Woman traders??

If women really are paid less than their male counterparts for doing the same work then firms hiring more women than their competitors would crush them in the marketplace with increased profits. The argument that women are as productive as men yet have lower wages is demolished by this simple logical deduction. Sure there is some anecdotal evidence of this, but I can find a lot of men with similar stories.

Some empirical evidence from Canada on the alleged wage gap from 1971 (when the wage gap should have been even more prevalent):

Symbol Definition
W{mF} wages of married females
W{nmF} wages of never-married females
W{mM} wages of married men
W{nmM} wages of never-married men

Wages of Married and Never-Married Men and Women Category
Ratios
W{mF}:W{mM} 0.33
W{nmF}:W{nmM} 0.992 (no gap)
W{F}:W{M} 0.38

Wages of Men vs. Women in Various Age-Groups Category
W{F}:W{M} All 0.76
25 and over 0.74
16-24 0.95

From a Walter Block Lecture on the topic:

 

1. The glass ceiling theory is that women are highly under-represented in the upper extremities (top-notch) of whatever you want to talk about.
2. Block's argument is that men are "God's crapshoots". There are more male CEO's, but also more male crooks and nut-cases.
3. Women are stable, "God's insurance policy".
4. The idea is that the the distribution of male and female intelligence, while having the same average, has a different variance. The female distribution has less variance, and is focused around the mean, with thin tails. The male distribution has more variance, with less focus around the mean and fatter tails.
5. There is a socio-biological reason for this: men are expendable, women are not.
6. From the standpoint of human repopulation, if a lot of men die, so what? If a lot of women die, it's bad because you can't repopulate.

Some pretty interesting, albeit controversial thoughts. Logical thinking and looking at actual facts turns out to be pretty useful when analyzing the world.

To the topic of women traders, we are all equal when trading. The only thing that matters at the end of the day is the P/L statement.

It is best to see people as just people in most situations as everybody is very different. Stereotypes have some grounding in truth, else they wouldn't be stereotypes, but acting and speaking out based solely on such generalizations is just stupid.

Hi MIA Austrian,

Part of the difficulty in discussing this subject is the need to define precisely what we are talking about. It isn't about the alleged differences in generalised wages between men and women across the full spectrum of populations. I agree that there is close parity in this regard these days across the wider employment population.

The issue in question here is the niche sectors where women are already under-represented because the natural hiring practice has been very male focussed. In these environments, women do often need to compete much harder to prove themselves. The other issue is that when push comes to shove in the promotion stakes within these sectors, women tend come out of it second best e.g. ak4x's daughter's experience. It isn't of course, the experience of all professional women, but it does happen with sufficient regularity to warrant acknowledgement.

Protaganists to the glass ceiling theory need to keep in mind that invalidating it's existence is a cognitive exercise alone - it doesn't mean it doesn't exist for others. People from all walks of life have different experience, just because our experience or perspective differs, does not invalidate the experience, views or realities for others.

There are decided biological differences between the sexes, and this does show in the way people trade and view the market. Women on the trading floor and in trading houses do provide a measure of balance to the testosterone loaded environment (there was a recent university study on this, reported in WSJ I think, I'll try to find it later and post the link)

Variance also exists however among women as it does men - some women can be less than competent analysts and traders, while others excel. I've read many studies in recent years on the profitability of women vs men however the focus of these studies has always been other asset classes. I am not presently aware of any quantitative or qualitative research on this subject regarding women who trade Forex (doesn't mean it doesn't exist, I'm just not aware of it if it does).

I also agree that this isn't a contest between the genders, what matters is the P/L bottom line. However a trader might arrive at that point of profitability is not greatly relevant to the debate, it's a personal journey that each of us make whatever the raw material we might start with.

Shared knowledge of trading this market well, whether it comes from males or females is always valuable. We each bring something useful to the discussion whatever our origins or perspective.

hi girl u dont need to leave this women thread just coz few @#$% dont like ur views stay here and kick there ass

In my experience a lot of incompetent women use discrimination as an excuse for not being paid or promoted. Business don't care who makes them profit, if someone is good at their job they will be promoted, paid more. If businesses do discriminator against a group then that group will move to companies that don't. If it happens repeatedly than I would question whether the person is really as good as they think. I see women in very high positions in many companies.

