> rather than his character or qualifications The idea is that those two (meritocracy) are not the only criteria used when we select our leaders, employees etc

> rather than his character or qualifications The idea is that those two (meritocracy) are not the only criteria used when we select our leaders, employees etc. so they resort to saying: > It’s not just about that position either. What I think they are saying is that it is not just about the job, which he would do fine, but also about the job of being a woman so that other women can aspire to be like that, feel motivated that people with less privilege than white men can be leaders too. That way you are more qualified for the job.