what about the laws that punish differences? what about the public figures that punish differences and the law allows them to do so freely? That has nothing to do with an individual's upbringing..

@Touched You are talking "laws", which involve justice, and the conflict between rights such as that between free speech and hate speech. Some nations have laws against hate speech some do not. I was thinking more along the social lines that Audre Lorde seems to be referring to in the OP

@Deiter I have the feeling that men & women will always be at odds about certain things, but I also think we can agree on the important things such as a woman's right over her own body.

@cava isn't justice a by product of no justice leading to punishment.? i thought we were talking about celebrating differences..when one is restricted from celebrating their difference, it done from a position of power... power creates laws that we must abide by or suffer and one such suffering is the inability to express self...j

"...isn't justice a by product of no justice leading to punishment.?" No, the vast majority of our laws have a basis in history, some going back prior than the Laws of Hammurabi.

While most laws are negative prohibitions, many norms can and do celebrate differences and distinctions in our society as such they represent a positive power in cultures. Things like:
Treat each other with dignity and respect.
Transparency: avoid hidden agendas.
Be genuine with each other about ideas, challenges, and feelings.
Trust each other. ...

@ToolGuy Evangelicals are mostly conservative and they celebrate the paternalistic impulse in society, the subservience of women to their man as celebrated in their version of religion.

How do we decide what "tolerance" is?

Should we tolerate men condemning millions of women, by threat of death, to live in black bags in the desert? I say no.

What say you?

@Jacar forcing your will on other people is probably the most intolerant thing you can do. Maybe I should refine my shitty anecdote for clarity. If your goal is to enslave people against their will, that is intolerance because you are refusing them the right to decide where they live, work, eat, believe, etc. and this definitely extends to non-consensual religious practices. What I am really trying to say is that people should have every freedom so long as it doesn't interfere with the freedoms of other people. It isn't as catchy to say it like that.

@Happy_Killbot Totally agree. Too many at the left-pole proclaim their support of women's human rights but also support the insanity of male dominated religious shit, islam being the worst at the moment.

@Happy_Killbot what about socialization and other factors that determines what are "freedoms" and demonizes other ideas? like those other ideas interfering with the "freedoms"of other people who are socialized differently?????

@Happy_Killbot what if the women are complacent? maybe both.lol but I did mean compliant ..over sight.. now tell me, do you think human beings are "instinctive?" Is xenophobia instinctive? do cultures instinctively have different world views? If so, then it's not a universal institutionalization. I don't mean obvious cultural differences like language, dress, food, dance, etc. If so, then it's more than "belief"..and more than an institution demonizing, one group over another.

@Touched when you say complacent do you mean compliant? maybe both? If you are raised to believe that one race/gender/ethnicity/belief is superior, then chances are that institution will also tend to demonize other groups, because if they don't they may tend to lose members to other ideas. that is why all major religions teach both don't go to other religions and bring people into ours. Its an evolved trait of institutions that extends beyond just religion. Any one want to go to North Korea? Anyone watch the documentaries about North Korea where the people think they have a high standard of living? The point is after a while people will get used to the ideas that surround them if they don't go out of their way to search for new ideas and differing viewpoints, and that can gradually lead to peaceful enslavement. Usually this is benign, like whether or not you refrigerate eggs. (USA does, Europe and most everywhere else doesn't)Sometimes this will have unwanted sideffects, like women having their genitals mutilated so that they won't cheat, and they might be totally okay with it if they think it is standard practice. Question everything, think outside the box, and follow every lead to it's conclusion.

@Touched I understand what you are trying to ask. This is a little bit of a touchy subject though. People who are raised in diverse environments tend to be more open minded. However, It's hard to dismiss the evolutionary benefits of xenophobia to a hunter-gatherer. What's implied here is that whoever is in your "in " is the people you will tend to trust. Just think about how two people who have never met can be friends in a hurry over a shared love of sports! What is important to realize is that these are almost all social constructs that tend to revolve around race, which makes sense because racially similar people all share ancestry. Over time, the boundaries have shifted beyond those original tribal boundaries and institutions were created to uphold the status quo. These institutions may radicalize against internal threats or other institutions, and should that occur then it is more than just human nature.

@Happy_Killbot What do you mean "diverse" societies, at what time period? So this "in" thing, are you implying that Africans trust other Africans over Europeans? This shared love of sports example is removing my ideas of instinctive culture behaviors (created thru different environments) creating different world views because it's moving it the level of food, drink and dance, surface culture, not deep primordial culture. It's more than just institutionally demonizing one group over another. I suggest it's primordial and instinctive. What's institutionalized is one groups idea of xenophobia express by a created racism and white supremacy over another.. African should instinctively trust each other over Europeans but they don't, because of the socio-economic, political conditioning.

Not sure about your hair style. The flips seem a little high. Might need a bit more length.

@Jacar Well you will be disappointed. Since that photo I had a hair cut. My hair is now much shorter.

Jolanta please, give an example of ones that should not be celebrated????

@Touched How about the difference between an religious fanatic and a person who is not.

@Jacar This comment on hair is little unfair if we cannot see the length of your hair... and what dark eyes you have!

@Mcflewster It is very short but I know it suits me. Makes me look years younger too. I love it.

That can be interesting from an antropological point of view.

@JOHNGALT - Was the staff advisor to the student atheist group for a time. It's eye opening to feel more in common from someone from the other side of the world than some of the holy rollers of your own street/city/state/country.

But, is indoctrination, the same as addiction?

That might be considered pathology. I was thinking more of what is found with average people.