There should always be equality of opportunity. That can never mean however equality of outcome. THAT is what the SJWs are demanding. If someone wants to achieve a goal, that person deserves to give it his or her best and no more or no less than anyone else. But if that person fails because of personal limitations, he or she should possess the grace to accept it, and move on.
The drive to overcome our limitations has been one of the engines of true human progress. Ironically, so-called "progressives" have done their damndest to destroy that engine in the name of "feelings".
I'm all for equal opportunity. Provided it is acknowledged that it can never guarantee anticipated wealth and success in parity with others. Indeed, it shouldn't be that at all.
Putting that opinion into practice creates, over time, social chaos.
When opportunity is radically equalized, and outcomes are radically different, the bottom one third simply does not accept that their outcomes were not an evil done to them by the majority.
Anyone who went to an American public high school in the past 50 years understands this intuitively.
The false ideal of "equal opportunity", like all other libertarian concepts, presumes a population of overwhelmingly rational actors capable of foresight and able to grasp cause and effect.
That's not what we have, though.