It is simply uninteresting to keep repeating the same obvious point - the activist focused on adding unrecognized women to Wikipedia is using a lower bar than the typical Wikipedia article. That is obvious and not debatable, so I'm just going to ignore your gaslighting on the subject.
Regarding other men on Wikipedia of similar low notability - I'm not sure what you think this shows. If there is a male article below the bar, remove it. My claim is not that there are no low notability figures on Wikipedia, but that activists should not intentionally erode Wikipedia by adding low notability figures of their preferred demographic groups.
If you point out a French astronomer who has a barely substantiated blurb on Wikipedia I will think nothing of it. Some Wikipedia articles aren't great and perhaps some should be removed. If this French astronomer is below the bar, remove him. If, on the other hand, you point out a French chauvinist who is adding French academics of any kind for the sole purpose of increasing French representation on Wikipedia - then I will say that's a problem and bad for the exact reasons I've outlined here. Wikipedia should be about true things that people want to know, not an outlet for social activism.
Finally, more as an aside, I'll just say that my personal preference is that Wikipedia should have a lower notability bar. I don't understand why Wikipedia doesn't keep unimportant articles, perhaps just marking them with a "low reliability" indicator if there are too few legitimate sources to substantiate the article. If I were king of Wikipedia I would like to have an article on every professor and academic and author and so on. Why not? But, given that Wikipedia does have a notability bar articles should clear that bar. If you want additional articles you should remove the bar, not selectively ignore the bar to favor your preferred demographic group.