Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The article and the OP are assuming, as an article of faith, that women are actually equal to men in competence, hirability and mentoring, and therefore, it is bias to think counter to that bias. But no effort was even alluded to, to validate this presumption of equality.
In order to argue that a perception is biased, it is first necessary to demonstrate with empirical data that a contrasting perception is not objective.
In other words, the article starts out with a bias, and then screams bias at anyone with a different bias. "Competency, hirability and mentoring" are simply not values that can be quantified and measures, so equality would be impossible to demonstrate by any objective metric. It's like saying male and female scientists are equal in terms of likeability, good looks, or fashionable dress.
I'm not saying that women are not equal to men. I'm only saying that the equality of women to men needs to be demonstrated, before bias can be attributed to a contrary perception. And the article fails that simple test of logic.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
