Do avoid saying this about a woman, about, say, Marissa Mayer, present CEO at Yahoo. Her personal and professional lives are rightly evaluated separately.
They aren't, though. When she announced the "no remote working rule" she was criticised for having babycare facilities next to her office, allowing her to care for her child at work. And it was a valid criticism- she was subjecting her employees to conditions that she insulated herself from.
If you are evaluating a person as a whole (which the article is), you can't ignore their personal life without also losing a lot of important context.
Think about what you're saying. I hope by now you are aware that women rightly object to this kind of mixing of the personal and professional
I think they object to being unfairly singled out on that basis, not that people shouldn't ever take someone's personal life into account in general.
They aren't, though. When she announced the "no remote working rule" she was criticised for having babycare facilities next to her office, allowing her to care for her child at work. And it was a valid criticism- she was subjecting her employees to conditions that she insulated herself from.
If you are evaluating a person as a whole (which the article is), you can't ignore their personal life without also losing a lot of important context.
Think about what you're saying. I hope by now you are aware that women rightly object to this kind of mixing of the personal and professional
I think they object to being unfairly singled out on that basis, not that people shouldn't ever take someone's personal life into account in general.