On the one hand, I don't remember seeing that in my workplaces. On the other hand, I'm much less sure that I'd notice that than that I'd notice discrimination based on ability.
I'm not convinced that people are as capable as they think at noticing discrimination based on ability. Sure, the really blatant one-on-one discrimination. But, in my experience, when you have 10% women in a technical group, that 10% is rarely in the bottom half of the group in ability. And they're never the least-able person on the team. (Sometimes the least experienced. Never the least capable.) That is the visible effect of invisible ability-based discrimination: the men that are on the lowest 20% of the curve shamble along, still able to find jobs. The women that are on the lowest 20% of the curve get pushed out of the field entirely.
Look for non-normal distribution of ability, and look for places where the ability curves for men and women don't match, and you're seeing the tracks discrimination leaves behind.
no subject
I'm not convinced that people are as capable as they think at noticing discrimination based on ability. Sure, the really blatant one-on-one discrimination. But, in my experience, when you have 10% women in a technical group, that 10% is rarely in the bottom half of the group in ability. And they're never the least-able person on the team. (Sometimes the least experienced. Never the least capable.) That is the visible effect of invisible ability-based discrimination: the men that are on the lowest 20% of the curve shamble along, still able to find jobs. The women that are on the lowest 20% of the curve get pushed out of the field entirely.
Look for non-normal distribution of ability, and look for places where the ability curves for men and women don't match, and you're seeing the tracks discrimination leaves behind.