ETA: This example points up the difference, I think, between "PG" and "prodigy." DD is quite likely the former (I could provide a lot of anecdotal support for the claim that her reasoning ability was that of at least undergraduate level when she was 4-7yo)-- but clearly not the latter. COULD she be in the right domain? Perhaps, but we've certainly not seen anything that lights her fire that way long-term. Mostly, she inhales information and is then 'done' with whatever it is, or dabbles periodically over a longer period of time.
I think males are more likely to develop obsessive interests and thus harness their talents to become prodigies. It's not clear that if as many women were obsessive as men that things would be better. To make a good living it suffices to be very good at one thing, but a parent must play the roles of teacher, dietician, psychologist, and doctor, among other roles. Maybe females have evolved to be more well-rounded and less obsessive because their domestic roles have required that.
