Again, the underrepresentation in STEM IMO doesn’t mean a whole lot. Most women just have a) very little interest in actually becoming a techie and b) working either lots of overtime or choosing a career path to optimize their direct earnings. The latter is not an evolutionarily winning strategy for them and doesn’t tend to optimize their lifestyle or liiving standard. Now that I think of it, it wouldn’t surprise me if there was a co.parative mismatch between male and female accounting students and I guess workers. The women may be more likely to come out of and aspire to the bookkeeper model in general and the men to the CFO or big accounting firm partner mode. Relatively more able women to go into liberal arts or law or medicine.
The underrepresentation in STEM is significant in the US because outside of government work, they will be the only jobs with decent earnings - and those fields increasingly touch on many others (think of the computers in cars, cellphones - really miniature computers at this point, etc.). With a media and legal profession obsessed with equality of outcomes, they ignore the equality of EFFORT - demanding bookkeepers receive comparable pay to accountants, for example. BTW, it is no accident that “finance” isn’t included in the STEM acronym - it can be easy enough to accommodate people who aren’t very motivated. Yet all that does is lead to female accountants bemoaning their incomes compared to male actuaries - even though there is no comparison between the level of preparation and work involved in those fields.