girlish girls, manly men.

[John V]

Don't think I didn't notice how you're suddenly completely changing to a new argument without having finished the last one convincingly.

You won't be convinced by any argument I make.

You never got beyond a vague statement that somehow being a dominant chauvinist might aid to prevent depression, or something, and that gives any justification to that lifestyle.

Now your argument is that it's because it has always been done like that. Ok...

Actually my point is that men and women have different natural tendencies. So, the point isn't that traditional roles should be continued out of tradition...it's that traditional roles developed and continued because the genders have differing natural tendencies. This isn't rocket surgery. You can't logically blame social constructs, because those social constructs developed for a reason. If, looking across time and cultures, typical gender roles were random, with somewhat equal proportions of patriarchal, matriarchal, and egalitarian societies, then the social construct as cause position would make sense. But that's not what we find.

No, I discard your ideas because they severely limit the ways women can flourish,

My ideas don't limit the ways in which women in general can flourish. Nature (from your POV evolution I suppose) limits the ways that women - and men - can flourish. I don't necessarily like that - being a kept man sounds pretty good at times - but my dislike of it doesn't blind me to reality, as it does for you.