Making a hash of it
I’m taking a look at the publisher Hachette’s incloosion policy. I’ve spotted something quite funny (in its own warped way).
It lists a bunch of networks – AgeWise Network, AllTogether Network, Accessibility Network, Gender Balance Network – ah yes that’ll be the one, let’s look at the caption under that one.
The Gender Balance Network aims to eliminate the gender pay gap by focusing on equal recruitment and progression for all genders, at every level of the business.
What?
What is this “the gender pay gap” of which they speak?
If you google it you find it’s the pay gap between men and women. This doesn’t surprise you, because that’s what it’s always meant. What else would it mean?
But, Hachette says this is about all genders – which has to mean more than two, because otherwise they wouldn’t bother to say all. It would be stupid to say “this is about all two genders.” When it’s two you say both, not all.
So what pay gap is Hachette talking about then?
There’s no way to know.
Equalise all the unspecified things!
I wish them all the luck in the world attempting to get “equal recruitment and progression for all genders…” They’re going to need multidimensional spreadsheets of Borgesian complexity to keep track of the advancement up the corporate ladder of all those trans-masculine demi-boys, agender neutrois aeros, and non-binary, genderfluid demi-girls. This is IDIC gone mad.