3/19/17

If you haven't seen it yet, a picture has gone viral of someone humping the "fearless girl" statue that faces the Wall Street Charging Bull. According to a Huffington Post Article, the "man in suit humping 'fearless girl' statue is why we need feminism."

"Almost as if out of central casting, some Wall Street finance broseph appeared and started humping the statue while his gross date rape-y friends laughed and cheered him on," Kaloyanides wrote on Friday.

"He pretended to have sex with the image of a little girl," she continued. "Douchebags like this are why we need feminism."

"He was gone within 20 seconds, but it just ruined the mood of the scene," Kaloyanides told Inside Edition. "There were people talking about empowering children and women and for then to have this 20-something showing his entitlement, defiling the statue ... it was utterly revolting."

In just two days, Kaloyanides' photo of the man has been shared on Facebook more than 19,000 times. If you would like to see the picture it is available in the article.

A picture is available at the above link. What do you guys think about this picture and the attention it is receiving?

Comments (146)

3/12/17

Broseph should have opted for a darker navy tie. Rookie mistake.

Financial Modeling

Best Response
3/12/17

I saw it. People do dumb shit with status. I've seen countless pictures of women bending over in front of male statutes. Who cares.

The statue is dumb. The bull represents the animal spirits in the market. The bull and the bear. It has nothing to do with masculinity. Women in finance want to crush deals and get paid, same as men.

I'm sure this will cause snowflakes to get upset and cry in their safe space. Who cares. I'm sure some homeless guy is pissing on it right now.

Master in Finance Website

"We've always been at war with Eastasia"

3/13/17

Somebody already fixed it: http://imgur.com/th582eJ

6/21/17

.

3/14/17

It's a statue. It means nothing. Do you really think young women are going to flock to Wall Street because State Street spent a couple bucks putting it there? What would really make a difference is if they started actively hiring and promoting more women. I'm not saying they should or shouldn't, but jobs and paychecks make differences, not immobile bronze dolls.

3/15/17

Prescott Boregaurd Sessions,

The Statue is commemorative of the fact that passive fund managers (like Vanguard, State Street, BlackRock) are taking their proxy duties seriously.

Also, symbols matter.

Best,
51% of the population

3/16/17

Interesting. I'm really not sure how my argument that focusing on hiring more women and enabling them to earn more money is a far more significant gesture than a statue ties into Sessions' views, but okay.

Do you have stats here? I'm genuinely asking, because I don't have the data.

Maybe I'm a bit jaded, but I really don't see how this statue makes any impact. I've seen politicians, businesses and regular citizens make so many empty gestures like building a statue, or making a humanitarian speech, slapping a fair-trade sticker on a product, etc. that make a few people feel better but do not correlate to an underlying change in ongoing practices. At best these are benign, at worst they are harmful distractions.

The journey from wondering what you want to do with your life, to getting a job in high finance is so grueling, I have trouble believing a statue would give anyone the extra gumption needed to make the trek. IMO, showcasing actual women who have shaped Wall Street and how they did it would be far more impactful. This just feels shallow.

Nice little dash of self-righteousness at the end there. I know plenty of women who would agree with me.

3/15/17

Dude, you could say that about anything.

There is almost no one below 5'2" on any of the boards on the S&P. Where is the damn diversity there?

Most bankers come from target schools, lets get some damn diversity in here. Bring in the non-target by the boatload.

What about the outlandishly small amount of stay at home Dad's. Surely discrimination is a foot! Something must be done!

Whether or not you think this is a problem, I'm sure people can universally agree discrimination is a pretty strong factor that explains this low representation.

We have special recruiting programs just for women for crying out loud. How much help do they need?

Maybe the just don't like finance, equality of opportunity not outcomes.

The amount of rage that this post gives me... I cannot be the only one...

Let me hear you say, this shit is bananas, B-A-N-A-N-A-S!

3/16/17

Men getting serious rage that women still aren't given a fair shake is very telling.

3/16/17

Jews survived holocaust and now hold many positions of power. You can't keep people down, it's just not possible. What's your excuse?

Let me hear you say, this shit is bananas, B-A-N-A-N-A-S!

3/16/17
xgozax:

Jews survived holocaust and now hold many positions of power. You can't keep people down, it's just not possible. What's your excuse?

Nontargets survived '08 and now hold many positions of power. You can't keep people down, it's just not possible. What's your excuse?

Former fake Frank Quattrone
youtube.com/watch?v=XwOAS1TBoN4

3/16/17

XD I'm dying. SB'ed

3/17/17
Frank Quattrone:

xgozax:Jews survived holocaust and now hold many positions of power. You can't keep people down, it's just not possible. What's your excuse?

Nontargets survived '08 and now hold many positions of power. You can't keep people down, it's just not possible. What's your excuse?

SB +1.

(That said, my views about women on corporate boards and Jews may be different from yours'. This is mostly about nontargets, lol.)

3/19/17

Companies and Universities aren't incentivized to bring in white males. Nor are there any white male scholarships. What "fair shake" do you want? Does this "fair shake" include you signing up for selected service like us? Do you want to enter the other male-dominated fields like construction or plumbing?

5/11/17

Women are given all kinds of special privileges, now men (and a large number of non-stupid women) are finally fed up and you're seeing backlash

3/17/17

it's a girl about to be trampled by a symbol of market forces...super powerful stuff, snowflake

Move like lions do.

3/14/17

0/2 on spelling the word "statues" correctly

3/14/17

I apologize. Please ignore my point because apple has a shitty auto correct.

Master in Finance Website

"We've always been at war with Eastasia"

3/17/17
TNA:

I apologize. Please ignore my point because apple has a shitty auto correct.

People getting bent out of shape over an autocorrect that my iphone has tried to do 2x to me this week. WTF?

I hate it when people get shoved around over bullshit, and that sometimes swings against a guy like you, but it's swinging in your favor right now. + 1 SB.

3/17/17

The Iphone has gone full tilt mad. I think it is an Apple thing. I am consolidating HSA's and putting it into excel to track and it kept changing it to NSA.

Master in Finance Website

"We've always been at war with Eastasia"

3/19/17

I want to print this comment out on thick resume paper and duct tape it to the statue late at night.

"A modest man, with much to be modest about"

3/25/17

Oh yes, mere dumb shit. Mere statue and what has that really got to do with masculinity? It's just a rep of market spirits, I agree. I don't believe that will stare a dumb shit out of women. What difference does it make after all.

3/12/17

Agree, just shows how stupid this little girl is, she is about to get straight up TRAMPLED by that bull.

3/12/17

His beard and mustache are atrocious

3/13/17

I doubt the guy even works on Wall Street. Most of the bank offices have moved away from there. People just jump to conclusions.

This country just gets dumber and dumber.

Master in Finance Website

"We've always been at war with Eastasia"

3/13/17

LOL. Very true, we only got DB posted there.

3/15/17

Re: homeless man pissing on statue and guy possibly working at DB -- maybe one-and-the-same given DB's recent comp?

3/13/17

Here are the top facebook comments on the photo to caveat off that:

"I see these types of phuckbois all the time near my office... they're such wretched people."

