Toni, do you genuinely not get the concept here, or are you being contrarian?
Of course some few women have higher sex drives than the average man, just as some few women are taller than the average man. But the reality, which should be uncontroversial, is that men have materially higher sex drives on average, and that extremely few women at all have sex drives higher than the average male sex drive.
You end up sounding like you're insinuating that men and women have the same degree of sex drive and there's no observable difference in the degree of perviness, rapiness, and violence between the sexes. It's a silly thing to latch on to, given that the prevalence of paraphilias is significantly higher in men than in women*, the rates of rape and sexual offending are significantly higher among men than women, and that the volume of violent offenses committed by men is significantly higher than those committed by women. I mean, it's not like it's just a smidge different, it's a lot different.
*Re: paraphilias, the single exception is submissiveness as a paraphilia, which is a bit higher in women than in men.
I’m arguing against the notion that males are inherently more violent or more prone to sexual violence than women. We cannot overlook the role that society plays in assigning certain traits based upon sex/gender.
I think your argument is fallacious, and demonstrably so. I get it though - there was a point in time where I would have argued the same thing, thinking that it was the good feminist thing to do, and that it was necessary for equality.
Not every male is more violent or sexually aggressive than every female, but across the vast majority of mammals, males are more violent and sexually aggressive. Testosterone is a steroid that is present in all mammals. It's present in both sexes, but in almost all mammals it's much higher in males than in females. As a steroid, it has the same effect that all other known steroids have - it increases aggression. Interesting, some few species have evolved such that females have a higher amount of testosterone than male, such as in spotted hyenas - and in spotted hyenas females are more aggressive and violent than males.
In addition to the effect of testosterone, in almost all social mammals, males have a sex-based role that includes protecting pregnant and nursing females and their offspring. Having a higher tendency toward aggression and violence is a selected trait in those social groups.
Do you genuinely believe that girls are taught to not be sexually aggressive and that boys are encouraged to be so? I think this is monumentally wrong - girls are innately less sexually aggressive, and we as a society have invested a lot over the past few thousand years into teaching boys to be less sexually aggressive than they are inherently wired for. I happen to think that's a good thing... but I also recognize that we're actively combating instinct by doing so.
To me, that is as offensive and ignorant as saying that boys are better at math and science and girls are better at cooking.
The difference is that one of these behavioral tendencies (sexual aggression and violence) has a known mechanism (testosterone) and is observable with material significance throughout mammals in a highly consistent way. The other is a capability that has no identifiable mechanism, and which is observed to be untrue on a regular basis.
That said... the best of the best mathematicians are males. Actually, the best of the best of most skills are held by males. In almost every non-physical capability, the means for men and women are fairly close to each other, but the standard deviations are very different. Women have smaller variances, producing a "peakier" distribution with shorter tails, whereas men have larger variances producing a "flatter" distribution with longer tails. So while men might corner the market on the "top end" outliers... they also corner the market on the low end. The absolute smartest person on the planet is statistically far more likely to be male than female... but the absolute dumbest one is also going to be a dude.
None of that is proscriptive, which is important to note. Just because men are more likely to come out with a ground-breaking physicist doesn't at all imply that women can't be extraordinary physicists too. And it certainly doesn't imply that women shouldn't pursue physics as a career, let alone that women should be prohibited from studying physics.
Linguistic prescriptivists [/mutter] )