This is a very relevant thread, thank you for sharing. A lot of those replies are echoing the same sentiments echoed by TQ supporters' belief in "compulsory heterosexuality," or comphet-- which is, in fact, a radfem belief. So I am not exactly heartened by that.

Do you see that top comment and its top reply, and the one after that (which is much higher rated like the first comment)? That is the spread of opinion among radfems, at play. The first and third comments acknowledge/accept the reality of sexual orientation being based in biology, the second comment minimizes and ignores it-- which is Julie Bindel's approach. The ratio's about 30:15 or 2:1, so if I were judging based on just this thread (questionable but I'm simplifying), I would say you are right, more radfems would disagree with Bindel than agree with her; I'm glad to see that. At the same time it seems like there's a pretty sizeable minority who are at least sympathetic to the anti-scientific part of her claims, so I'll continue to be concerned... but with the knowledge in mind that a lot (maybe the majority?) of individual radfems might completely disagree with Bindel on the homophobic parts of her claims.

Thank you for the thoughtful discussion, I appreciate it.