The text is unsurprisingly from a guardian article, though in their defence they included two brief defences. “With reference to Lucy Ellmann’s starkly eloquent letter (We should blame men for the climate crisis, 29 July), I have spent 30 years teaching secondary geography pupils that we don’t use the term “manmade” any more – it’s gender-biased. We should use “anthropogenic” instead. It also makes you sound cleverer. I’m not sure that I’ve been doing the right thing. The climate emergency is indeed a very gendered fact of 21st-century life. The primary drivers of it have been male-led and male-dominated entities, and the primary victims will be poor, brown and female. It may be time to approve of the term “manmade” once more – with qualifiers.”

Perhaps this is low hanging fruit, but it bothers me that everything must be gender neutral until it is bad. Acknowledging that men are responsible for the majority of our buildings and our technology is bad, but when it’s climate change suddenly it matters. Strength isn’t gendered until it’s something to vilify and acknowledge as an unfair advantage that needs to be kept in check. When women struggle or have disadvantages they’re strong, when men do they’re weaker and inferior. I don’t even know how to combat it because it’s so pervasive and at best you can only say “some men are good” and even that’s too far for some people. It’s like we endlessly have to put up and man up until our emotions are convenient for the right group.