> And as it relates to ever present discussions on HN about women in tech, the reason women are not in tech is because they are not interested in tech as much a

> And as it relates to ever present discussions on HN about women in tech, the reason women are not in tech is because they are not interested in tech as much as men. For whatever reason they simply are not. Jumping from this to "therefore evolution" is exactly as specious as jumping to "therefore culture." Actually moreso, because it's cultural by definition; the question is what sparked the culture. The culture may, indeed, be rooted in biological predisposition toward the topics involved. It could also be rooted in biological predisposition toward shoving others out of a social club, and/or allowing oneself to be shoved out -- metaphorically or through literal physical force. Or it could be rooted in a long history of self-serving decisions which have nothing to do with biology whatsoever, only people in power working to concentrate and maintain that power. Disqualifying half the race is quite a coup. Yes, we have significant gender dimorphism in our hormones and neurotransmitters. It's very likely that at some level, that's relevant. But claiming it as the root cause is arbitrary non-sequitur. Causation has to be demonstrated, it can't simply be inferred.