I don't know, but what I'm asking is: if your real question is "why mention X's gender?" then why instead ask "why mention X's gender but not mention Y's gender?"?
I think the point is to make the difference more stark; merely saying "why include the manager's gender" doesn't show the inconsistency between calling out the gender in the case of the employer the writer is unhappy with but withholding it in the case of the employee the writer is happy with.
> I think the point is to make the difference more stark; merely saying "why include the manager's gender" doesn't show the inconsistency
But that's the thing -- is the GP's problem really the difference/inconsistency? Is that really what they're trying to highlight? If it is, then I agree, but that's what I was trying to clarify, because it seems more likely to me that making it more "consistent" could've left them unhappier.
I might not have been clear; GP's (GGGP's?) question was rhetorical; their point was to make a point, not to actually suggest a course of action that they preferred.
To put it another way: suppose I ask someone "why did you forget my birthday but not his?" It's not that I want them to forget his, too (though that is one literal interpretation). It's to suggest that the answer isn't merely "I forget birthdays in general."
That would be weird in this situation since "I mention every gender in general" would be quite a bizarre response (and behavior)... and arguably even more fuel for subsequently accuse the speaker of sexism if that's the intention.