[tpoacher]

So, the conclusion is that in terms of the typical metrics used to get a job in academia (i.e. grant funding and publications) there is no difference between men and women. But there is a difference in terms of getting a job per se (with women hired more than men). But that's ok because the metrics that one tries to tick to get hired are equal. Therefore there is no evidence of sex discrimination.

It's a bit like saying, we found that the CEO works the same hours as their workers (productivity metric), but the pay (i.e. the intended reward for achieving said productivity measured by said metric) was not the same because of the CEO's massive bonus. BUT, since the hours worked are the same, we conclude that there's no pay discrimination. Wat?

There may genuinely be no sex discrimination involved, and I'm inclined to believe that this is indeed the case; but to me the argument above is not as much in support of this statement as the authors seem to think it is.