I think a lot of this gender inequality in certain fields is less due to the fields and more to do with how children are raised to begin with. Granted, I don't have any scientific evidence to back it up, but from what I see perpetuated by parents and in the entertainment industry (particularly in the past), I feel this has some merit.

My wife and I never forced our daughter to do the things girls are "supposed to do". She'll be going into the 7th grade next year and will be taking advanced courses in every subject. She excels in math and science and will be taking her math classes with the 9th grade and getting several high school credits for other courses as well.

She has, and has had, many friends who are boys as well as girls. The way parents treat their children based on gender, from an early age, is astounding to me. Most dress their daughters in cute pink dresses and show them Disney princess movies and get them play kitchens. To me it seems that they are being taught from an early age that they need to spend time in the kitchen and rely on a man to take care of them.

I got those things for my daughter as well when she asked for them. But I also got her toy dinosaurs when she wanted them as well as Nerf guns, and scifi movies, etc. Stuff that most parents got for their sons only. I also got her tons of books and read to her from and early age. She had a computer before she was 2 years old too.

When my daughters friends, who are boys, are afraid of something that my daughter is not afraid of; their parents will try to shame them because they won't do something that a girl will do. It's not just the fathers that do this either. We were at a picnic along a river a few years ago and some of the kids were fishing. My daughter had no issues putting a worm on a hook. Some of the boys were afraid to even touch a worm. The mothers were telling them they needed to "man up" because my daughter could do it.

There very well may be issues within some of these industries, but I think we may need to look at society and how we teach our children from an early age too.

Those are for products manufactured for the masses, not the rich. I agree with the rest of what you stated.

Sure, but Amazon should at least make an effort to classify the reviews for the correct format/version. That's the problem. You could easily be reading a review for the fifty dollar special edition while looking at the ten dollar version. Some reviewers are smart enough to specify. But others are not. Often times I'd rather get the extended version of a movie in single disk packaging because I don't care about four hundred hours of documentary shows about the movie. I simply want to watch it with the extended footage.

I wish they would find a way to separate reviews of different formats. It gets annoying trying to determine which edition of a classic movie is being reviewed on Amazon. They lump VHS, DVD, & Bluray along with all editions together. It can be interesting reading someone's opinion on classic movies, but I'm more interested in format/edition information about Citizen Kane than what someone thinks about it. Some movies have had multiple Bluray releases, and some are considerably better than others. The newest is not always the best.

This can also be the case with older music. There was a studio back in the late 1960's/early 1970's that did not have the recording speed of their equipment calibrated properly. It actually recorded at a slower rate than it should have. Some remastered versions took this into account, but several newer ones did not. This is a case where edition specific reviews are very important to me.

Just wait until the malware companies can afford to launch one of these platforms

"Is your satellite running slow? Sat-FXR(TM) has detected 4763 viruses and 1723 malware programs slowing down your satellite. Sat-FXR(TM) can automatically fix these issues for the low price of $85,000,000. Would you like to pay by credit card? If not, your satellite may deorbit in the next 36 hours."

I can't say I recall the specifics, but I'm pretty sure Dubya was a failure in the oil business.

After six years of listening to our current president blame his predecessor, I find your post fairly amusing. Almost as amusing as your webonics dialect. Perhaps you should have cleaned the bird shit off of your "Dubya's basic phonics book".

That's some kind of joke, right? Your UID is low enough for you to realize that this is /. You're lucky if anyone gets past the title. You might have even less of an understanding if you actually read the summary these days. And there's no way in hell anyone would actually RTFA before commenting. That being said, congressmen don't even read the bills before voting on them. It's pretty damn obvious that in some cases congressmen don't even read the bills they supposedly wrote. Do you really expect us to? When we don't even read a summary? My post is long enough at this point that I could start typing gibberish and no one would even notice, except for the grammar Nazi types.

More of a quantum leap I think. ;-)

I guess you haven't taken a look at those images lately, the "special effects" have not aged well. This site is truly revealing But you be the judge. ;-)

What are you talking about? Bruce Willis and Michael Clarke Duncan can drill a hole and split an asteroid with a nuke so perfectly that, even if it's between the earth and the moon, both halves will miss...

Oh, wait. We're in trouble.

That's a good one. Probably the worst that will happen is that someone higher up will be forced to retire earlier than planned, at full pension of course.

It's not as good as the multi-million dollar golden parachute that a CEO gets for running a company into the ground, but they'll be comfortable.

They forgot to add the "5" after "1234"

I'll take a "Child size" please.

At least until the RIAA starts using drone strikes.