Well, I can't speak for the rest of the historical record. Grace
   Hopper is one of my heroes and it bothers me that she gets slid
   over so frequently, placed as "GREAT WOMEN IN SCIENCE" or "GREAT
   WOMEN IN COMPUTING" OR "GREAT WOMEN IN ENGINEERING".

   The thing is, she was GREAT PERSON. The accounts of her story
   which emphasize that "look MEN, here's a WOMAN and she's BETTER
   THAN YOU" turn her story into an Oprah-worthy tale of COURAGE
   and BRAVERY against a male dominated society.

   In short, turned her story into every other story of bravery and
   courage against a male dominated society.

   The thing is, Grace Hopper was special and amazing.

   She's my hero because of the contributions she made and her
   ideologies of sharing code when others wanted to keep code
   departmentalized. The whole "Open Source" thing ultimately
   traces back to HER, not to the so many others that keep trying
   to take the credit.

   I could go on and on about other contributions she's made.

   The thing is: I don't hear about those specific contributions
   when she's included in WOMEN IN... lists.

   Instead, it's almost patronizing. "Wow, she's a WOMAN and she
   did ALL THAT!?! AMAZING!".

   No. She's a brilliant person successful partially through her
   nature and efforts and also happenstance (it happened that in
   the 1930s, women and men were EQUAL in Universities. We took a
   MAJOR STEP BACKWARDS after WWII that we haven't fully recovered
   from].

   Ok, wait, No, I'm not going to do a Grace Hopper history lesson.
   Point is, the women who have bee slighted in history need to be
   treated side-by-side with the men. They need to be put in the
   same slots, equally.

   promoting separately and above, turns it into separately and
   below - highlighted temporarily only to be dismissed again until
   NEXT YEARS "GREAT WOMEN IN..." lists. That's wrong.