"And to anyone out there who question and criticize those of us who march: THIS is one of the MANY reasons we march."

"New Yorkers love to complain that their neighborhood is changing too quickly. It's nice to know there are some neighborhoods that never change."

"And each one of them probably told someone within earshot to "lighten up" because "it's just a joke" and never once questioned his motives or wondered what about this might be "funny." I've said before, if you see a white guy in a suit below Canal and you punch him in the face odds are good that he deserves it for SOMETHING. And to anyone who wants to tell me that's not fair, I'll just say, "Lighten up. It's just a joke. Jeez.""

3/13/17

Yeah, these are all rational responses and don't jump to conclusions. And punching random people is cool.

People have lost their mind.

Master in Finance Website

"We've always been at war with Eastasia"

3/13/17

Update:
The act has also been denounced by New York Mayor Bill de Blasio and his wife Chirlane McCray, with the mayor describing the image as a manifestation of rape culture.
link

3/13/17

I'm sure a law will be passed to restrict rape culture in intimate objects.

My desiccating a magazine cover prediction is looking a little more real isn't it.

Master in Finance Website

"We've always been at war with Eastasia"

3/13/17
TNA:

I'm sure a law will be passed to restrict rape culture in intimate objects.

My desiccating a magazine cover prediction is looking a little more real isn't it.

Dude this Patrick fellow keeps yanking your chain. Same with Andy on the liberals, who decided to post a caption contest on this. It's not healthy for us to do this to ourselves.

Mayor D is going to do what Mayor D does.

20-something Brosephs are going to do what 20-something Brosephs do.

I'm gonna do what I'm gonna do.

And you are free to do what you're gonna do. But I suggest you not get... too excited about this and just say NBD.

Next week the media will have another zany story for everyone to get bent out of shape about.

3/16/17

there is going to be a statue movement. these statues are clearly being discriminated against.... should start a statue discrimination campaign and get it funded by the snowflakes

"He profits most who serves best"

"Every failure brings with it the seed of an equivalent advantage"

*Mark 11:24

3/16/17

A fetus doesn't have rights, but a statue does.

Liberalism is mental syphilis.

Master in Finance Website

"We've always been at war with Eastasia"

3/16/17

Wouldn't touching the bull's balls also be sign of rape culture and a hate-crime against all men?

Why is the world becoming like this guy?
PC police

3/16/17

This is nothing new, most people deserve a good punch in the face for some reason. I know I do.

I thought the point was to punch people in the face who have done something to you.

3/13/17

People grab the bull's nuts all the time. Didn't see the guy humping the statue, but we can all agree that's creepy. The thing with the little girl statue is it's not a symbol of feminism but anti-capitalism trying to stop the bull, right?

where's your sense of humor?

3/15/17
TippyTop11:

The thing with the little girl statue is it's not a symbol of feminism but anti-capitalism trying to stop the bull, right?

Swing and a miss. It's supposed to be about feminism.

"There's nothing you can do if you're too scared to try." - Nickel Creek

3/22/17

How'd that work out for you?Charging Bull's artist speaks

where's your sense of humor?

3/23/17

... Just fine. It's a call for more women on corporate boards.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2017/03/0...

And what does the article you posted have to do with anything? All it says it's that the charging bull artist doesn't like the statue.

"There's nothing you can do if you're too scared to try." - Nickel Creek

3/13/17

As much as I agree with @TNA that it's only snowflakes that are going to get upset, this was beyond a stupid move on his part.

Basically, he's brought horrible publicity to himself (and once his firm is identified, his firm). He'll be lucky if he keeps his job if he works on the sell-side, especially with all the sensitive political scrutiny banks go through. What a moron.

3/13/17

First off, not cool.

Second off, we need more women on corporate boards. State Street isn't arguing for gender parity; they're just arguing the fact that if a corporate board has no women at all on it, that's a problem. And it's a reasonable ask to make sure most or all corporate boards which SSGA has voting power in (and they exercise this power on behalf of both men and women investors, and the womens' ownership of ETFs is greater than 0%) have at least one woman on them.

Also, maybe a more controversial point: who was the idiot who decided to make a statue of a rambunctious girl as their symbol for women on Wall Street? Sheesh guys, come up with something that's more dignified. If your image of a woman in corporate America is frigging Pippi Longstocking, this country has much bigger issues than misogyny or "radical" feminism. It has a general problem with adulthood and professionalism.

Last thing, and this is a message to all the social liberals out there. OK, so for the longest time, you guys were claiming that sacrilege doesn't exist. Art exhibits where visitors step on the American flag. Artists filming their abortion. People painting pictures of a drunk and passed out Jesus with Mary Magdalene. You guys ran around claiming conservatives were getting their undies in a bunch over progress-- that it was backwards to protest these sacrileges. Now that other people are painting cartoons of Mohammad and now someone's profaned this statue, apparently sacrilege DOES exist.

Good. Let's talk some more about that. If you don't like it, don't dish it out and (beyond supporting the first amendment) don't provide ideological defense for those who do.

3/13/17
IlliniProgrammer:

Also, maybe a more controversial point: who was the idiot who decided to make a statue of a rambunctious girl as their symbol for women on Wall Street? Sheesh guys, come up with something that's more dignified. If your image of a woman in corporate America is frigging Pippi Longstocking, this country has much bigger issues than misogyny or "radical" feminism. It has a general problem with adulthood and professionalism.

Some things I'll never comprehend about social liberals in America.

IlliniProgrammer:

Last thing, and this is a message to all the social liberals out there. OK, so for the longest time, you guys were claiming that sacrilege doesn't exist. Art exhibits where visitors step on the American flag. Artists filming their abortion. People painting pictures of a drunk and passed out Jesus with Mary Magdalene. You guys ran around claiming conservatives were getting their undies in a bunch over progress-- that it was backwards to protest these sacrileges. Now that other people are painting cartoons of Mohammad and now someone's profaned this statue, apparently sacrilege DOES exist.

Solid point this one.

Former fake Frank Quattrone
youtube.com/watch?v=XwOAS1TBoN4

3/15/17

sacrilege? hardly - the dude was raping a life size statue of a little girl.. its got nothing to do with the religious status of this particular statue but the sexualization of a child

3/15/17

sacrilege for the liberals, and their religion of extreme "tolerance"

Former fake Frank Quattrone
youtube.com/watch?v=XwOAS1TBoN4

3/15/17

cool story, bro. Sorry you and Milo got kicked out of CPAC but no room for child rapists in this party either

3/15/17
FOHFLady:

cool story, bro. Sorry you and Milo got kicked out of CPAC but no room for child rapists in this party either

Speak, after you break out of your glass walled prison.

Former fake Frank Quattrone
youtube.com/watch?v=XwOAS1TBoN4

3/17/17
FOHFLady:

sacrilege? hardly - the dude was raping a life size statue of a little girl.. its got nothing to do with the religious status of this particular statue but the sexualization of a child

I don't like this more than anyone else, but while you can 100% attack this from the perspective of a conservative evangelical Christian woman, it's frankly none of a liberal's business. If it's OK to a kill a 20 week old fetus on camera for the sake of an art project, what's wrong with sexualizing an inanimate statue?

