Klumpen0815: Gender is only defined by anatomy for me and not by "how male/female you act" *sic*.
[...]
maybe I'm the only one that only defines gender by your bones and what you got in your pants.
You probably are, because that's the exact opposite to the commonly accepted definition of "gender". What you describe is referred to as "sex". "Gender", as it is used today, is a term explicitly meant to describe gender roles as taught by society, as opposed to biological sex. And the distinction is not made to prove that "males have to be like this, females like that", but on the contrary, to raise critical awereness and to support what you're saying - that your biological sex alone does not determine how you behave as a man or a woman, that it's really difficult to talk about supposed differences in personality between men and women without acknowledging that a large part of what makes a man a man or a woman a woman is a social construct and taught by your environment since birth, instead of inherently related to your sex. That is not to say that there aren't any biological differences - of course, there are - but to what degree they influence your thinking is hard to tell, since they are overlayed by a lot of other strong influences outside of you that you will have a hard time separating from the biological.
By your refusal of "gender" as a social construct I think you're actually rebelling against the very same concept that you seem to believe in. And I agree with you that the quoted phrases attributed to Anita Sarkeesian about "female personality" are silly, if she meant them that way.
Anyway, I thought this wasn't meant to be another one of 'those' threads. Just give the OP his nude mod already and let's move on. :D