Do you seriously not see the inconsistency in your position? You're arguing for "outcome based" faculties and citing it as proof of bias in a way that would make the most ardent defender of affirmative action blush.

You can't have it both ways: Either

1) The disproportionate number of liberals in academia is merit based, so liberalism's likely consequence rather than cause and what sociologists and educators say about math evaluation of the sexes has merit OR

2) The disproportionate number of men outperforming women in math is due to bias as surely as the disproportionate number of academias liberals.

The practical difference is is the same; bias is likely in evaluation of the sexs performance on math either because those best qualified to say so DO say so, or because a disproportionate representation in ANY area reflects bias.

If you want to know what I THINK rather than what I KNOW, I'd say men tend to outperform women at math for the same reason liberals tend to get more faculty positions than conservatives: Because they earned them. However, there's at least as much reason to doubt that in the former case as in the latter, if only because advancing the social sciences tends to involve pushing the envelope in a way conservatives don't like, whether it's liberals like Jefferson and Locke or more modern ones.