It might, but it does not - that's kind of the whole point, the gender differences appear even in societies/areas where there's opposite social pressure. Preferences matter, preferences differ between gender, and even in a hypothetical ideal world with perfectly equal opportunity and noone being dissuaded from pursuing certain career paths the gender distribution of quite a few professions would be far from 50/50 due to the preferences.

For an example more detailed/sourced argument, http://slatestarcodex.com/2017/08/07/contra-grant-on-exagger... might be a start.

It's an abuse of HN to use it primarily for political or ideological battle. Since this account has been doing this, and also has broken the HN guidelines by being uncivil, we've banned it.

>There are some barriers, implicit and explicit, that are perfectly appropriate. Some of them serve a higher purpose, like reinforcing gender archetypes and standards of behavior that are productive in the long run in their own ways.

This argument is interesting -- you're not saying discrimination doesn't exist, just that it's... good?

What would be appropriate about a barrier that discourages men from becoming teachers, or discourages women from STEM fields?

Where is the productivity gain in pushing a young girl away from STEM?

If exceptional people really have something to offer in areas where they are shunned for other reasons...

Many exceptional people won't even discover their talent if they are actively dissuaded from pursuing the education and career they have the aptitude for, all in the name of "reinforcing gender archetypes".

Tearing down the entire social structure

Tearing down a social structure that's weighted against certain genders in certain career paths sounds exactly like the right solution. Let people choose their path on their own desires and aptitude, don't choose it for them based on some historical standards of behavior.