Not knowing the gender of an applicamt makes sexism MORE likely

>>131816860
https://archive.is/rCfMx

>>131816901
Thank you walrus-chan

>>131816860
>realize women are only being hired because it's "sexist" to turn down a female applicant
>go back to quotas to enforce your dystopia

>>131816860
Cool cat.

>>131816901
>>131816976
Give ad revenue to my nation reeeeee

>>131816860
>When your study was supposed to prove that sexism exists but instead proves that women are inferior

Soon it will be required by law to not discriminate applicants. They will make it illegal to hire too many people of the same ethnicity/sex.

That's the only they can achieve equality.

>>131817642
0.001 kangaroo dollary doos have been deposited in your nations treasury

>>131818345
>soon

>>131816860
This doesn't sound like it was meant to improve "equality," it sounds like it was designed to prove inequality but branded the opposite way so it could be funded.

>Men continue to outnumber women at senior ranks of the public service, despite vastly outnumbering men at the rank-and-file level.

Also can anybody tell me why only the first part is seen as a problem?

>>131816860
>Women are only every hired based on the fact they have a vagina and a set of tits
>suddenly when her physical apperance is removed from the equation we find out how atrocious her character is

>>131819199
the goal of the left is to destroy the West
the easiest way to do that is give women power

>>131819199
Women in public service do it as a side gig for family spending not as a career.
They're content being the low level shit kickers(of which they don't do much actual work) and just cruising on it.