I think this piece, by no means uniquely, misses a much larger "problem" which is that we are rapidly approaching a world in which very few of the jobs which we are currently training people for; men and women, white collar and blue, will need human involvement.

One of the primary concerns of organised labour for nearly the first century of its existence was reducing the standard working week as technological advances improved productivity. The interesting thing is that the emphasis on female workforce participation is completely aligned with that aim. In the late 60s well over 90% of males over 15 who were fit to work did so, full-time and about 30% of women did too (barely changed since the 30s), while about 25% of women worked part-time.

By the mid nineties male f/t employment was down to around 70% and casualised male p/t work was expanding. Female f/t employment was barely changed at around 35% or so, but over 50% of women worked p/t, many in work that exists in response to regulation rather than to fill a natural need.

It's hard to find good current data that's comparable, but I see no reason to think the trend has reversed, although female f/t work has increased somewhat.

The problem that labour, capital and the political class needs to find the courage to tackle is how to manage the transition to a world where working for wages is not a significant part of the economic model and centralised manufacturing is limited to large durable products with most consumer items manufactured locally using 3D printing and other such technologies.

We are approaching a utopian age, or at least, we could be. Couldn't we?

Beaucoupbob:

“Women deserve better - no argument there, but they should get these benefits from the government, not the employer, passing the costs of children, for example, onto society as a whole.”

Why should these costs be passed onto society? There is no woman alive who has ever had a child with the aim of benefitting society – their aim is simply to benefit themselves. Having a child is a purely selfish thing to do and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that but why should society bear the costs of one group’s selfish desires and not anothers?

Women should not have this choice. They should have to earn their lifestyle like men do without government assistance. Society does not benefit from women having children – it benefits from the shared resources of adults. The only ones who benefit from children are those who have close relationships with them but this is not an economic benefit. It is these relational benefits that women seek and not any betterment of society. This is perfectly legitimate but let’s call it what it is and not expect the taxpayer to carry the burden for it. What does the government do to aid the selfish desires of single people or couples who choose to not have children?

If the government refused to assist women to have children then at lot fewer would have the inflated sense of choice that they now enjoy. There would be more competition in the workplace between genders and women would likely rise to the top in equal numbers. While the government continues to provide a safety net for women then you will not get that competition because women who find the competition a little too hard can always opt out and become mothers.

Often you can observe women who are not doing as well as they hoped at work emphasise the fact that they are mothers as if this is their primary role or their excuse. Make the competition equal and do not allow women to opt out of it with taxpayer assistance.

When I see all these feminists and their male supporters making a REAL effort to change the lives of the many millions of their "sisters" who endure daily repression and abuse right across the planet rather than jousting at statistical straw-men in the West just to enhance their own privilege then and only then will I support them, and not before.
Having mutual-masturbatory "conferences" and issuing press releases does NOTHING to relieve the suffering of the women and girls in almost all of the non-Western societies, and THEY make up a huge majority of the female population of this world.
I doubt dodgy statistics about pay levels or the number of women at Board level in a few big companies matters a great deal to the many millions of women enduring almost slave-like lives plus violence and sexual abuse as a daily condition.
Take the battle to where it is necessary, then I'll believe you really care about women rather than you're own bank account and self image.