Classic Diversity Rant

Here we go again, boys. Diversity rant. Notice what I did there? I said "boys" because I'm sexist, right? Wrong. Am I sexist? Fuck yeah, if paying for everything and thinking (knowing) that men are better drivers is sexist. But no, I'm actually just speaking to my intended audience, heterosexual white men like myself, because I need some back up.

How many of you have been working at your financial institution for at least 5 years and have noticed that even within that short time, PC culture has gotten wildly out of control? I was asked to put a trigger warning on a presentation that utilized the word "black" in reference to financial solvency.

Granted the person who made this request was black, and homeless, possibly schizophrenic and was promptly escorted from the building. But really, isn't that just the kind of person that gets a platform when we actively seek "diversity"?

By the way, I work with plenty of women and they make great coffee. And I think I mentioned before, my aunt works in finance and she's tough as nails, but she didn't get her job just for being a woman, because in her day, that wasn't an option. She had to fight for it. Literally.

She got into a bar fight with a male member of her summer associate group and took him out with a right hook. After that and a virtuosic roadshow presentation, she had the respect of every male in the place. She didn't need to write to HR complaining about sexual harassment.

So pardon me if I think being a woman or a racial minority and expecting to be listened to for that reason alone is a little bit ridiculous. There are millions of people out there who are competing for these jobs and we can't afford to let precious talent slip through the cracks because that talent happens to ooze out of lily-white man pores.

I'm serious. If you're down with the cause, then swallow some Woodford and creatine and get pumping because feeling animal anger is the only way to counteract the shame heaped upon white men in this country. Shake your weights and stake your claims, boys!

END AFFIRMATIVE ACTION
DOWN WITH MATRIARCHY
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN

Forever and ever, amen.

(Sorry for gilding the lily. Not.)

 

Honestly I agree. Blind modeling and intellect tests. If most people who finish on top are white males cool! If most end up being first generation Asian or Indian kids don't complain.

You have your cards because you are a fit, don't downplay other people cards. It's all a game, keep your cards to yourself and shut up.

 

Hahahahahaha "cis" anything makes me want to keel over and die. Fact: those who use "cis" in a phrase such as "oh that's so cis-hetero male" are 10x more likely to ask for a safe space after being triggered by exposure to reality.

 

Why I mock it. At risk of narrowing myself out, I've had some bad shit happen to me. The kind of shit that actually DOES give people PTSD so I have little respect for people who are "triggered". A lot of that is because I know first hand that trying to hide and run from the trauma doesn't help. You need to gradually re-expose yourself.

 

Identity politics is taking over universities at a ridiculously fast rate, especially the elite ones. Mainstream politicians either openly endorse or are too afraid that being labeled racist or sexist will end their career. The same goes for CEOs and managers in general.

South Park was onto something when they called out political correctness for creating a false sense of ''everything is absolutely great'' and hide the crap. The pile of crap is there, it's getting bigger by the day and it smells. The rotten image of the Western world on its way down.

Never discuss with idiots, first they drag you at their level, then they beat you with experience.
 

re: microaggression...I've heard plenty of these and I think the problem is people take shit too seriously

https://www.buzzfeed.com/hnigatu/racial-microagressions-you-hear-on-a-d…

instead of getting annoyed at someone because they asked "what are you?" or "where are you from?" versus "what's your ethnicity?" maybe just answer the fucking question and don't be so sensitive.

I think having different points of view is important, but that doesn't mean you need to hire just to fill every slot of a crayola box.

 

Mostly agree with you mate, just wanna say you ain't seen my mum whip the merc in close quarters streets during rush hour. Some women are great drivers.

Absolute truths don't exist... celebrated opinions do.
 

Interesting topic, I think that by simply drawing so much attention to diversity we make it a bigger issue than it should be. We should only ever hire the best and the brightest, regardless of color, age, gender. However, the purpose of affirmative action is to give minorities the same resources that the white male had received in the past. That is, to level the playing field so to speak. Minorities don't get the same resources as do most white males. That makes it important to unfairly rig the system in their favour for a short period of time, till the playing field can be totally leveled. To simply hire on the basis of merit, at the current point of time, would still be bais in favour of the white male, as the average WASP has access to better schooling and education. I think, that as time progresses, this cultural sensitivity will correct itself as the minorities begin taking leadership roles, and once that time comes, we will be able to only hire the best and brightest regardless of ethnicity. That said, the white male culture of which you speak is dying and as globalization increases, I don't think it will ever return. It is theefore easy to see why a white male such as yourself, would be scared of globalization and diversity. Simply put, you are now facing more competition for top level positions. So your negative disposition to diversity is understandable.

