It&#x27;s a neanderthal idea to determine whether or not you&#x27;re going to hire&#x2F;promote&#x2F;review a candidate based on what plumbing is in their pants.<p>Acknowledging the &#x27;issue&#x27; you described above isn&#x27;t taking a brave stance against overreaching feminism. It is actually <i>illegal</i>. Not to say that people don&#x27;t do it all the time. (Yay, at-will employment!)<p>This conversation is actually a perfect illustration of how one aspect of gender-based discrimination works.<p>And if we&#x27;re going to talk about speaking statistically, according to the Disparate Impact clause, if whatever criteria you use for employment happens to statistically discriminate against a protected class, what you&#x27;re doing is also illegal.<p>(And while we&#x27;re here, black people are more likely to get arrested, and Russians are more likely to be alcoholics. I&#x27;ll be sure to mention that the next time hiring is under debate.)