Many (and probably most) animals also have gender in the sense that individuals with penises behave in certain ways, and individuals with ovaries behave in other ways, despite not having memes.

I think this is a cached thought.

Yes, but it's still true.

It's very easy to anthropomorphize; if scientists can do it for the concept of natural selection itself, they can certainly do it for animals. The scientific community is much less neutral than we would both like it to be, and as such, it will support findings that are more in line with the social status quo.

I'm confused by this statement. Are you seriously arguing that the observations that, e.g., female but not male bears take care of the cubs, or that peahens prefer peacocks with more impressive tails, etc., are simply cases of scientists being biased?

In my experience, almost all "status" conversations are based upon a hackneyed post-hoc evolutionary just-so story.

Speaking of cached thoughts: it is a common cached thought to dismiss any explanation of human behavior based on evolution as a post-hoc just-so-story regardless of the merits of the explanation.

The fact that they reject them isn't very useful; what would be interesting is why, but you don't bring that up.

OK, let's look at your explanations:

Feminist theory has held that gender (the set of memes that people with penises behave in certain ways, and people without penises behave in other ways) is both socially constructed and socially enforced. This is accomplished by instilling a great many cached thoughts in humans of both sexes that even most rationalists never question, and then severely punishing the people who transgress those categories in a variety of horrific ways.

(...)

Gender is, as the OP suggests, maintained mostly by men for our own benefit (and to a lesser extent, maintained by women so that men will reward them).

So you're explanation appears to boil down to "it's all the patriarchy's fault". This appears to be a classic case of an anti-affective death spiral.

even if my team is bad in some way, that isn't evidence for it being wrong

On the contrary, if your team is bad at rationality, that is evidence for it being wrong.