 

Mind if I ask what specific "resources" white men have that minorities do not have? I'm pretty sure Malia Obama has more "resources" at her disposal than pretty much any white boy I knew growing up.

I'd also challenge your notion that "the average WASP has access to better schooling and education". I'm pretty sure Jews and Asians do pretty well in this department.

 

Firstly, Malia Obama is the daughter of the US president. To use her to generalize the opportunities available for all black people get is absurd. We are talking about the average black person (or any minority, for that matter) vs the average white male. Generally speaking, at the current point of time, white males have access to better resources.

Secondly:

"I'd also challenge your notion that "the average WASP has access to better schooling and education". I'm pretty sure Jews and Asians do pretty well in this department."

I will preface my response by saying not all minorities are treated equally. The average Asian and Jew has more opportunities as they come from families that promote education. When you look at minorities like Hispanics and Blacks, they come from families where blue collared work is prevalent. That is, these minority groups have historically worked in factories or on construction sites as opposed to front office IB. That means, there is an inherent bais in society that places certain minorities in to certain jobs. (Case in point, Hispanics in the landscaping industry). That is exactly what affirmative action is trying to resolve. They want to provide those, who come from "untraditional" backgrounds or families to get a fair shot at IB, even if they did not attend the best prep schools or Ivy league universities. Additionally, if you go on the websites of most BB IB, you will see that their diversity programs are usually only catered towards Black, Hispanic or Females, as opposed to Chinese, Indian or Jews. That is because the latter group of minorities are recognized as having a fair standing in the corporate work force.

 

You didn't exactly answer what "resources" your referring to. I would reword "Generally speaking, at the current point of time, RICH PEOPLE have access to better resources."

To your second point, I fixed that for you too. "The average PERSON has more opportunities as they come from families that promote education."

If your are raised by a single parent making $20k/year, you have less opportunity someone coming from money. You are mistakenly equating race with socioeconomic status, probably because race is easier to identify, which is lazy.

 
Best Response

Okay you are right. I will adjust my response. White males are over represented in Corporate America (especially C-Suite). Additionally, as diversity increases the pressure to hire a more diverse work force increases as well. Simply put, that means hire less white people and hire more ethnic people. Now the tricky part - this is the part that I revised. Not all white people have the same resources... and this is where I agre with your sentiment about rich people getting better opportunities. The thing is, there are poor white people and rich white people. If you are a rich white person, you are less affected by affirmative action because, as you said, your resources give you an upper hand (access to prep school, Ivy League schools, etc.), if however you are a poor white person, you are screwed, because on the one hand, not only do you lack the resources the rich person has, you also are facing more competition as corporations hire less white people. This is the middle-class white sentiment that has given Trump such traction in the US. He is speaking out for thi group and in many ways I agree with you, in that the middle class and poor class white person is fucked. For them, Diversity is a pain in the ass. That is, not only are they losing jobs opp. they are also turned down for jobs for which they may be better qualified then their ethnic counterparts. This creates the irony that in their focus on making corporate america a fair place for all, these corporations are actually being bais against the white male group. That is why white males think diversity is Bull Shit and that only the best and brightest should be hired, etc. There is not much else to say here expect that it is the way it is.

Honestly, I appreciate your response. This is a very complicated matter with lots of nuances. To argue about this further is to waste time. Let me know what you think. But if you have a different view, lets just agree to disagree.

 

I'll ignore your grammar and spelling issues so that I may focus primarily on the content of your argument.

Firstly:

"We are talking about the average black person (or any minority, for that matter) vs the average white male. Generally speaking, at the current point of time, white males have access to better resources." Not only did you generalize here (how could you do such a thing?), but you also failed to provide me with any specific resources that white males have access to that are better.

Secondly:

This argument is laughable. You mentioned that Hispanics and Blacks historically worked blue collar jobs, implying that neither Asians nor Jews ever have. Let me ask you this: did you know that the Transcontinental Railroad was built by a substantial Chinese labor force? Or that Eastern European Jews emigrated from Eastern Europe (mainly into New York City) to become garment workers? I would say both of these examples are a far cry from "front office IB" that you alluded to in your argument.

I'm sorry - did I (accidentally) encroach on your "safe space"? I'm actually surprised someone like yourself would even read such a thread. You do a fantastic job of blaming other people and making excuses though. I imagine those attributes will help you immensely throughout your career.

 

This is such a croc of bullshit. To quickly summarize white males are worried about facing greater competition by individuals who were -given- not earned their respective positions... Giving individuals resources and giving them free jobs based on nothing other than genetic roulette will never breed competition nor "level the playing field". Everyone has access to the same schools (resources) and as time has proven very little if anything changes when shifting the haves and have nots in-between public schools (resources).

