It's true that "science" is now the language in which people express their sexist views. (Compare the social acceptability of 'evolutionary psychological" explanations of women's subordination in marriage with the theological account given by the Southern Baptists.) But "science" is also the language in which people -- Natalie Angier, Barbara E, me,you for example -- express their anti-sexist views. What has lowered the stock of the evolutionary psychologists hasn't been non-scientists putting forth a general theory that "science is socially constructed" or "serves the status quo." As you point out, those ideas have been around for a very long time. What has made a difference is feminist scientists and anthropologists refuting sexist science with better science, and the popularization of their work by people like Natalie A and Barbara E.
katha