So, for Alexander the Great the specialities were already existing, but in accordance with the then feminine culture they had to be united in an all-embracing universal whole. Nowadays it is no longer usual in philosophy to distinguish between feminine and masculine notions. That's understandable because modern analytical distinctions are neutral. Analysis presupposes complete isolation. Especially unlinking from associations with elusive, immaterial, spheres and meanings is an absolute must.
Philosophical statements ought to be grounded on concrete, positive and measurable quantities.
So the assertion that Alexander the Great's culture was characterized by a feminine way of contemplating reality is meaningless in the eyes of modern thinkers. Because they have no choice they resort to the ineradicable habit of equating masculine and feminine notions with concrete human male and female characteristics. In their eyes however these characteristics are only prejudices, products of ages of civilization. But the most worse fallacy of modern culture is that it has become common opinion that male and female features would be nothing but accidental results of evolution and that these features just as well could have been absent or something totally different. For modern thinkers it is difficult to understand that every phenomenon of life is a materialization of a web of immaterial relations within reality.