The study I referred to on the effects of testosterone and cortisol on male traders while on the trading floor, is from the University of Cambridge, it can be read here

http://www.pnas.org/content/105/16/6167.full.pdf

The article published by the New York Times related to the research is here

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/08/op...traders&st=cse

I could never imagine I will find a thread like what you find on facebook which has nothing to do with trading system/strategy on ForexFactory!

Proof: Ali IS a woman!

I am a girl, 28, and I am a trader,- said Kelly. And that goes for me too. I started out just a month ago. So, yes I am still trying to learn how to walk before I can run. To add on the gender subject, I believe evryone can excel and bring the best to the table as long as there is genuine interest, desire to succeed and ability to absorb new knowledge. You don't have to be a man to succeed, it's a game of probabilities afterall and we can just TRY to predict the future. ;-)

ok girls i am regular catch me on Euro thread....hehe

Science unveils hidden drivers of stock bubbles and crashes

Posted Fri Sep 19, 2008 1:43pm AEST
Updated Fri Sep 19, 2008 2:13pm AEST
http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200708/r166723_619980.jpgTestosterone encourages confidence and risk-taking, and has an accumulative effect (Reuters: Brendan McDermid)


Many economists believe that investors make decisions rationally, weighing up corporate data and other pricing signals to evaluate gain or risk before buying or selling stocks.
But this keystone belief in how markets function is now under mounting attack after this month's global stocks crash, the latest in a string of financial shocks over the past two decades.
Proponents of rival concepts say that primitive emotions, herd mentality and raging hormones are among the invisible motors that help inflate an asset bubble and then prick it.
"In standard economic theory, the way that prices in all markets are meant to be set depends on people being rational and having access to all available information," David Tuckett of the Psychoanalysis Unit at University College London says.
"This way of looking at things is almost completely wrong. Markets are operated by human beings."
Investigators into the theories of behavioural or emotional finance say conscious decisions are only the surface of a river with deep and powerful undercurrents.
A boom-and-bust event can follow a distinct path, they say.
At first, investors are sceptical about dipping into a market.
When they perceive that neighbours or peers are getting rich by buying a given stock, they cautiously make a purchase and their confidence builds as the stock's value rises.
The gains fuel enthusiasm, which leads to the euphoric conviction, as the price spirals higher, that this is an easy way to wealth.
At this point - when the bubble is most inflated - the investor becomes indifferent to warning signs, such as share values or price-earnings ratios that are stratospherically high.
What happens when the market starts to tank? The initial response is dismissal, for the investor still believes that his stocks will come back up and there is no point in selling.
As prices slip further, denial cedes to fear and then, suddenly, to panic.
Traumatised by their loss, investors vow never to invest in stocks again - a sentiment that can be durably enforced if many others have also been burned.

'Tulip Mania'


