The purpose of this study is to systematically examine varied organizational contexts in which gender bias is expected to thrive. Discrimination against women is hypothesized to manifest itself implicitly in the assessment of suitability and potential of job seeking candidates. Data were obtained through an experiment among 296 full professors, senior scientists and students at a Science, Engineering and Technology (SET) University. Women's opportunities to be ranked for a job interview are contrasted with men's using Bradley Terry log-linear models for partial rankings and justifications for the respective ranking decisions are analyzed using content analysis. The findings show that women are ascribed significantly less relevant characteristics and skills in SET than men and are significantly less often ranked for job interviews by even experienced decision makers. Furthermore, homophilous pressures to select “socially compatible” candidates fortify discriminatory selection, while the request to respect anti-discrimination law in recruitment cannot prevent discriminating decisions. Implications of findings for organizational practice are discussed.