Statistics vs Dynamics - Your tittle and interpretation are actually....anti-scientific.... A survey of current gender and job CORRELATIONS isn't SCIENCE.... if you add the possibility of CHANGE of time.... which has happened a LOT in university admissions and career paths over the century. It's a common (non-scientific) error of inference.... And at it's worst,  19th Century scientific racism and scientific sexism were based on similar (and simple) errors of static empirical INDUCTION of this kind. It's also well-known that the founders of Statistics, Galton and Pearson, were strong eugenicists and "scientific racists". Looking back, hiding behind pseudo-scientific authority is the very reason that late 19th Century and early 20th Century so the rise of terriblly repressive authoritarian regimes. And to be clear....It's NOT that we shouldn't openly discuss this....But don't claim absolute SCIENTIFIC authority... When making obvious scientific errors. Hope the newspaper CORRECTS this.