Seriously, the A-Team? Is he getting a kick-back from the makers of the movie that’s coming out this year? Ye gods - all he’s got are mediocre TV shows from the 70s and 80s? FAIL.
I think this is better than it used to be. I have definitely noticed a tendency in professional women I’ve known who are 45+ to decry anything traditionally feminine. They vocally hate pink, they think crying is a capital crime, they think stay at home moms are either subjugated or crazy, etc. I think it’s a byproduct of a time when, to get ahead professionally, women had to “act like men,” participating in male-dominated discussions and avoiding anything that reminded their coworkers that they were female.
I see it less in my colleagues that are my age, but maybe I’m not noticing when they do it.
There are so many false premises in this article that I don’t know where to begin. I’ll admit I only read the first five paragraphs or so, but every other sentence evidences willfully poor reasoning.
I find ‘Just biology’ to be more of a religious distinction than anything else. The idea that we try and separate our psychological constructs from the biological materia that makes up our bodies leads us into angels dancing on the head of a pin territory. Psychological aspects of a human being are biological/neurological. Yes, there is cultural construction. But that would be more Gender ROLES rather than Gender. My Gender is male. That’s not merely a role, it’s a fact of my existence. Within that I can alter how I perceive myself and manipulate how others perceive me, but there are immutable biological facts that define my gender, such as my sexual organs and neurological wiring.
But that’s not altering gender, that’s mimicking gender roles. I think you are confusing mimickry for the authenticity. A Drag Queen isn’t a girl, and no Drag Queen I’ve ever met would claim they are anything other than a man dressed as a woman.
I think what confuses this issue is the people are conflating gender with gender ROLE.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gender
I hate to take sides but I think the dictionary’s got a lead at this point.
Doesn’t conflict with what I said in any way.
Enjoy playing with your straw dolls. 
I do so love the, “Lets reiterate what you said as though it were a rebuttal.”, game though.
It is true that the current government taxation and spending structure redistributes away from men and towards women - taxing high earners (mostly men) and subsidizing single mothers (women) and the noncriminal poor (mostly women). This also does place stress on traditional family formation, when the state can act as a husband substitute, even for the non-poor, via alimony. However I don’t think that we’re near the breaking point yet - not least because the upper classes have far more traditional families and far fewer broken ones than, say, the urban poor, and are thus insulated from the consequences the ideologies they propound.
The idea that gender and sex are not the same thing isn’t a “transgender doctrine” it’s actually found in scholarly anthropological works.
What traits would say are masculine and what traits are feminine? Are you familiar with the work of Margaret Mead? She had some pretty interesting things to say about the construction of gender.
Gender specifically refers to societal roles regarding sex. Sex is biological. Saying Gender isn’t biological is like saying culture and psychology aren’t biological. True in one sense and false in another.
No, I am unfamiliar with Margaret Mead.
I don’t get it. The banner ad invites me to “date wealthy women” but the girl in the picture is clearly 15 and Russian. An heiress, I guess, or a really successful model.
It’s SCIENCE, people!
Okay, that made me laugh.
Here’s how Anthropologist define gender:
If gender were truly biological then we could expect to see the same standards of masculinity and femininity in all societies. Heck, we’d expect to find the same number of genders. There are some societies that have three or more genders.
Mead published her work in Sex and Temperament in Three Primitive Societies. Basically there were these societies where the gender roles were completely different some what you’d find in the western world. You can read a little about her on Wikipedia.
Sex is biological, gender is cultural and psychological. And yes, they mix. But these definitions help to define people who would otherwise be undefinable.
I wonder what would happen if the nutjob who wrote this article met ZPG Zealot (of the infanticide thread)? I think that:
a) They bond over their mutual obsession with the evils of child support
b) Then she kills him.
Hey…
And the world is a better place! 
Comment 1: It’s a load of crap. The assertions are ludicrous. Most of the links that supposedly prove vital points in the argument just go to other blogs, rather than to actual research.
Comment 2: It must be will of a whimsical God that lead to this thread being in GD at the same time as a thread about why evolutionary psychology is viewed as a joke. The Futurist article is full of the sort of pseudo-scientific crap that gets spewed whenever somebody takes evo psych seriously. It’s easy enough to spot when he uses the terms “alpha male” and “beta male”. Those terms apply to animals. Anytime that anyone uses them to refer to humans, you can be sure it’s a bunch of pop psychology nonsense.
Comment 3: Hulk Hogan!? Really ?!?