OP quandary.

How can biology alone determine a role unless your are only genetically an animal both physically and behaviourally?

Even though this is a massive generalisation please try and run with it and see how both men and women can substitute in something else for these basic biological drives. — I like sushi

If you cannot do this there is probably not much for us to discuss because:

PLEASE NOTE: I am not saying these drives define either men or women only that they are part of our collective biological features not merely social constructs. — I like sushi

I am not saying these drives define either men or women only that they are part of our collective biological features not merely social constructs. — I like sushi

Ok, so you believe there is some innate biological drive in adult males and females to act a particular way.

To what extent do you agree that the basic roles of men and women are as follows.
1) Men provide for and protect women.
2) Women provide babies and protect them. — I like sushi

I think this is a stereotype and prejudice, not an actual reality. I know a women in my life who provides for and protects her man. She's a psychologist who makes all the money in the house while he's a stay at home 'entrepreneur' who hasn't started even one business in the 7 years they've been together. I've known of at least two women who've abandoned their kids when I was growing up.

But this judgement is anecdotal. Biological sex expectations cannot be determined by pop-psychology or philosophy. It can only be determined by good science. That means lots of studies that take bias into account, study cross culture outcomes, and are repeated despite looking for different outcomes.

If you want to talk about the social biases or expectations and whether society should have them, that's more a conversation which can be discussed here.

Ok, so you believe there is some innate biological drive in adult males and females to act a particular way. — Philosophim

Assume there is something, small but just significant enough, if you think biology is separate from psychology.

If you need evidence that there are clear biological differences between men and women that play into their psychological make-up go seek it out if you wish. It is certainly messy and not particularly clear cut.

If you want to talk about the social biases or expectations and whether society should have them, that's more a conversation which can be discussed here. — Philosophim

Not particularly.

If you wish to argue that they are 100% social constructs go ahead I guess (but preferably in another thread). — I like sushi

So, if women do not have children and they have a drive to nurture and care for children, then how might this present itself in modern life?

And, if men possess a natural drive to provide and protect for their partners and children, then how might this drive present itself in the modern world if there are no women willing to have children?

If you are not interested in participating no problem.

Assume there is something, small but just significant enough, if you think biology is separate from psychology. — I like sushi

But that's just biased speculation. I don't see that as good philosophy when the answer is clear that we need objective research to truly judge. Its in the same vein of, "We assume women are born to work in the kitchen and make sandwiches for men, what it be like if they could not be in the kitchen but still had that innate biological drive to make a man a sandwich?"

If you are not interested in participating no problem. — I like sushi

My participation is pointing out that this is not a reasonable topic to discuss and can only rely on prejudice and sexism if it continues. I'll leave it at that.