The other major issue she didn't seem to pick up on well enough imo is this idea that traits that are more commonly found in men are more linked to success in the workplace. It was a bit unclear as to whether "success in the workplace" refers to personal career success or actual success of the company. Because if it's the former, then surely that's evidence of the exact point that men are rewarded purely because of their maleness. If it's the latter, then there's more of an argument that men are in those position because they're more effective, but even then, you could argue that they're more effective because they're operating in a system that maximizes their natural traits, and devalues the qualities that women are more likely to possess. He does say at one point that this might be the case and that we simply don't have the data on that yet. But to me, saying that men get paid more than women because they happen to possess particular qualities that are better rewarded in the workplace, and therefore that doesn't count as gender bias is ridiculous, especially when it's generally men who are making the decisions as to what is valuable to a company.
