Men do more elements because they are allowed to (more jumping passes, longer time limits). And furthermore, I don't think it's obvious that men do objectively "more difficult" elements. Rather, it's that the elements at which average male physiology tends to give men an advantage are simply more heavily weighted in scoring. For example, jumps are, on average, simply worth more than spins (an element where average female physiology seems, in my perception, to give women an advantage.) In other words, there is a bias toward male physiology built into the scoring system. (N.B., I'm not saying that this is intentional, or part of some malicious conspiracy.)
Let's say we accept the propositions that
*(fully rotated) triple and quadruple jumps are very difficult and should be rewarded commensurately with their difficulty
*male body types make it easier to perform these jumps than female body types
*some spin positions and gliding positions are easier for female than for male bodies
*most other skating skills are not dependent on body type, with caveats that taller skaters are likely to achieve greater absolute speed or power from each push, shorter skaters are likely to be more agile at reversing direction quickly, etc.
*females tend more than males to be socialized toward cultivating graceful, polished presentation, but there are obviously exceptions on both sides
*the ideal skater of either sex demonstrates both athletic power and refined body line, and can skate to various kinds of music
Do we want rules that
*are designed to apply exactly the same to both sexes, even if that inadvertently gives one sex a natural advantage in terms of maximum average scoring potential?
*are designed to apply exactly the same to both sexes and are intentionally adjusted to balance typical male and typical female strengths so that it would be meaningful and equitable for male and female skaters to compete against each other?
*differ between men's and women's events based on each sex's average maximum abilities in a way that is deliberately designed to result in comparable total scores in the two separate events?
*differ between men's and women's events based on social expectations such that skaters who conform to their respective gender norms are highly rewarded and skaters whose strengths lie in areas typically associated with the opposite sex do not have access to the same rewards?
On the one hand, as mentioned by a few posters in this thread, it's problematic from a feminist perspective if the elements that men tend to do better than women also earn the highest scores, so that the best women's score totals pale in comparison to the best men's, making the women seem less accomplished.
One obvious change to minimize the discrepancy could be to use the program component factors in both disciplines, which would raise the women's PCS totals to be more comparable to the men's and thereby close some of the scoring gap. However, with all else remaining equal, that would mean that a larger percentage of the women's total scores would come from the subjective, artistic portions of the scoring, which would reinforce the idea that women are more judged on artistry and appearance and men more on athletic accomplishment. So that would still be problematic.
Well, how could women's TES could also be increased to be more comparable to the men's and to the higher factored PCS?
Increase the time limit and the maximum number of jumping passes of the women to match that of the men. It was certainly not unheard of for women to do 8 or more jumping passes under 6.0 rules. The current competitors may not be conditioned to pace themselves for 4.5 minutes instead of 4, but it might be worth asking some of them to give it a try. One more jumping pass wouldn't eat up a whole 30 seconds, so that extra time would also give the women more time to show other skating skills -- including some posing or two-foot gliding if needed as rests, but preferably choreographed to enhance the program theme at the same time as allowing the muscles to recover.
The highest scoring level 4 elements are comparable in base value to a solo double axel, which is often the easiest jump in a senior freeskating program. Now, it is true that there are plenty of skaters at lower levels who can achieve level 4 spins (and spiral sequences, when they had levels) but who can't do triple jumps, maybe can't even do double axels. Is that evidence that the hardest possible spin is easier than a triple toe loop? What about the other skaters, at senior junior or novice level, who can do multiple triples but can't do level 4 spins? For them it isn't easier. So maybe the difference in difficulty is not so much absolute as it is dependent on body type (and talent, preference, etc.) and skating has, in the last 20-30-40 years tended more and more to screen out body types that don't lend themselves to triple jumps.
Also, just meeting the minimum requirements to be credited with level 4 may be a lot easier than the hardest possible spins or spirals of the skaters who excel at those elements and challenge themselves to push their own limits. So maybe capping the difficulty/scoring potential of spins and spirals, but not of jumps, is not the fairest approach.
How can skaters who excel at spins or spirals be adequately rewarded commensurate with their area of excellence and the relative difficulty of what they achieve in that area?
Spirals can always be used as connecting moves, and at this point only in senior ladies' long programs are they scoring elements. So a skater, male or female, any level, who excels at spirals can use that skill to increase the Transitions score and possibly other component scores as well. Probably not by as much as a level 4 spiral sequence used to be worth, though.
Limiting the number of spins in a free program to three, with capped difficulty, puts the great spinner/average jumper at a disadvantage against the great jumper/average spinner. Is that the intended effect? If not, how could
One obvious option would be to allow skaters to trade one of the jump passes for an extra spin. This would benefit anyone who can add another level 4 spin but who cannot add another triple jump and need to fill the 8th slot with a double jump, or who are likely to earn higher GOE on the spin than on the jump.
But I wonder if there could be some way to redefine the way difficulty in spins is rewarded so that the very best spinners could get higher base marks as well as higher GOEs for their most complicated spins (and not encourage weaker spinners to try more complexity than they can handle).
I've deliberately left out the step sequence element because it relies on skills that are basic to figure skating and should be demonstrated throughout the whole program as well as in the designated sequence. And it doesn't seem to favor one sex over the other. (In my opinion elite men have shown more interesting and more skilled step sequences than elite women on average, but I attribute that to the fact that they had to do two of them instead of one in each program and didn't have to work on spirals. With similar training incentives, I'd expect similar results.)