One of the areas that I found most startling myself was the brief bit about negotiating salaries -- how studies have shown that women who negotiate salaries are likely to be much more successful than men who negotiate salaries.
My understanding of why this turns out to be true is that women consistently underrate their financial worth, and employers (both men and women) do as well, so women tend to be paid less than their worth is work (and therefore less than men doing the same work). Which means that when those women go in and try to negotiate a higher salary, they can very quickly and easily show evidence that they're being underpaid and should be paid more.
Whereas most men actually *are* being paid what they're worth (or a bit more, because men's financial worth is consistently overvalued), so the ones who go in and try to negotiate a higher salary are far less likely to have an actual case for it.
Personally, I absolutely hate arguing about money, so this one really struck home for me. In the various freelance writing negotiations I've dealt with, I've generally taken whatever was offered, and when Kevin kept telling me that I was being underpaid, I wasn't willing to try to talk them into a higher pay rate. This is one of the reasons I love having an agent, so I don't have to think about money and what my writing is worth.
And if I were offered an academic job, I'd be really scared of negotiating for more money, and would be inclined to be grateful for whatever they offered me. I thought this was just my own neurosis, but perhaps it grows out of a pervasive gender schema. If that's true, then it's easier for me to tell myself that I really shouldn't give in to it. It's based on a faulty cognitive process happening somewhere in my head, and I honestly believe life is better when one is thinking clearly. :-)