Fields and jobs can be dominated by people of a certain race or gender, and that doesn't mean that racism, sexism, or oppression was involved. Look at the number of African Americans in the NBA and NFL. Or the number of African Americans in jazz, R&B, or rap. Or look at the number of women in nursing. Would you also suspect that men don't get into nursing because women are the ones judging? I wouldn't be suprised if people would have thrown out the exact same explanation for why women weren't that represented in colleges back in the day. However, now for every 100 college degree men get, women get 130 - 140. How does that explanation hold? Things changed and men became less oppressive? Or how do you explain the situation now? That women are the ones doing the oppressing? Did you also know that 1/10th of 1% of the worlds population is Jewish (that's 1/1000 for you people who hate math)? But did you know that Jewish people make up 29% of the Nobel Prize winners in Science and Literature?
People always jump to conclusions of discrimination, racism, sexism, etc, when fields are dominated by white men, but never say the same when fields are dominated by anyone else. I don't know why people would expect that most fields would be a racially and sexually sample that perfectly represents the population. When this doesn't happen, it doesn't mean foul play was involved, but rather it probably arises for other cultural, social, etc, reasons.
One reason for this is that Jewish society is a matriarchal one. Some Jewish mothers 'encourage' their children to do 'more' and make something of themselves.
Most of civilization through history has been a male dominated one, and it follows through and into the arts. Just look at the 'church' male dominance for example.
Women used (male or semi-anonymous) pseudonyms in the arts and literature often as to be more 'accepted' for their works.