The above response is spot on, since we all have a natural inclination to identify with the parent of our own sex and replicate what that parent's role has been in the household and in society. Traditionally, in most cultures, that has included males working outside the home to bring in earnings, and women working within the home, to take care of food preparation, cleaning, and child-rearing. Little girls saw mother cooking and concluded that was what they would do when they grew up, while little boys saw their fathers go out to work every day and followed that pattern.
Today, all of this is in flux, with more women than ever before working outside the home, comprising now, I think, more than 50% of the workforce, and with more and more stay-at-home dads doing the cooking, cleaning, and child-rearing. This implies that in fewer and fewer instances will the traditional gender roles be carried on into the future. Little girls will be more likely to see their mothers working outside the home, and little boys will see more dads doing the diaper changing and making dinner. And of course, we are also seeing more and more households in which both parents work and to some degree share equal responsibility for maintaining the household. Whether or not we ever reach a point at which male and female children are influenced "equally" to want to do both remains to be seen, since, in addition to "nurture," we do not fully know what part "nature" plays in our choices.
How much does this socialization really affect our choices? Does our evolutionary development play an equally powerful role in these choices? Bear in mind that we think that men were the hunters and women were the gatherers as we evolved into who we are today. This made a great deal of sense over the thousands of years of our existence. Since men were larger and stronger and possibly because their hormones made them more aggressive, they made better hunters. Women's hormones and greater endurance in tasks involving less physical strength made them better suited to gathering, food preparation, and all other tasks on the home front. Additionally, speaking of hormones, the "love" hormone, oxytocin, is generated in females as they bear children and breastfeed, promoting a bonding with their children that I do not believe is present in males, making them the most logical candidates to take care of the children. This hormone is likely to also promote a sort of "nest-building" instinct, which reinforces the notion of the woman as the homemaker.
Only time will tell how powerful our natures are vis-a-vis how we are raised. Much of our evolutionary makeup, of great use in times past, is not necessarily of much use today, in a cubicle, for example, where there is no need to be the largest or strongest. But it is hard to overcome things like hormonal impulses or the lack thereof. Will we evolve further in ways that reflect the needs of the times? What will be needed to survive and pass on one's genes?