The original motivations of the kibbutzniks were to limit biology as much as possible, assuming that women were only biologically restricted by the actual bearing of children. What they found was that "biology is a variable." 30 But to what degree? Certainly the average woman lacked some of the strength of the average man, but as Tiger and Shepher note, "[b]iology is not destiny, it is statistical probability." 31 Tiger and Shepher rejected their own biological conclusion for a biologically-based parental investment theory. Spiro and Rosner see the return to familism as biologically based, but Bowes offers a more psychological explanation. Perhaps there is an underlying biological role, but there are other variables which must be addressed before coming to such a conclusion. What would happen if men played a larger role in child care, or if women were given a wider choice of careers? Much more can be done on sociological, ideological, organizational, and practical levels before excusing the current situation as a biological fact.

Related research has taken a number of forms. Spiro was one of many to study an individual kibbutz in depth. Lieblich chose to compile an oral history. Tiger and Shepher combined census data from two kibbutz federations with interviews at four kibbutzim. The combination of methods provides for a much greater understanding than any single one. Most scholars concede that there is not de facto equality on the kibbutz. Tiger and Shepher conclude that sexual equality was a "positive ideology that men and women wanted to put into practice. They gradually abandoned hope of being able to do so fully because sexual division of labor became indispensable for everyday life (since it was never suggested that men could care for small children)." 32 Rabin believes that the "attitudes and behavior of many of the women themselves are retrogressive with respect to equality of the sexes." 33 He thinks that in the beginning there had been a denial of differences between men and women, and "equality was interpreted as not only equality of rights and opportunity, but equality of role and status as well...As time progressed it became apparent, however, that equality of roles was impractical." Rabin attributes women's discontent not only to the fact that the "promised equality of opportunity and freedom of occupational choice never materialized,...[but also to his conclusion that] many women began to have second thoughts about their 'liberation' from the household, especially from the care of their children." 34

Spiro bases his conclusions on the further distinction between "identity" and "equivalence" meanings of sexual equality. The identity meaning "signifies the absence of sexual specialization," 35 described above by Rabin as the equality of role and status. By this definition de facto sexual equality is still only a dream. Spiro asserts, however, that sabra women--the second generation--subscribe to the notion that "sex-role differentiation is biologically [as opposed to culturally] determined" 36 and "have adopted instead the 'equivalence' meaning of sexual equality." 37 Creating a series of criteria to apply to this "equivalence" meaning, he concludes that sexual equality on the kibbutz has been "substantially (though not entirely) achieved." 38 Nathan seems to contradict this conclusion with his claim that "[s]ince [kibbutz girls] assume that it is not within their power to change reality, they prefer, nolens volens, to change their value system, or more precisely, the relevant component" 39 but a "repressed conflict" 40 still exists. Kibbutz females are unhappy with their position; is this not a sign of inequality? Spiro disagrees. "That the limitation of roles available to them has led to discontent on the part of many kibbutz women," he asserts, "is a function of the demographic (small population), ecological (rural settlement), and economic (agriculturally based) characteristics of the kibbutz, rather than of sexual inequality. That these same characteristics may produce work discontent among kibbutz men, as well, indicates that sexual equality is not the issue." 41

Whether or not discontent is a sign of sexual inequality, it is still a fact of life on the Israeli kibbutz. The reality is that there has been a sex-division of labor throughout kibbutz history, such that women as a group are economically dependent on men as a group. The educational system is losing its adolescent females, many of whom are leaving the kibbutz entirely after the army. Families have grown so large that the demand for metaplot and educators precludes most women from pursuing other careers. And women are not in a position to make changes politically. It is worthwhile to take the "problem of the woman" a step further and search for solutions. How can the utopian ideal of de facto sexual equality--in either "identity" or "equivalence" form--be achieved, and how can women find satisfaction on the kibbutz? To answer these questions requires thinking about the kibbutz as an ill-structured problem.