"In fact, while tracking the fuzzy concept of 'prestige' as it flits between professions, applying a gendered perspective establishes the ideals of the American Dream in stark realities."

After seeing this unintelligible gobbly-gook BS from the first paragraph, I found it difficult to continue reading and could not take the author seriously. Sounds like the author is currently a student in Feminist Studies 101 and is eager to show, with supposedly impressive-sounding nonsense sociological jargon, that he/she has it all figured out.

My congratulations to the writer(s)for this outstanding piece. The war for gender equality has hardly begun. I was reminded while reading this piece of the fight that women faced in achieving positions in major symphony orchestras (everyone should read the last chapter of Malcolm Gladwell's book Blink; even when women overwhelminingly won gender blind auditions, many male conductors still did not want women to join their orchestras, convinced they were nontheless undeserving or less good). And as the proportion of women in major orchestras increased, suddenly acquiring a seat in these orchestras was seen as less prestigious. It is unfortunate that rather than responding by reasoned argument some of the writers of these comments have resorted to ad hominen personality attacks, which have the effect intended or not, of discouraging discussion and action about issues of great importance to all of us. Denial of discrimination is a very real phenomenon. Male or female, we are all the victims of prejudice, and well meaning people should not be so quick to disparage those who speak of it.

I'm sorry, but I simply don't buy the author's excessively speculative argument. The argument could just as easily be made that the falling prestige of law and medicine has little to do with women entering the professions in greater numbers. Instead, many believe that law and medicine simply aren't "sexy" anymore -- especially when compared to career paths offering greater pay, free time, and flexibility. In today's instant fame, dot-com culture, prestige (in the employment context) is more associated with five "F"s -- funds (money), fame, flexibility, free time, and fun. The self-made entrepreneur, regardless of gender, is simply a more glitzy figure than a lawyer or doctor could be. Right or wrong, there's nothing "glamorous" about pulling an all-nighter at the firm or at the hospital. There is, however, a lot "glamorous" about jetting across the country, wining and dining executives into sign million / billion dollar deals, and / or coming up with the next great innovation (think eBay, Tivo, or Facebook).
Also, the author's argument that women have an easier time with work-life balance as lawyers and doctors than as entrepreneurs doesn't really work either. It's not as if lawyers or doctors have great hours -- they're just as likely to be kept away from their families through all-nighters at the law firm or emergencies at the hospital as entrepreneurs will be traveling. For example, just take a look at the number of women who quit their law firm jobs after a couple of years due to work-life imbalances and this conclusion is abundantly clear. Women certainly face unique challenges in the workforce that are worth bringing to everyone's attention and examining further; however, this editioral doesn't flesh those issues out at all -- instead, it sadly comes off as just another piece of "fluff journalism."