The problem with equality and dynamic typing is rather deep and intractable. Kent Pitman (of Lisp fame) has an entire essay about it: https://www.nhplace.com/kent/PS/EQUAL.html

> If COPY can't be done properly, then neither can EQUAL. And, in fact, that's the case. There is no uniquely determined equality function for complex structures--there are only arbitrary ones.

What Steele says about equality is true for Scheme. Everyone has seen the famous "Wat" video of adding "{} + {}" in Ruby or JS. But no one ever mentions Scheme or Lisp:

  scheme@(guile-user)> (eq? "test" "test")
  $1 = #t
  scheme@(guile-user)> (eqv? "test" "test")
  $2 = #t
  scheme@(guile-user)> (define x "test")
  scheme@(guile-user)> (define y "test")
  scheme@(guile-user)> (eq? x y)
  $3 = #f
  scheme@(guile-user)> (eqv? x y)
  $4 = #f

Of course, if you read the RxRS specs then it's all documented and to be expected. But the same is true for JavaScript. As much as I hate typing the "===", there is precedence.

> breaks an important mathematical property

Even mathematicians get lazy and create new syntax and short cuts to express their ideas. Programming is ultimately a human UI. It's easy to see why automatic type coercion was once popular (and probably will be again, I can almost guarantee this).