18% of computer science majors in the US are women. 20% of the computer science jobs are held by women. How is that underrepresenting women?

* - https://www.computerscience.org/resources/women-in-computer-...

These people believe that men and women are identical (except for socialisation), and so any less than 51% representation is under-representation and evidence of sexism.

There's zero reason why in computer science and tech women and men should have so drastically different ratios. Even back in the day programming was seen as a women's job.

Zero reason?? More opportunity in other traditionally male jobs like doctors, nurse pay has increased, tech jobs require longer hours than they used to, the opening of various CS-parallel fields like UX/UI design that don't count as computer science, more economic freedom for top earning families to not require 2 incomes. There are literally dozens of reasons why women's interest in CS might decrease.

* - https://www.payscale.com/compensation-today/2020/05/for-nati...

> more economic freedom for top earning families to not require 2 incomes

Isn't this not actually true? More families are unable to avoid needing two incomes.

Nah. Do you know nurses? Their hours are pretty damn long and much more stressful. So longer hours does not sound like a valid reason why someone would choose one profession over another.

What ratio "should" they have then? What is the right ratio based on non-social causes, from which any deviation is evidence of bias or cultural sexism?

Pick whatever gender and/or race you like. That's just the most commonly used example.

My point is just as in there have been and are people that are willfully malicious and ONLY hire white men/women, it seems we have a hard time accepting there will be some willfully malicious enforcement of a policy such as "we need to make an effort to hire more outside of a gender or race group".

Indeed. It's very easy for people to say, "I'm sorry there's systemic discrimination against you, but it's your problem. Any solution that might affect me -- or somebody like me -- is discrimination against me, and that's unacceptable."

That doesn't make quotas the right solution. More creativity is required, and varies by situation. Which is why I always bristle at the outright rejection of calls for hiring a more diverse group of people without even pretending propose alternatives. Reinforcing the status quo means perpetuating the racism, sexism, etc.

But these people are the only racists you will find in general hiring, so here discrimination would make sense.