>>2866868
>To the men of this board, what are your opinions on women in a socialist society or during revolution?
Fighting and working alongside men (and whatever else doesnt wanna fit in the binary).
>Should they have any specific role?
The only real special role women have, which is not up to any of us to change, is giving birth to children and breastfeeding them. At least, we cant change it yet, perhaps in the future
>What's your take on this? Where do you draw your conclusions from?
Egalitarian ideas + experiences. There is no real difference between what men and women do apart from reproduction.
I would even go a step further than >>2867103 and say that women who double down on traditional gender roles are reactionary and should be eliminated (not in such harsh terms). "Trad" women more so than men, trad men are simple reactionaries who seek dominance, but those women undermine the social position and struggle of women as a whole by validating reactionary views, as well as the fact that many of them either seek an idealised "princess" version of womenhood where all the hard labour women originally did such as the household is now mostly taken care of by mechanised means, or they are dealing with phychological problems that lead them to seek a life of subservience to satisfy self-harming urges and needs resulting of their trauma (daddy issues, self image issues, etc). In the former case, such leeches ought not to be allowed, and those types tend to be the female version of the dominance seeking male, often taking advantage of less secure partners, and in the latter case they ought to be helped rather than indulging in damaging behaviour.
Any person who damages their own interest without good reason is both damaging to the interest of their 'group', other groups, as well as damaging to themselves.