Better?

True - it's amazing we've survived this long. ;) The good news is that understanding our memetic as well as genetic make-up gives us more control over our evolutionary future (for better or for worse). I think the tough part will be using the crowbar in such a way that it doesn't kill the patients, and here I mean both men and women. Adaptation is tough, even when environmental variable changes are purposely inflicted.

Guys and girls here who read this, think about this, and incorporate "smart is sexy" values into their lives are my "kids," even if I don't have any biological ones (and I don't).

You have made the most unmistakably sexist comment, which cements your position in the Troll Hall of Fame.

Womem with careers produce less children? Please cite a source. The vast majority of American women with young children are working outside of the home (http://www.hoover.org/publications/hoover-digest/article/6798). And the more women work, the more babies they have (http://www.worldcrunch.com/more-women-work-more-babies-they-have-new-french-study-says/3816).

Where is your proof? Know your own foolish limits.

It's always refreshing when the smart, moderate minority at the back of the room pipes up.

I like the attitude, Vanitas, and I don't disagree with what you said, but the heart of the issue here is setting early expectations. I think girls and women are sold short of their aptitudes early on partially as a result of media standards, partly as a result of parental expectations, partly from the lack of role models, partly from peer pressure to think, act, talk, and, yes, write a certain way, among other factors.

I don't hold anything against women who use their sexuality as an advantage for personal gain from men stupid enough to let them. More power to them. If you've got it, flaunt it if you want to, I say.

What strikes me, though, is the venom with which not only men, but other women, tear down women who are achieving, or attempting to achieve, success. From my experience, women can actually be meaner in that regard, and it baffles me every time I see it. The effect is a class of women who have become "the best at what they do," and I use that in quotes for a purpose. Female corporate leaders (academic, too, now that I think about it), I've known and worked with have had to reach a new level of shrewdness, callousness, and political savvy that borders on psychopathy in order to compete with their male counterparts (psychopath male counterparts, should I say). Those aren't very good role models, in my opinion. Plus, it feeds and extends the life of the crazy, megalomaniacal corporate "brain," which cares only about making short-term numbers.

I think the intelligent woman's sentiment today is generally "to hell with that. I'm going into a field where women are currently respected and being the best I can be there." That's certainly the path of least resistance, but one that won't result in positive change. There will be those that need to endure the claws of jealousy and disdain. There will also need to be those of us that do our best to protect and support them in their rise, but we're still early in the fight. Very early. And sometimes, I look at television and pop culture and I wonder if we aren't losing.

To answer your last question, yes, I felt pressured to exercise to look good, but the pursuit was the date with the "ideal beautiful" woman. The 10. The supermodel. Shallow and stupid. (No, never got that date, btw.). Fortunately, I grew up and realized that a curious, intelligent woman is far preferable to the arm trophy. Having a best friend, life partner, and intellectual equal is far preferable to, and less stressful than, having someone who requires success to maintain a high standard of living (aka, someone attracted to my future cash flows). I get tired of veneers.

I value the explorers, the discoverers, the tinkerers, the thoughtful problem solvers. We need all we can get - male and female.