It isn't winning the lottery, or some sacred vocation that only a few can achieve.
That sounds absolutely bang on. Time was when I thought being a pilot was like winning the lottery (although even winning the lottery is not really like 'winning the lottery' if you see what I mean).
FWIW, my view on this - I can see both sides. On the one hand, there was a time when I'd have given my left arm to be a BA trainee, and get it all paid for me with a great job at the end. I'd have considered it pretty rich of anyone, male or female, to start dictating to BA their terms and conditions of employment.
On the other hand, once you're trained you're a valuable asset to the company (and you've had a lot of money invested in you), and as such you can set the agenda yourself to some degree. That's what Ms Starmer has done, and although not a pilot myself and therefore probably not qualified to comment, I don't really see a problem with that.
411A
Now, I have certainly flown with several female First Officers, and they were first rate, one was on secondment from BA.
They have to be, in an otherwise male dominated profession.
Isn't that the problem here? The fact is that the profession is very male dominated. What you're suggesting is that women have to be better than the males if they are to get on. Or in other words, a male pilot can be second rate, but a female can't be. That seems pretty unfair to me, and it's probably because there's a lot of truth in it that BA did for a time follow a 'PC' policy and recruited some women who weren't interested enough to see it through. That obviously doesn't apply to Ms Starmer, reading the comments above from some who have worked with her.
If this debate is about equality, then it's clear there isn't equality for women in such a male dominated profession. I wonder what the reaction would have been if it were a male pilot who'd been involved.