I could hug you for your beautifully sane and eloquent article warning against the nuclear option in today's Guardian ("Take the clean, green alternative over macho nuclear rod-waving"), especially after reading so many articles and editorials (even in the Guardian) in its favour.It is very interesting that women are so much more opposed to it than men. The reason, I'm sure, is biological: men are programmed to pursue power (originally to secure and retain as many females as possible to increase their progeny), while women are programmed to care more for the young, including their grandchildren. Instinctively, they want to protect their young from the risks posed by nuclear energy, risks which men are inclined to play down as they use it in their own power struggles (social, political, military, economic or whatever).
Your humorous reference to "macho nuclear rod-waving" is a classic example of many a true word being spoken in jest. An anthropological approach to this issue, as to all social and political issues, can be very illuminating. It provides a perspective that may scare you to death initially, but is essential to understanding and coming to grips with the primitive, animal side of human nature, which informs our entire socio-economic order and dominates our behaviour to a far greater extent than anyone seems to realise.