If you were to classify jobs as either more interpersonal and empathetic, or more technical and STEM, you would of course find more men in those tech fields. Women are generally more interested in people and men generally more interested in things.

The interesting thing is if you compare a bell curve distribution of men and a bell curve of women across these types of fields, they overlap significantly. This is why the fields that fall in between extremes are popular with both men and women. Things like sales, accounting, management, consulting are appealing to a bulk of both men and women. This is why DEI is easier to achieve and moderate in most fields, because it isn't really an issue. The hiring pools are diverse by nature.

It is at the extreme ends of the bell curves where you find the issues. Why are nurses and teachers and social workers and HR predominantly women? Sure there are male nurses and teachers, and many are competent and do well, but it's not something most men are into. The extreme end of the bell curve is where you find these careers that appeal almost exclusively to women.

The same is true on the other end. There are many STEM and technical fields that have competent women who do well... but they are the outliers on the extreme end of the female bell curve. It's not that women can't do the job, they just don't want to do it. The core skills don't appeal to the interests and goals they have, and given a choice Mathe majority want to do something else.

The DEI advocates always like to highlight fields and industries where there is an extreme imbalance and chalk it up immediately to bias or discrimination, but from a statistical standpoint there are clear reasons why people of various groups tend to be over or underrepresented and it's usually by choice.