What is the evidence for that being 100% genetic, or 100% inherited,
There is none.I hadn't meant to imply that.
I only have taken a few classes on psychology in highschool and an introductory university level class but it was my thought that modern psychology maintains that personality looks to be 50% socialization and 50% genetic.
Yes. In simple terms. Genetics are essentially a basis for our behaviour, socialization then focuses that in one direction or the other.
it's just interesting to me that men are socialized to want to sleep with as many women
They aren't.Men are genetically inclined to sleep with as many women as possible (remember, we're primates).The socialization is in our tendency to try to remain monogamous. Because that has greater advantage to the species, as it allows females and their children a steady provider and protector.
women are socialized to try and run away
Not socialization.It's a natural impulse because sex is a more risky proposition for women. Pregnancy is a heavy biological investment to make just for a little fun. Men, on the other hand, can just have a little squirt and then move on. So women are naturally more cautious and selective about their partners.
largely condemned or looked down upon. Slut shaming and so on shouldn't happen in my opinion, women should be allowed to sleep with men in the same way men sleep with women, that is if they want to.
If you pay attention you'll notice that it's women who do the slut-shaming. Men like sluts. It means easy sex. Which is why women don't. Accessibility to sex is a part of their influence and power.A woman giving it away for free devalues it for other women.
But I read an article that I can no longer find that says little girls are very interested in STEM at the lower levels of education, but that interest drops off with each and every grade.
That's because girls grow up and start to be more like girls.Also there's a difference between being interested in something academically and wanting to do it professionally.
In school I studied to be a chef early on, but once it started to become a job and I had to be involved in the real work of it,I quickly lost all interest in doing it.Even though I loved to cook at home and in class.
the problems outlined by Sir Ken Robinson, which posited that education is very very bad at teaching divergent thinking, and mostly useful when indoctrinating a belief system.
Yes,At least for modern education that's right.
A belief system that, idk, looks to me includes not wanting women in STEM. Maybe I'm wrong.
There is no belief system that does not want women in STEM. They've been trying to pimp the idea for almost four decades.It never works.You can get more women into the classes,but once they get to the actual jobs they quickly leave due to lack of interest. The numbers never go much higher than ten percent. Which is what they were before we started trying to push women in.
You are right, we are different but does that make us not equal?
Equally human, yes.
Just because we have different approaches to things and different ideology does not, in my opinion, necessitate that we view one sex as greater than the other.
I never said otherwise. As I pointed out,we are not in opposition.We are complimentary. If you'll notice the traditional idea of gender roles.Men have are considered superior in some, inferior in others.And women are considered superior in the ways that men are inferior, and inferior in the ways that they are superior.
Frankly speaking when I was a little kid I was a loser, and so part of my understanding of feminism is that by empowering women I would also be empowering men to interact with those women in more friendly ways if they wish.
The problem with feminism is that it posits that women need to be empowered in the first place.But it's basis for that is by looking at men and assuming that they are automatically in a superior position.They only pay attention to where women are disadvantaged and men are advantaged.Never where women are advantaged and men are disadvantaged.
I don't want to force women into tech fields, I just want to have a conversation about the causes of that and look at the research and decide if there is something that can be done.
We know the causes.Feminists just don't want to admit it.
More to the point though, why try and encourage women into it anyways?Women who want to do it will do it.There's not a single obstacle besides their own desire stopping them. You don't have to put so many women/men/minorities.etc into an occupation to fulfill some bizarre equality quota.
I call myself a feminist because I am questioning a lot of the inherent privileges I see award to each sex, and why things are that way.
Why call yourself anything?especially why use the name of a group that's viewed as standing for bigotry and hate?
Would anything change if you just didn't label yourself and did what you wanted to do?
I don't think women can suffer from feminism if it's not sarkeesian-esque feminism. Am I wrong in thinking that?
As I said, feminism is just women being weak weaponized. It hurts women greatly,mainly because it teaches them to be victims rather than to be useful. Also because feminism has no real interest in solving the problems that it claims to want to fight. Because if it solved them,they would have to stop.
That's why they actively work to oppose any sort of rape prevention initiatives, or any attempt to educate women about rape. It's their trump card. The only time they do anything about rape is when they're trying to expand the definition and put more men in jail.