Is it not a bit sexist for the Europeans to insist on a female candidate? Surely the two best qualified contenders should be nominated regardless of gender, if any. The whole idea that a cute arse or a pretty face should be deemed a qualification for what should be akin to a senior executive role is, frankly, an insult to women and could mark the start of a very slippery slope. How long will it be before we're obliged to nominate a lesbian, a poof, a female by accident of birth gender fluid, a male by accident of birth gender fluid, a normal woman and, at the bottom of the list, the best qualified candidate i.e. a normal man.
I've often been irked by that myself rats. It's becoming the norm these days in public life that the make up of a govt or some such grouping must have a certain ratio of female to male representation. This, as you rightly point out, is ensuring that the best available candidates for the positions are being excluded by default, all in the name of equality. It's bullshit gone mad.
They want their equal status in all walks of life, but THEY DON'T MIND AVAILING OF CHEAPER CAR INSURANCE from those "IT'S ONLY FOR WIMMIN AND NO-ONE ELSE" websites. Hypocrisy of the highest order. Can you imagine if Blow Job Pierce only quoted men for taxi insurance and told the burds to fuk off and go elsewhere?
Der'd be ructions.
Sent from my T770H using Tapatalk