Honestly the conservative evangelical housewife has the most intellectually consistent view in this.

(I don't have a horse in this race as a gay ex-evangelical)

3/17/17

Sacrilege implies an elevated status. The statue was not of a specific icon (say, the Virgin Mary) but rather it's very 'everywoman' character that makes it an affront to all women, not because it attacks some perfect form of the feminine. The man depicted, enacted, the defiling of a young child, the word, I think we are looking for is not sacrilege but decency, humanity.

3/17/17
FOHFLady:

Sacrilege implies an elevated status. The statue was not of a specific icon (say, the Virgin Mary) but rather it's very 'everywoman' character that makes it an affront to all women, not because it attacks some perfect form of the feminine. The man depicted, enacted, the defiling of a young child, the word, I think we are looking for is not sacrilege but decency, humanity.

Fair point on defile vs sacrilege.

I agree with being humane and decent. But that has broad applicability. Don't violate statues of little girls. Don't make Trump pinatas. Don't attack Gold Star families. Don't have abortions and call it artwork. Don't burn US flags on US soil. You can't say one is OK and the other isn't and still call yourself consistent. Either they're all ok, or they're all indecent and/or inhumane.

3/13/17

I am a pretty liberal woman, but even I thought, "Really? A girl? Not a statue of a woman?". Perhaps it would have been even more radical to have put up a statue of an older woman.

********"Babies don't cost money, they MAKE money." - Jerri Blank********

3/13/17

perhaps a statue of g-strings? or a statue of a pair of tits? now that would be radical

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

3/13/17

Can one make a statue of G-strings out of metal? Or would it be more like one of those gigantic twine balls, except made with actual G strings?

********"Babies don't cost money, they MAKE money." - Jerri Blank********

3/13/17

I say we should put it on kickstarter.

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

3/29/17
tropos:

Can one make a statue of G-strings out of metal? Or would it be more like one of those gigantic twine balls, except made with actual G strings?

This is the reason why we need a statue in the likeness of @tropos to represent true feminism on Wall Street. Where men and women don't have safe spaces, and don't blush or hesitate when they talk about building a G-string statue.

Former fake Frank Quattrone
youtube.com/watch?v=XwOAS1TBoN4

3/13/17

Agree with your point on the boards. Somewhat on the little girl. On the social liberal comment...

The design of the voting system basically forces two party democracy. This, in turn, leads to a broad sorting into two camps ideologically (or, at least, a broad failure to consistently notice/identify nuances in political leaning). You will thus find people on both sides that support (or do) essentially anything.

Flag-burning is a first amendment right, as is humping statues of little girls. Thus we can both agree that they should be legal, as should abortion videos and pictures of Mohammed. The difference I notice in this country is that liberals are willing to defend these rights no matter who they apply to, while conservatives will jettison or actively subvert them when it offends their sensibilities. Saying liberals are providing ideological cover for flag burning is like saying conservatives are providing ideological cover for racism and hate speech (not false in many cases, but certainly a somewhat selective reading of the mileu)

3/13/17
dazedmonk:

Agree with your point on the boards. Somewhat on the little girl. On the social liberal comment...

The design of the voting system basically forces two party democracy. This, in turn, leads to a broad sorting into two camps ideologically (or, at least, a broad failure to consistently notice/identify nuances in political leaning). You will thus find people on both sides that support (or do) essentially anything.

Flag-burning is a first amendment right, as is humping statues of little girls. Thus we can both agree that they should be legal, as should abortion videos and pictures of Mohammed. The difference I notice in this country is that liberals are willing to defend these rights no matter who they apply to, while conservatives will jettison or actively subvert them when it offends their sensibilities. Saying liberals are providing ideological cover for flag burning is like saying conservatives are providing ideological cover for racism and hate speech (not false in many cases, but certainly a somewhat selective reading of the mileu)

Liberals are doing more than just defending these peoples' first amendment rights. They're also affirming some of this speech in some cases. Like the abortion video or various sacrileges of Jesus. The equivalent would be Bill O'Reilly running around saying that it's OK to use the N-word, that this is progress and it's 2016.

Liberals and conservatives should both affirm flag burning as a constitutional right, and also condemn it as behavior that while legal, is an irresponsible use of the first amendment, and people really ought not do stuff like this.

3/19/17

There are conservatives that run around using the N-word, calling gay people f*GS, wearing "trump that bitch" and "fuck your feelings" t-shirts.

Your saying liberals are affirming these views is equivalent to my saying conservatives are running around slurring minorities and women. Certainly some are, but 'sacrilege' is not fundamental to liberalism. You can't simply take one (or a few ) people's actions as being broadly representative of the movement.

FWIW, this is even more true of liberalism than conservationism, since there are no liberal "Fox News" or "Bill o Reilly" type institutions

3/20/17
dazedmonk:

There are conservatives that run around using the N-word, calling gay people f*GS, wearing "trump that bitch" and "fuck your feelings" t-shirts.

Your saying liberals are affirming these views is equivalent to my saying conservatives are running around slurring minorities and women.

That comparison is pretty darned silly. Nobody is running around claiming that these t-shirts represent progress and liberals are getting their undies in a bunch. People *are* doing it with the college student who had a bunch of abortions for an art project.

Liberals can be selective in their condemnation. When Cedric Richmond (D-LA) told crude jokes about Kellyanne Conway's body, Nancy Pelosi laughed it off and said everyone was saying that about Conway. Yet when it happens in the workplace, or when Trump does it-- when people who don't control (or better yet defy and create massive cognitive dissonance in) the media narrative do it, heads roll. This applies whether you are liberal or conservative.

Also for the record, I've never heard anyone use the word f*g. That might be because I'm gay, but I'm also white and I haven't heard anyone use the n-word either (you can argue that's because I'm white, too, I guess, but you can't argue both situations make it harder for me to hear epithets). And I have a lot of conservative friends, a lot of evangelical friends, and a lot of friends who voted for Trump. If anything, and this hasn't been recently, I hear the word f*g used by angry gay people. No, brother-- either the word is OK for everyone to use, or it's wrong for everyone. (I don't know the correct answer to this one, but if you go around using it, you lose your right to get offended when someone calls you one.)

Certainly some are, but 'sacrilege' is not fundamental to liberalism. You can't simply take one (or a few ) people's actions as being broadly representative of the movement.

FWIW, this is even more true of liberalism than conservationism, since there are no liberal "Fox News" or "Bill o Reilly" type institutions

Umm, you've never watched MSNBC lol.

3/15/17

Why do we need more women on corporate boards any more than we need more xgozax's on corporate boards?

Really, not a single one on any corporate board.

My point being, there is no reason for a woman to be on a corporate board just because she's a woman. There is no merit to it. If there is discrimination to it, it's a different story, but often times theres not.

Let's be a little realistic, GENERALLY women are completely different than men. They make way different life choices, they can get pregnant and often do early in their career. They are typically more timid and less aggressive. Put 3 of them in a group and you are guaranteed to have drama. It's not if, but when.

I'm not saying women are less smart, or less qualified than men at anything (although its true if you look at every single athletic sport). What I am saying is that women are not men, they don't make the same choices as men and thus get different results.

