Edited:
As goldbrick says, you seem to have misunderstood the meaning of 「ゆえ」 in 「ゆえに」. It doesn't indicates a consequence, a sort of "Some condition ゆえに some consequence", but it indicates some condition that leads to some consequence.
I think you misunderstand the phrase as "some condition, ゆえに some consequence" just like "some condition, よって some consequence" but the correct interpretation should be "some condition ゆえに, some consequence" just like "some condition なので, some consequence".
Watch the correct position of a comma precisely!
Original
I'm confused about the use of ゆえ in case it is followed by の instead of に.
Group 1 は、意味(差別の内容)が、Group 2 に比べて明確です。 Group 2 では、意味の確定度合いが低いので、いろいろな解釈が生じます。
The meaning or the contents of discrimination of Group 1 is clearer compared to that of Group 2. In Group 2, since the degree of determination of the meaning is low or the degree of ambiguity of the meaning is high, various interpretations will occur.
例えば、極端な例ですが、2-2 は、2-3 の文で「首相が」と「男性が女性より不利になるという」を省略しているとも解釈ができます。
For example, although it may be an extreme example, the sentence 2-2 can also be interpreted omitting "首相 prime minister" and "男性が女性より不利になるという men are more disadvantageous than women" in the sentence 2-3.
文章は、特殊な場合は別ですが、受け取る側でいろいろな解釈の余地がない方がよい文章だと思います。
I think a sentence is, aside from special cases, better to have less room for various interpretations on the receiving side.
この説明で、「ゆえの」と「ゆえに」の違いが分かりますか?
I hope you will get the difference by the explanation.
Group 1
1-1 男女平等といっても、女性ゆえの差別はまだ残っている。
1-2 男女平等といっても、女性ゆえの差別は、まだ残っている。
Even if we say gender equality, discrimination because of a woman still remains.
Group 2
2-1 男女平等といっても、女性ゆえに差別はまだ残っている。
2-2 男女平等といっても、女性ゆえに、差別はまだ残っている。
Even if we say gender equality, discrimination still remains because of a woman.
2-3 男女平等といっても、首相が女性ゆえに、男性が女性より不利になるという差別がまだ残っている。
Even if we say gender equality, the discrimination of that men are more disadvantageous than women still remains because of the prime minister being a woman.