And these limits are placed by a variety of subjects such sexuality, expression, weather, relationship, etc.
We are humans who bounce between these subjects, categories, and environments. That is what makes us human and not animal.
If someone feels "constrained" they are the issue.
Animals are not meant to be an inspiration for tolerable human behavior. They attack each other, kill each other, eat each other, commit incest, and so on. Just because an animal doesn't wear clothes, and that humans are a form of glorified animal, does not mean that it follows in any way that humans should be okay with doing the same.
changing societal norms
but at the same time you said one cannot change about themselves.
Strong contradiction. How does society change if people don't? Get them while they are young?You have zero clue on how the systems we have today originated. Yet you want to hypothesize on what a made up world would be like if we didn't teach certain things.
Answer the first question: Are you suggesting society change while arguing at the same time a person cannot change?
"There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so." --Shakespeare.
A reasonable takeaway from the article is that objectification of women is a primary barrier to that normalization. Therefore, that normalization can't happen because objectification keeps getting a pass from us.
Straight men objectify women, gay men objectify men, women objectify babies. Puppies and kittens are objectified by all.