The majority of gender roles are social constructs. Some are completely arbitrary (E.G. pink for girls, blue for boys), some are extrapolations on harder, evolutionary-bound factors (E.G. men being considered "fighters" and women "caretakers" based on that having been part of the larger evolutionary survival strategy). I think culture is the vast majority of it.
I think gender identity typically being a vital part of courtship and sex is going to doom it to not make sense forever. That general space seems to be something humans will never be able to really form sensible cultural rules to, while being a strong enough idea that it's difficult to let go of. It's useful knowledge to have, too. If you were a bisexual gender-nonconforming person, with no knowledge of things, and you, say, wanted to have sexual relations, with no particular preference for the particulars. you'd very quickly learn that it's much easier to engage in sexual relations with certain groups than others, based on a number of things, such as what part of the world you're in, what you look like, and the way each gender as a whole forms it's cultural mythos around sex. So to optimize, you'd take on the straight female role and seek copulation with straight men. The point here is that knowing the different mythos around how groups and cultures tend to think and behave is critical knowledge. It's harder to navigate the world without it, and so upending those rules would not only be very difficult, but also not sensible without a clearly-established replacement that makes sense, is consistent, is functional, and which the majority of people would acknowledge. People aren't just going to change behaviors when you ask them to, even if nobody in particular wants it. Like a less extreme version of a police state that no individual likes, but since dissenters are killed, no effective opposition can arise. So it is with our current situation with the idea of gender. It's a moderate burden to try and work against because it's the established norm, so few people really try to challenge it in a meaningful way, and those who do are going to have an uphill struggle.
Gender roles ultimately serve as a social blueprint. I think it's a rather poor blueprint, but i think it's better than just uprooting them without establishing something new that the majority of people can agree on, or at least acknowledge. I'm not sure forming a new blueprint is possible, i certainly don't think it's possible in the current environment. Hell, certain places are trying. GQ is trying to redefine masculinity now, in rather hilariously fashion. https://www.gq.com/story/voices-of-the-new-masculinity
. It's a clusterfuck that can't function. Our current system is shit, but it's basically functional. Not only will people not accept this new system, but they'll mock those who try to establish it (rightfully so in this particular circumstance, if you ask me, as much of it is simply avocation of eliminating traditional masculinity and having everyone default to traditional femininity, not very thoughtful or creative, and more importantly, almost certainly non-functional). I think that would happen even with a system more than simply trying to yell at men to feminize or yell at the established order without having any real ideas on how to replace it. Even if someone did come up with a better idea, implementation is going to be a BITCH, if it's achievable at all.