To play Devil's advocate here, it's a very non-engineering mindset to discard the possibilities in revolutionizing the hair dryer. Sure, it's not as glamorous

To play Devil's advocate here, it's a very non-engineering mindset to discard the possibilities in revolutionizing the hair dryer. Sure, it's not as glamorous as working on the top Node.js module on Github, but you know what's in nearly every household in America? A hair dryer. I'm not aware of any significant changes in hair dryers beyond safety for a good long while (though, as a short haired person, I don't use them often so I could be mistaken). It seems like a good thing to work on. I don't believe the circuitry is very complicated, and the ceiling for complexity you could work with is fairly high (i.e. is there some combination of heat, air pressure, and air directionality that could cause curlier hair?). It gives an entry point to people at various skill levels. I think there was a gap in communication. Women felt as though IBM were implying that they should stick to their gender roles, when really IBM was saying that women are in a unique opportunity to improve on womens products. Not that they can't work on more "serious" subjects, but rather that they welcome both genders to work on all of their projects but this one is something women are going to be better at due to experience. It would have been far more impressive if the project had ended with a far more efficient or featureful hair dryer than burned down amidst cries of sexism.