Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students

Feminists have found their new whine and dine refuge. The STEM fields do still have a gender wage gap (after controlling for differences in qualification). And they are not willing to accept that women are susceptible to take more leaves and also get pregnant and have children because of which work may get compromised. Fine. The patriarchy exists and is suppressing them. Wait, not so fast; here's one argument they have yet to encounter-the education system.

Essentially what everyone misses, but subconsciously knows, is how easy girls have it in the education system. 70% of school teachers are females, and female teachers are heavily biased against male students. They only accept boys behaving like girls as worth giving marks to. The reformation of schools to make them less and less challenging and more homework oriented is only another measure to support girls against boys. Essays require you write about how you feel towards a certain topic, while there is hardly any space for essays with actionable content any action. In fact, the very system of sitting in a class and listening to a teacher speaking out lessons is geared towards the female way of learning. It is well known boys are kino-aesthetic learners. They cannot learn properly without participation. This system continues well into college, to the point where a surprising majority of college goers are women.

This is especially surprising because, assuming a college degree in a certain major requires a minimum IQ of more than 100 (say 110), you should expect boys to be the majority (since females are centered more towards the mean IQ of 100, and boys are spread out more both towards the retarded side as well as towards the genius/gifted side-aka have a higher standard deviation; thus if you cut off the graph of IQ vs frequency at a base point of 110, more males will be there above 110.) But instead we get to see the complete reverse of this.

Coming back to the topic at hand, I can well see how the employers in these STEM fields subconsciously view the world. They have seen from childhood the dumbest girls get good grades while hard working intelligent boys get nothing. They know subconsciously know how flawed and perverted the system that is awarding merits and qualifications to people is. It comes as no surprise then, that even female employers are just as 'biased against' women as male employers. Unlike school, this is real science. They subconsciously know that having a vagina is not going to make the employee more productive or give her a distinctive advantage unlike school or college. She has to do real work here and the employers know this. Which is why they do not give the same wage to John and Jennifer even though they might have the same qualification. They are merely controlling for the flaw and the perversion that exists in the patriarchal matriarchal education system that awards merits and qualifications to people.

However, the research paper does not mention any of this. It just mentions how women are the victims and are being oppressed, and how STEM employers need to be educated to not give Jennifer a lower wage. Even as I type this, there is probably a STEM employer out there being shouted down by a feminist for controlling for this flaw. Of course they are patriarchal for doing this and are oppressing women. The subconscious knows the red pill but the blue pill is being forced down these employers' throats.