Inequality quantified

When I opened this article, I had no intention to actually read it and discuss its role as a science feature. After all, this article is about the gender gap in the science field. Not too science-y, right? Well, this article discusses inequality of the genders in a social science perspective, making it a rather unique science feature article. Prom the second I opened it, the prickles caught me. The interactive graph with data comparing the number of males to females in a given science field over time. While the field of psychology was relatively balanced according to the data, I was surprised to find how lopsided fields such as engineering and computer science were. These prickles made me keep reading. The shocking statistics grabbed me like a good hook would in any English paper while the goo of the article worked on my emotions. The article systematically broke down the argument into sections to promote equality in the field.  Common thoughts were brought up to be related giving the article a human aspect. Like many science feature, subtitles are also used, organizing and focusing ideas to keep the readers interest. While this feature did a great job at pointing out an issue in social science and presented a good amount of data, the amount of goo became overwhelming at points. In the equal pay section, it sounded more like a diatribe or argument than a science feature presenting factual studies, which the feature uses earlier.