I don't think the question of why CEOs are older than non-CEOs is interesting. Highly important roles require suitable experience, which of course is going to b

I don't think the question of why CEOs are older than non-CEOs is interesting. Highly important roles require suitable experience, which of course is going to bias the sample towards older people. The problem is that, if the only answer if there's no "reasonable explanation" is to imply the existence of some kind of discrimination, you're going to include a lot of weird things under that category, and often make complex problems appear simple. Scott Alexander wrote a good article "Black People Less Likely" that discusses a similar idea. There's often possible explanations for local bias, ideas of unfair treatment and rude old white people, but sometimes you hide a lot by addressing at a local level. If what is identified as a problem is present at all levels of the hierarchy from social clubs to CEO positions, it's useless to ask why more xyz people aren't CEOs.