> If you think that the current hiring discrepancy represents a genuine and real skill discrepancy, it is a logical necessity for you think that women are not e

> If you think that the current hiring discrepancy represents a genuine and real skill discrepancy, it is a logical necessity for you think that women are not equally capable. I believe they are not equally interested in the same fields men are and vice-versa. So I don't see any value in forcing women and men to fields which they don't want to be in. > Conversely, if you think women are equally capable, then you must think that the hiring discrepancy is not justified by competency. If you get this far, then it follows that there is a huge opportunity for increasing the pool of competent leaders by requiring 50/50. As they do actually have a goal of increasing the economic potential of the region, this means they should push the issue. I think they are equally capable in certain areas, and less capable in other areas. Just like men are less capable in some areas and more capable in others. It's how nature works, nothing sexist or discriminatory about it. Just like two men are not equal, or two women are not equal. But trying to forcefully push the narrative that somehow men and women are 100% equal is very detrimental to everyone involved.