I have to say one thing about the whole "it's just women's choices" issue when it comes to representation in STEM/wage gap: I've seen it being claimed by atheists who, in other discussions, will tell you that there isn't even such thing as "free will" or "choice" at all, and everything we think and choose is based on complex chemical reactions in the brain. I mean, given such views, it seems pretty logical that you'd assume our choices are heavily influenced by our environment, without that fact making us "brainwashed". It's just the way things work. If there's only the physical brain, and its interactions with the environment, including other physical brains, there isn't even such a thing as a "deep", "core" self that makes the choices without being influenced by anything other than itself. These people seem to contradict themselves a bit. And if you're going to claim "biology"(aka hormones) is the basis for the difference in choices...that's a pretty bold claim. It might account for *some* difference, but does it account for everything, or even the majority?
Though I have to ask: Given that most college students seem now to be women, but ones that follow humanities, are we stating as a goal that we want *less* women to choose humanities as a subject? I mean, it does seem a bit..."bizarre" to have such a goal, doesn't it? Or am I missing something on how the numbers here work?