As I said, there's a bit of chicken and egg here. Women are most often the caregivers in our society, and caregiving is low status. Is that because more often women do it, or do women do it because it's low status?
I'm not disputing that there are aspects of cultural femininity which are harmful - the most obviously to me is lingerie, all scratchy and boned and godawful uncomfortable. I don't think that these things shouldn't be examined and challenged. But I genuinely think that the cultural revolution which most feminists I know are working towards involves breaking a few of those eggs - if something is associated culturally with women, and called feminine on that basis, and either dismissed as pointless, weak or less, or lionized and turned into a fetish, then quite frankly, I am well up for the challenge of asking what assumptions are working behind that. I'm not especially feminine myself, and I don't really give a monkey's about it as a standard. But I know very feminine women and I really don't see the worth in saying they are engaging in a negative thing when they wear a dress or have long hair because they enjoy cultural femininity.
As annoying as Lass could be before she left, one thing I did agree with her about was that there can be a really dismissive attitude among some towards feminine women, as though they were letting the feminist side down.
For me, breaking free from gender means that we acknowledge the sex binary, but we do not hold each sex to specific roles and expression - either the traditional ones, or the reversal promoted by trans ideology, and we accept that anyone can express themselves as they please without needing to deny sex like the non binaries do. But trying to unhitch the meaning of specific words in our culture seems a bit too close to the MO of transactivism to me - I'd much rather say 'Yes, that man is quite feminine, why would that be a bad thing?'