I agree with you on the fact that gagme can fire him for any reason. Others seem not to get that and cry that his rights are being violated. However, as an individual with a strong scientific background, I disagree that his article is accurate in all aspects, particularly in regards to gender differences. I realize you said "mostly accurate," but as the thrust of his article is aimed at gender differences, there is no scientific consensus on that, and as I see it, his argument falls flat solely on that aspect alone. Specifically, the science is still out on gender differences, and he seems to think that a study of monkeys that is referenced in the link I am posting, (which I also posted in another thread on this same topic in response to someone saying that differences in gender affinities to career preferences were shown to be scientific fact) is the be all-end all of gender differences. http://www.parentingscience.com/girl-toys-and-parenting.html That link does a much better job of looking at the gender differences that he seems to cite as valid scientific fact. What he refers to regarding gender differences are not valid scientific facts. The scientific community is still out on this, and while other statements in his article may be "accurate," the statements that he makes about gender differences are not supported by science. With no valid scientific evidence for gender differences, though his other points might be valid, his article is blatantly sexist - IMO. As I see it, his article is junk science at best.