Trust us, it's not sexism that keeps women out finance, it's science. Or so says the Economist.
The Economist makes the classic correlation-equals-causation mistake in its recent article that reports a study from Chicago that found female MBAs with more testosterone in their saliva tended to engage in riskier gambling behavior and went on to choose high-risk careers like finance.
Naturally, the Economist bills this as justification for the lack of women in finance:
THAT the risk-taking end of the financial industry is dominated by men is unarguable. But does it discriminate against women merely because they are women? Well, it might. But a piece of research just published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences by Paola Sapienza of Northwestern University, near Chicago, suggests an alternative-that it is not a person's sex, per se, that is the basis for discrimination, but the level of his or her testosterone.
But the study didn't definitively find that it was testosterone that caused risky behavior, just that it correlated. It also didn't find that higher levels of testosterone intersected with riskier behavior in men. It was only a matter of time before someone used this study, a biological finding, to justify gender inequalities. What's more, as we've see with the financial crisis, it isn't necessarily a good thing to have high-risk individuals, men or women, dominating the culture of the financial sector. Many of the reforms that have been proposed have been examining how much risk in the financial sector is a good thing.