The discoveries made by women have helped to improve a range of processes within numerous domains, as well as made significant progress in general. Therefore, it is critical to give credit where it is due and explore the essential discoveries and breakthroughs made by women (Ignotofsky, 2016; Lutter, 2015). Despite the lack of gender equality in a range of states, women have played an important role in propelling the development of science and industries across the globe. To locate the information concerning innovative solutions and breakthroughs made by women, the following search words were used: “women inventions discoveries.” During the search process, the article titled “32 Amazing Women Inventors” was located. In the article, Sarah Burns and John Harrington (2018) shed light on some of the crucial achievements and discoveries in science and technology made by women. The importance of the topic is quite high due to the problems associated with gender relationships in modern society (Wang & Degol, 2017). One might argue that it is the discovery and not its author that matters, yet the systemic gender disparities have made it important to recognize the contributions made to the global development by women (Eddy & Brownell, 2016). Therefore, discussing the article will add to the promotion of gender equality and equity in modern society. As the title suggests, the article provides a description of 32 women who have advanced science and global development. Although the authors of the report focus primarily on the residents of the United States, the article features some diversity, with Olga D. González-Sanabria (a Puerto-Rico resident and the inventor of Long-life nickel-hydrogen batteries), Rachel Zimmerman (an Ontario citizen and the creator of the blissymbol printer), and several other non-American women being listed in it. When evaluating the reception of the inventions and discoveries made by the women listed in the article, however, one should address certain ambiguities. On the one hand, Burns and Harrington (2018) rightfully acknowledge the importance of the contributions made by these female researchers and inventors, thus creating the impression that the innovations were received with much gratitude and great publicity. On the other hand, there are indications in the report that the specified inventions could have enjoyed warmer reception. For instance, when describing the impact that Patricia Bath’s invention has left in ophthalmology, Burns and Harrington (2018) mention that Bath was referred to as “one of the top 100 living geniuses” (para. 5) in 2007 (see Appendix A). However, Bath made her breakthrough much earlier, which makes one question why it took so long to recognize her significance in healthcare. The issue of recognition and fame is linked not only to the gender issue but also to the racial disparities that could be observed almost globally several decades ago. Specifically, the situation with the lack of attention to Bath’s achievements could be explained by racial profiling that took place in the U.S. at the time (Reich, 2017). Therefore, when considering the reasons for a range of female scientists and innovators of the pr