Conrad, in your piece was a comment I found really interesting and I wonder whether you might like to expand on it. That comment was

'we cannot sit here and think that the sum of all intelligence, innovation and wisdom sits in the hands of university-educated white men – an increasingly small part of the population.'

While I understand and accept your point about the desirability of creating gender equitability, this particular extract is a little difficult to unpack and could lead the reader's thoughts in several directions.

For example, is it a university education that you regard as being problematic? Apparently it isn't, because the examples you give of successful women are university educated. However, if it is, then as you point out, wouldn't that tend to make an argument for more, not less male participation in leadership, since university educated males are 'an increasingly small part of the population.'? I understand the current gender ratio at university is around 5:3 in favour of women (excluding foreign students). Of course, within the STEM fields it is around 90:10 in favour of men.

On the other hand, if it is the case that a university education is a desirable leadership criterion, then surely we need to be promoting a more even opportunity for males to acquire that education, so that we can ensure a good pool of male candidates are available to fill the seats alongside the 50% of females at the board table?

Your initial example was that you had a pool of candidates that was 60% female for a job that required accounting and finance background. Doesn't this reflect pretty closely the gender ratio of people working in that field at a mid-senior level, which reflects the gender ratio of students at university around 10-15 years ago?

Thanks for the article, I hope you can find the time to give us your thoughts on these questions.

Craig Minns, universities require a certain level of prior learning results or experience from prospective students.

If there are currently more female students at Australian Universities, then I take that to mean that currently more females are attaining the correct prerequisites to get into universities.

Maybe the problems with the education of our boys lies with the schooling they currently go through?
Or maybe there are just more female students now, with more choice of study at universities than they ever had before, who are now wanting to go to university?

It wasn't so long ago that it wasn't considered appropriate for females to go to university because they would be needed at home to look after their men and children.

University places are achieved by merit, not gender, and that is how it should be.

Based on results and historical precedents we actually can assume that all innovation and wisdom is to be found in the White population though a university education isn't a pre-requisite and gender isn't an issue.
If you want to live in a technologically advanced, first world society or even a stable third world one where malnutrition isn't the norm the reins have to be in the hands of White men and women.
It's all academic anyway, due to the globalisation of business, out of control immigration and purposeful racial demographic change the future outlook for Australia is a standard of living something like that currently enjoyed by the inhabitants of Thailand or Indonesia.
We'll once again see a brain drain with all our best and brightest White men and women going overseas, to the U.S, China and the E.U. because there won't be jobs for graduates or the safe and prosperous society which is needed to nurture and sustain talented people.

I think the author has made a great case for why there hasn't been as much progress and people would like. It's because we have clueless people such as him, driving the bus.

As the first post pointed out there are lots of women accountants and lawyers. Try finding a female network engineer, or plumber, or brick layer.

But it's okay you just have to remember its the middle aged white mans fault.

the whole term 'gender equality' is idiotic and usually used by feminist for some ideological purpose. Treating all people fairly at least recognises the fact that men and women are different. Men don't need to take off to breast feed babies or have regular days off at certain times of the month. Not every company can be like the public service which pays people no matter what their performance ( or even if they are at work or not) because the money comes from the public trough.Surely the last Government and Captains picks taught us something. It appears not!

Yes J.O.M.
We need to invest in our brightest people and their better ideas.
And that probably means removing the current road blocks that prevent that?
Namely, the corporate psychos, who chase power in the way a moth chases the flame.

And who bully and critique those with the best ideas; at least until they can present them as their own, and in so doing, accept all the acclaim, kudos and reward!

These are the seriously and serially incompetent money wasting/money burning empire builders, who surround themselves with 2-3 super competent assistants.
Who are often expected to work around the clock fixing the messes made by the born to rule emperors; (tinpot potentates) and who are all too often rewarded by becoming verbal punching bags for these rogue employers; or so called leaders!?

And in that context, one notes that K.R. gave away Pulsed Laser Light enrichment to the Yanks; (which ought to be rescinded) and or, leading by example, Alpha male T.A., has just one single token female in his Cabinet; and arguably, the most (only) competent one there?

Conversely, he has appointed/anointed one as Speaker!
Who has highlighted as nobody before has; the need for a truly independent Speaker; as seen in the real; and much spruiked, Westminster system.

I mean, would one appoint a member of one team or corner of either gender, to referee or umpire; and expect entirely impartial decisions?
Well, would one?

And then one bad decision compounded and followed by another; T.A., doesn't understand why he's doing so badly in the polls!
Rhrosty.