But surely there are roles where lived experience takes precedence, and others where technical knowledge is more important? I don't think anyone would suggest that a male oncologist with his many years of training would be unsuitable to treat a female breast cancer patient. His technical knowledge and training is the priority here, and the most important. But as @Blister very astutely points out, a doctor who has also sat in the patient's chair tends to have much greater insight into what the patient needs and how they're feeling. And that results in much better care. Is it imperative? No. But it does make a big difference.
Clearly insisting on only having a doctor who has had cancer themselves would be ridiculous, and unsustainable but lived experience can really improve the quality of care, and provides insight.
In this role, the job description says the applicant should have "a successful track record of engaging and empowering a large range of people from a diverse range of cultural and socio-economic backgrounds, in particular young people who menstruate."
This part of the job description and other sections which refer to "engaging with young people and communities" makes this role appear very different to a simple project management role. It's almost a hybrid position.
Young girls, perhaps today more than ever before, experience a lot of difficulty talking about their periods and bodily changes. Talking about their periods with a man makes it infinitely harder and will absolutely prevent some from engaging. We'll ignore the fact there's a whole older demographic in these "communities" who would also be very uncomfortable with discussing periods with a man.
I understand the points you were trying to make earlier about equality. And I agree it's important to consider whether a position really does need to be fulfilled by a woman, or if we're trying to tilt equality too far in the opposite direction.
This isn't about a bloke sitting at a desk directing internal resources and organising funding. The job is about engaging young people and interacting with communities. I don't see how anyone can genuinely believe that a man can do this as effectively as a woman. This is one of those cases where lived experience really does matter.
That's why I went and looked at the job description because while it would have been a bit irritating, if it had been purely a pen-pushing role and not public-facing then the sex of the post-holder would have been far less important. But it's not. We're talking about putting a biological man in a position to engage young females on the subject of periods. It's just not relatable and will undoubtedly affect accessibility of the service for many.