[gopher2]

This could be better phrased, but it seems to me:

Working to achieve a 1:1 sex ratio between men and women creates a sense of division by fundamentally looking at men and women as different when they should be looked at as the same in the workplace. It fosters a sense of "otherness", polarization, two separate groups and a sense of difference, when there should be a sense of LACK of importance of gender/sex.

Same pattern applies to racial diversity. By looking at skin color and purposefully categorizing people and trying to achieve a certain balance, you enhance a sense of group-identity and otherness that creates racial division in the first place.

I think this is why this issue seems so intractable. Just by talking about and labeling groups you help reinforce and create those groups and divisions between them.

[lomegor]

How could you solve the problem without indicating the group of people who is being treated differently?

I understand what you are saying, but there's no other way to achieve equality, other than specifically separating the groups that need to be treated differently than they are now. Otherwise you wouldn't even be able to do statistics or anything to see if what you are doing is working.

[gopher2]

I guess first you have to specifically define "the problem" because there are tons of situations like this.

> no other way to achieve equality, other than specifically separating the groups that need to be treated differently than they are now

Is this really true? Perhaps you could find ways to improve processes overall so that "equality" was an outcome of an improved unbiased process without focusing on specific race, sex or beliefs.