Patricia Fara departs from five hypotheses: (1)"Women scientists do not get the respect they deserve", (2) "objective measurement is an illusion", (3) "scientific breakthroughs are never the work of a single scientist", (4) "scientists are vain and controlled by money and power", and (5) "the scientist with the better personal promotional skills allways wins in the end". She could have taken a detached analytical approached (scientific?) and looked at which cases substantiated and which falsified her five hypotheses. Instead, she chooses to follow each case study with a very carefully selected subset of these five "facts" - depending on which of them can be substantiated by this particular case. Add to that, that every time she says QED wrt one of her five "facts" it happens in a tone of clear moral indignation. Oh, and by the way, I'm sure prof. Fara would put this review down to "fact" no (1).