I’ve had an interesting dust-up the past few days over a comment I made about a LinkedIn post. Now I’ve been challenged with a follow-up question that I believe warrants an extended answer, so I decided to write it up here.

It all started when a female VP at a large financial services firm posted a photo with colleagues from a women’s empowerment conference, along with some standard rah-rah commentary. But she also included the hashtag #thefutureisfemale. I publicly challenged the propriety of that, asking her point-blank whether a male executive could equally make use of the hashtag “#thefutureismale.” She didn’t respond.

I’ve since had a couple of comments directed at me from other female leaders challenging my viewpoint, the latter of which drives this post. That commenter saw nothing involving superiority or exclusion, problems I called out in the back-and-forth on the matter, in the original post.

I find it sad and distressing that I’m the one doing this education for people already in the position of leading others. If they’re in such a role and don’t already get this, the company has a huge problem. (Plus, as with all such consultants on this topic, I should be getting huge compensation for this effort.) Regardless, I recommend they (and all companies, for that matter) institute basic respectful treatment training for all levels, especially executives. Because there’s nothing respectful about “#thefutureisfemale,” for anybody.

The basis for that hashtag is a slogan dating back to 1975 coined by a radical feminist separatist who encouraged women to cut all ties with men. It was rooted in the basest of misandry. I wouldn’t expect people today to know that offhand, but perhaps a bit of introspection and research might be expected of an executive to find that out for herself, before foolishly making use of such a phrase. I sincerely doubt the corporate empowerment event that spawned this discussion favored separating from men completely, so why then use a phrase so freighted with such hatred and bitterness?

But let’s put the history aside and simply look at the impact of the words themselves. I fail to see an honest way to view them as anything but exclusionary, or as implying anything but superiority. If the future is female, it pointedly is not male. And it therefore logically follows that in that future, the female will be superior to the male.

Now what is the impact of those words, coming from a VP, on her workforce? First let’s discuss the men under her purview. If I put myself in their shoes, I certainly wouldn’t believe I’d get a fair shake from her or the directors and managers under her direction. I’d assume that I’d be discriminated against as a matter of course – it being clear to me that actively driving that female-superior future is part of my executive leader’s objectives. Quite frankly, I’d be looking for a new job ASAP.

For the female portion of the workforce, this leadership by example sets out a clear and dangerous double standard. Nobody I challenged or who challenged me in the exchange of comments answered my original question about whether a male could do something similar. But we all know the answer; he couldn’t – or at least he couldn’t without almost certainly losing his job. So it tells female employees that they live under a different set of rules, and are free to treat their male coworkers with disrespect and scorn, just as their VP does. Meanwhile, though, they’re to demand the opposite treatment from their male counterparts, who face the termination of their employment for any transgressions.

On the careers page at the website of the firm in question, it says this: “At [this company], we value the unique perspectives and experiences of every individual, as we work hard to maintain our reputation as a welcoming and rewarding place to work for people of all identities and backgrounds.” I would assume that they have a fundamental expectation for their leaders to live by those words. If that’s the case, there’s no place for them to be using the hashtag, “#thefutureisfemale.” And there should be consequences for doing so, the same ones as there would be if someone used “#thefutureismale.”

Indeed, that should be the case at all companies trumpeting their respectful treatment of all employees.

Meanwhile, I’ll also be challenging LinkedIn as to why that hashtag is a recognized one on their supposedly respectful platform. They’ve failed in that regard in the past, so the fight goes on…