Perhaps levels of interest and aptitude differ between groups, but the differences have been exaggerated by bias. Perhaps bias is being applied to counter natural differences. Unless we can estimate what the bias-free results should be, either belief is equally silly, right?
Obviously a bias-free result would be representation by equal proportion. That's simple mathematics. In a world where 52% of the population is female, any results less than 52% female involves bias of some sort.
One bias in play is that men feel threatened by women who make more money, which encourages women to seek lower-paying jobs. STEM jobs are seen as quite lucrative.
Another bias in play is that boys are encouraged to build, tinker, and fix things at early ages. Girls are encouraged to play with dolls.
Another bias in play, as has been mentioned earlier, is the lack of gender role models for STEM fields. Little girls can be inspired by Jane Goodall to pursue biology. Where's the female Bill Gates or Linus Torvalds? Where were the women in the Apollo program?
It was mentioned that girls have an aversion to math. Guess what? It's not biological, it's social:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...-differences-caused-attitudes-women.htmlBias, bias, everywhere.