There are drastically less women in finance. You're going to get drastically less on the corporate boards. It's tough as fuck. Men hate the hours, what do you think women will think of them?

If our main concern is getting more women in good positions, we've got bigger problems.

Let me hear you say, this shit is bananas, B-A-N-A-N-A-S!

3/16/17
xgozax:

Why do we need more women on corporate boards any more than we need more xgozax's on corporate boards?

Really, not a single one on any corporate board.

My point being, there is no reason for a woman to be on a corporate board just because she's a woman. There is no merit to it. If there is discrimination to it, it's a different story, but often times theres not.

Let's be a little realistic, GENERALLY women are completely different than men. They make way different life choices.

Ironically, I think this is the point on the left. They think war would end because 'all wars were started by men'. I don't have to point out the idiocy there.

"There is no greatness where there is not simplicity, goodness, and truth."

-- Leo Tolstoy, War and Peace

"Little monkeys turned gorrillas. Now they trapped in the station, filled up on noctaine, and now they not sane."

3/16/17
xgozax:

Why do we need more women on corporate boards any more than we need more xgozax's on corporate boards?

Really, not a single one on any corporate board.

My point being, there is no reason for a woman to be on a corporate board just because she's a woman. There is no merit to it. If there is discrimination to it, it's a different story, but often times theres not.

Let's be a little realistic, GENERALLY women are completely different than men. They make way different life choices, they can get pregnant and often do early in their career. They are typically more timid and less aggressive. Put 3 of them in a group and you are guaranteed to have drama. It's not if, but when.

I'm not saying women are less smart, or less qualified than men at anything (although its true if you look at every single athletic sport). What I am saying is that women are not men, they don't make the same choices as men and thus get different results.

There are drastically less women in finance. You're going to get drastically less on the corporate boards. It's tough as fuck. Men hate the hours, what do you think women will think of them?

If our main concern is getting more women in good positions, we've got bigger problems.

Professor Ned Smith of Northwestern has done some work on this.

Here's the problem as a more extreme example:

If you get a bunch of Illinois graduates running JPM, they're going to assume they need to land ADM, Caterpillar, John Deere, Chicago Bridge and Iron, Eli Lilli etc, as clients-- that's where their friends work; that's what they know. They're not going to walk ten blocks down the street and try to land Pfizer. Now, if you get someone from Columbia, someone from NYU, someone from Oxford, and someone from Berkeley in the room, the corporate strategy will adjust. The ideas to go after Eli Lilly will still be there, but trying to land Pfizer as a client will be there too, along with Google and Unilever.

The more high-quality people, and the more high-quality diversity you get in a room, the better the ideas and the analysis are. There are more opportunities to come up with good ideas and more opportunities to challenge bad ones.

Corporate boards shouldn't put a woman in the room just for the sake of having two x chromosomes somewhere, but if you can find a high-quality, qualified executive who's a woman, you should get her in there. Likewise, if we can find someone with a blue collar background who spent thirty years in rural Alabama or Wisconsin, and they are qualified to be on a corporate board, we should put them on there. A strong team needs people who have different ways of approaching problems who can all work together.

If nothing else, a board should be at least as diverse as the people who drive its competitive advantage (customers, workers, etc). I can understand how a defense contractor might have close to an all-male board with a bunch of ex-military people with Annapolis and West Point backgrounds running it. But most boards should try to get multiple perspectives and people with different approaches to solving problems. And my suspicion is that an all-male or all-female board reduces that opportunity.

Look I keep diversity on a really short leash. I think there's a such thing as diversity sometimes being toxic, and diversity for the sake of diversity doesn't necessarily make sense. For instance, I think it would be a really dangerous idea to put a Chinese national on the board of Lockheed Martin for the sake of "diversity" when we've got a lot of military rivals out there. But I think women have proven they can peacefully coexist and contribute in the corporate world, I think they often bring in an insightful and necessary perspective, and I think that in many cases (not a majority due to career choices made by women), they're not only qualified for the board but the best person to run the company.

To be sure, women are investors. So are men. And they have a right to vote their shares. They also have a right to redeem their SPY ETF in favor of IVV if they disagree with State Street. Me personally I don't have a huge problem with this, so long as State Street is also going to advocate for putting one or two men on all-female boards if that ever becomes an issue.

The average corporate board has roughly 9.5 people on it (Sheila Margolis, 2011). Let's say 1/2 of women decide to pursue a career rather than be a full-time parent. So for a typical industry, 1/3 of senior employees ought to be women, and the other 2/3 ought to be men. What about the board? If we apply these assumptions, the odds of finding 10 directors but not getting a single women are (2/3)^10 or roughly 1.7%; that's outside the 95% confidence interval. But 25% of companies have no women on their boards.

In many cases, these firms may have smaller boards or they may be in industries that are largely represented by men (EG Lockheed Martin is probably made up of mechanical engineers and ex-military people). But 25% of the F500 has zero women on their boards. And there are probably cases where having one or two women in the room (along with several men) might improve the decision process.

My own personal rule would be that the t-stat on a single-gender board has to be significant relative to the makeup of industry employees or their customers before I start stomping my feet and demanding another gender on the board. I get it. Ann Taylor probably isn't going to have a lot of men on its board, and Lockheed might not have a lot of women (actually Lockheed has 4 out of 12). But my hunch is that when 25% of F500 boards have no women, there are many cases where there's something strange going on and companies are making sub-optimal decisions as a result.

3/18/17

Exactly. There's a reason consulting firms have diversity goals: smart people from all walks of life in a team produce more value than smart people from one or a few walks of life in a team.

Second and just as important, when we make diversity a part of the culture we enable people (all people) to bring their true self to work. When surveyed, ~70% of white males say they've masked part of their identity at work.

Authenticity->Idea Generation->Value

Financial Modeling

3/13/17

For some reason this statue reminds of how when a fight breaks out and a female tries to get in between it hardly pans out well for her.

Work hard, work clean, & most of all do not give up.

3/13/17

Dude, when were divorces favorable to the bulls? Females get alimony, child support, and a shit ton of other benefits because they are seen as 'vulnerable'. There's a good article in WSJ on how NY's laws are atrocious towards males.

Former fake Frank Quattrone
youtube.com/watch?v=XwOAS1TBoN4

3/13/17

If there's no marriage then there is no divorce. Marriage is little/no upside for men with all the benefits for women. If you do marry then it is to someone of equal status. e.g. The dukes of Europe did not marry peasants.

Work hard, work clean, & most of all do not give up.

3/13/17

Too bad marriage is a societal more. Even the great @Eddie Braverman had to settle down from his high-falutin' life and have kids and shit (for his reasons, ofc).

Former fake Frank Quattrone
youtube.com/watch?v=XwOAS1TBoN4

3/22/17
Frank Quattrone:

Dude, when were divorces favorable to the bulls? Females get alimony, child support, and a shit ton of other benefits because they are seen as 'vulnerable'. There's a good article in WSJ on how NY's laws are atrocious towards males.

