tl;dr: Pointless rambling drivel about why women need men to lead them.

This interesting article popped up in r/programming:

Why the Nation’s Top On-Campus Women’s Hackathon Invites Men.

And this paragraph explains the title:

I asked Brea Dionisio, a UNC sophomore and Pearl Hacks organizer, about the presence of men. She told me that, although all registered attendees were women, Pearl Hacks had tapped “the guys” in UNC’s Computer Science department for help. In other words, the menfolk were not infiltrators. They had been explicitly invited to offer tech support and guidance, and they were volunteering their entire weekends to do it.

Without going further in commenting about the extreme beta behavior likely here, it's just a fact that men are in overwhelming preponderance at the topmost level of almost every field, from religion to science, and most certainly in business. The very few outlying women at these pinnacles makes the point.

Now, before feminists of any gender complain, and show examples where this wrong, I am saying the "overwhelming preponderance", and "almost every field". The fact there are fields where men don't much participate, and so women are the leading gender at the topmost level of those fields, has nothing to do with disproving "overwhelming preponderance". Be sure you know what I'm saying first.

Of course, the feminist is going to say "see, that proves The Patriarchy™ controls everything!" But it doesn't. In business in particular, and BIG business most especially, whether technological, financial, manufacturing, etc., it's men at the top, both as leaders and technologists. And at these levels of action, your performance is your only measure. Company does bad: you lose the job. The board won't care about your gender. There are a few notable female-run (large) companies, like HP. As I said, the board won't care about your gender (in most cases) if they believe you can do the job. There are just very few women who qualify in such stratified altitudes.

But this article is far more telling than the story at the top. When it comes to technological field, even when there IS competent and capable women, they bring men into it, because their activity would flounder and flail without them.

It's been pointed out that all-women businesses run far worse than mixed businesses, as this very on-point example shows. Granted, we're talking about women thoroughly culturally inculcated in the West. I don't really have information on third-world companies, but most Asian cultures are male-dominated as well.

It is possible that women are mostly poorly suited to the technological fields. This article talks about women hackers who supposedly have the necessary skills. But also points out that the organizer simply couldn't get attendees unless there were men helping. Truly all-female hackathons didn't draw the crowd. I'm betting it's because they don't expect to learn much from other women (see the example of how women work together from paragraph just above). A more cynical supposition would be that they would be bored without male attention. Honestly, you can pick your RP fundamentals to explain this phenomenon, and perhaps that would be interesting discussion.

BTW, the other day, a feminist told me, after I'd referred to a human female as "a female", to "never use the word female to describe a woman." I told her, "well, that's my male privilege ;-)"

I'll let you imagine her emotion-soaked logic-lacking reaction.