Why we need more (good) female traders

@falstaff Great post… I am definitely in the younger men category, perhaps, although I am no longer entitled to a young persons’ railcard :slight_smile:


@peterma nice one, Peter

@peterma - I postulate that it is NOT the replies which "Are Awful - Ain’t they ?"

I suggest that for the reasons we have been examining in some of the latter posts in this thread, it is actually the question which is flawed !

Taking the form as it does when applied by an experienced Barrister, to a virgin defendant in a trial situation - "Have you stopped beating your wife yet ? "

Thank you PMH - I do feel that there may be the germ of understanding beginning to be hatched in this thread ! :sunglasses:

1 Like

@Falstaff Thank you for breaking the monotony of my monologue !!


Piers Margan - just bet some “spokeswoman” on ITV “Good Morning Britain” $500 that “Nobody wants to see ugly women talking about world peace - ratings will tank !” She said “i’ll take you up on that” - but clearly without great commitment !

Like him or not, he is a bright man ! :laughing:

[Edit - during the conversation which followed he saiid “As the only man here” and Mariella Frostrop said “The token man…”

This situation is now quite normal on Daytime tv - just “a token man” here and there. ]

Nah, the question was positive i.e. what more can be done - that’s what I meant about ability to quick think or multi task under stress, the flaw lies with the answer.

Anyways, I’ll quote another airline CEO yesterday which sums up many forward thinking business people in the 21st century:

“Not only is diversity a competitive advantage, it’s the right business thing to do …”



One of the points about this thread is diversity: while focusing on the subject of women in finance,

I also mentioned that diversity in this sector, especially at more senior levels, is also severely low

in terms of ethnic diversity.

However there have not been any people starting that topic up on Babypips forums; yet it is incumbent on companies

to try creating an atmosphere that welcomes diverse backgrounds: some finance sector employers are better at it,

but others terrible. In some cases, stories emerged of ethnic minority women being treated like

exotic playthings - fair game for all kinds of assumptions and comments or lower bonuses - which

basically reinforces the reputation of s#xist, all-white, all-male finance cultures.

Diversity is a great thing but only when there is someone willing to put themselves in the shoes

of someone who is not like them, and try to simply leave his/her stereotypes about that person’s

ethnicity or different background (e.g. sexual orientation) at the door when dealing with them in

the workplace.

We need more, not less, diversity in companies, because one-colour, one-sex, one-culture work

environments are possibly what created the 2009 crash, which is the very proposition with which

I started this whole thread.

This is my opinion only, and I respect what others think but I am profoundly convinced of this and

for this reason I can say that I feel deeply about this issue, as though it were a family matter.

1 Like



former CEO at Merrill Lynch and founder of Ellevest:




We appear to live in a world turned upside down, since the days of “The Cold War” - where the old “Communist Countries” are now way more enterprising and hard working than the old “Capitalist Countries” - where Eastern Europeans are the “employees of choice” in the uk because of their work ethic in comparison to the “Entitlement cuture of Brits”, China is way ahead of the west in Electronics design and manufacture, (We can no longer even design even a simple television) - Russia is the undisputed software king of the world and citizens in Asia are way better educated and set the highest achievement standards for education.

Where America is now more leftist than either of the two main “Communist Countries” which value enterprise, knowledge and ability - ie traditional Capitalist values, some of us have not yet or are only just beginning to realise the magnitude of the changes which have taken place since “Leftism” collapsed completely in these places.

Their citizens used to be told "Don’t think- just toe the line and do as you’re told, whereas in the west we were told “think, be enterprising, strive to excel” !

Now - we are now being told “don’t think”, “striving to achieve is bad” (pointless) - “some people just have a Right to be promoted above anyone else” because of their “S#x, race, disability”.

It is said that the two old enemies ( the two main Communist blocs) are now co-operating and forming alliances.

We in the old Capitalist Countries are being “Led” “cajoled” and bullied into conforming with new dogma the vast majority of th epopulation neither desire, nor approve of. We are “Regulated” to the state of entirely being shackled into being unable to compete and in many cases the Industry of “Social Justice” which is parasitic on the backs of workers is so powerful, that nobody dares to stand up against it.

It is a great money earner for some, kids ! :wink:

But hey

“Don’t think !” :slight_smile:

Yes that is one f the attributes which women are repued to have :sunglasses:

The research seems to show women to be good investors of the “Buy and hold” persuasion as well.

However they are (or were in the past) notoriously poor in spacial awareness / map reading and women mathematicians are pretty rare.

I wonder if they feel disadvantaged by charts ?

1 Like

Thing is, there is nothing wrong about a sector’s under-represented group wanting to break into itr: we positively encourage men to go into mostly-female environment (eg. nursing or primary schools) because we see it
as a good, progressive move that ultimately benefits the workforce in that system.

