If you look at things like physical strength for instance, the difference is quite marked. That some females can be stronger than some men does not change the fundamental distribution. This is not a construct of the mind.
If male and female abilities differ, it should follow that our social expectations differ.
If you are using "female" as a noun in a sentence to refer to human women, it is a good idea to also refer to human men as "male". It is more consistent and doesn't end up dehumanizing one side.
People seeing this inconsistency may jump to conclusions about your thoughts on men and women.
When the variation within the category is greater than the variation between categories, it's worth asking just how useful or informative the categories actually are.
If by muscular and skinny you mean that one has more capacity for developping strength, then sure, why not ? Should our expectations not be based on ability ?
No, I meant exactly what you wrote. You say that since physical strength of men and women differ their cognitive abilities should differ too. The physical strength of muscular and skinny men differ too, hence, according to your argument, their cognitive abilities should differ too.
I did not say anything about logic or emotions. I'm also not sure I agree with your characterization of Donald Trump.
For the sake of argument, let's say I had mentioned logic and emotions and you were right about Trump. He would just be an example of an outlier (which by the way he obviously is, although not in the way you imply), not an argument against my point which is that male and female distributions are quite distinct for some traits, with little overlap.
If male and female abilities differ, it should follow that our social expectations differ.