You don't know the reason for the behavior. And absent a "why" you can't cite bigotry or prejudice.
Nope. Case in point: I don't need to know why someone says "all men are smelly violent thugs who will rape women given the opportunity" to know that they're a bigoted fool.
The "why" is critical. And without that you can't speak to the motivations of anyone making any of those choices
I wasn't speaking about the motivations. You are the only one doing that.
The allegation is sexual discrimination. You don't know that. You know that decisions are being made on a single variable but you don't know WHY.
No, I don't know why, but the actual reason is of cold comfort if you're being discriminated against. For example, when women were denied the vote by virtue of being female, the ultimate motives for the denial are immaterial.
The fact that both sexes are making the same choice suggests that it is not discrimination.
Nope. Plenty of women disagreed with universal sufferage. Most people like to stick with the status quo.
But this is typical of you: first you try to deny the existence of discrimination. Once it's been shown to exist beyone any reasonable argument you insist that it's all invalid unless you know the motivation of the people involved.