For sure. It would be counterproductive to promoting equality to elect someone clearly ill-equipped for the job, or at least ill-equipped compared to other candidates, purely based on gender. That said, an element of tokenism all other things being equal is not a bad thing. As I said, I'd happily see someone like Pidcock or Starmer elected leader. Is it wrong for me to factor in Pidcock's gender based on the fact Labour is yet to have a female leader when making my choice? I don't think so. The point is that she is an equally credible candidate to the others based on merit alone, and if a barrier can be broken down with her selection, then it's fair to deem that a small but not inconsequential plus-point in her favour (but equally I do not think a position to the contrary is unreasonable).