
The cost of devaluing women - edem
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/02/opinion/sunday/the-cost-of-devaluing-women.html
======
Boothroid
'First Round Capital reports that its investments in companies with a female
founder have posted 63 percent better returns than men-only firms.' so what?
Correlation does not imply causation. Also it might be that female founded
firms are less risky, and so less likely to generate mega returns. Or it could
be the opposite. Point is we don't know and the stat is useless on its own.

'This man naturally assumed that he knew more about it than I did. It was his
ingrained view of women — a view that’s costing all of us.'. This is nothing
more than an assertion.

Finally I think only the most naïve or faux-naïve would be surprised to find
that Wall Street contains some pretty serious/insane characters. Isn't that
kind of the nature of the beast? I bet there are plenty of men that have to
deal with terrible behaviour also. That's not to excuse any of this behaviour,
but I'm sure the idea that if you are a man you are guaranteed an easy ascent
to the upper reaches is risible.

------
megamindbrian2
I wish women didn't have to work for their own protection.