A famous example of this process was "Tulip Mania", which occurred in the 17th-century Netherlands.
Tulip bulbs, then a rarity in Europe, scaled extraordinary heights in the course of a mad year, only to fall just as abruptly.
At the Mania's peak in 1636, a single bulb of a particularly coveted strain, the Viceroy tulip, changed hands for the equivalent of more than 25,500 euros ($44,859) today. When the bubble burst, there was a wave of moralising and calls for tighter controls against speculators.
Trond Andresen, who specialises in behavioural analysis at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, says investors may think less about the intrinsic value of a stock and more about the perception of its value.
This is an important distinction, he says.
"Short-term volatility is created when you have people running after each other," he argues.
"If people stopped chasing what they think the other person is thinking, rather than actually trying to value a stock on their own best terms without second-guessing people, the volatility would disappear."
John Coates, a Cambridge University researcher into biochemistry and behaviour, says market fluctuations are amplified by hormones.
In a past life, Mr Coates traded at US investment house Goldman Sachs and Deutsche Bank in New York.
During the dot-com boom, he says, he was stunned to see male traders "displaying classic symptoms of mania," with symptoms of omnipotence, raging thoughts and diminished need for sleep.
Quitting finance and heading for Cambridge, Mr Coates explored a hunch with Joe Herbert, a professor at the Cambridge Centre for Brain Repair.
They took saliva swabs from 17 male traders at a London stock-dealing firm twice a day and measured the samples for two hormones.
These were testosterone, which is associated with male aggressiveness and sexual behaviour, and cortisol, which is summoned by the body to deal with "fight or flight" emergencies.
When the traders were in profit, their testosterone levels surged. But when they were in loss, or in fluctuation, it was their cortisol that rose sharply.
Testosterone encourages confidence and risk-taking, and has an accumulative effect, which could explain winning streaks in sports teams, for instance.
But research in animals suggests that, over the long term, high doses of the hormone impair judgement and encourage excessive risks.
Similarly, cortisol has a beneficial, euphoric effect in the short term, but after two weeks of exposure to it at high levels, the hormone can turn negative, eroding confidence and magnifying fear of risk, Mr Coates says.
"If you were to take an identical set of facts and present them to someone high on testosterone and someone who's got chronic cortisol, the first one would see opportunities everywhere and the second would see nothing but risks," he said.
In this light, says Mr Coates, fund managers would be advised to get an "endocrinal mix" on the trading floor.
Women and older men would add a calmer, longer perspective to the headstrong, testosterone-driven actions of young male colleagues.
In 2007, Mr Tuckett interviewed dozens of fund mangers at top investment banks around the world.
Under crushing pressure to perform, they blocked out the risk factor and convinced themselves, day in and day out, that they had had the keys others were groping for.
"The 'Master of the Universe' really does believe in his own invincibility," Mr Tuckett said.
"Even though many of the traders I interviewed told me 'this boom can't go on forever', they kept on investing in it."
- AFP

http://www.sfomag.com/homefeaturedet...st&YearID=2004

There are great male traders and great women traders, but Linda Ram makes an excellent point, and it’s food for thought: “If you were to take a man at an 80-percent success rate and a woman at an 80-percent success rate, I would bet you that what they are good at would have very little overlap. The solution is that men should get a woman trading partner, and women should get a man trading partner. Multi-sex partnerships are better than single-sex partnerships.” In fact, that’s what Hank Camp did when he hired Rita Whitfield, and he’s never looked back. “Every man should trade with a woman,” he contends. “They will never be sorry.”

i will appreciate if u can give me company from monday...

Very brave of you to ask. Considering the fact I am a month old baby

no probs even u are 1 month old if u are a good charm for me.

Hi Neptun84, great article link. Thanks for posting it. Something all traders should read.

Indeed. One balances the other and both can then see the whole picture from every point of view.

Jade then we are in absolute agreement. Yes of course there are some industries that still have certain biases against women, Wall Street being a good example. However slowly but surely women consistently prove themselves to be as good as men in nearly everything (obviously men and women can perform certain things better than each other because the sexes really are quite different).

Trading is most definitely a profession where I could see women being better than men as I think it is harder for men to change bad habits stemming from emotions than it is for women who are more introspective and willing to change.

That's a very interesting study that seems to jive with basic common sense, thanks for linking that. I think, Jade, you proved in this thread that women (at least you) have greater self control than some men, a fact that, unfortunately, bears itself out in all areas of life time and again.

That was a joke, my foot in the door post.

So you agree with Jade's point that women are better traders than men(It wasnt just a point, she has presented it as fact)? I have not claimed that any sex was a better trader, the only trait that I pointed out was competativeness, which I beleive men have more than women.

Ill say it all again, IF i was CEO of a hedge-fund and I was looking for new traders I would take on the one who had the most solid record, regardless of gender.
Were talking about making a living here, real money, you dont hire a man because your sexist against women, you will hire who ever can demonstate they have the capability to make you the most money.

Trading Is a performance based Job, income largely dependent on your worth to your employer. IMO sexist conspiracies are just that when it comes to trading.

Am I only stuck in this thread with the ignorant people? Somebody, anybody show me some agreement? Please. This forum is really starting to seem like a loony bin.

No not just u...i am also stuck some where else with same ignorant people lolll

enjoy there ignorance... hehehe

I agree, the people arguing that women make better traders than men, provide zero evidence. Look at FF hall of fame, how many women traders are mentioned? And the last time I checked brokers dont discrimnate against women private traders so that excuse can't be used.