Maybe I'm not quite understanding what you're saying here.
For one thing, I don't have much sympathy with socialism. If anything my sympathies lie with individual choices. And I agree with you that radicalism, whether it be on the side of biological determinism or social determinism, will inevitably lead to very poor outcomes.
I believe in data driven approaches. In this field of social sciences we have limited, unclear and often contradictory data. We have data that the differences between men and women are not as large as they appear, or they are expressed in different ways other than what we might anticipate based on our previous assumptions. For instance, if it turns out that females tend to perform worse in maths tests NOT because they have less mathematical ability but because they react differently to competition, this might give us a better understanding of how to employ this kind of potential in a useful manner by designing systems that take into account these kinds of differences.
If we did not have feminism prompting us to re-evaluate our initial expectation, we might never have made the inquiry in the first place. Feminism plays its role by continually urging us to re-evaluate our assumptions where they may be incorrect. This does not mean that these assumptions never have merit or that the ideas of the theory are practicable. Marxism might give us an interesting framework for understanding capital (and even a useful insight into how some people might perceive systems in terms of class struggle) but as a rationale behind resource allocation it is absolutely dismal.
Perhaps you see something more systematic and institutionalised in feminism than I do, but as far as I can see from my perspective in Australia and looking at what goes on in the US, feminism is still a reactionary movement against a status quo. I do not see a one sided threat of radical third wave feminism that you seem to see. And I would hold that a humanist idea that people be given the opportunity to excel without preconceptions about their ability is not one that is likely lead to a system of systematic oppression against any particular group of people.
Then again, the Westboro Baptist Church supports African American civil rights but rails against the rights of homosexuals, so I suppose in the hands of idealogues any contradiction of ideas is possible.
Anyway it seems like it would take a lifetime of experience rather than a forum discussion to persuade either you or me about any of this. On the original topic, all I can say is that it seems slightly crazy to presume that women do not take to the hobby of audio because they have deficiencies in hearing.