Kate Stewart: Gender equality not about numbers

IN a world where we now get to pick our own gender neutral pronouns, we are still left to battle with the age-old issue of gender inequality, particularly in the workplace.

Canada seems to have taken the matter to heart, insisting on a gender-balanced Cabinet since 2015 with plans to expand the 50/50 quota system to all government departments but is this the most effective way of dealing with inequality? Does it even deal with it at all?

I have some reservations.

In a bid to appear politically correct and progressive they are actually doing a disservice to the issue of gender equality having it based on quotas rather than skill or suitability.

Any true believer has the right to feel insulted. This policy is only based on the making up of numbers.

It's as if the powers that be have all but given up on finding the right and proper solution and have instead surrendered to the, dare I say it, stereotypical nagging of a fishwife. A desperate bid to shut them up? Gotta keep the little lady happy, happy wife - happy life and all the other patronising cliches.

Others may beg to differ but I don't see this as a win for women and/or equality as the policy does nothing to address actual ability and recognise true personal worth.

Whatever the position, whether it be a chef, cashier or Cabinet minister, I want to know the individual was employed because they were the best candidate for the job. The most committed, passionate, qualified and where necessary, experienced.

Gender aside, who could possibly feel flattered and appreciated to be offered employment when the ideals of equality and equity get lost in mandated equation.

This is not progression. It's little more than a platitude ... a token gesture with little or no substance but one that gives the impression of keeping up appearances.

For me, gender equality isn't about the numbers, it's about making sure that both genders receive equal pay and conditions for assuming the same roles. The ratios shouldn't even be a factor but in Canada's case, it appears to be the prime focus.

I hope that New Zealand and the PC brigade, in a rush to do the "right thing", don't leap on the bandwagon without first looking both ways and exploring the true meaning of gender equality.

What self-respecting woman could honestly claim this as a win, knowing their employment is largely based on math as opposed to merit.

Seems like a pretty hollow victory in my book.

The only number we should be focusing on is the one that represents the pay packet.

We are after all talking about equality not making up numbers for a country square-dance for heaven's sake.

The real irony though is that this apparent forward-thinking, windfall for women in Canada comes with restrictions. They can't possibly be permitted more than their 50 per cent quota. God forbid they actually get to outnumber the blokes.

It's like giving with one hand while suppressing with the other. It's a bloody joke!

Maybe I've got it all wrong but I thought the whole idea of gender equality was to sell women as employees of equal value not sell themselves short by being hired to fill a highly questionable quota.

-Please address your feedback to Miss. Quota'd at investik8@gmail.com.