+1

"I like money (as do most females) but love is...great :)"-student quote
Winners bring a bigger bag than you do

3/13/17

Remember when I spoke of nuking the Davos WEF a few months back? How about we plan something like that for HuffPost's offices?

Former fake Frank Quattrone
youtube.com/watch?v=XwOAS1TBoN4

3/13/17

I have seen a lot of videos of the running with the bulls and that girl should not be standing there.

3/13/17

1 - That mustache. Seriously?

2 - As TNA said people do a lot of stupid things around statues everywhere - No big deal. However that guy will get a lot of bad press, and his firm's HR will definitely not be happy about it. Stupid move IMO, but well...who cares.

3/13/17

Well to be fair, that dude looks a bit Russian. There has got to be some other angle here.

Follow the shit your fellow monkeys say @shitWSOsays

Life is hard, it's even harder when you're stupid - John Wayne

3/14/17

It's @Flake .

Former fake Frank Quattrone
youtube.com/watch?v=XwOAS1TBoN4

3/13/17

Humping a statue of a little girl is a bit more than odd. Maybe I am not with the times, but that is probably the last thing that would come to mind.

3/13/17

The dude looks like some eurotrash douchebag. Probably comes from a rampantly sexist country and thought this would be hilarious joke to show his boys back in Belgrade.

3/13/17

Was more offended by the guys atrocious beard than the statue grinding actually

3/13/17

wow... talk about sexism, what about the ageist undertones in the article? '...and for then to have this 20-something showing his entitlement, defiling the statue.'

typical 'entitled millennial' bash. Give me a moment, i need to pretend to be outraged and appalled and offended.

3/13/17

This is why I hate technology. This guy doesn't deserve the attention and serious people shouldn't be wasting time on it. If we had Huffpo and FB in the 1970s would every streaker get a 50-comment story?

3/13/17

This is the fascism of the left. I doubt any leftist protestor destroying property of screaming st people calling them Hitler would have any job repercussions. But this guy does something silly (is he even humping the statue?) and the witch hunt begins.

How about maybe this guy was young, acting immature and his behavior isn't indicative of mysoginy or anti feminism.

I pray this idiocrisy has a terminal point because I shudder to think what it will be like in 20 years. Like if I throw away a magazine with a feminist figure on it and I going to be condemned because the action is perceived as disrespectful? At some point the lunacy needs to self correct.

Master in Finance Website

"We've always been at war with Eastasia"

3/13/17

I agree with you for the most part, but come on, do you really think there is even a minute possibility that something as insignificant as throwing out a magazine will become a manufactured controversy? There's no reason to believe that the "tyranny of the left" (or whatever you want to call it) will get to the level of extreme where we somehow destroy our basic freedoms.

Gimme the loot

3/13/17

I'd argue we are already there. Supporting trump can get you physically assaulted. College campuses have riots when different opinions are discussed (bell curve, milo). If you criticize or question BLM you can lose your job.

Master in Finance Website

"We've always been at war with Eastasia"

3/13/17

Almost all cases of these things are provoked, it's not like conservatives are acting innocuously. And when have any of these cases amounted to a national crisis? I can only find far-right websites that have an agenda-pushing operation confirming your examples.

Gimme the loot

3/13/17

1.) are you saying if a leftist protestor was caught on video damaging property and he worked at (for example) Goldman Sachs he wouldn't be fired or reprimanded? That is quite the claim.
2.) Young and immature guys can be very misogynistic (not saying that is the case here), those conditions are not mutually exclusive

I mean I agree it is an immature and silly act, not a big deal, but this post is a bit over the top.

3/13/17

Companies don't have hordes of conservatives calling for people to be fired. Philly had a Drexel professor calling for white genocide. He kept his job. If the race was flipped he'd be gone In a second.

Young males aren't mysoginistic. They can be dumb and possibly sexist, but this is largely bravado. Young people are practically indoctrinated in political correct ideology. Especially those living in NYC. The mysoginy boogeyman is pathetic.

Master in Finance Website

"We've always been at war with Eastasia"

3/13/17

Lol, young males can be misogynistic and they sometimes are, this shouldn't be up for discussion. Again, an act can be both misogynistic and immature, your only argument would be the immature individual didn't understand the implications of their immature act, not that it wasn't misogynistic. Everything you disagree with appears to be a boogeyman. Maybe you should realize that some matters don't affect you and you lack empathy thus matters that don't affect you don't exist to you (hence the boogeyman). In any case, this was just some dude being dumb, doesn't really matter. I will say the left turning everything into a sexism or racism issue diminishes the seriousness of actual instances of racism/ sexism, which is unfortunate.

3/13/17

1) you're making assumptions and painting with a broad brush.

2) young men are immature. But young people are far more tolerant , as a group, than middle aged or older people. This is a reflection of the time we are living in.

3) humping, if that is what he was doing, an inanimate statue is reflective of nothing. It isn't a person, it is sexism, it's nothing.

4) sexism is a boogeyman. Women outnumber men in college, they live longer and they're plenty of legal protection for them. This idea that evil sexists are running things is clown and just used for more bulkshit. Bulkshit like the witch hunt to out this guy being pushed in huffpo and other liberal sources.

There is also an absolute double standard created by liberal fascism. A professor calls for white genocide and stays. This guy jumps a statue and I can guarantee the wave of butt hurt snowflakes will stop at nothing to get him fired.

This is fascism. This is 1984. I pray it moderates or abates.

Master in Finance Website

"We've always been at war with Eastasia"

3/13/17

I won't go further with you. If you honestly believe sexism doesn't exist because of "legal protections" (lol, I'm sure racism ended in 1964 the moment they passed the civil rights act), women living longer (wtf does this have to do with anything), or the number of women attending college (which says nothing about how they're treated while at or after college by male colleagues and administration) then idk wtf to tell you. My cousin's wife who is an engineer has had numerous comments made to her by both colleagues and management (she told me this hilarious story of her boss asking if she'd quit and be a full-time mom after giving birth cuz she is currently pregnant). Legal protections, her health, and her college degree didn't help, I'm not big on anecdotes but let's keep it real here, your previous comment is ridiculous on every level.

3/13/17

I'm glad you won't respond further.

I never said it doesn't exist. I said that the hyperbole surrounding it, especially in NYC, is a joke. Your acedotal evidence is much appreciated.

Go back to reading VOX and huffpo.

Master in Finance Website

"We've always been at war with Eastasia"

3/19/17

Your persecution complex is showing. For you to suggest that there isn't broad sexism and misogyny is bizarre - I say this as a man who ... y'know ... talks to other men.

"Supporting trump can get you physically assaulted. College campuses have riots when different opinions are discussed (bell curve, milo). If you criticize or question BLM you can lose your job."

Supporting Hillary could also get you assaulted. Churches try to pray the gay out of kids. Please show me some data on BLM - related firings (side note: the panic 'conservatives' feel as progressive political movements, whether Occupy or BLM, tends to be massively out of proportion to the actual influence of these organizations).

