Agreed.  And here's the other paradox: by artificially restricting male representation, it can serve to exacerbate the so-called gap rather than reduce it.

The few males that do manage to get through, will, on average, be more exceptional than the females, because they are competing against more peers for fewer spots.

In turn, they're likely to go on to a much greater career trajectory and contributions than the average quota candidate, furthering another round of outrage.

Women have no problem getting into and excelling in STEM fields that they find interesting.  The majority of med students have been female for a long time and veterinary school has cohorts that are over 90% women.  Where's the outrage there?