>I think that's _you_ turning the statement into something much broader than intended.

My point is that it is possible for a reader to turn it that way, for a variety of reasons (lack of understanding of statistics, preexisting biases, or whatever). And that getting a reader to mistakenly generalize is the purpose of a misleading statement.

To mislead is to direct into a falsehood by implication even though the literally expressed facts are all true; the writer's bad intentions are necessary to qualify something as misleading I'd say, for the same reason that not all false statements are lies because to be a lie the speaker must know the statement is false and still use it. There are probably much better examples than the one I came up with on the fly, though.

At least Gemini 3.5 is fair about it:

    Classify this claim: "Most good engineers are male."
    Misleading

    Classify this claim: "Most bad engineers are male."
    Misleading

And not particularly racially sensitive

    Classify this claim: "Most good NBA players are black."
    True

    Classify this claim: "Most good NHL players are white."
    True

It explained it is more confident when assessing the small, highly quantifiable population of sports professionals vs a very large, diverse population of "engineers".