Originally Posted by
BlackPeter
True, but I can give you for any chairwoman who did a bad job ten chairmen who underperformed much worse. Based on this statistics - why are their still people around who think that appointing men to board positions might be a good idea? Terrible performers.
Same in many other jobs. Given that the most disgusting and filthy US president of all times is male - how could anybody ever think about picking a male for a politician? Given that Trump is a male, they all must be disgusting crooks and liars, aren't they?
I hope you realize that your argument is non sensical but very sexist.
Sure, in any job there are some people who do a very good job, some people people who do a very bad job and a lot of people who do a mediocre job. No matter whether the job entails emptying rubbish bins, sitting around board tables or running a company or a country. The sex of these people has nothing to do with the quality of the job they are doing ... so maybe just give her the benefit of the doubt, as you would give as well anybody with a member between their legs ...
And yes - the STU board underperformed for some time now. Oops - aren't they mainly men?