Comment Re:Why is this a concern in and of itself? (Score 1) 1027
I've discussed this at length with my sister, a magna cum laude engineering graduate of this school. She's commented that many of her other similarly gifted female friends just can't picture being a windshield-wiper engineer for 30+ years. They're more likely to find fulfillment in (for example) managing a bunch of geeks. (Again, I said most. A handful of her peers are happily employed as geeks or pseudo-geeks.)
Aside: Your law and medicine examples are interesting. I don't know many lawyers, but I have pegged many physician roles as ones more suitable to women. Those include primary care positions and surgical fields (e.g. ophthalmology) that involve "small" surgery.
Another aside: Is science harder than medicine or law? I'd say that depends on your approach (and the particular "science" field). To be successful in medicine or law you have to be (above all else) an informaniac that can assimilate lots of (often boring) information in a short time. The analytical part, when it appears, is child's play. In engineering, you may not be overwhelmed with information, but the concepts are more difficult to grasp. So, yes and no. Who is more likely to be an informaniac? A number cruncher? We may never know for sure, but I'll bet the distribution won't be 50:50 for either.
One more aside, on the subject of hard-wired gender differences: Here's a single example; extrapolate at your own risk. A friend of mine has two young sons (4 and 2). She's consciously strived to make their environment gender-neutral and has done some interesting experiments. Not long ago she got them a dollhouse and some customary accessories for it. They pulled out the furniture and rugs and parked their trucks in it.