Yes, I think this is a good point. What sort of negative duties should be expected of women? Maybe this sounds like an obtuse question, but I think in a feminist culture it is good to reorient ourselves to the basics.
I’d like to stress that what you outline above is a very unusual circumstance for our society – is there anything left that is reserved only for boys? Even the Boy Scouts are now enrolling girls. Recall that a foundational principle for my argument was that throughout my life there has been a push to open male-dominated spaces to women for the purpose of equality. As a boy and as a man, I never experienced any event or privilege that was not also opened to girls and women under force of law or cultural pressure, aside from sports teams and within my own church. To create a hypothetical analogy, it was as if feminist pressure had opened Boundary Waters camping to girls, but since girls are weaker than boys, the boys were expected to carry the girls’ packs for them. Essentially, it is simultaneously argued that girls are equal to boys, so they get to go camping, too, but since girls are not equal to boys, the boys must pick up the slack. That’s the sort of double standard I had in mind, and the source of my resentment as a young man. Was it justified? Maybe not – as you say, it’s easy to be blind to negative duties. But a negative duty implies that something is foreborne, and do women forebear anything these days?
So now let me clarify my original question. By “reciprocal” I did not mean “identical”, and by “double standard” I did not mean “lack of identical duties”. What I intended to ask was whether some duties should be expected of women, and if the duties are in the negative sense, that’s fine, but what are they, or what ought they to be?