Equal Isn't Always 50%

For John, BLUF:  We should look for talent wherever we can find it and encourage all to work, even if it is raising children, which is a lot of work if done right.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

The futile nature of gender equality

From USA Today and Ms Suzanne Venker we have a look at the statistics, in a general sort of way.

This article, published on the 14th of December, begins:

On Wednesday more than two dozen executives at companies such as Bank of America Corp. and LinkedIn Corp. signed a pledge to get more women out of the home and into our nation’s boardrooms.  The goal of this initiative, entitled Paradigm for Parity, is to have women represent 50% of the “upper echelons” by 2030.  Only then, these advocates believe, will America have achieved equality.

But gender parity in the workforce is futile.  There will never be enough women who want that kind of life — not as long as they choose to have children.  Indeed, children are “a key factor” in how women choose to structure their lives.

Basically Ms Venker is saying that if men and women are of equal capability and a percentage of women are stay at home moms, then were won't be enough women around.

Going to Wikipedia:

	Males	Females
Totals	101,612,000	104,577,000
In Labor Force	70,417,116	59,295,159

So, right off the bat "half" looks a little unfair.

If you accept that there are about 4 million births a year and ten percent of mothers drop out of the work force for a couple of years (and 2 percent of fathers), then it looks like this:

	Males	Females
Adjusted Number	70,017,116	57,295,159
Labor Force Percent	55%	45%

So, how is half of all folks in the upper echelon female fair?

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

: Column