>As if having male founders of all major firms is a thing to be avoided. I don't think that's the intended read. If women are 50% of the population, yet 0% ar

>As if having male founders of all major firms is a thing to be avoided. I don't think that's the intended read. If women are 50% of the population, yet 0% are represented as leaders in a specific industry (which I don't think is completely true here, BTW), I don't think it's unreasonable to ask why. There must be a reason beyond sheer chance, and I think the real question being asked is whether it's an issue of opportunity or access. So, why wouldn't we want to ensure that there are no issues with the playing field? Who does this hurt? >promoting this intersectional garbage? What is it, specifically, that bothers you so much about this?