The number of patents with at least one woman inventor grew from 7% in the 1980s to 21% in 2016, according to an analysis released this month by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. But there’s a long way to go: Women made up just 12% of all patent inventors in 2016.

Women are more often the family caregiver, also leave the workforce not just when a baby is born or adopted, but also when their spouse, parent or another family member falls ill. And that can hit them at the peak of their career when earning the most, and when they’re supposed to be stocking away for retirement and making up for lost opportunities earlier in their career.

Toni said all her life people would tell her to do something more ‘feminine’, but that didn’t stop her from chasing her dream. “There was one situation in high school where I was already on the football team and the principal of my school told me I couldn’t play anymore,” Harris explained. “So what did I do? I called the superintendent and was back on the team the next Monday. Nobody is going to stop me from achieving my dream.”

In a recent survey, high-net-worth women — and particularly those with more than $5 million in assets — reported that they are often making their financial decisions with an eye toward making a difference. For example, while men with $5 million or more in assets cite tax benefits as the greatest deciding factor in their charitable giving, women at the same level of wealth most often cite the ability to make the greatest impact.

The analysis showed that approximately 28% of CEOs were women, according to federal data, yet images of female CEOs showed up in just 10% of Google searches for CEOs.

“As millennial parents start families of their own, we see them reconsidering some of the more traditional elements of parenting,” said Dana Macke, associate director of lifestyles and leisure at Mintel. Still, kids see the difference. Nine out of 10 boys ages six to 17 say Barbie toys are more for girls, and more than half of girls in that age range say Nerf toys are more for boys, according to Macke.

After analyzing donations around the election and comparing them to 2015 and 2017, researchers found no evidence for “rage giving,” at least when it came to overall charitable giving. In fact, there was actually a dip in overall giving right after the 2016 election, concentrated among men. But women stepped up their giving significantly to a certain category of nonprofits: those that had a progressive bent and worked on issues debated during the campaign, like Planned Parenthood and the National Immigration Law Center.

A Harvard Business Review study published last year referred to these tasks as “office housework.” It found that women volunteer for these tasks at much higher rates than men for such jobs as planning holiday parties, taking notes at meetings, ordering office supplies and serving on low-level committees. “Our research suggests that this reluctant volunteer is more likely to be female than male,” the authors wrote. “Across field and laboratory studies, we found that women volunteer for these ‘non-promotable’ tasks more than men; that women are more frequently asked to take such tasks on; and that when asked, they are more likely to say yes.”

Historically, the world’s richest women were more likely than their male peers to have inherited some or all of their wealth. That’s now changing. “Driven by the shifting trends in global wealth distribution and cultural attitudes, and with technology spurring new opportunities for wealth creation, the number of self-made female entrepreneurs is on the rise,” researchers noted in the Wealth-X report.

“This suggests that, as the gig economy grows and brings more flexibility in employment, women’s relatively high opportunity cost of non-paid-work time and gender-based preference differences can perpetuate a gender earnings gap even in the absence of discrimination,” they concluded. Earnings are not related to the time of day drivers work and the gender wage gap was not explained by the choice of customers, they added.

The New York Post cover raises questions about what is merely a raunchy play on words and what crosses the line, especially in the #MeToo era. Should a tabloid like the New York Post, known for and widely lauded for its pun-filled, boorish headlines, continue this tradition? If so, what is off limits? And if a celebrity uses her body and sexuality for publicity, do those things become fair game for tabloid fodder?