Go back to VOX/huffpo/MSNBC/ protesting/ not paying taxes while we become Goldman BSDs is the last desperate gasp of a WSO conservative losing the argument. We liberals are also reading WSJ, Economist, Financial Times while making more money than you on the buyside :-P

3/13/17

Calm down Huff Post. It's a form of political protest against the hyper liberalism that's overtaken this country. Most (most, not all) of the idiots complaining about rich people and that their wealth should be redistributed are the ones without the talent & energy to get there themselves. This guy is just fighting what he considers the good fight just as you have the far left constantly doing controversial things in Times Square (but now with the liberal media, this has come to be recognized as the norm). God forbid anyone stage a similar protest if they are on the other side of anything liberal ever anywhere anytime.

3/13/17

The dude was broing out and being dumb, trying to frame this as some sort of political protest is pretty hilarious. I mean this statue was made specifically to promote gender diversity on corporate boards, how is that something that even needs to be protested?

3/13/17

We can frame it any way we want; that's what the media does. Join up my man

3/13/17
BobTheBaker:

The dude was broing out and being dumb, trying to frame this as some sort of political protest is pretty hilarious. I mean this statue was made specifically to promote gender diversity on corporate boards, how is that something that even needs to be protested?

People use all kinds of things as the focus of their protest, including crosses, US flags, etc. Many people don't see the US flag or Jesus or motherhood as something that should be protested either.

Look, I don't know what the right answer is here. I just know that this is no different from other peaceful but objectionable/not-cool forms of protest. If flag burning is OK but this isn't, or if this is OK but flag burning isn't, you're being inconsistent. Right now I take the view that while it's OK to be more pissed off about one or the other, they're both wrong and civilized people don't protest this way.

3/13/17

I agree with your point. My question is if this dude was actually protesting anything. If your way to express your view about a movement is to hump a statue then at least have a sign. Most flag burners at least have something to actually say and actually express those thoughts.

3/19/17

It's unclear that this dude was actually protesting anything. He was probably just being dumb and misogynistic.

People don't burn the flag for fun. They are usually making some point about current or past actions of the United States government. While you find that objectionable, it is also a fairly logical form of protest (burning the symbol of something you disagree with ). If you ask people why they might burn a flag, perhaps they are protesting (past or current) examples of war/violence, racism, imperialism, or any one of a whole bunch of other actions the United States has undertaken one could find objectionable.

Why should the flag always be venerated? I assume its because you believe the United States (as a country, a government, a people, an idea) is broadly good and its symbols should be treated with respect. Some people disagree with one or both points. Even if you disagree with the opinions/actions, the logic is clear: U.S. govt/ U.S. govt actions bad -> burn symbol of badness.

Now, what the hell is this guy protesting by humping this statue? How is humping the statue a logical way to protest this.

This is a perfectly legal but idiotic thing to do. FWIW, if you work in finance or any other industry where reputation is key, I would think it was pretty bad (potentially job threatening) for you to be seen on camera burning the flag as well (yes, i know he didn't expect to be filmed), so I don't really see that as being a double standard

3/14/17

Unfortunately, there are way too many rich people with redistribution interests. People born into money, or somehow lucky because of the proximity to money in which they were born, have a very bad infection of guilt. This is Ayn Rand Atlas Shrugged world.

"There is no greatness where there is not simplicity, goodness, and truth."

-- Leo Tolstoy, War and Peace

"Little monkeys turned gorrillas. Now they trapped in the station, filled up on noctaine, and now they not sane."

3/13/17

As a woman, I think it's pretty hilarious.

Stupid, but boys will be boys...

Scientist: Molecular Cancer Genetics.

3/13/17

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_1PGldbbZOls/Sidg-b5DLII/...

Disgusting display of rape culture. I'm literally shaking right now.

Master in Finance Website

"We've always been at war with Eastasia"

3/13/17

I'm totally with you TNA... I want to post this on my FB but I know some SJW will try to get me fired for it: http://imgur.com/a/SmGdB

3/13/17

I got spoken to by a teacher from my school for uploading a Paul Joseph Watson video about Saudi Arabia on FB...

3/14/17

Yeah. You see the double standard though. People just do dumb shit . But when that dumb shit involves a person the left wants to demonize, watch out.

Honestly, this is going to become MAD. Liberals will witch hunt and conservatives will have to start retaliating. Instead of all of us just realizing people don't have evil intentions all the time, every little thing will get blown out of proportion.

Master in Finance Website

"We've always been at war with Eastasia"

3/13/17

I once witnessed a sober woman climb under the bull and cup its balls while pretending to be fucked by the bull. We all laughed and moved on. Not sure if there were any pics or not, but I'm sure there were. No HuffPo article though. People pick and choose the shit that they call as inappropriate to fit their narrative of the day. To give an example, all the Dems got all bitchy about the "grab them by the pussy" comment but Rep. Richmonds made some pretty crude comments about Conway and Pelosi was like "we were all making crude comments" lol - so it's ok when your guys are doing but not ok when you can use it as a bullet to hit the other side. I also think that generally we have gotten too sensitive, like the woman who ripped into Google and Alexa digital assistants because apparently they are not feminist enough (not making it up - google it).

Moral of the story: there are people who forget to take their meds. Just like those people on the train who try to convert you on the way to work just don't make eye contact and move on.

"I'm talking about liquid. Rich enough to have your own jet. Rich enough not to waste time. Fifty, a hundred million dollars, buddy. A player. Or nothing. "
-GG

3/13/17

It's really not that offensive and Huffington Post writers equate everything with deep rooted social injustice but that guy is still a jackass for putting himself in that position. You gotta just assume everything you do in public could end up on someone's Instagram/Snapchat/Facebook these days.

3/13/17

Can you guys really throw around the word snowflake if you voted for a guy who gets offended by Saturday Night Live?

3/13/17

Just because someone recognizes that bleeding heart liberals constantly get bent out of shape about anything and everything does not mean that they voted for Trump. That just means that they don't like people turning a stupid and relatively innocent act into a reason to riot.

3/14/17

Yeah I didn't vote for Trump and I still think these snowflakes need to get over themselves and grow some hair on their nuts. Although I fund it funny that you automatically assume "not being a pussy" = "voted for Trump". You know what, I may think Trump's economic policies are retarded and I may not like the guy, but I'd rather hang out with 'deplorables' than with 'insufferables'. At least his supporters don't spend 90% of their time in a circlejerk trying to figure out whose gender is most fluid and complaining about people not spelling it "womxn" or some bullshit like that.

3/14/17

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-03-14...

Interesting that as we discuss this a new study is posted by bloomberg that shows that while women are less likely to engage in misconduct and even when they do it is less likely to cost their respective firms as much as male misconduct, they are 20% more likely to be fired and 30% less likely to find a new job after said misconduct. At firms with no female owners or executives, women were 42 percent more likely to be fired than men. This is for financial advisors btw. Sexism is totally a boogeyman though.

3/14/17
BobTheBaker:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-03-14...

Interesting that as we discuss this a new study is posted by bloomberg that shows that while women are less likely to engage in misconduct and even when they do it is less likely to cost their respective firms as much as male misconduct, they are 20% more likely to be fired and 30% less likely to find a new job after said misconduct. At firms with no female owners or executives, women were 42 percent more likely to be fired than men. This is for financial advisors btw. Sexism is totally a boogeyman though.

