That's a straw-man. I didn't say that: • I, or anyone should go into a particular field to meet potential partners • That the women or men whom are at the to

That's a straw-man. I didn't say that: • I, or anyone should go into a particular field to meet potential partners • That the women or men whom are at the top of their field chose those fields to meet partners • That people should be hired because of their gender irrespective of their qualifications I said that people behave differently in environments where the subconscious flips a switch that says, "You are now in an environment where you may meet a potential partner." Which is quite different. Do you genuinely believe that universally top-performers behave identically in mixed vs. single gender environments? The basic thesis of the article was that work cultures can be structured in such as to produce a more egalitarian environment without compromising on the quality of employees. The question asked is then why a company would want to do so. Again, my proposition is simply that given that assumption, that a more egalitarian environment is a more pleasant workplace, at least for some subset of employees which includes folks like myself.