Why must women prove that they’re better than men?

‘I’m bewildered by how the male, pale and stale devalue women’

Why can’t a woman be more like a man?

Men are so honest, so thoroughly square;

Eternally noble, historic’ly fair; Who, when you win, will always give your back a pat.

Why can’t a woman be like that? Why can’t a woman be more like a man?

Women are irrational, that’s all there is to that!

Heads full of cotton, hay, and rags! They’re exasperating, irritating, vacillating, calculating, agitating,

Maddening and infuriating hags!

I do hope I won’t get into trouble for publishing this excerpt from a new report into female representation in the boardrooms of FTSE 350 companies. The chaps are feeling in a bit of a tight squeeze, you see, what with the monstrous regiment hammering at the door.

One century you give these martinets suffrage, the next they start wanting mortgages, independence and a seat on the board. That means one fewer fellow, don’t they realise?

There’s where the real discrimination lies; women just aren’t men and never will be. And they can’t get a proper grasp on what’s going on because it causes the hay and rags to spill out of their heads.

No, of course we don’t include Her Majesty. Or Theresa May. Or Dame Helena Morrissey at Legal & General Investment Management, which has £894billion of assets under management. Or that slip of a thing running ITV – used to be an air hostess, doors to manual and all that.

Dame Carolyn Mccall, and she used to run easyjet? Right. Well, don’t get us started on lassies identifying as laddies just to get round us, because we don’t have any truck with transgenderism. That Per Una frock in Gerald’s office belongs to his wife and we’ll speak no more about it.

Here in 2018, I feel so disheartened by the dismal, misogynistic report released this week by the Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy that I find it impossible to smile, even though parts of it appear to have come straight out of a Monty Python skit.

Excuses given by companies that have failed to introduce gender diversity to their top tier include (in your best Cholmondley-warner voice) “women aren’t a good fit”, “most of them don’t want the hassle” and “the issues are extremely complex”.

My favourite was “women will insist on missing board meetings once a month when we chase them into a hut on the edge of the village to bleed”. I paraphrase, but not much. It’s depressing that just when we think we are moving forward with a push for equal pay, actual equality of opportunity is still a pipe dream. Here we are in 2018 celebrating suffragists and suffragettes, waving purple, green and white flags but – while I wouldn’t go as far as saying #Soldapup – we appear to be celebrating, if not a pyrrhic victory then a piecemeal one because common or garden social justice eludes women.

Eight in 10 firms pay men more than women, who bring home an average of 18.4 per cent less than male colleagues. Is that what men in power want for their daughters, wives and mothers? It sure as heck looks like it.

I am the mother of girls and every day I am bewildered by the way the male, pale and stale systematically devalue women in the workplace. Why would they want to limit the pool of talent to 50 per cent of the population? And even that is usually narrowed down further to an old boys’ network comprising those of the same background who attended the same schools and universities and play at the same golf clubs.

Just yesterday the Bank of England failed to appoint a woman to its hugely influential rate-setting committee. At present just one of the nine members is female. When a vacancy arose four women and one man were shortlisted. Guess who got it?

Nobody doubts Prof Jonathan Haskel’s ability to do the job, nonetheless Rachel Reeves, chairman of the Commons business committee, described the appointment as “truly staggering”, adding: “The fact that four women were shortlisted shows that there are plenty of capable and well qualified women, but yet again top jobs seem to be reserved for men.”

Of course, sometimes the man is the best person for a top job; but can it really be the case in every one of the 16 per cent of UK boardrooms that have no women?

As of November last year, women took up 27.7 per cent of directors’ seats on FTSE 100 boards, according to the Cranfield School of Management’s annual Female FTSE benchmarking report. The Government’s target is a third by 2020.

But not all board members are created equal. Oh no. Drill down into these figures and you find that the vast majority of these women hold non-executive positions, which is to say their role is to check and monitor.

The proportion of women holding executive directorships, enabling them to drive change or shape strategy is just under 10 per cent. Studies have shown a board needs at least three women out of 12 or 15 positions for them to be heard and have influence.

The jury is out on whether women on boards mean greater profits, but why must women be expected to prove they are better than men just to be treated the same as them? If you are still in any doubt, re-read this, and transpose the word “men” and “women”; I’ve just done it myself and it’s unexpectedly shocking.

Without wishing to sound like a Pinterest slogan, feminism is a journey, not a destination. I just hope my daughters don’t start asking: “Are we nearly there yet?” Because the answer is: “Not for an unconscionably long time.”