I'm glad I grit my teeth and read to the end of this.

The reports of men are accused of and successfully sued for misconduct isn't surprising. The judicial system is arguably biased against men-- we're supposed to be more deliberate and the culture holds us to a higher standard. It's part of the reason the vast majority of people on death row are men, even though women commit aggravated first degree murder at a much higher rate than their representation on death row.

I'm going to get to why I read to the end in a second (skip to the bold part if you'd like), but more criticisms first. There's likely also a lot of interaction between the "leave industry" vs. "remain in industry" results for men and women and the fact that men generally stay in the workforce until age 65 while many women choose to focus on parenting.

The first order stuff is just going to result in a bunch of political framing, spinning, and hogwash. But the diff of diff-- that women are punished more harshly at firms run by men than firms with a mixed C-suite is very interesting. It raises some legitimate questions about gender bias.

Frankly I think men get attacked too much in our culture. I also think that if society really does hold men to a higher standard, "male privilege" looks less unfair in context. I can't talk my way out of a traffic ticket or pretend that trading my PA without preapproval was an honest mistake, and I'm utterly terrified of blackout drunk women who want to see my bedroom. I can get drafted to fight in one of Trump's wars, and there's a stronger expectation that I will provide for myself and my family, and work until retirement. We're trained to work harder to win. And if we hold ourselves to a higher standard due to western culture and make different decisions than some (not all) women as a result, it shouldn't be a surprise if we sometimes wind up with better average outcomes on a level playing field, so long as the upper tails look the same-- as long as driven women can succeed playing against driven men.

But there is a boys' club culture on Wall Street, in some places more than others, varying from firm to firm. (My own personal experience is that it's better in IT and QR than in S&T and by my guess IBD) But this study is proof that when we can find highly skilled women with 20-30 years of industry experience to put in leadership, we need to do it.

3/14/17

Sexism exists and it's a big problem. But when the left makes it its business to organize witchhunts against "finance bros" for the smallest political correctness infractions, it just makes most men associate the entire movement with hatred and SJW extremism. I support equality, but if equality means constantly bitching about 'microaggressions' like a dude drunkenly humping a statue, then GTFO - your movement annoys the shit out of me and for that reason I hope it fails miserably until its supporters grow up and quit this type of bullshit.

3/14/17

My issue with a lot of the "right" and "conservatives" is they seem to be more upset about the left portraying sexism as more widespread than it actually is than they are with actual sexism. Perhaps if they spend more time addressing the root causes rather than complaining about people making them too big a deal the world would be a better place. The same goes with whining about BLM and their confrontational protesting without acknowledging the justice system is fundamentally biased against African Americans and Hispanics. It all seems like an attempt to ignore the actual issue.

3/14/17
BobTheBaker:

My issue with a lot of the "right" and "conservatives" is they seem to be more upset about the left portraying sexism as more widespread than it actually is than they are with actual sexism. Perhaps if they spend more time addressing the root causes rather than complaining about people making them too big a deal the world would be a better place. The same goes with whining about BLM and their confrontational protesting without acknowledging the justice system is fundamentally biased against African Americans and Hispanics. It all seems like an attempt to ignore the actual issue.

I think the right's problem is that sexism is an order of magnitude better today than it was 30 years ago, but the identity politics is an order of magnitude angrier.

Look, if we have a stable system here, Newton's law of cooling suggests that as we approach temperature parity, the transfer is going to reduce proportionately. The same ought to apply to race relations and gender relations. As the wage gap decreases, you should expect less anger about it. As segregation abates and we get equal opportunities for people of different races, we ought to see less racial nationalism and less obsession on racial inequality.

The opposite seems to be happening.

Conservatives just want a stable, balanced, and fair system that gives everyone equal opportunity.

3/14/17

People are more vocal. Young people feel more free to express their consternation with the system than ever before, social media has us all connected, of course the identity politics are going to seem (emphasis on seem, I am almost 100% sure the black community was angrier at the system 70 years ago than they are now, the world wasn't just as connected and ofc fear kept them from such expression in many instances) angrier. Everyone now has a voice. Look at the Rodney King situation and what video did to racial tensions in LA, now multiply that by everyone who has a camera phone now. This doesn't absolve conservatives (and everyone else) from trying to address the issues just because people are yelling about it more than ever before. Many liberals are simply fed up with the excuses and avoidance of these issues, they are thinking "this is 2017 and the fact that we still have to deal with racism/ sexism no matter how diminished is bullshit" and they are even angrier that there is a contingent that seems to believe legal protections and the superficial appearance of equality is actual equality. In many respects I disagree with their methods but I most definitely agree with their sentiment.

3/17/17
BobTheBaker:

People are more vocal. Young people feel more free to express their consternation with the system than ever before, social media has us all connected, of course the identity politics are going to seem (emphasis on seem, I am almost 100% sure the black community was angrier at the system 70 years ago than they are now, the world wasn't just as connected and ofc fear kept them from such expression in many instances) angrier.

I'm not sure if white people feel more free to speak out.

Everyone now has a voice. Look at the Rodney King situation and what video did to racial tensions in LA, now multiply that by everyone who has a camera phone now. This doesn't absolve conservatives (and everyone else) from trying to address the issues just because people are yelling about it more than ever before.

Maybe, but I think it discounts loud, vocal people. If the supply of vocal people is increased, the value of being vocal naturally decreases.

Many liberals are simply fed up with the excuses and avoidance of these issues, they are thinking "this is 2017 and the fact that we still have to deal with racism/ sexism no matter how diminished is bullshit" and they are even angrier that there is a contingent that seems to believe legal protections and the superficial appearance of equality is actual equality. In many respects I disagree with their methods but I most definitely agree with their sentiment.

Yeah, we have two different worldviews about what constitutes equality. And we need objective research to help sort things out. I'd argue that the Fryer study is an important data point, but so is Egan, Matvos, and Seru.

3/14/17

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_i...

Here is the paper. I'm reading it now. I have about zero trust in the news to report purely what is talked about in an academic paper.

Also, the timing is interesting. Smart move by these professors who will undoubtedly hit the news circuit with their "new" findings considering the paper was first released in 2016.

And per the paper, they discuss how male advisors have more experience (3 years), have more licenses and have different licenses which can make them more valuable. They are also more likely to be in manager positions.

The paper talks about controlling for this, but I am still looking at their methodology. They also mention some regional differences which can explain some of the findings.

Edit

Table 6 in the paper is interesting. While men are 20% more likely to remain with the firm, which is what they choose to highlight, Women are much more likely to leave the industry. This could be for a variety of reasons I'd like to see expanded on.

More reading to do.

Master in Finance Website

"We've always been at war with Eastasia"

3/14/17

See thank you for looking at the facts here. The problem with society today is that no one has the ability to do their own analysis and instead take everything spoon fed by the media as truth.

Example: Statistics were cited as outrageous by the media that 80% of people pulled over in Ferguson are black. Well if you actually look at the demographics of Ferguson, it is like 75% black.

