Apparently gender is an important factor in determining funding

Here's an interesting article by Left-Wing site The (Leftist) Conversation about how science funding should be democratically determined.

A key line in the article caught my eye:  "To make sure the biggest guns didn't take all the funds, the winners could be stratified according to important criteria such as experience, gender and field of study".

My first problem with this is that the author of this article obviously knows that a lot of scientists don't necessarily believe in Climate Change, so are clearly not going to vote to send money towards studying something they don't believe in.  To overcome this, Climate Change will obviously be a 'field of study' area that'll automatically receive money regardless of actual votes given.

My second problem with this is that the author obviously thinks that women are incapable of putting forward any sort of compelling case to study some thing, so any woman applying for funding should automatically be given funding because we can't have any inequality in genders when it comes to science research.

My final problem with this is that what is being proposed is a system that removes any outside influence and allows an already overly credentialed and clique system to become more self absorbed.