A lot of what we categorize as male and female behavior, although most likely derived from instinct, is a far cry from actual instinct. I, and many others would suggest instead, these are behaviors learned from generation to generation.
If you look at the Mouse Utopia project, one interesting thing we learned was that after a certain population density was reached, and access to resources was limited, behaviors became unhealthy and classical gender roles were eventually lost to the mice, in favor of individual survival tactics. As generation and generation continued to breed, and as the population density remained at a threshold referred to as equilibrium, behavior continued to get worse and worse. Some theorize that this was because the good behaviors of the mouse "family unit" were not being communicated to further generations, and instead they would watch and learn the need to fight or hide, until the mouse population ceased to reproduce and died-out entirely.
I believe that a lot of our behaviors typically considered instinctual, are actually learned and passed-down from generation to generation. Like I said, I'm not saying primal instinct doesn't exist, but that the preference of men to wear pants, and women to wear dresses is learned. My evidence? Kilts are very manly, and I know some women who know more about rebuilding an engine than almost any dude I've met.
So, it gets down to distilling what behavioral traits are important to the continuation of this species, and I believe that a lot of what we currently opt to believe are instinctual are actually not, and many are harmful or limiting to our individual and community potentials.
Of-course, I'm just arguing from my philosophical throne here, and have not conducted any kind of formalized research or study on the matter, myself, so I could also be wrong.
-Kyle Goodman
An excerpt of my commentary on a discussion with someone who was asserting his toxic masculinity and the subservient role of women.
