all 4 comments

[–]our_team_is_winning 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Not every gay person is out or wants their sexuality to be their identity. Many companies probably already have LGB on the board that they don't even know about, unless we're forcing everyone to be out? This isn't about LGB. This is about T.

[–]lefterfield 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah, that was the part I noticed. NASDAQ is positive that every single board member of these companies is straight? How? And do they really expect companies to add that question on their applications? Brilliant...

The T's, though, they don't mind outing themselves if there's profit to be made from it.

[–]LilianH 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

NASDAQ is mostly IT stocks isn't it? And it's "self-identify" as a woman or as LGBTQ+ So they already have a big pool of potential candidates to draw on given the number of males who identify as trans in that sector.

[–]davids877 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I figured this would happen with the California board laws as well since they allow self identified gender. "For a 10% raise Joe you're now Jolene for the duration of our board meetings."