Preferences dictating gender roles

If it’s a matter of faith or gods will why should whether it’s supported by science matter? It would still be holy to police gender roles whether or not science backed it being “natural”.

Murder is after all natural. Naturalistic fallacy etc.

religious people who think that gender roles are backed by science because according evolutionary psychologists and surveys men and women prefer Traditional gender roles.

Ok but yet again who cares? What should be done differently if it were scientifically proven (can’t be btw) that people on average prefer trad gender roles?

And Again Those are average differences. Or does this person believe that every person is identical? Are they blind or don’t understand statistics or both? And what a boring world if everyone were the same...

I think everyone wants to be equal in a lot of situations , but it's always obvious the real thoughts of people when there's a spider or a bin needs to be taken out. That's always a mans job somehow. Not everyone of course, but to me that shows the difference in people that automatically that's the male area , if the options there x

People might have preferences for things based on socialisation and culture.

Girls are taught from a very young age to engage in household work, (help mummy with the washing), while boys often get a free pass on tasks and see their fathers doing a minimum at best. They see the same thing replicated in the media and the world around them. So girls learn that they should do housework and it’s their responsibility.

And there are structural reasons why women are more often housewives. Women are the ones who bear children, so there is an expectation they’ll stay home to care for them. Women generally earn less than men, so it becomes “sensible”, for the higher earner to remain in the workplace.

The thing is, it’s impossible to know what humans, men or women, would do without the influence of socialisation into gender roles. So what such studies are measuring are not natural or innate preference, but the success of socialisation.

Men get to have preferences for all kinds of interesting and energetic activities that are not housework, precisely because cultures teach women that they should care about housekeeping, whatever their real desires.

But what’s the point of “having gender roles” in that case? If most people have those preferences, for whatever reason, they can go ahead and do those things no one is stopping them?

Or are they under the mistaken impression that the feminazis of the world are in the business of knocking and doors and “liberating” housewives? And in any case if that worked wouldn’t that also demonstrate said preference is pretty malleable?

The point here is that average differences do not translate to universal differences. Many people will conform many people won’t. Leave us alone ye “gender trads” and seek out each other.

Why we no longer enforce universal gender roles- because gender nonconforming people always exist and they get killed or imprisoned by society or are driven to kill themselves.

Are you talking universal preferred enforced gender roles at population level or preferred gender roles decided at individual level?
Very different.

I'm not sure what you describe are universal 'preferences'.

It seems to be this kind of reasoning for example;
"I observe many children working in slum factories in Bangladesh.
This must clearly be a 'preference' of Bangladeshi children.
Therefore it is right that we consider it a Bangladeshi child's role going forward."

The reasoning is broken.