Yes, I do personally think that there should be some exceptions to gender equality in the workplace. Women in general, do have a harder time doing some tasks than men, and it would be silly to have them work them just because they have to have gender equality in the workplace.
There are lots of jobs where the best person should have the job no matter if it is a male or female. I do not want a female firefighter that was twenty people less than a man trying to save my life when there was a better male but she was hired because she is female.
Sometimes, gender equality in the workplace can be dangerous. Gender equality in the Army would place women directly in combat situations where they might be kidnapped and tortured. Gender equality in steelyards might require women to lift the same amount of weight as men, resulting in potential injury or plant accidents.
I support gender equity in the vast majority of cases, but every now and then, there may be a job where men or women will significantly outperform the other gender. For example, rape counselors who counsel women (the majority of victims) should probably be female is most cases. Similarly, most firemen should be men unless a woman can meet the same physical demands.
Gender equality does not mean hiring women simply because there aren't enough in the workspace; it means providing the same opportunities and salary to men and women. In fact, gender equality really means taking gender completely out of the equation of someone's job performance. If we make exceptions to rules about gender equality when we haven't actually reached it yet, there's no such thing as gender equality at all.
Gender equality has been a long fight that is still not completed, women still statistically make less for the same jobs. Putting further restrictions on gender equality when we haven't even arrived where we need to be as a society yet would send us in the wrong direction, back towards old ways that we have gotten past and should keep behind us.