Well, unless only women can be nurturing (or any other personality trait), or only men can be aggressive (or any other personality trait), that still doesn't work. Naturally I cannot speak definitively for the entirety of the feminist population, but I am pretty sure that is all that anyone is saying.

Anyway, it's really not to hard to judge people as individuals rather than [collective group of females] and [collective group of males]. Everyone is different, both within and between sexes.

That's a very weak and pitiful strawman. I have never heard a feminist say that there are no biological or physiological differences - in fact, if you'll notice, we're all saying the opposite. But the existence of biological differences does not prove any inherent differences in traits. Personality traits are sex-blind. And until our enormous social constructs that teach men they must behave in x manner, but never in y manner, because that is for women, and the social constructs that do the same for women, are removed, you can't prove that they are inherent. Considering the number of men and women who do not exhibit the characteristics that are supposedly inherent in their sex (e.g. nurturing in women, aggressive in men), I'd say that it is largely social construct.

Thanks. Interesting/amusing for me as well.

Trying to prove a point about the real world by using a hypothetical situation that is so far gone from reality is absurd.

I assure you I am not misunderstanding what he is saying. There is a difference between not comprehending it and finding it absurd.

not really anything to offer but some links