Not this BS again. The idea that women are as poorly represented as they are in STEM because they "just don't like it" is just willfully ignorant at this point. Disregarding the obviously insulting diaper comparison - Eccles concluded nothing of the sort, and that one sentence summary is an insane oversimplification of her research. Studies show the opposite, young girls have equal interest in STEM until we condition that away. This is alongside study after study showing girls are treated differently in STEM classes and are socialized away even if they do choose that track. Here's a PDF Eccles wrote herself, skip to the end for a summary : http://www.rcgd.isr.umich.edu/garp/articles/eccles07.pdf Misrepresenting scientific studies so heinously makes me distrust the rest of the article and question his motivations in writing it. I'm a bit disappointed this is getting so much traction here, I expected better.Maybe women can do math and science perfectly well but they just don’t like to. After all, most men don’t like math either! Of the small minority of people who do like math, there are probably more men than women. Research by Jacquelynne Eccles has repeatedly concluded that the shortage of females in math and science reflects motivation more than ability. And by the same logic, I suspect most men could learn to change diapers and vacuum under the sofa perfectly well too, and if men don’t do those things, it’s because they don’t want to or don’t like to, not because they are constitutionally unable (much as they may occasionally pretend otherwise!).