I think the article misses out on one thing from both the civil rights and gay rights movements
Both the civil rights and gay rights movements focused on the legal fight in a way I don't think that the women's rights movements has.
The gay rights movement started at low levels like with Harvey Milk in San Francisco where they were likely to succeed. And they haven't tried to strike down laws against gay marriage or such at the national level instead proceeding at the state level like Lawrence v Texas.
The civil rights movement used a lot of civil suits to get some lower level legal decisions in their favor and leveraged that upwards. Granted they did have Thurgood Marshall, but the overall strategy was still effective.
I think that the women's rights movement hasn't been able work within the existing legal structure in the same way. Additionally I think the women's rights movement is almost too broad. There's equal pay, there's reproductive rights, there's domestic violence, there's the overall patriarchal society, etc. I think focusing on one or two things at a time would be more effective than trying to fight on all fronts at once.