How could they consider this an even remotely inclusive way to build a workplace?
My experience is in Japan, but I could summarise a common opinion as "Men and women are different and should be treated differently".
Recently, when asking for a recommendation for a tax credit accountant, I was asked if I would prefer a man or a woman. The question was very matter of fact and not thought of as unusual.
To make things clear: I think this is nonsense and should be called out when it comes up.
Don't be such a cultural imperialist.
You think you're "doing the right thing" -- but isn't it "wrong" to assume your culture's current (in flux) definition of culturally "progressive" values is actually a moral right?
Come to China and see what things are like. Then maybe you can feel entitled to dictate what to call out.
You think your culture is morally supremacist, but are you so sure you are so right? Maybe your way is not the only "right" way -- maybe you can learn from other cultures. But you don't be open to doing that while you are so sure of your own moral supremacism. And being so certain, so full of passionate intensity of your own righteousness -- well that's just likely to make you less open to correction and learning, and more likely to be wrong, isn't it?
If your culture is so adept at "equality" (even "gender equality") then why are your genders ( races / politics ) so divided? In light of the actual state of things, rather than how you prefer to see them ( through a culturally imperialist lens of your own moral supremacism ) -- isn't it more likely that divisions have been artificially and deliberately inflamed, to keep you all fighting each other, to distract you from placing the blame on those in power? To make you all easier to control, in other words.
The best slaves are the ones who think they are free. "Progressive liberal values" has been a great way to divide people into groups to better distract and control them, and get them to channel their (perhaps otherwise constructively directed) emotions, into useless vitriol and conflict. Also stressed out combat-mode people purchase more, and think less about it. So, a harmful way to bolster consumer economy.
Also it's incorrect to say "gender equality" is not an issue "in Asia". It's just you don't understand how it is. In China, Mao made women and men equal before feminism "liberated" Western women.
But of course, "the West got there first" and better -- Oldest fake narrative in the book, buddy.
Comments should get more civil and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive.
https://cpianalysis.org/2017/10/23/the-struggle-for-gender-e...
I also think the rest of your critique doesn't really hold together. You seem to be playing both sides of your ambivalence on gender equality. And for somebody opposed to one culture criticizing another, you seem awfully willing to be very vigorous in criticizing another culture.
Still, in the post-post-socialism (i.e. when the society recovered from the right-wing dominance of transition years) many of these returned to these values and I bet if one would to do an earnest comparison (which Western media rarely want, too much bias) they'd probably be able to count significantly more females in high politics, enterprise management and even entrepreneurship than in places like the USA, Ireland, Switzerland or other more conservative western countries.
In some of those countries, like Croatia and Serbia (even if they'd hate to admit it), even the right has been pushed, partly by inherited social norms and partly by strong female presence in the left to de-masculinise as well. Hence the female right-wing president in Croatia and the far-right lesbian prime minister in Serbia.
The rest of your post makes a lot of assumptions about views and my background, but I certainly didn't say anything about them my comment.
Did you know in China almost no women change their last name to their husband's upon marriage (and it's been this way long before feminism even became a thing in the West)?
Whereas today in the "progressive" West it is still expected that women change their last name to their husband's and most do.
I think it is silly to try to compare across cultures by looking for the presence or absence of specific customs, because you'll always be biased by your awareness of practices in your own culture, and ignorance of those in a different culture.
Not in Spain, where everyone keeps their last names and it was traditionally so before feminism. Children get two last names, traditionally the first from the father and then from the mother, but the order can be reversed.
Yeah, I did a group interview at a San Diego startup that was like that. 90% of the developers were male, but 90% of the recruiters were young, attractive women with no background in tech. We didn't meet them face-to-face until we'd been flown out to San Diego, so it wasn't even about piquing people's interest to get them to the interview. Best I can figure is "male nerds are more likely to accept our laughably low salary offer if they think they might get to be near cute girls." It was really creepy.
> It is refreshing.
"Refreshing" in what way?
I can only speak from the perspective of the IT market in my own region, but whenever a company hires more females (including but not exclusive to the young, attractive ones) it was a really change for the better in every regard.
When surrounded by more females in offices men are better groomed, behave more professionally, and since they now have a much more complete social surrounding they are under less stress. Productivity might seem to suffer on the surface (chatting up and banter) but in reality it usually improves as a consequence of all these mentioned factors.
Pretty sure the same would happen in a, say, administrative office, accountant shop or medical practice that was all female after you'd get a few more guys in there.
Attractiveness of the persons of the other sex also plays a role, despite it not being a popular thing to say, so if the company can pull it of and maintain the same business value of such a hire it's prudent to do so.
How now?
how now?
1. You consider that men and women have identical interests and you strive towards equal representation in your workforce because there is equal representation in society.
2. You consider that men and women have different interests and you strive to accommodate the different interests by diversifying the job offering.
Women tend to be more agreeable than men, more focused on people than things and if you want more women in your company it pays to focus on creating jobs based on relating. For example, I don't have hard data at hand but based on my experience, the IT recruitment field is dominated by women.
I absolutely believe it should be, but for the vast majority of human history, in the vast majority of civilizations, inclusivity was not a goal. It's certainly not universal now.