http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/07/27/new_study_into_lack_of_women_in_tech_its_not_the_mens_fault/

(emphasis mine)

A new study into causes of the scarcity of women in technical and scientific fields says that it is not discrimination by men in the field keeping the ladies away. Nor is it a repugnance felt by women for possibly dishevelled or unhygienic male nerds.

No, the reason that young women don't train in Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths (STEM) areas - and thus, don't find themselves with jobs at tech companies, in IT etc - is quite simply that they mostly don't know enough maths to do those courses.

"It is all about the mathematical content of the field. Girls not taking math coursework early on in middle school and high school are set on a different college trajectory than boys,” says economics prof Donna Ginther.

Ginther and a colleague, Shulamit Kahn, examined statistics on young women's maths qualifications and mathematical requirements for college courses in America. Put simply, they found that absence of women studying a given course can be accounted for simply by the fact that most young women don't know much maths.

The two economists were seeking to debunk a much-discussed study earlier this year which suggested that women were being kept out of STEM fields by innate prejudices held by faculty in those areas. The study was conducted by a philosopher, two psychologists and a sociologist.

“Their results didn’t add up,” Ginther says bluntly.

Other theories as to why there aren't many women in tech or (hard) science have been advanced. Some say that putting up sci-fi posters and leaving tins of coke about puts women off; others that women are just simply repelled by nerds; others that the problem - specifically for very attractive women - is that they fail to mention the fact that they're very attractive during job interviews.

Our own Tim Worstall chipped in recently on this subject, suggesting like Ginther that girls perhaps get steered out of maths - and thus out of engineering, tech and the tough sciences - well before any STEM people get a look at them.

"Really it happens a lot earlier than college,” says Ginther.

Ginther and Kahn's technical comment challenging the trick-cyclists' study appears today in premier boffinry mag Science, which also published the original paper. ®

This reaffirms something I've parroted both here and at /r/theredpill ad nauseum for years. Despite feminism wanting to make every perceived female disadvantage the fault of misogyny men, the fact of the matter is, no, there is not a Misogyny Boogeyman hiding in the halls and broom closets at university admissions offices, kidnapping STEM-bound women, throwing a kitchen apron on them, and transporting them to a kitchen somewhere in the midwest US.

Quite simply, men still dominate STEM fields because most women simply do not like STEM. It just doesn't appeal to them.

Which is why I find the constant brow-beating, droning, and moaning about the lack of STEM-hens to be completely hypocritical and irrational. Why? Well, there are plenty of fields that women absolutely dominate, like human resources and teaching. For example:

Demographic Characteristics

In 2011–12, some 76 percent of public school teachers were female, 44 percent were under age 40, and 56 percent had a master’s or higher degree. Compared with public school teachers, a lower percentage of private school teachers had a master’s or higher degree (43 percent).

So less than 1 out of every four school teachers, at any grade level, is a man, yet nobody complains about that disparity. No, that is seen as a female achievement to be lauded and celebrated.

So, can we finally put at least this fabricated example of "misogyny" to bed, and just accept that, well...no matter how many boys play with Barbies or how many girls play with GI Joe, there's just certain things that men and women are wired to excel at differently?

  EDIT for clarification: I don't think the article's intent is to insinuate that women don't have the capacity to learn the required math skills for later STEM careers; I think it's insinuation is that not enough women have interest at a young age to even begin to tilt the gender split in these professions. For instance, I was told at a young age that I'd make a great artist, that I had a "knack" for it by more than a few of my teachers. But it didn't appeal to me, and as soon as "art" was no longer a "compelled" elective, I pursued other interests like shop class. I think a similar thing goes on with girls in their formative years.