So you're issue is that math is more "things" oriented too, so why would women make up 45% of undergraduate mathematics if the things/people brain differences w

So you're issue is that math is more "things" oriented too, so why would women make up 45% of undergraduate mathematics if the things/people brain differences were real? I think it's an interesting point. It's purely anecdotal, but the two women math majors I personally know are high school math teachers, which would be more "people". Are math teachers enough to account for a 20% (engineering) to 45% (math) difference? Probably not, but I think it is more open ended in terms of what math majors end up doing vs engineering or computer science. I find Scott's arguments persuasive though, and could easily be fitting my memory/interpretation/facts etc to work within other beliefs. Post hoc rationalizations like this are always tricky.