Mate, "resistant to change" is a baseless phrase when analysing the hiring processes in a country where a rejection based on ethnicity, gender or any other meaningless feature usually leads to the rejected applicant walking out of the courtroom as a multi-millionaire, and the incriminated corporation's reputation taking a costly hit in the public eye for years to come. We're talking billions in settlements, legal fees and fines here. Rest assured that no airline makes a conscious effort to lose that kind of money by denying opportunities to ethnic minorities or women.
There's simply no malicious gate-keeper that'd prevent non-whites or non-males from pursuing a career as a pilot in the West. And as far as females are concerned (hence my sentiment you took umbrage at): Much like there's never going to be more male than female nurses, there's never going to be more female than male pilots either. And that's perfectly fine. That's nature. Men and women aren't as different from one another as the right and religious types would have you believe; but they're not identical, as the left wants us to pretend.
Freedom is giving the women who do want to become a pilot a fair chance. Just hiring every woman who responds to an employment notice in order to fill a quota is the opposite of freedom. It's not just unfair to their male co-applicants and the passengers; most importantly, it's unfair to the women themselves, who have to contend with bearing the label of not having succeeded on their own, but of being dependant on a discriminatory quota. Equality of opportunity, that's freedom. Equality of outcome is preventing free decision-making, that's the antithesis of freedom.