Financial Advisors: How Did Reverse Sexism Become the Acceptable Norm?

Financial Advisors: How Did Reverse Sexism Become the Acceptable Norm?

In my opinion, pretending not to be sexist by engaging in sexist activities is probably the worst demonstration of a moral foundation within human endeavor. Let’s take an example from the financial media industry, if possible.

Okay, The Wall Street Journal publishes a list of the best financial advisers and on that list are men and women based on ranks, actual returns, and amount of money under management. Then the Wall Street Journal publishes a list of the best female financial advisers. Looking at this, one could easily say; And that? But that’s only because we’ve been trained to think this is correct, even when it blatantly shows the full bias for women. I wondered why the Wall Street Journal does this.

It’s simple, those in the media are journalists, journalists spend a lot of time in college to get their journalism degree, therefore they have had more time to be brainwashed and fall into the trap of theory. of sexism, one that says that in our patriarchal society women are somehow victims. . The Wall Street Journal, a business newspaper, claims to be above all of this, but obviously they are not, judging by those choices in their content.

If things were fair and sexism didn’t exist and everything was truly ‘gender neutral’, there would only be one list with men and women, or there would be two lists, one with only men and one with only women to be fair to both . When we look at the list of all financial advisers, there was only one woman in the top 20 and four in the top 100, not a good result, and of course, there are probably reasons for this, but those are the numbers, fair. and square. We live in a competitive society and the financial sector is, and those are the actual results based on predetermined criteria. That’s the truth.

If for some reason we as a society are concerned that women will look bad in such polls and data points, or if the Wall Street Journal is concerned, then we have better options;

A. Do not post the survey at all

B. Two separate surveys: one for men and one for women

If we choose “A,” then we are being biased to withhold or hide the data, which only perpetuates a skill misnomer and underpins the theme that both men and women are totally equal in all aspects of human endeavor. are not. We all know this or should have known it by now, simply from mere observation of our species and the basic people-observing techniques inherent in our species’ need to understand the world around us.

So the “A” above is better than the way we are doing the Financial Adviser Survey now, but it’s probably not as good as the “B” option, which makes more sense.

Now one could argue, and a gender studies professor would definitely, that the reason women only had 4 in the top 100 is because the industry was previously biased against women. Okay, let’s take this for a moment, shall we? First, the field of Financial Advisor is quite new, in fact, the first people even got licensed for this, and the first courses happened in the late 70’s and early 80’s. There were women in these first classes. I know because I was married to one of them, I actually signed up for the first class. Most of the people in the class were men, but there were also women.

Maybe that class title or topic didn’t interest women as much. Anyone at that time could sign up. Most of the stockbrokers who were somewhat fed up with the norm were first-class, but not all, some were just people from finance, banking and accounting, and other backgrounds and interests. There was no bias at the time the industry started. In fact, some might say that since financial counseling has a lot to do with ‘relationships’ with clients, women might be more suitable, this of course is my bias when speaking, as I think women, that evolutionarily they are the mothers of the family unit, they do better. than men in relationships, but I digress, as enough words have been spent on that topic to fill a day’s worth of human-generated internet data.

So why do men outnumber women as financial advisers? Well, you could say that men tend to be more competitive, therefore they take a higher risk approach, leading them to be very successful or more typically less successful so they crash and burn. and they look for a new job in some other sector. In this case, a survey showing the lowest or worst performing financial advisers (in terms of profitability) would be full of men; And women who are better relationship builders, taking less risk because they don’t want their clients to lose money, would show more average returns, so overtime is a safer bet. In fact, this could make them “better” overall, a topic for future dialogue.

The funny thing about all this is that I don’t give a shit about ‘gender equality’ and I don’t even have a high regard for the financial sector; is that while humans were busy playing with gender equality, and the government was busy rolling out more regulations to the sector, the Artificial Intelligent Robo-Advisors came and took over. Soon the best person for a job will not be male or female, not even transgender, it will be a computer. Well done humans, you did it yourselves – again!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *