General Discussion

Prism

(5,815 posts)

254. It's not a debate I particularly enjoy

Sat Mar 17, 2012, 02:42 AM

Mar 2012

Personally, I think most of our personality traits are a combination of nature and nurture, and the degree of each very much depends on the individual, experience, genetics, and a host of idiopathic unknowns.

But, and I know this threatens my Gay Card, I'm not entirely persuaded sexual orientation is entirely inborn. I think some people are born with a certain orientation and others are shaped into it by their unique experiences, environment, and how that interacts with their genetic predispositions.

(Before anyone kills me, I firmly believe by the time adolescence rolls around, orientation has evolved to the point of being hard-wired into the noggin).

So it is with gender. There are definite social influences there, particularly in early childhood and how parents treat boys and girls differently. But, I firmly believe genes can predispose people one way or another.

So it's a bit of both, really.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

267 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Why "fun feminism" should be consigned to the rubbish bin [View all] seabeyond Mar 2012 OP

Seems like a very good article to post in the Feminist Forum. nt Old and In the Way Mar 2012 #1

I don't see that happening. UnrepentantLiberal Mar 2012 #2

Not really. MineralMan Mar 2012 #107

Turns out it is getting a good discussion here on GD Old and In the Way Mar 2012 #123

It is. That's what GD is good at, generating discussions MineralMan Mar 2012 #125

It's shame that you can't cross link a post to a specific group though. Old and In the Way Mar 2012 #133

I think many now a day take the personal is political boston bean Mar 2012 #3

Do you agree with her statement: tammywammy Mar 2012 #4

I don't get that. There are lots of men that are far more supportive of feminist ideals then some Jennicut Mar 2012 #7

I agree tammywammy Mar 2012 #11

To me, most women's rights issues are ideological. Jennicut Mar 2012 #16

my husband was an unwavering supporter of Hillary Clinton in 08. He persuaded me that I CTyankee Mar 2012 #101

Keep an eye on Elizabeth Warren KamaAina Mar 2012 #159

I'm a feminist and I didn't support Hillary for President. PassingFair Mar 2012 #162

I humbly say no DonCoquixote Mar 2012 #9

On a side note, about that damned patriarchal power structure Zalatix Mar 2012 #91

I would expand on that... the patriarchal system makes finding a mate even harder! tech_smythe Mar 2012 #244

a step further seabeyond Mar 2012 #262

I would really really like to see the OP's response to that. 2ndAmForComputers Mar 2012 #10

Yes, I do. salib Mar 2012 #205

I tend to agree with you. n/t MadrasT Mar 2012 #206

I would STILL really really like to see the OP's response to that. 2ndAmForComputers Mar 2012 #214

Some of us women run from the angry militancy as well Ruby the Liberal Mar 2012 #5

What angry militancy are you speaking of? boston bean Mar 2012 #6

LOL! The article in the OP, and Ruby the Liberal Mar 2012 #8

Here is what I think boston bean Mar 2012 #13

Thank you, that was helpful insight. Ruby the Liberal Mar 2012 #14

I don't think you could transplant today's 3rd wavers into the culture 30-40 years ago Old and In the Way Mar 2012 #97

You may be Old and In the Way but I'm pretty sure you're not old enough to remember the 1st wavers Gormy Cuss Mar 2012 #134

Yeah, I'm not really up on my waves, I guess. Old and In the Way Mar 2012 #138

Yes, you were talking about second wavers. Gormy Cuss Mar 2012 #139

Actually, back in the late 60's, I was very focused on wave theories. Old and In the Way Mar 2012 #144

There is nothing wrong with being angry with other women. Daemonaquila Mar 2012 #192

You mean the sort of angry militancy that tells hetero women they can't be feminists if they're Warren DeMontague Mar 2012 #235

She lost me at: LadyHawkAZ Mar 2012 #12

Very well stated. Thank you! Ruby the Liberal Mar 2012 #15

i had to go back and read the article, because i did not hear her say any of that. seabeyond Mar 2012 #17

I think LadyHawk is commenting on the final paragraph mackattack Mar 2012 #19

that was some interpretation. nt seabeyond Mar 2012 #21

Really? Ruby the Liberal Mar 2012 #22

Well, when the author states... mackattack Mar 2012 #23

i think the difference would be seabeyond Mar 2012 #28

Forget interpretation, did you find the overall tone to be positive and welcoming? Ruby the Liberal Mar 2012 #31

Julie Bindel encourages women to become political lesbians tammywammy Mar 2012 #36

ha ha. thanks. i appreciate that. i am going to read that tomorrow. seabeyond Mar 2012 #44

Try finding some of her other articles when you get time. tammywammy Mar 2012 #48

i did. actually i didnt seabeyond Mar 2012 #53

I get ya tammywammy Mar 2012 #55

traditional views of women and feminists themselves... much softer, appealing yet powerful force. seabeyond Mar 2012 #131

I read the article mackattack Mar 2012 #47

So she doesn't ACTUALLY want equality... so much as to flip the table tech_smythe Mar 2012 #248

that is just an opinion of the poster seabeyond Mar 2012 #263

It wasn't just the one sentence LadyHawkAZ Mar 2012 #76

SB... you seem to forget YOU'RE a reasonable person tech_smythe Mar 2012 #246

i love you..... seabeyond Mar 2012 #261

What? Blacks get to express hatred of white oppression and still get good corporate jobs? Really? saras Mar 2012 #216

That is the subtitle of the article stevenleser Mar 2012 #199

You hit the nail on the head Major Nikon Mar 2012 #51

Here's a black woman speaking about First and Second Wave Feminism... MicaelS Mar 2012 #185

Wow. +1. n/t lumberjack_jeff Mar 2012 #117

This writer's opinions would be on the extreme edge of second wave thought Gormy Cuss Mar 2012 #137

That is true. nt boston bean Mar 2012 #172

You beat me too it but that is what lost me too. See my #195 stevenleser Mar 2012 #198

Very Well Put. n/t ElboRuum Mar 2012 #224

"For heterosexual women, feminism can be a nightmare." mackattack Mar 2012 #18

I'm pretty sure that is not what the author meant. boston bean Mar 2012 #24

Ah! So "radical" is ok, but "militant" isn't. Ruby the Liberal Mar 2012 #26

Radical feminists locate the root cause of women's oppression in patriarchal gender relations seabeyond Mar 2012 #29

In saying it "sounds radical" boston bean Mar 2012 #30

So you feel that the article, being not radical, represents mainstream acceptable 2012 feminism? Ruby the Liberal Mar 2012 #34

I think that nothing in that article boston bean Mar 2012 #40

I am not asking for homogeneous - just the opposite. Inclusion. Ruby the Liberal Mar 2012 #43

That is a two way street, Ruby. boston bean Mar 2012 #49

There. Is. No. Patriarchy. Ruby the Liberal Mar 2012 #56

wow. nt seabeyond Mar 2012 #59

Do you get class warfare? Ruby the Liberal Mar 2012 #72

+2 double wow! Little Star Mar 2012 #104

see post 62 boston bean Mar 2012 #64

The second wave argument is.... mackattack Mar 2012 #70

Howdy! I *do* get that. My claim is that it is outdated. Ruby the Liberal Mar 2012 #74

Ahhhh ok mackattack Mar 2012 #78

As a Marxist Ruby, I agree with you, EXCEPT......... socialist_n_TN Mar 2012 #124

You are monumentally correct. hifiguy Mar 2012 #140

I'm glad I'm not a feminist. It seems very complicated. scarletwoman Mar 2012 #82

It seems very complicated. mackattack Mar 2012 #90

this is going to be the next seabeyond Mar 2012 #98

My HERO. Ruby the Liberal Mar 2012 #93

There is - first of all, look at the undeniable fact that women are not paid equal to men. chrisa Mar 2012 #197

Are you serious? Tumbulu Mar 2012 #212

This message was self-deleted by its author Warren DeMontague Mar 2012 #240

"...is the struggle for equal rights between men and women. Not for men. Men already have more..." lumberjack_jeff Mar 2012 #126

we are multi task oriented and falls under human rights and equality. i dont think it is tough seabeyond Mar 2012 #128

If it were about equality, it wouldn't be necessary to multitask. n/t lumberjack_jeff Mar 2012 #130

of course. you are in a male movement. you focus on male issues. seabeyond Mar 2012 #132

Heh. Pretty exclusive "movement". lumberjack_jeff Mar 2012 #143

what i am really about done with, is people that ignore what is said seabeyond Mar 2012 #145

I can't ignore what you don't say. lumberjack_jeff Mar 2012 #149

and at the very least seabeyond Mar 2012 #156

It wasn't my intent to criticize and yes. You ARE the one who speaks up. lumberjack_jeff Mar 2012 #166

interesting. i really do LOVE discussing this with you seabeyond Mar 2012 #169

why should feminism have to worry about it? Scout Mar 2012 #135

Fine. You chose "eat the cake" lumberjack_jeff Mar 2012 #141

oh poor pitiful lambs, it's the evil feminist's fault... Scout Mar 2012 #168

I'm not whining. I'm saying. lumberjack_jeff Mar 2012 #170

maybe this post isn't, but many of yours are. you're nothing if not consistent. Scout Mar 2012 #173

"Consistent" I think this word means something other than what you think it means. lumberjack_jeff Mar 2012 #178

I read your post last night and had some thoughts to share with you Tumbulu Mar 2012 #231

That is a generalization that I would not make. lumberjack_jeff Mar 2012 #233

More later I'm on the road Tumbulu Mar 2012 #245

I misunderstood. lumberjack_jeff Mar 2012 #250

if she see's fit, yes Tumbulu Mar 2012 #251

back now Tumbulu Mar 2012 #249

not what the author says mackattack Mar 2012 #52

Two different sentences in two different paragraphs. boston bean Mar 2012 #71

Two different sentences in two different paragraphs...???? mackattack Mar 2012 #75

I was replying to your response to me, where I was speaking originally of this quote: boston bean Mar 2012 #83

Oh, no no no mackattack Mar 2012 #87

I understand mackattack Mar 2012 #27

This is where I think the problem arises. boston bean Mar 2012 #33

Or, people have heard it for ages, REJECTED it, and just now Ruby the Liberal Mar 2012 #41

What I am saying Ruby, is you can believe what you would like. boston bean Mar 2012 #46

Okay, hows this. I am woman. I am empowered. I am NOT OPPRESSED. Ruby the Liberal Mar 2012 #54

That is what you believe. boston bean Mar 2012 #62

Because I am not supremacist. Ruby the Liberal Mar 2012 #65

Come again? boston bean Mar 2012 #73

What do you replace it with Ruby the Liberal Mar 2012 #77

Replace it with Equality. nt boston bean Mar 2012 #79

So in acheiving that goal, feminist men are unwelcome. Ruby the Liberal Mar 2012 #81

I wrote "Replace it with Equality" - as in replace the patriarchy with Equality, not a Matriarchy.. boston bean Mar 2012 #85

But the author never calls for that mackattack Mar 2012 #84

It was an article written for feminists, meant to be interesting to read. boston bean Mar 2012 #86

I can see how someone might see it as radical. But truly, it is not. mackattack Mar 2012 #88

She is speaking of a certain type of feminist boston bean Mar 2012 #89

Last I heard, the generally used definition of feminism was "equality for women". lumberjack_jeff Mar 2012 #122

for me, in my opinion, i think seabeyond Mar 2012 #127

"Equality for men" would be advocacy, not a search for equality. lumberjack_jeff Mar 2012 #129

you can keep asking, but if you ignore my answer seabeyond Mar 2012 #142

The system which created a congress 83% male... lumberjack_jeff Mar 2012 #120

This message was self-deleted by its author tammywammy Mar 2012 #68

EXCELLENT post, Grasshopper! obamanut2012 Mar 2012 #110

That is exactly what she meant, that is what she is known for obamanut2012 Mar 2012 #109

Some Feminists give Feminists a bad name. Germaine Greer comes to mind. William769 Mar 2012 #20

Here's an interesting article tammywammy Mar 2012 #32

Very interesting. Thanks. William769 Mar 2012 #39

See muriel_volestrangler's post #35 for more links tammywammy Mar 2012 #42

gee, that can be said about any group of people, don't you think William? n/t Scout Mar 2012 #136

Of course. It just seems more pronounced in some more than others. n/t William769 Mar 2012 #148

back atcha. "more pronounced" in some than others. Scout Mar 2012 #174

What nonsense. Odin2005 Mar 2012 #25

you know the one poster seabeyond Mar 2012 #37

That has zero, zip, nada, nothing to do with the OP. Ruby the Liberal Mar 2012 #45

you dont know what i am talking about. seabeyond Mar 2012 #57

LOL! Ok. Ruby the Liberal Mar 2012 #66

I have a pretty good idea what you're talking about Major Nikon Mar 2012 #80

That's not at all the point of the article. Daemonaquila Mar 2012 #193

Who the fuck said we can't talk about rape? Odin2005 Mar 2012 #247

Julie Bindel is highly controversial muriel_volestrangler Mar 2012 #35

I have no idea what this post is about Canuckistanian Mar 2012 #38

It is a promotion of 2nd wave feminism Ruby the Liberal Mar 2012 #50

It is amazing that almost every post I click on has a reply from you. You are crazy great. HangOnKids Mar 2012 #102

