A relevant excerpt: > We also discovered that these interest stereotypes were linked to worse outcomes for girls. The more that a typical girl in our study bel

A relevant excerpt: > We also discovered that these interest stereotypes were linked to worse outcomes for girls. The more that a typical girl in our study believed in these stereotypes favoring boys, the less motivated she was in computer science and engineering. This wasn’t the case for the typical boy. The more he believed in these stereotypes, the more motivated he was. Three things stand out to me: 1) The article uses very pointed black/white language, even though it's describing something as mild as children's interest in hobbies... Girls not being into computers is only a "worse outcome" if a career in CompSci is your measurement of "good" in this world. Why is that the case? Article makes little mention of this. 2) The article is very clear that it's about the children's "belief", not any concrete measurements of their lives. A two-year opinion survey (as in here) is not nearly as convincing as its more expensive cousin, the longitudinal study. The only reasonable call to action for the reader is to change what their children "believe" and secretly hope the world becomes "better." 3) The article starts with "Stereotypes about what boys and girls supposedly like aren’t hard to find." Words like "supposedly" prime the reader into thinking childhood gender differences are arbitrary, which the rest of the article seems to assume. This is not clearly explained. This article is very clearly slanted. It's a shame that such an interesting topic always gets this kind of lip service. If there were evidence that demonstrates women being genuinely happier/healthier/more fulfilled in STEM fields that would be cool to read.