I believe that there is no gender in pretending to participate in sexist activities. This may be the worst manifestation of the moral foundation in human endeavour. Let us take the financial media industry as an example.
Okay, The Wall Street Journal lists the top financial advisors. The men and women on the list are based on rank, actual return and the amount of funds managed. Then, the “Wall Street Journal” listed the top female financial advisors. Looking at this, it’s easy to say: So what? But this is only because we have been trained to think this is correct, even if it blatantly shows total prejudice against women. I asked myself why the Wall Street Journal did this?
Quite simply, the people in the media are journalists, and journalists spend a lot of time in college to get a degree in journalism, so they have more time to be brainwashed into the trap of sexism theory, which shows that in our patriarchy Women in female society are victims. The commercial newspaper “Wall Street Journal” pretends to be above all else, but judging from the choice of content, they are obviously not.
If the situation is fair, there is no gender discrimination, and everything is truly “gender neutral,” then there is only one list of men and women, or only two lists, one with men and one with women, which is fair to both. When we look at the list of all financial advisors, there is only one woman in the top 20 and only four women in the top 100. This is not a good performance. Of course there may be reasons for this, but these numbers are Reasonable and square. We live in a highly competitive society, and the financial sector does so. These are actual results based on predetermined standards. This is a fact.
If for some reason we (as a society) worry that women look bad on such surveys and data points, or if we are concerned about The Wall Street Journal, then we have better options.
A. Do not publish surveys at all
B. Two separate surveys-one for men and one for women
If we choose “A”, then we will be biased towards retaining or hiding data, which will only perpetuate the misuse of abilities and support the theme of complete equality between men and women in all aspects of human endeavour. We are not. All of us know or should already know this, just by observing our species and basic people observing our species need to understand the inner technology of the world around us.
Therefore, the method above “A” is worse than the “financial consultant survey” we are currently conducting, but it may not be as meaningful as “B” in the selection.
At that time, one might argue that a gender studies professor would definitely say that the reason why women were only 4 in the top 100 was because the industry was biased towards women. Okay, let’s take a moment? First of all, the field of Financial Advisor is a very new field. In fact, the first batch of people even got permission for it, and the first batch of courses took place in the late 70s and early 80s. There are women in these first-class cabins. I know, because I am married to one of them and is actually a student in the first class. Most people in the class are men, but there are also women.
Maybe that class title or subject is not so interesting to women. Anyone at the time can register. Most stockbrokers who are a little tired of the standards are first-class brokers, but not all of them. Some people are just people with financial, banking and accounting and other backgrounds and interests. The entire industry started without prejudice. In fact, some people may say that because “Financial Advisor” mainly involves the “relationship” with customers, that is, women may be more suitable, so this is of course my bias, because I believe that women who evolve into mothers in the family department do better it is good. I am better than men in terms of interpersonal relationships, but I digress because I have spent enough words on this topic to fill a day’s artificial Internet data.
So why do men outperform women in financial advisory? Well, it can be said that men are usually more competitive and therefore take a higher-risk approach, which will make them very successful, or generally less successful, so they will collapse, burn and find new jobs in other fields. A survey shows that in this situation, the worst-performing or worst-performing financial advisers (in terms of return) will be full of people. Women who are better relationship builders take less risk because they don’t want their clients to lose money, so their average rate of return is higher, and working overtime is a safer choice. This may actually make them “better” overall, which is the subject of future conversations.
The interesting thing about all this, please note that I will not talk nonsense about “gender equality” or even make the financial sector highly respected. It is when people are busy playing gender equality games and the government is busy making more regulations in the department, artificial intelligence robot consultants take over. Soon, the best candidates for work were not men, women, or even transgender people, but computers. Well done human, you did it yourself-again!