still have no idea what on earth any of it is supposed to mean

Despite what they keep saying that it' s not about stereotypes... it is about stereotypes. It is the usual bullshit of "if you display the same behaviour as a group, then it means you are part of that group". Except they are bringing the idea that those behaviours are sex based, even though they admit that they are not instinctual, which makes no goddamn sense whatsoever.

If they were instinctual, then they could maybe have a point (women are biologically programmed for X trait, so everyone who displays that trait is a woman), but it can' t be proven and it has been one of the biggest topic of discussion for ages. Not to mention, the behaviours they would probably list as a proof of their theory would be directly in contraddiction with feminism and real life, including trans people' s behaviours. However, that poster admits that those behaviours are not instinctual, which means that they are influenced by external parties, and as such they can' t be considered innate and sex-based, so basically they destroy their own argument by themselves.

In general, it' s the kind of language people use when they know they have nothing concrete to say and want to hide their agenda behind big words hoping that people will be put off enough that they won' t delve too much into it.

It also had the added bonus that it makes them feel super-smart and look down on you for being too dumb to understand what they are saying.