradictions between his love of the environment and his love of being a strong, pungent male.

Make recycling bins more phallic. Paint nude women on solar panels. Rename wind farms "fight clubs".

Oh sure, to those who do not face the crippling fear of emasculation every day it might seem a bit silly — but when it is the survival of our species at stake, is it not worth it?