You answered a question about comparative scientist competence (which is highly objective, because it's judged on the basis of peer review of published work) with stats about elementary school grades handed out by teachers (which is highly subjective, because it's a virtually unchecked power, almost never judged by any outside auditor), not to mention the difference in age, task, environment -- basically every single criterion is different. It's not a question of liking anything. You're simply trying to move goalposts.

Judging by the various forms of intellectual dishonesty you've attempted thus far, I would gladly do my utmost to prevent anyone the least bit like you from finding employment anywhere near me for as long as I live.

This thread started with drz saying we should leave everyone to their own devices, and "those with highest merit deserve representation". I agree that this should be happening, but I disagree that it is happening. drz then claimed that you can't dictate interest. I disagreed. drz claimed that only taking and passing CS courses can "show interest". This is obviously false; if ever a woman was interested but then discriminated against, she might not pass the CS course. I submitted an article on stereotype threat, which is one reason that competent women might not succeed in class or industry. I think drz took this to mean that I thought women were, on average, as competent as men. I admit to getting confused at that last change in topic since I don't think it's relevant or interesting. No one in the original article, or anyone else in this conversation, has made that claim.