 

There's a reason why Trump does much better in polls conducted by robo-calls and worse in those conducted by humans. There's a certain social intimidation instituted by the liberals. If you support a Republican you're automatically called a racist, bigot, sexist, xenophobe (their new favorite buzzword), homophobe, and Islamophobe. Of course, none of these adjectives likely apply, but that's the culture we live in.

Trump will win in November.

 

Love this post, especially as it relates to hyper-PC culture. However, after spending a few years in the work force I have to disagree with you about diversity. I'm in a client serving industry and have worked on multiple teams and projects, and it's obvious that the highest performing and happiest teams are ALWAYS the most diverse. This made me realize, as much as it sucks watching a black/Mexican/eskimo/woman beat you out for a job even if you outworked and outhustled them, it's for the good of the firm and the team to represent and employ a diverse workforce.

However, the problem I have with affirmative action and "forced diversity" is the government determining for us the parameters for which we measure and identify diverse individuals. Diversity comes in many forms: gender, race, economic status, geographic region, personality type, family background, etc. However, the government and society as a whole seems to enjoy shoving a few of these metrics down our throats (ie race and gender), while ignoring all other facets. It's a step in the right direction, but doesn't fix the problem. For instance, which team is more "diverse": a black and white male who grew up in the same town, with the same socioeconomic status and family background, or two white guys where one is from a wealthy family in the northeast while the other is from a farm town in Missouri? My point is there are many ways to measure diversity and create a culture with diverse experiences and therefore optimal decision-making, and we shouldn't confine ourselves to the preconceived metrics that society and the government have fed us about what diversity means.

 

Well, studies show that women led funds outperform those led by men (http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20150806/BLOG09/150809957/what-we…), women led companies outperform those led by men (http://fortune.com/2015/03/03/women-led-companies-perform-three-times-b…), and women in general are smarter investors (http://fortune.com/2015/04/10/why-women-are-better-investors-than-men/).

Technically, doesn't this mean that your battle cry to hire only the best would move you boyos to the back of the line? ;)

 

How to succeed if you are a hispanic women that sexually identifies herself as an apache helicopter? Study hard, more harder, even more harder. Go to IMO, take the gold medal, go to IOI, take the gold medal. Apply for a trading position, see how you wipe out every white male during an interview even if he is the whitest male on earth.

You killed the Greece spread goes up, spread goes down, from Wall Street they all play like a freak, Goldman Sachs 'o beat.
 

I don't like the use of "PC" because it is becoming a word that people use to categorize something that they don't like. It is a very general term and by using it you are actually being "PC", because you are choosing to hide behind this word instead of saying what you really mean.

Couple that with the straw man arguments and I begin to wonder if some of you are as smart as you think you are. Not because I disagree with the point that is trying to be made, but because the execution is lacking reasoning and seems to be driven by emotional feelings.

Ironically, it appears that the point of this thread is to create a safe space away from "diversity", instead of tackling the issue or having a constructive argument.

 

I just read this post. I have no doubt you must have worked extremely hard to get to where you are and that you wholeheartedly deserve to be there.

I don't know you, but as a female minority I wish you could get the opportunity to see the world from a different perspective. Perhaps try volunteering in a low-income neighborhood or working with immigrant children. They say it takes a village to raise a child ... and if you don't have the right support system and role models, it is much harder to be successful. There have been many studies done that prove this. The article below talks about how poverty taxes the brain. Google the article: How Poverty Taxes the Brain.

But you have a right to hold your viewpoint of course.

On a side note, I always offer to pay on dates and never mind doing so. You should just communicate that with whomever you are dating. Out of my friend circle, I don't know many girls that would mind.

 

Didn't want to post in this thread but here u go: this assumption that minorities are mostly less qualified than their majority counterparts is bullshit. If we all acknowledge connections, networking, & merit are the way to break into (and move up in) the world of finance then let's make this very clear: the first two conditions are essentially are about skirting merit (perhaps there is a GPA cutoff for a job and you use a connection to break-in despite the cutoff) and white males have, overwhelmingly, the advantage here. For decades minorities/women were barred from the financial industry, all those possible connections simply don't exist due to this. When I network with random people, I honestly believe it is easier to make a connection white guy to white guy, black guy to black guy (although ofc I am not saying to exclude opportunities due to this) etc. I don't know a single person in my family/extended family friends who work in finance, I got here by exceling at an expensive MSF program, whereas one dude in my office works for his Dad (ding ding ding, he's white). The excuse regarding "firm culture" (a buzz-word employers use increasingly to bar people who do not look like them) can only hurt, not help me, it is unlikely that the (mostly) old (mostly) white dudes who run the financial world would feel as comfortable with me as they would John Doe the white guy in an interview situation, all else being equal. Of course I have no numbers on this but I would say if you took a percentage of unqualified minorities in finance and compared it to a percentage of unqualified white males, obviously compared to their respective overall populations, the latter would be higher. This is the exact same scenario w/ affirmative action vs legacy admits in ivy league universities (of which, the majority are white: again due to the previous decades in which white people established a privileged position in society). Studies show that if you have a "black-sounding" name you are less likely to get call backs for jobs than John Doe, even with equal or slightly better credentials. There are studies that show minority college graduates are underpaid in comparison to the majority, even controlling for field of study. I've no problem with ending affirmative action, as long as we couple that with ending legacy admits & the secret societies/ exclusive frats (many of which will not admit a minority unless he's/she's the son/daughter of Colin Powell) that are used to continue to skirt merit. We need to stop acting like being a minority/ woman is some sort of golden ticket when in reality, in a majority of situations, that is simply not the case.

