Serious question HN: If Katie was a man do you think people would be going through git histories and their published papers trying to determine if she is being over-credited for her achievements?
No, but if it was an "unlikely man"... I work with Computer Engineers and Scientists, and I know what is an "unlikely" person. That's a really handsome soft-spoken guy, wearing a shirt and clean shaven. That guy tries to sell you software but you know he has no bloody clue what he's talking about. If it was some "unlikely minority" - for instance Asian person regardless of gender would not be checked, while some other groups might be seen with more suspicion. You can see this as a security check. Yes, it's prejudice - but, in a way, it's a good kind. We aren't saying "she couldn't have done it because she's a girl", all we're saying "based on our life experiences - person of that age, gender and demographics is unlikely to have played the most important role in such a project". Now we try to check our suspicion, if it's proven to be wrong, and indeed she was the most prolific contributor - then next time similar person would get an award we would be less suspicious! All about life-experience!