It appears that in the past women in sciences are kept down and men take credit for their doings. Code crackers during WWII comes to mind. Wouldn't be surprised if old boy network was still in play.

According to this article, I am right, but it's more social pressures that put up the blockers. Those with social systems to support and not ridicule them from childhood on are probably the ones IN the fields.

I know that I grew up in a culture that didn't allow women to go to college. And that really stunted what choices I had because my parents refused to sign for anything and I was so secluded from the "world" that I didn't have any ideas what options were availabe to me.
[businessinsider.com]women-out-of-science-2013-10

Because they are actively pushed out of it, either in school or later. I should know. I experienced it and I watched it happen, over and over again.

I know quite a few programmers, high-tech being a big industry in this area, and most of them are men - and, it must be said, very much the nerd stereotype: in other words, it only takes half an hour experiencing their lack of social skills and emotional intelligence to realise that their only friencd in childhood was their computer. As a result, they've grown up in their bedrooms thinking about computers and how they work, whereas most of the girls were out making friends and learning how to interact with other humans. Thus there are more males who have developed an understanding of how computers and software work. The geekiest person I know, a man we'll call Martin (because that's his name) is a very, very good programmer indeed (code he wrote has been launched into space and he gets paid quite frankly ludicrous amounts of money) but he has a surprisingly active social life and a large circle of friends. It's notable that at his level, the balance is much more equal: it's not quite 50:50, but perhaps 30-40% of the programmers he works with are women (as is his company's resident mathematician, whom he rates as the most intelligent person he's ever met). So, my guess is that to be a very, very good programmer at Martin's level you need to be exceptionally gifted and highly intelligent, both qualities that are shared equally between men and women; but to be an "average" rank-and-file programmer is more likely to stem from a childhood that is more typically male. - and there are a lot more of those programmers than the real maestros, so it skews the figures and makes things look even worse than they are. However, having said that, there is undoubtedly a lot of sexism in the industry: as can be seem from the Gamergate affair and other incidents.

When I applied for a position , more than 50 years ago , they required that we take a full battry of tests , they called CQB , which stood for Career Qualification Battery . It was to determine which field we were most likely to succeed in . At the end , the final test was only given to the males in the group . I learned years later , that test was to see who was qualified for electronics . They would hire people and , put you in jobs based in which you showed capabilities , then offered classes in those fields . A decade later , they finally opened that test to women . I took it , and scored very high in that field , but couldn't take any of the courses because they didn't relate to the field I was working in . Eventually , I went to my boss , telling him that if a young man came directly fron high school , and took that test , he would immediately be allowed to take those classes and work in that field . I eventually , got a different boss , one who took me seriously , and eventually was allowed to take those classes and to transfer into that field . THIS WAS A FEDERAL AGENCY and WAS THE THIRD LARGEST EMPLOYER IN THE ENTIRE STATE ! I was also taking electronics related classes at night , on my own . Once I got the transfer , tha Agency began helping with some of my college costs .

Because, for nerds, women are fearsome beasts who breathe fire and tear limbs off males caught in their trap. And they have titties. And, and ... they smell like flowers. And... they giggle. It's all a trap.

FFS, the feminist solution is split in 3 essential failures:

1. Force businesses to hire more (up to 50%) women. If women do not want to enter or stay in the carrer, so that women represent 30% of the workforce in IT, and there are jobs for 80% of all candidates, all unemployed people will be men. That, according to feminists, would be much greater oppression than the current situation.
2. In order to fix this, women must be forced to study IT. Then you have a workforce composed 50% of women. So feminists have to control what men and women want.
3. Finally, feminists need to control salaries and competition between companies, in order to balance salaries not only within companies but also in the market.

I used to work with a very talented female programmer. When her carreer was really taking off, she decided to abandon it, get married and become a housewife. These communist feminists would force her to continue her carreer.

Show me how mainstream feminism nowadays does not actively promote these three guidelines. The interview actually proves these three points (a bit of bait-and-switch here and there, but yeah).