Jezebel 
Enter your username and password.
New York, 12:55 AM
Thu Nov 12
67 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors:
tips@jezebel.com
Editor-in-Chief:
Anna Holmes
Email | Twitter
Deputy Editor:
Dodai Stewart
Email | Twitter
Senior Contributing Editor:
Tracie Egan
Email | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Anna North
Email | Twitter
Sadie Stein
Email | Twitter
Reporter:
Irin Carmon
Email
Editorial Assistant:
Margaret Hartmann
Email | Twitter
Contributors:
Jenna Sauers
Email
Rich Juzwiak
Email | Twitter
Lizzie Skurnick
Email
Interns:
Katy Kelleher
Twitter
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
08/28/09
The guys play all or nothing. I'm always with the prudent cash reserves.
That said, there are other women in the group who win on the regular so who knows?
08/27/09
08/27/09
08/27/09
In fact, in many studies men and women take risks equally often. I cited a study yesterday that gauged risk-taking in the form of a math test, that found that men and women were nearly equally likely to take risks after the age of 13. Ben Barres (a neuroscientist who's published a lot about discrimination against women in science) has pointed out that women are MUCH more likely to engage in risky behavior in some ways: he gave the examples of the gender ratio of kidney donation, for example, or secretly housing Jewish people during the Holocaust, both of which are undeniably risky and tended to skew way toward women.
08/27/09
Namely, women on the whole take fewer risks, but they also trade less frequently and perform better over long periods of time. Basically, if you take all traders and split them into groups of men and women, the women perform better.
I work in finance as a trader, and as many below have mentioned, sexism in finance is so rampant it's comical.
I have never been in an industry with such a thick glass ceiling, or toleration of near-constant sexual harassment. The world of finance is like a lumbering, racist, sexist dinosaur in a fast moving world. The tech industry has dozens of top female executives. In finance, you can count the women on one hand.
Moreover, the lack of women in trading has to do with both sexism and performance... ism. Namely, women are harassed and mocked, but since women generally have different trading patterns than men, their performance reports read differently. Women and men who trade more conservatively rarely hit those massive 25% single returns, but they also rarely fail so spectacularly as those that do.
Unfortunately, the same mentality that drove our financial world into its current condition also keeps out those who would trade for the long term. People who take massive risks and shine super-bright get all the attention. Those that simmer under the surface, constantly nailing 15% returns never bubble up.
The financial world is littered with the corpses of those who shined so bright only to "lose their touch." They didn't lose their touch. They were fucking lucky.
08/27/09
08/27/09
Are there any female-friendly firms out there?
08/27/09
08/27/09
08/27/09
08/27/09
And 85 Broads was created by women out of Goldman Sachs.Anyone consider the lack of work/life balance and growing initiatives like 85 Broads being a reason why women aren't in the field in such high numbers YET?
08/27/09
I can see how finance may not appeal to a lot of women - especially those who want kids. The hours can be brutal. There's high levels of risk and absolute accountability. I'd agree work/life balance is probably a larger factor than hormones...
08/27/09
It's more masculine than a testicle down there.
However, I will say that I know a few women who are successful investment bankers, and they're no less feminine than any other woman. Additionally, we have a few very successful female brokers in my office. And finally, while progress in the financial world may be slow going for women, take a look at Sheila Bair, Meredith Whitney, and Sallie Krawchek. Say what you will about their management styles, but you can't argue that they wouldn't be where they are forty years ago.
08/27/09
08/27/09
And they've been pretty forgiving of Obama.
08/27/09
08/27/09
08/27/09
Even if that is the case, vehemently denying there could be any truth in the science isn't the way to counteract jackassed comments or regulations as if they needed ANY justification at all, anyway.
08/27/09
08/27/09
Also, to frame this post as "bad" vs "good" traders, when all the original article & study talked about was attitude towards risk just seems to be inviting a controversy.
08/27/09
The thing is, discrimination is not just about a blatant attempt to deny a group certain rights or opportunities. It is also very much about how generalizations about a particular group can lead to unintentional denial of rights and opportunities by people who otherwise mean well. For example, a school career counselor who guides an ambitious female student away from finance, because he or she believes that female students are generally not interested in finance, and therefore this student won't be either.
I do believe that, generally speaking, men and women are different. I also believe that most people hear that, don't pay attention to possible nuances, and start applying generalizations to individuals, which ultimately leads to discrimination. Talking about the differences in individual hormone profiles would be helpful,but that takes the discussion to a level of nuance that many people aren't willing to go to.
08/27/09
08/27/09
08/27/09
To your other point re: discussing discrimination affects performance: You're right, a mere mention (even if untrue) that one group is better than another at something will 100% affect performance and cause that to actually become true (Sway is an excellent book on this subject). HOWEVER, does that mean that we cannot study & discuss biological differences in the brain chemistry between the sexes? I would hope not. Really, I refuse to live in a world where we can't talk about large swaths of scientific material because it affects individual performance - - - that's not intellectually responsible. How do you deal with the fact that that discussion can and does affect performance? Through social programs, structural changes, etc. But you can't implement those changes without having a nuanced and responsible understanding of what is going on - - - something you're denying yourself if we're forced to put our collective fingers in our ears.
08/27/09
08/27/09
08/27/09
08/27/09
08/27/09
08/27/09
08/27/09
08/27/09
08/27/09
I think that the crux of our disagreement is instead that I don't think a priori that "women can be discriminated against" is only a caveat. I think it's likely one of the more important factors. And if that's so, attributing a gender gap primarily to testosterone instead of discrimination is not just "a different angle;" that wording implies the effects are at least equal. If they are not comparable effects in magnitude, ignoring the largest effect when explaining a phenomenon is worthy of critique- a point on which we also disagree, I think.
08/27/09
08/27/09
*sigh*
Maybe risk-taking is not such a great behavior to have? See: our current economic downturn.
08/27/09
08/27/09
08/27/09