There’s absolutely no excuse for Twitter not to have a woman on its board
It’s their company, their property, they can have whoever the hell they like on the board of it. Shit, it’s not even a publicly listed company, is it?
All of its investors are also male
And? Seriously? You think this is some appalling form of sexism because only men put their money up to fund this company?
It has a very familiar ring to it. Most newspapers traditionally have more female staff, but they remain under-represented in senior positions.
Yep, the motherhood gap. We know all about that, carry on.
When it comes to sources, men are quoted more often than women, who remain a minority in the eyes of newsgatherers.
Yes, that follows. The majority of those quoted are the powerful: which because of the above will be a male skewed group.
That the same patterns of sexism emerge from a young company without a chauvinistic legacy like that of traditional media is alarming.
Yer what? Bunch of blokes risk their money together, succeed, and now this is sexism?
None of the usual reasons sufficiently add to a good enough pardon as to why in 2013, women still lack a board seat in a young, ground-breaking company. Rather, they point to a solid justification of why there should be one, or more. No excuses.
Dear God. Look, this is not your property. You do not decide what happens to it. You want a woman on the board? You want to be the woman on the board? Go find $15 billion and buy the thing then do as you wish. Until then fuck off because it ain’t yours.