That is: the escrow of funds (50% seems about right)--demanded for each "new.. New!.. NEW!!" previously-unneeded 'product'
which someone wants to get rich, supplying.

[...]

I propose another possible explanation: women's creativity is expressed differently. I have long suggested that fully 50% of the funds allocated toward any new research or development project be used to investigate possible negative consequences of that project. So many discoveries have turned out to have nasty undersides; we don't find out until years later about nuclear waste, holes in the ozone due to CFCs, genetic damage due to hormone disrupters, and a great variety of other technologically-induced horrors. Could it be that women somehow intuitively sensed that these were genies better left in the bottle? Perhaps they devoted their creative skills instead to more practical matters, such as storytelling and crafts. These fields, while undervalued in today's world, have much greater utility in a socially-oriented culture. The craftspeople and the storytellers are the ones who preserve the fabric of society, producing its artifacts and passing on its legends.

[...]

But like all generalizations.. some female's chameleon-like tendencies can produce an ugliness barely hinted at as, say:
a Ruperta Murdoch? or what's-her-face, the ex-Great Repo prez White Hope ... whose mate 'cures queerness' ... and such.

We are so depraved, that the million+ words in the Unabridged seem barely able to limn the USSR-of-A's actual corruption.