I guess I should have put the following as a comment, rather than a reshare text:>
I think the controls in the study, based just on two journalistic pieces (i.e., I read the Quartz and Smithsonian pieces, but not the AAUW paper) report, may be inadequate. Class has been shown to be a very significant factor in other contexts: women from families of high social standing are generally much more able to overcome gender barriers than those from lower classes. If you look at a population that has already passed through such a strong gender selection barrier, I would expect the class distribution to be much more biased towards higher class background than for the males, and hence be a population that I would expect to have higher earning capacity in the absence of barriers (since there is a strong positive correlation practically everywhere between wealth of parents and income of working children).>
If the study did not control for family background, I would take the finding of parity to suggest that gender barriers have reduced but are still substantial.