Sophie Walker, leader of the Women’s Equality Party, supports linking City executives’ bonuses to their promotion of women

Sophie Walker’s Twitter account is @SophieRunning, and it’s instructive to see what she’s been tweeting and re-tweeting. She recently re-tweeted a short BBC piece on linking City bonuses to gender balance, without commenting on it, thereby presumably indicating her support for positive gender discrimination – for women into highly-paid office-based jobs, anyway. I have yet to find any evidence of her support for more female long-distance lorry drivers, construction workers, sewage workers, garbage collectors…

The start of the article:

Bonuses for City executives should be linked to progress on appointing women to senior roles, a government-commissioned review is recommending.

It is being led by Jayne-Anne Gadhia, chief executive of Virgin Money. She wants financial firms to report and act on creating gender diversity.

“My report proposes addressing the issue in a way that the City will recognise. Make it public, measure it and report on it. What gets published gets done.”

Ms Gadhia said each company should appoint an executive to take responsibility for gender, diversity and inclusion.

The review was announced by Chancellor George Osborne in July as part of the government’s productivity plan aimed at boosting UK output. The final report will be published ahead of the Budget next March.

Ms Gadhia said 60% of the financial services workforce are women, but less than 20% of them reach executive positions.

She believes businesses will increase productivity and improve results by encouraging women into senior roles. [my emphasis]

Does Ms Gadhia really believe that? I doubt it, but if she does, she clearly doesn’t have the intellect to run a branch of this company, let alone be the chief executive of Virgin Money.

Isn’t is extraordinary how every government-commissioned review ends up demanding ever more advantaging of women over men? It’s almost as if the outcomes of the reviews have been determined in advance…

In plain English, what Sophie Walker is endorsing with her re-tweet is the bribing of City executives (mainly men) to encourage them to positively discriminate for women (and, by extension, discriminate against men) when promoting staff.

Does Sophie Walker have no shame?

I think we know the answer to that question…

A link to the Lying Feminist of the Month award we presented to Ms Walker yesterday is here.

6 thoughts on “Sophie Walker, leader of the Women’s Equality Party, supports linking City executives’ bonuses to their promotion of women

  1. Somehow all simple sense and integrity goes in “gender” . Foolishly I was enticed to watch an ITN news item on the “gender pay gap”. First line saying it was an investigation where men and women were paid differently doing almost the same job. Oh I thought maybe looking at the odd ideas of ” same value”. But no. The first example was Wayne Rooney as England Captain and the captain of the women’s football team. She only got £65, 000(I was surprised it was so much) and Wayne had millions ( not how much for playing for England as opposed to the premiership) . Millions watched the women the reporter intoned forgetting to mention the men’ s world cup drew over a billion. Then on to Hollywood where the star of the Hunger Games franchise was shown in an interview claiming being called “bratty” was silencing her , the interview about her poor pay going out at the same time as the news that the success of the franchise meant she is now one of the highest paid Hollywood stars! 
    Then on to taekwondo, which I used to do and still follow, where the recently crowned women’s world champion relies on lottery funding. Not mentioned that this is the case for the whole England squad male and female. 
    So many silly things in one supposed “news” item. Like a report by a child not news at ten. The news was that movie and sports stars can negotiate huge earnings based on their audience size. That calling a female star “bratty” is silencing but the abuse levelled at Rooney at his recent contract negotiations isn’t. And that sports with little or no paying audience struggle to pay practitioners. 
    What I couldn’t get over was the sheer journalistic stupidity of the whole thing. 
    Living in sports mad Manchester I get to go see Ice Hockey, Basketball, Baseball, Lacrosse and Rugby League. For the most part anyone wanting to earn much of a living at these will have to go to Countries where there are bigger audiences. 
    How did we get to the point where a Hollywood stars ploys to help her agent extract a good deal from the Producers becomes so important it’s on News At Ten as anything other than a footnote? 

  2. The women’s equality party is actually a communist party. It operates strictly on quotas for women, because it recognizes that women can not compete with men on an equal footing.
    Nice to see this admission but they need to take their party back in time,at least 30 years to the old east bloc. There is no room for this kind of ‘governance’ in a democratic society and a market economy. Another solution is for women to become housewives,if they can’t compete with men fairly.

  3. Why do these feminists believe that every man simply walked without effort into the position that he is in, and that women should thus be given equality of outcome on a plate? Is it because these self-same feminists have never themselves worked in the real world? The real women, the ones who could be ar*sed working for these ‘senior’ roles, have achieved them – in similar numbers to the women who could be ar*sed being dustbin men, lorry drivers, quarry workers, sewage farm sludge-furtlers and farmers and the like. There has been no barrier other than women’s own choices in these matters. On the other hand – try being a ‘stay at home’ man and see how the system works for you! Single fathers can’t even collect their own children from school gates without raising some sort of ‘The Body Snatchers’ falsetto scream from the massed mothers…

  4. “Determined in advance”?
    No, surely not – that would necessarily require corruption in the highest places.
    It would need there to have been organised long term infiltration of systems of governance, of law, justice and fairness right down to local authorities and multiple other non statutory bodies and organisations.
    Even public opinion would have to be influenced, and in such a way that many were not even aware of their own manipulation.
    Great national treasures like er, well even the BBC for example, would need to be on board across a whole spectrum of policies. Ģiven that their licensing conditions require them to give fair and proportionate coverage to all ‘points of view’, (indeed this is even the name of one of their programmes!) how could it be otherwise.
    So what sort of pernicious political supremacist set up could exercise power like that – they’d have unprincipled tyranical pathological liars, unbalanced in mind and spirit, underhand in all matters, capable of stooping to anything and quite uncaring of doing untold damage to both society and indivduals. Now, who do we.. know…who….could……BE…….like……….

    Oh, ..Er, …

    Is it just me, or is it getting a bit too hot in here?
    Mind if I open a window – or two, anyone?

  5. What nonsense! And no doubt those who are not believers in the religion of diversity and positive discrimination will suffer the usual fate of heretics and burn at the stake.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.