That makes no sense at all, how are numbers not relevant?
Assuming you actually read the link I gave and found it lacking (it is only an article), try this on for size: Why men earn more
Here is a small bit at the top of that page:
Dr. Warren Farrell, the only man ever elected three times to the Board of the National Organization for Women in NYC, once asked, “If men are paid more for the same work, why would anyone hire a man?”
He may be sorry he asked. But during the years of research that followed, the answer evolved: Men earn more than women, but not for the same work—for 25 different workplace choices. Men’s choices lead to men earning more money; women’s choices lead to women having better lives.
Men’s trade-offs include working more hours (women typically work more at home); taking more-hazardous assignments (cab-driving; construction; trucking); moving overseas or to an undesirable location on-demand (women’s greater family obligations inhibit this); and training for more-technical jobs with less people contact (e.g., engineering).
Women’s choices appear more likely to involve a balance between work and the rest of life. Women are more likely to balance income with a desire for safety, fulfillment, potential for personal growth, flexibility and proximity-to-home. These lifestyle advantages lead to more people competing for these jobs and thus lower pay.
If you actually read the book and find issue with the conclusions, you should write your own book that refutes it provided you can come up with valid research that contradicts him.
By the way, notice I don't go into the topic of sexual harassment now nor did I before, because that is an argument I will not engage in here. It is a whole other can of worms.