> everyone understands why care givers _tend_ to be women and race car drivers _tend_ to be men.

I’d actually like you to explain this beyond a loose and implicit “everyone understands why”.

The old saying goes, assumptions make an ass out of U and I, and I don’t think the “why” of the matter is shared between everyone.

> everyone understands why care givers

I don't.

Would that be

* the natural order of things,

* God's plan,

* the end result of iterative bias such as that which gave us the L-chirality Vs D-chirality of amino acids | sugars,

* something else?

Sorry, I can't help you there, perhaps you're not human? Am I possibly speaking to a bot?

A bot will never understand in the same way that they'll never understand when I say "everyone understands why water tastes so good". It's just a part of the human condition that everyone picks up on by the very act of existing.

The vast majority of humans grew up around other humans, and these things get learned as a part of that. "Everyone understands how a hug feels".

I'm sorry that you're a bot, but I'm also not going to bother trying to explain something that will never be understood no matter how much I try.

Perhaps at some point ChatGPT will become good enough to better understand the human condition, but we're definitely not there yet.

Not a bot .. go on, take a stab at it.

At least outline your reasoning for what you think everybody understands.

Bear in mind I'm an intelligent human outside of your parochial bubble.

You're either trolling or employing detraction techniques straight out of Shopenhauer's art of being right.

You don't want to learn or engage in meaningful discourse. You just want to be right.

Normally such a blatantly bad faith reply deserves nothing more than a downvote, but I'll add that all these comments are doing, earnestly, exactly what your opposition is arguing: you're applying naturalist and traditionalist fallacy to maintain a conservative status quo interpretation of gender.

What's funny is it's not even historically accurate: your "universal human" interpretation of masculine / feminine binary is simply not universal by any stretch of the imagination.

Look how easy this was, I googled "examples of non gender binary societies" and got a listicle with ten examples you can go learn more about: https://screenshot-media.com/politics/lgbtqi-rights/non-bina...

You're arguing about gender identity, I am not.

Let me know when you decide to join the conversation that's actually going on.