.. Attempt this point of view shift: If you are a professional political rhetorian tasked with promoting the interests of the plutocracy, and you are asked about your political stance, which answer would increase your effectiveness at your job the most?

Now, I do not actually think most economists are that self aware. Such overt corruption is not needed to utterly wreck the discipline.

It is merely the case that economists that have theories and viewpoints aligned with the interests of the plutocracy mysteriously have far more funding to promote them, and far better job security. It is not necessary to be conservative to hold such views - you can, for example, be pro-abortion, pro-gay rights, and so on and so forth and believe in lower taxes on the rich in all circumstances with absolutely no cognitive dissonance arising.

The difference between male and female economists would then arise from the fact that the actors dispensing this flow of patronage are in fact overtly conservative, and sexist. So less of it reaches women.