We do not have to be male or female to do most jobs, indeed in a service-base economy there are very few jobs,
from bus-driver to cafe’ barista to train operator, that men or women cannot do interchangeably and equally well:
gone are the heavy-plant industries that fed entire communities in Western Europe in the day of the railways or
industrialisation, where men’s obviously superior upper-body strength was instrumental in working down coal mines,
or excavating tunnels for new train routes, or ship-building, etc. So men’s traditional jobs requiring their strength have
been reduced and women have become direct competitors in areas that do not require such physical attributes to get
the job done.

This poses a problem for men, not women, and it is they who must adapt to the new reality of being no longer sole
providers but sharing more equally in the household economy, which also means doing what working women have done for decades, that is, being both at work outside the home and inside it, by which I do not mean fixing the odd lightbulb but actually taking an active interest in planning things for the family, for the children, and cooking, washing, cleaning, etc. Given that, in spite of automation in homes, those chores still need to be done whatever the century, men and women should share it equally if they have more-or-less equal jobs outwith the home: if one person is earning ten times what the other earns, to take an extreme and theoretical example, then it is more black-and-white who should prioritise spending more time pursuing work away from home and who should take more care of the running of the household, but again that should not be a choice imposed by society.

Think about the years of education that we put girls through: is it all for nothing once they get a man to live with? Are they expected to just become house-bound cleaners? Is that not a terrible waste of ambition? I would be sad if we regressed to those days, it would be terrible for everyone. Instead of making women who want a career AND children feel like terrible mothers and inadequate at everything, we should make men who don’t lift a finger at home or don’t demand more time with their children feel as terrible fathers and inadequate, because only then will things change.

We, the men, must make that change from workhorses of the industrial age to people who are all-rounded individuals, able to work more on healthier lives with better/longer time in the home and with family and less spent feeding an employer’s needs. This is what a better society would look like: less suited men full of their own importance at the top of boardrooms and more of them actually cleaning their own homes and wiping their kids’ dirty bums to realise that if you can do all that and still be in a boardroom position you can then look at women who do that in the eye as equals, rather than doubt their ability to hold down that job.

Our male work logic is so screwed up and it is time to really review if what we are about is just making money and take it to our deathbed alone, or to be at our deathbed surrounded by less money and more family and loved ones to whom we are not strangers and with whom we have dedicated time that no job, however valuable, can pay us back for when we retire and it has gone.

Oh dear !

I cannot even begin to empathise with those males who choose to reject “prinary school teaching” as a career !

There is stupidity and mental retardation !

Please - Please explain how a man who chooses that path - has the slightest possibilty of “retirement” -Please Explain how a man who chooses that path - has the slightest possibilty of “retirement”

we all know that such a moron has no option - He is going to lose his house and al he has strived for !

For a lot of us there will be no retirement , regardless…we will have to make ends meet well past retirement, health permitting …at least as a musician, that is the reality. Being a primary school teacher
would be as good as any job…

1 Like

There is abbsolutely nothing wrong wih being a primary school teacher.

My mother was one and I have dated a couple. All basically good people.

As a child I had one male teacher , who was absolutely excellent as a teacher. Probably the best one I had during my time.

But in these days of “me too” and of males being guilty by simple denunciation, do you never have any fears that one day - maybe 30 years in the future, one of you “girl pupils” will jump on that particular bandwagon and sue you ?

What about your male colleagues - I’m sure it must be something you discuss. Do they feel vulnerable to such allegations ?

1 Like

Whoever wrote this article is an idiot. Feminists are sexists. They need to get over themselves. America was great long before the feminist movement, we don’t need to change anything. If a woman is great at business she will succeed, we don’t need to make an artificial environment for weak people (of any gender) to succeed.

No, he clearly isn’t !

He is a thinking man of high morals.

You and I may feel his opinion is misguided, or in my case that the pendulum has already swung too far in many ways.

BUT the Poster has every right to hold those views, even if some of the others who hold those same views actively prevent those of us who disagree with Them from receiving a fair hearing !

1 Like

This needs thinking about.

Just yesterday an historian mentioned in passing the importance of George Washington in US history. He commented how much risk including financial that he faced when he undertook the road to freedom for his country. There is little doubt that he would have discussed with Martha, his wife the possibility of losing everything.

It happens that Martha likewise was wealthy in her own right.

They were both risking much, yet they decided that the risk was worth the gain.

Point I’m making is that America became great when both male and female came together.

1 Like

Always nice when THAT happens ! :wink: :boom:

1 Like

Falstaff, when it happens it is special.

People often mention ‘feminine intuition’, usually us males and often as an urban myth.

My wife has zero interest or knowledge of the market, yet back 18 years ago she questioned my investment in tech stocks - just before the bubble bust.

Taught me a lesson :slight_smile:

1 Like