Using logic and physiology to justify why a man or a woman should do a certain thing is certainly not a unique or original take...

I mean I see what you're saying, and if I had a wife I would gladly take risks for her so that she didn't have to. But I've been told in the past that I was being sexist for having that mentality. Sort of an "I'm not a delicate flower and I don't need you to do things for me!" type of situation.

So, being amenable to disagreement as I am, I adjusted my mentality. Women can be heros in stories, and they can take risks and handle dangerous situations in real life, too.

That's why I find it a bit jarring when suddenly it seems the feminist take has become "Actually, men should do dangerous things for the women in their lives." It kinda just feels like they're willing to argue any position that 1) disagrees with something a man says; and 2) is convenient for their purposes at a given moment.

It's just not consistent, and I have a hard time feeling convinced by anyone whose argument is inconsistent...