This week, the American Psychological Association released a new study on why women are underrepresented in the so-called "STEM" fields of science, technology, engineering and mathematics, particularly in their most math-intensive reaches... (more) http://www.forbes.com/2009/03/05/fe...erence-opinions-columnists-women-science.html Personally, I agree with Lawrence Summers who suggests women are intrinsically less capable in these fields. And I don't think those "Ph.D. physics type" women should be offended...rather, they should just recognize that they are unique. What I have observed personally, and also statistically backed up, is that women are attracted more toward social type jobs and jobs that directly help people. Mathematics related work are often more isolated. For many women to go into these types of STEM scientific fields, it then becomes a matter of living their life "out of character". And when people discover this, they are unhappy and don't go that path. You have to look also at the biological fields where there's more than enough women. These jobs are often less "mathematical" and directly help people. There are many other biological reasons why women should be more social and less logical, that can be traced back to evolutionary theory. There are exceptions of course, just as there are male nurses and botanists. Why don't be start suggesting that more men go into THESE fields??? Furthurmore, I don't think this statement counts: "One tally showed that 27% of French physics Ph.D.s were awarded to women versus 13% of U.S. physics Ph.D.s, with presumably no biological differences between French women and their American sisters. " Everyone knows that Americans are one of the STEM shyest nations in the modern world and you have to compare apples to apples to make it fair. What a stupid comparison made by the author. Just wondering what some of the thoughts here are.