the very same comment you are replying to mentions the Abel prize and the Wolf prize for recognizing general mathematics achievements, which if you look at the recipients over the last 2 decades, are almost all over 40 (usually white men who typically get tenured as mathematics professors and have the time and resources to focus on research).
I appreciate OP for explaining that the field recognized this pattern and made a step to try to encourage future mathematicians to have something to aspire to.
Actually, it's a bit of the reverse. The Fields medal was established in 1936, Wolf in 1978, and Abel in 2003. And Wolf and Abel filled gaps that Fields left because of its restrictions. Further, the first woman to get the Fields, Maryam Mirzakhani, was only awarded in 2014 (Abel, Wolf are worse). I don't think you can look at any of these awards and address the gender inequity in mathematics, either.
It kind of tracks that Abel and Wolf would trail behind Fields in that regard.
As someone noted, since Fields is for the under-40 crowd, it'll be able to draw upon female mathematicians coming up into the field. Abel and Wolf would need to draw on the larger population. And thanks to all the biases, I'd imagine the number of women get smaller as the age gets higher.
I appreciate OP for explaining that the field recognized this pattern and made a step to try to encourage future mathematicians to have something to aspire to.