No, there's no biased assumption that women are worse developers, just one about relative numbers and relative skill distribution. If the number of qualified f

No, there's no biased assumption that women are worse developers, just one about relative numbers and relative skill distribution. If the number of qualified female developers is less than the number of qualified male developers, then any company which manages to achieve hiring parity has either lowered the qualifications it demands from women developers, or increased the incentives it offers to them relative to other firms (enabling it to capture a higher share of high-skill female developers). Since the latter approach is obviously discriminatory and quite possibly illegal (not to mention a blatant violation of the principle of equal pay for equal work), the former is more likely. The result of the former is that the median female developer at that company will have lower skill than the median male developer at the same company, even if women in the population at large have the same or better development skill. The incentive strategy could enable a firm to secure the best female talent, but besides the ethical and legal implications it would also make things much worse for all the other firms out there: the best female talent being off the market, those firms would be forced to either settle for lesser-skilled women or accept a disproportionate share of male developers, neither of which would be appealing. Naturally, increasing the supply of women developers to match that of male developers (or reducing the supply of male developers …) would improve the situation, but that's a horse of a different colour.