@RazumikhinPG It's your implication in the way you've worded many of your comments: That this is somehow happening either purely because someone is female or because there's all these socially constructed rules in society that are geared against women and toward men--which is just plain wrong. In fact, if you do the real research you'll find the vast majority of rules and systems in modern society now actually serve women far better than the do men. Seriously, go properly look up this stuff.

https://youtu.be/3WMuzhQXJoY

Women are no longer the "victims", and men certainly aren't the "perpetrators".

"Well, it seems men can have careers and babies tho, why don't they sacrifice one?"

No, they can't. If men want to have a baby without a partner then they realistically have to sacrifice their career to a large degree (unless they're totally loaded, which would be the same for a woman). If they have a partner then they can work out a way that they can have both between them (usually with one staying at home and other going to work, or mixing and matching it up). The exact same thing is true of women in today's society. But, the problem is that it seems we're trying to convince women they can have it all, even without men, and if they aren't getting it all then it's because there's some inherent systems in society standing against them progressing. It's just absurd. And, like I said, I actually think it's dangerous to sell that lie.

And, if we're going to talk about who's having both when it's just one trying to get it all: The vast majority of women these days get child rights over men in any custody disputes, as dictated by completely female-biased laws, yet the men are still paying the vast majority of the costs of raising the child, even when they aren't allowed to see the child. Even when they aren't even the real father. Even when it's a boy who was legally raped by an older woman and she gets pregnant and chooses to keep the child and the boy has literally no say:

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/09/02/statutory-rape-victim-child-support/14953965/

"Equal" and "fair" much?

You can't blame recruiters or men or anything other than nature for them choosing what's best for the business at the end of the day. Shake your fist at nature if you have to shake at something. But this is precisely one of the reasons why it has been established over literally thousands of years that women tend to stay at home and raise the children and men tend to go out and raise the money, because it actually makes best sense given the very reality of nature itself. It's not some socially constructed unfair bias against women or whatever--it is literally just the nature of the beast for the most part.

Wanting it otherwise will lead to a world that serves every need of women literally at the expense of many men (and, to be clear, no, that is not how it is now but the just other way around in favour of men). And if you actually want that--and I'm not saying you specifically do, but I'm rather making the general point--then you have a problem with your thinking.

Genes don't make men smarter than women at IT; genes make men more likely to choose careers and pursuits in IT because the kind of things that IT encompasses are what their minds and instincts are naturally geared towards--so says the years of scientific research.

I'm not particularly bothered about Japan as one example. When people bring up the gender "pay gap" it's an issue that most people think of as being something that it happening across the world and indeed a problem with all of society--and it's just not. It's not even real in most western countries, as most people think of it.

All companies should be aware of equality at work. And when I'm talking about equality, I actually mean equality, not "equality. So, for example, there should be no rules whatsoever that say you have to guarantee a certain number of jobs to women if the very same rule does not apply to men for example.