It sounds like you're confusing "most minorities are Christians" and "most Christians are minorities" as equal statements, and reaching an improper conclusion couched in some failure to understand simple statistics. Also consider that males and females exist in roughly equal percentages in the general population, so it's a weird claim to make.
Now as for the realities of women in science, there is a very real issue at the top, a lot of it having to do with grad students and post docs, at that age, generally going into motherhood and a good number of them not continuing on. It just happens. There is also a very real problem within academic departments and corporate offices that highly competent women still receive short shrift during faculty recruitment, and when on faculty, generally do not receive the same deference when it comes to department decisions. I've seen it over and over again.
BUT, the fact is that the sciences, in general, are highly populated by women who I find to be at least, if often not more capable than males, at comparative stages in their careers (I've found that female undergrads make for better lab members than most males, in general, but that isn't to dismiss some brilliant males as well.).
Anyway, the point is that women are all over science, but concentrated in the "real work" sectors: graduate and post-doctoral work. This means that claiming that you don't see them as PIs as frequently, on Faculty or in corporate boards means that they aren't generally in science, is flat out wrong. Further, female scientists don't suddenly stop being "smart" and suddenly believing in "fairy tales" at a higher rate if they leave the field to pursue other interests.
...Actually I think this is sorta what you were pointing out, no?
Facebook
Twitter