Array
 

Just want to say as a mixed race minority (but not of the approved kind, i.e I'm mixed east asian/white straight non genderqueer tranny or germophiliac), the diversity culture is the biggest boondoogle to low IQ people who grift through the world that we have ever seen.

These people would rather sleep naked on a New York pavement than go back to their shanties in their countries.

When I looked around the various banking floors in my time or law firms or the management consultants offices I just knew the various diversity tokens from non White/South Asian/East Asian races were there to stop blue haired harpies calling people "racist". (Ever notice they way asians don't count towards diversity?....doesn't it give you a clue about what they really really want....)

They are a burden on the people that belong there. Its glorified welfare. Corporate boards and hiring should have the intention of meritocracy, not making the office look like dysfunctional orgs like the UN or FIFA.

These organisation are dysfunctional because they are not meritocratic. And thats why the USA IS FAILING.

The whole culture is poisonous because it encourages us to see each other as enemies.

It would all have been far better off had they not been allowed here illegally. But the directors at the top wanted cheap coolies.

MAGA.

 

A month ago they dinged me after a super day for M&A internship and provided me with "personal feedback," recommending that I gain more experience. I was sure I was going to get this spot.

Now I see a new "incoming" intern of this particular group on Linkedin. A woman with experience in BIG 4 audit as intern. I worked for a top EB in regional office for 6 months. This is insane.

 

Quis officiis sit et non vitae. Et iure officiis ut. Ratione velit numquam iste sit qui odit. Sit laborum dolore nihil pariatur qui.

 

Harum ab dolore necessitatibus cupiditate laborum in et. Quo veniam aperiam blanditiis molestias nostrum. Voluptatem ea vitae hic non. Dolorem et consequatur ab aut rerum unde. Numquam tempore quo a omnis delectus consequatur tempora.

Tempora officiis excepturi voluptatibus minima. Quis officia necessitatibus repellendus consequuntur tempora eum. Aut error laudantium est vel voluptatem accusantium enim aut. Placeat velit veniam reiciendis non.

Ducimus modi ipsum quo molestias. Expedita sit et ut rerum et. Tempora quia aut voluptatem facere explicabo.

Omnis est qui quasi velit praesentium sit natus dicta. Asperiores tempora quam est. Blanditiis eligendi nemo in distinctio ut.

 

Non quis mollitia delectus excepturi. Sint dicta id eum consequuntur optio dolores rem. Quisquam et molestiae a fugiat doloremque. Fugiat autem velit accusantium et voluptatem atque ut. Aut animi quis officia facere itaque aut.

Eum voluptatum accusantium dolor magni et dolor. Ipsum porro voluptates sapiente cupiditate eum qui sed. Quia nesciunt officiis provident.

Et esse qui voluptatem atque. Praesentium eum qui tempore sequi. Non enim quia est aut et occaecati porro delectus.

Career Advancement Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Jefferies & Company 02 99.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 19 98.8%
  • Harris Williams & Co. (++) 98.3%
  • Lazard Freres 02 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 03 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Harris Williams & Co. 18 99.4%
  • JPMorgan Chase 10 98.8%
  • Lazard Freres 05 98.3%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.7%
  • William Blair 03 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Lazard Freres 01 99.4%
  • Jefferies & Company 02 98.8%
  • Goldman Sachs 17 98.3%
  • Moelis & Company 07 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 05 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (5) $648
  • Vice President (19) $385
  • Associates (85) $262
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (13) $181
  • Intern/Summer Associate (33) $170
  • 2nd Year Analyst (65) $168
  • 1st Year Analyst (198) $159
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (144) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
99.0
3
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
4
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
5
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
6
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
98.9
7
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
8
kanon's picture
kanon
98.9
9
pudding's picture
pudding
98.8
10
bolo up's picture
bolo up
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”