>  50/50 is a pretty random number that I doubt nature has any reason to 
> have designed us for.

not so!  it's exactly the ratio we'd expect if males and females are not 
biologically different w.r.t. the salient metric (child-rearing, CEOing).

Erica is making the case for 50/50 as the right answer to Dave's question 
(or as she said, that at least it's an open question).	But Dave's point 
(similar to Lisa's) is also well made: so what if it's not 50/50? 
Whatever it is, we have a ways to go.

-- 
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/dreeves  - -  google://"Daniel Reeves"