3/14/17

Thanks. It's sad people are more than happy to read an article, but not read the source. I find it pretty coincidental that this "research" was rereleased. I was ordering a salad and looked at USA Today (worthless) and they said the optimal business has even men and women. I'm sure that research is Bullet proof.

Master in Finance Website

"We've always been at war with Eastasia"

3/14/17

I'm very confused. What exactly did you discover that wasn't previously discussed? Women are more likely to be fired and less likely to find new employment after being fired. They were also much more likely to be fired when there was no female owner/ mgmt/ executive. I'll wait for your detailed refutation of their methodology.

3/15/17

Thanks for posting a Bloomberg article. You're a human twitter feed. The actual research article was pretty interesting and you should have posted that.

What I illuminated was women were likely to leave the industry after being fired. This wasn't about finding a new job. They also talked about a number of differences that they attempted to control for. These things included more experience, more licensing and licensing which allows for a wider product set.

As I said above, I continue to read the actual research paper (conveniently re-released). The headlines me nothing without seeing the actual figures, sample set and methodology.

Master in Finance Website

"We've always been at war with Eastasia"

3/15/17

Idgaf about your online insults bro. The researchers controlled for experience and licensing (how hard is it to screen for women and men with CFPs for example). Perhaps women were more likely to leave after being unable to find work? How do you explain women being likelier to be fired by male superiors? Coincidence? Again, I'll wait for your detailed refutation of their methodology, in full, without assumptions or distractions.

3/15/17

You didn't even read the fucking report. They weren't even discussing CFP's (shows how much you got into the report).

Perhaps women leaving at a higher rate explains why more men are managers in the FA industry. Perhaps this explains why they are fired at a higher rate (firing junior employees with less experience than people with more time and performance).

I am going to finish reading the report and looking at the first paper published in 2016 to see the changes. The difference is that you have no interest in actually seeing a source document and just want to find a post on a website that supports your preconceived opinion.

Much like your inability to look at the Clinton Foundation financials. Much like your inability to look into anything.

Master in Finance Website

"We've always been at war with Eastasia"

3/15/17

What I just read are a bunch of assumptions. My CFPs comment was an example (I'm sure you read me type for example right after the example..). Keep trying to distract though. Women left the industry at a higher rate after being fired for misconduct because they couldn't find a job after said misconduct. Do you have a quote from the study that proves otherwise? Again, I'll wait for your detailed refutation. Trust, I can admit when I'm wrong. If the male superiors aspect of the study doesn't fully display to you the sexism at play here, idk what will.

3/15/17

No where in the report, the actual report, does it say they could not find another job. Just stop.

1) You didn't read the report
2) I'd didn't say they could not find another FA job (just think of how silly that sounds)

Love how you make shit up and then demand I prove XYZ.

Move on. Stop responding.

Master in Finance Website

"We've always been at war with Eastasia"

3/15/17

These are the numbers I put out:

1.) women are 20% more likely to be fired after misconduct then men are for misconduct despite being less likely to commit
2.) They are 30% less likely to find new employment after being fired for misconduct
3.) They are 42% more likely to be fired for misconduct if they have no female superiors

Let's not get bogged down in bullshit. I asked you to prove these figures false or prove the methodology used to arrive at these figures to be flawed. I am especially interested in how you explain (3). So far, you've provided nothing but assumptions and conjecture.

3/15/17

67% of the residents were black compared to 85% stopped. Black ppl were also 2x (12% vs 6%) as likely to get searched.

3/15/17

Who the fuck is talking about black people being stopped. Get a grip.

Master in Finance Website

"We've always been at war with Eastasia"

3/15/17

Did you even read Rags to Hermes' post.. wow

3/15/17

"See thank you for looking at the facts here. The problem with society today is that no one has the ability to do their own analysis and instead take everything spoon fed by the media as truth."

This thread is about a child status. You want to go off on some racial rant, go somewhere else.

Master in Finance Website

"We've always been at war with Eastasia"

3/15/17

I factually responded to misstated statistics, that's it, literally just provided the accurate numbers with no extra commentary. Why did you not quote the rest of his post? The more I interact with you the more idk why I do. You've no interest in reasonable discussion and I'd do well to learn that, it's just so hard to ignore the nonsense you barf out all over this forum. I suppose that's more my problem than yours.

3/15/17

Please don't respond then. I responded to IP with the article and my reading of it. Thanks for posting the Bloomberg article and having no interest beyond that.

I'm moving on. Thanks.

Master in Finance Website

"We've always been at war with Eastasia"

3/14/17

Since we're talking about the media and the foolish things they say...

Glad that an inanimate object can stand - "Even in the snow." LMAO

3/14/17

The comments on that are great. Thanks for posting.

3/14/17

Those phallic lampposts are doing well also! The matriarch is represented!!

Literally shaking at the thought!!

Master in Finance Website

"We've always been at war with Eastasia"

3/14/17

There is bias everywhere. Short fat ppl are infinitely underrepresented on boards when compared to tall slender people. blonde women,being a very small minority, are overwhelmingly overrepresented in executive and board positions. I pretty much agree with most of what ant is saying, except that the media is just pandering to the fad and much like daytime TV did...For ratings. FAds come and go, the pendulum is slowly swinging back

If the glove don't fit, you must acquit!

3/15/17

To force diversity simply for diversity's sake does not work. It never has and it never will benefit society in the long run because it creates imbalances in the marketplace. Let the free markets work and let the best players play (both in sports and business). People are either reliant on capitalism or the government, but not both.

Simply put, no economic structure has benefited mankind, lifted the impoverished and provided as many equal rights in the long run (50+ yrs.) as that of capitalism - bringing equality of opportunity vs. equality of outcome. Simply look at outcomes vs. intentions and history can be our teacher.

I do wholeheartedly agree that if there is a specific, identifiable case of racism, sexism, etc., I'm right there with you to shut that person or policy down. Please, for the love of logic and reasoning, I beg you to stop with the generalities, regardless of political preference. We use raw source data and cold-hard, emotionless facts derived from outcomes, not intentions to drive our decisions at our desks every single day, yet we use feelings (with either party) and check our brains at the door to drive our political decisions and activist causes? We can do better than that!

3/15/17

who gives a fuck

heister:

Look at all these wannabe richies hating on an expensive salad.

3/16/17

Guys, guys, come on.

Look at what this post has become.

We're attacking each other because "hey, but XYZ is being mean and saying things I don't like. This is so unfair! I will do the same!"

What are we, 7-year olds?

We should stand down and have a cold beer. I am sure that this would probably cut in half the "this is fascism" and "this is liberal tears" crap we see.

3/16/17

The girl statue facing down the roaring bull of the US markets? I don't get it. What is she trying to do, slow down/stop people from getting wealthier? Increasing standards of living? Driving progress? Financing and growing startups? Allocating capital?

I for one never took the bull to symbolize masculinity. It was always about drive, spirit, and energy. Raw desire for success. Regardless of gender.

3/16/17

Deleted double post.

3/18/17
3/19/17
3/19/17
3/20/17
3/21/17
3/29/17

Don't say this in a banking interview:

Which superhero would you be and why? I want to be like Robin Hood, stealing from the rich and giving to the poor - me.

4/4/17
4/13/17
Add a Comment