"Biology is not destiny." This was what we so-called "second wave" feminists said. Could we have been so right? Were we so wrong? Were men born to be doctors and women nurses? Could a woman be an engineer? A lawyer? A Supreme Court Justice?
Saying biology is not destiny is not the same as saying biology does not exist. Social constructs are a way societies deal with biological difference. For example, children are treated differently than adults. Society has social conventions to deal with all manner of inequity.
The question is: have feminists by and large up until now ignored real biological differences because so many artificial ones have been thrown in the path of women? Is there almost a siege mentality about biological difference because to admit any is to start on the slippery slope of "who runs the wolves" comparisons?
Do our political institutions really serve or fully represent women? Elsewhere I suggested that the ERA was opposed by some women because (possibly rightly) they feared men would gut the Amendment for the rights they could get and leave women holding the bag.
There is a Sturm und Drang between a law stating what IS and what SHOULD BE. I can pass a law that abolishes unequal treatment of blacks. These laws were enacted as blacks rose through their own struggles toward equality in education and the integration of the Armed Forces.
To take the absurd case, I could pass a law that said children are equal, and while there would be a big impact from such legislation if it were upheld, my sense is it would be unworkable.
The ERA presumes women have political clout and influence to enforce their rights. So long as we are underrepresented in the halls of government, corporations, religious bodies, and seats of power, even though we have equality in law, we will not be able to enforce that law/laws.
I think when we have the state legislators in place, we'll have the votes for ERA, for then it will be a done deal.
The question is, who is ready to take this task on. Once we prove that biology is NOT destiny, maybe we can get an after-the-fact Amendment to say it's so.