What on earth makes you imagine this to be the case in absolutely any situation?
How can one possibly think this is a given?
But that is already a compromise to the position that explains unequal demographics with discrimination. There are countless examples where demographics did change after civil rights got extended, psychology is an example.
I think CS has a distorted (self) image that can make it unattractive to women, but that is also something that either changes gradually or reflects the type of person drawn to the field. In the latter case there is no problem. Actually I think carelessly attesting systemic racism/sexism keeps more people out than actual discrimination.
You can easily falsify that when you look at academic juniors where there wasn't even any room to discriminate anyone and their later representation in the work force.
I don't feel to happy to justify myself for not wanting to discriminate against anyone and why I think that a Bloomberg author might have not a good grasp at what he/she writes about. Sorry, didn't look up the name/sex/race because I just don't care.
Some diagnose systemic issues and some apply positive discrimination, which is just discrimination with a supposedly correct reason.
I think it is unhelpful, builds animosity and I disagree with the generally accepted orthodoxy in that field.
We actually see that more free societies show more unequal distributions of demographics in some fields. Until there is an explanation, I regard these ambitions as unscientific and dogmatic.
To discriminate against white or asian people for injustices of the past is real racism and real discrimination. If we want to get rid of racism, you need to get rid of people perpetuating it first. Otherwise it become a self fulfilling prophecy.