Ah! Thanks for the translation. HappyMe Mar 2012 #106

No, it isn't a promotion of 2nd wave feminism. It's a promotion of Bindel's curious and twisted take Gormy Cuss Mar 2012 #153

Youve probably heard it described as Womens Liberation mackattack Mar 2012 #60

Transphobic "feminism" needs to be consigned to the rubbish bin. Starry Messenger Mar 2012 #58

+1000! William769 Mar 2012 #63

+1 n/t tammywammy Mar 2012 #69

+1 n/t fishwax Mar 2012 #94

Yes! Vanje Mar 2012 #95

well said, short and to the Point. Whisp Mar 2012 #100

Exactly == "funbots" isn't demeaning to women? obamanut2012 Mar 2012 #111

Thank you Catherina Mar 2012 #179

+1. Clearly, some insults to women are more acceptable than others. 2ndAmForComputers Mar 2012 #213

The more I see, the more I'm convinced it's religious fundamentalism oozing out in a different form. Warren DeMontague Mar 2012 #236

I support both radical and fun fishwax Mar 2012 #61

i.... seabeyond Mar 2012 #67

basically I just think that fishwax Mar 2012 #92

excellent. thank you seabeyond Mar 2012 #99

Heres a thought - quit trying to define yourself as a "2" or "3" Ruby the Liberal Mar 2012 #103

for me seabeyond Mar 2012 #115

How could you have been born at the beginning of the Third Wave obamanut2012 Mar 2012 #119

i was born at the time women of the 3rd wave was born, not 2nd... nt seabeyond Mar 2012 #121

All men are not your enemy. SomethingFishy Mar 2012 #96

Not to make light of feminism, MadHound Mar 2012 #105

Julie Bindel, the OP article's author, is extrememly transphobic obamanut2012 Mar 2012 #108

Movements that are exclusive, rather than inclusive, tend MineralMan Mar 2012 #112

After reading that, I declare that I am a fun feminist. ZenLefty Mar 2012 #113

Yummy! What kind? obamanut2012 Mar 2012 #114

Gluten free peanut butter cookies with funbot sprinkes! ZenLefty Mar 2012 #118

That'll work -- I love peanut butter obamanut2012 Mar 2012 #147

I can't reconcile these two sentences. lumberjack_jeff Mar 2012 #116

A hateful bigot who doesn't understand Generation Y. Not surprising. Prism Mar 2012 #146

Great post, Prism obamanut2012 Mar 2012 #150

Really?! Prism Mar 2012 #152

I wouldn't say she's against marriage equality tammywammy Mar 2012 #188

I've read she is against all marriage/civil unions obamanut2012 Mar 2012 #210

Very well said. n/t lumberjack_jeff Mar 2012 #154

Yep. Spot on. "Puritanism is the nagging feeling that someone, somewhere, might be happy" Taverner Mar 2012 #157

very good post. thank you. i appreciate it seabeyond Mar 2012 #158

Radicalism works, until it doesn't Prism Mar 2012 #252

It started with Girl Power and has sunk into mindless hedonism. Why has sexual equality backfired? seabeyond Mar 2012 #160

Isn't calling a woman or group of women "hedonist" a form of an attempt at slut-shaming? stevenleser Mar 2012 #201

+ 1 ! Vanje Mar 2012 #209

Yes, it's slut shaming n/t obamanut2012 Mar 2012 #211

interesting article, thanks for the link Tumbulu Mar 2012 #221

This message was self-deleted by its author Warren DeMontague Mar 2012 #242

I think we're watching a pendulum in motion Prism Mar 2012 #253

when you have an increase seabeyond Mar 2012 #259

The thing is, have 50 and 60-somethings EVER wrote about 20something trends and approved? Warren DeMontague Mar 2012 #266

