Here's the question.
Assuming a male hiring manager, does he make a 100% "gender blind" decision when reviewing potential applicants? Or is there a subconscious bias toward males or females?http://gender.stanford.edu/news/2014/why-does-john-get-stem-job-rather-jennifer
The hiring managers looked at the resumes and the only difference was a male vs female name.
"Despite having the exact same qualifications and experience as John, Jennifer was perceived as significantly less competent. As a result, Jenifer experienced a number of disadvantages that would have hindered her career advancement if she were a real applicant. Because they perceived the female candidate as less competent, the scientists in the study were less willing to mentor Jennifer or to hire her as a lab manager. They also recommended paying her a lower salary. Jennifer was offered, on average, $4,000 per year (13%) less than John."
Remember, these are the exact same people being offered up with the same experience. The only difference is the gender of the name - and the hiring managers made these decisions based just on the name.