"The important thing seems to be that there IS a distinction..."

That seems sound to me. At the same time, I note that the gendered distinctions seem most visible and distinct when one regards a larger population. They describe how things generally are, with some accuracy.  But they are less reliable as descriptors of how things may be with particular people, and how things may go in any given situation.  It's clear that we need the qualities we call "femininity," and "masculinity," but there don't seem to be such sharp divisions about who may show up with those qualities, or in the proportions they are allocated among us, as individuals, in any given moment.

Given those observations, the "arguably unsound system" might be the too-rigid application of a general description, taking it as a rule applicable in individual cases.  The other seems to me more the absence of a system, which clearly inspires anxiety.  (cont.)