I had not ever heard of Bindel prior to this. boston bean Mar 2012 #163

The question of gender MadrasT Mar 2012 #180

There's no reason The Philosopher Mar 2012 #227

It's not a debate I particularly enjoy Prism Mar 2012 #254

Awe-inspiring post cthulu2016 Mar 2012 #165

It's posts like this that make visiting DU every day a very worthy experience! bullwinkle428 Mar 2012 #176

Nailed it. As always. Catherina Mar 2012 #186

Very nice post. Rex Mar 2012 #189

Beautifully stated. nt Starry Messenger Mar 2012 #190

It's hard to take anything she says seriously knowing her bigotry toward Transgendered people stevenleser Mar 2012 #203

Not thrilled with her "political lesbianism" either Prism Mar 2012 #255

some great points there -- nice post fishwax Mar 2012 #207

Great post! nt Vanje Mar 2012 #208

really well written. thanks. La Lioness Priyanka Mar 2012 #217

Wow. This was a genuine pleasure to read. LadyHawkAZ Mar 2012 #229

Why can't we bookmark replies? LiberalAndProud Mar 2012 #238

This message was self-deleted by its author Warren DeMontague Mar 2012 #239

Gay men are always throwing a monkey wrench into 2nd wave Prism Mar 2012 #256

maybe it is not about her believing that it is a reality. maybe it is making a point. seabeyond Mar 2012 #264

This message was self-deleted by its author Warren DeMontague Mar 2012 #265

She should be happy that feminism is going mainstream, I believe. chrisa Mar 2012 #151

how has owning the word slut as in slut walk, worked for us? seabeyond Mar 2012 #161

Maybe the word can never be owned, but its power can be taken away. chrisa Mar 2012 #164

i get the concept. i played it, too. i think we clearly show an example how the power was not seabeyond Mar 2012 #167

another kinda way out there thought, that i would like to explore seabeyond Mar 2012 #171

I'm afraid that these examples are the end results of the oversexualization of our kids librechik Mar 2012 #187

yes, I agree (nt) Tumbulu Mar 2012 #218

I'm going to try to address both the above posts in this one LadyHawkAZ Mar 2012 #243

i appreciate you taking account past posts. i value when a poster is able to do that seabeyond Mar 2012 #260

Aw jeez...not this shit again Taverner Mar 2012 #155

... Rex Mar 2012 #184

does anyone besides me hate "Slutwalks?" librechik Mar 2012 #175

Never heard of a slutwalk Rex Mar 2012 #181

post 167 and 171. have been thinking about this seabeyond Mar 2012 #182

I'm with you Tumbulu Mar 2012 #219

A strong woman is not a strident woman. naughty nina Mar 2012 #177

Poor troll Rex Mar 2012 #183

A strong Pizza served is not a bad pizza! Thanks MIRT/Admins! stevenleser Mar 2012 #200

I welcome your complete scorn... Oh, wait... ElboRuum Mar 2012 #226

What a load of horsecrap - no such thing as "proper, radical feminism." Daemonaquila Mar 2012 #191

+1 - I have been re-educated by being here on DU these last few weeks. Whisp Mar 2012 #204

Amen to that Alcibiades Mar 2012 #223

This is dehumanizing. Funbots? mahina Mar 2012 #194

Article starts with a failed premise: "If your brand of feminism seems good to men, its bad" stevenleser Mar 2012 #195

BINGO!!!!!!!!!!! nt TeamsterDem Mar 2012 #215

Um, seems a sexist thing to say what "most men" do TeamsterDem Mar 2012 #196

There are too many feminists aren't there? CreekDog Mar 2012 #202

OK, another chiming in DonCoquixote Mar 2012 #220

Thread went about as expected. flvegan Mar 2012 #222

I saw this song and dance performed live twenty years ago Sen. Walter Sobchak Mar 2012 #225

Can we go back to women's liberation? Alcibiades Mar 2012 #228

the author has a few good points but its clouded by her desire to denigrate women La Lioness Priyanka Mar 2012 #230

+1 Rex Mar 2012 #232

This message was self-deleted by its author Warren DeMontague Mar 2012 #234

The "radical" feminism I encountered on DU has made me lose a lot of sympathy for feminists... DutchLiberal Mar 2012 #237

The author of the posted article is a hater of transsexual people and in general a self Bluenorthwest Mar 2012 #241

Whatever bluestateguy Mar 2012 #257

NEWS FLASH: A 180-degree total inversion of humankind will never, ever happen. dogknob Mar 2012 #258

This message was self-deleted by its author Warren DeMontague Mar 2012 #267