[JonGarfield]

What, exactly, are women supposed to explain to men? And why is it their job? (Honest question as I'm having difficulty seeing how this is supposed to work on an interpersonal level and no woman can speak for all women.)

Individuals can be consistent, populations are not. Men as a group do not all behave the same (aka "consistent" for their gender) or all have the same expectations, just as not all women behave/expect the same.

There has never been consistency at a population level when it comes to how men and women receive advances from the other.

[woodandsteel]

>There has never been consistency at a population level when it comes to how men and women receive advances from the other.

True, but there are norms and averages.

>What, exactly, are women supposed to explain to men? And why is it their job? (Honest question as I'm having difficulty seeing how this is supposed to work on an interpersonal level and no woman can speak for all women.)

I explained this in my original comment. Women should have a reasonably standard way of behaving when they are sexually attracted and a perceivably different way of behaving when they are just feeling friendly. And they ought to explain to men what the two sorts of behavior are, so men can spot the difference. I don't see why that is unreasonable.

[JonGarfield]

The fact that someone can't perceive a difference doesn't mean it isn't there. People are not as difficult to read as you are making them out to be. And if they seem to be, then that is a problem that other people can't fix for you. It is a skill gap that an individual needs to close on their own.

I've already said why your position is unreasonable, but I'll say it one last time: These homogeneous populations with homogeneous behaviours don't exist. Even within cultures and within generations, behaviour differs according to lived experience. You will falsely rule people in as well as out if you rely on some kind of shortcut rule of thumb to indicate interest. This applies to both sexes.