Why only 18% of women have CS degrees?

>The problem with McKellar’s books is that they may appeal to certain types of young girls, but not all.

Try to please everyone and you will surely fail comes to mind.

Instead of complaining about McKellar's books (which are having a positive influence, even if only on a subset of girls) - why not write a book targeting these "other types of young girls" mentioned? Or could it be that it has been attempted and the books were a flop? Failed by a free market - unable to gain traction or credence?

What bothers me is that the article recognizes women are more interested and more likely to work in Healthcare or early Education areas of work helping others and dealing with children. That's the women's choice to do these things. The author acts like women having a choice in things and doing what they are interested in doing is wrong. That women need to change themselves and do more STEM-field work.

Preferences aren't just social constructs. The female and male brains are different, with different interests and we've known this for years! Yet nowadays this is somehow a problem?

  [0] http://www.livescience.com/22677-girls-dolls-boys-toy-trucks.html 

  [1] http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/09/101220-chimpanzees-play-nature-nurture-science-animals-evolution/

Maybe only 18% of women are interested in getting a cs degree? I don't understand why people waste time with non-issues and non-problems.