Doesn't it make sense though? The childless women, a small minority, though growing, would be those who put their careers first and then it was too late, too bad, so sad. Where as the males who were childless already had low earning potential and couldn't "woo" a mate? Why biological fathers would be lower though, well, you'd be adding in the majority of the male population, including low earners to the average. Yes, men are being discriminated against in Western society, but I can see why the numbers might be as they are without necessarily pointing to said discrimination. I'm sure many women in higher positions are overpaid, or in make work jobs, or diversity hires. but I think they're really just comparing a bunch of sad outliers to the bulk of humanity and it's not quite as egregious, here, as it sounds.