How Can There Still Be a Sex Difference, Even When There Is No Sex Difference?

(3) does not follow from (2) and (1) together. What does follow is a need to analyse the argument further. I didn't make this analysis, I only sketched it in broad outlines. Let me put out my thoughts in a different way:

A) There is no causal link established between measured sex-linked variation in humans and social organization in humans, beyond the obvious one that the distribution of physical size and strength is strongly bimodal and this can be observed as an underlying basis for many social relationships.

B) And yet, the argument is made. The argument is made and it is presumed to be rational, objective, air-tight, and deductive. In fact, it is an abductive argument: It claims that sex-linked variation is the most likely and simplest basis for the observed social organization that leads to the stratification of society based on binary genders in bourgeois society.

I am specifying bourgeois society and assuming we are talking about modern capitalist societies, because that's the one I live in and the one I have most to gain in analyzing, and also the one whose ideology and real power dominates the planet as a whole.

C) I can accrue a great deal of data that demonstrates corroborated observations that the dynamics of gender in bourgeois society are actively maintained through institutional and systemic structure. This data ranges from the scientific, collected in aggregate, to the personal experiences of a diverse group of individuals.

A huge amount of human effort and ideology goes into gender as a social structure. This expenditure of labor and thought is prescriptive in nature, not descriptive. The argument being made neither explains their existence nor their dynamics because it solely describes variation at a very basic level between human beings. If human beings just naturally organized themselves along the gender lines we see, there would be no need for institutions, social mores, and propaganda to maintain those lines. What we see historically though, is that these lines were drawn by human hands, then dug out, then built upon with concrete, and then stringed up with barbed wire. The argument does not take this historical and sociological context into account and does not even try to exempt our present societies from that context.

D) This situation is incongruous. The argument is not only given more strength than it merits, its conclusions are essentially determined within the philosophical framework it is formulated in, and further it does not account for social and personal observations about gender dynamics. A criticism of the underlying ideology that produces and reproduces this argument is required. I conjecture that the underlying ideology is neoliberal rationality and sketched what that means.

Who claims that? Not me. I just want to know if sex differences exist, where they come from, and how big they are.

Feminism has always been allied with radical and revolutionary biopolitics. It does not need eugenics and futuristic bioengineering to be so. Furthermore, the idea that feminists give a shit about sex-linked variation is nonsensical and I really hope I did not give that impression in my parent comment. It's quite the opposite. The whole point I was trying to make was that feminists don't care about this level of difference, that their ideology is engaged at the structural level of society and that this engagement is completely unintelligible without deeper criticism.

Equality is about equal treatment. It's about judging the individual on their own merits, not some group they happen to belong to. "Men and women are equal" doesn't mean women are equally muscular and men can have babies. It means that when writing a law, selecting an employee, or counting a vote, you don't change your approach based on whether the person is a man or a woman.

There is nothing wrong with saying, for example, most of our warehouse workers are men because more men are able to do the heavy lifting required. There's nothing unequal about that. What equality demands is that you never say, I will not consider you for a warehouse job, regardless of your actual strength, because you are a woman and all women are too weak for it.

It's not actually that complicated IMO.