Men Suck - Women Are Better Traders

[Ingot54 13]

Ingot - you are touching on the ideas of freedom of choice and do we really want it, and are we actually able to handle it and the consequences that come with it.....this is not really just related to male/female relationships.

If you take it back to trading it can very easily be applied here.....and the reality is we only really have three choices to chose from - long, short, flat/square.....and even these three choices throw up endless conundrums of when to apply these freedoms....

eye yi yi yi yi...the head spins.

:rofl:

 

It's a hot one ... and daring indeed is the man who attempts to take it on without the necessary diplomatic skills!

 

It's not all that hard though.

 

Regardless of what kind of shoes you wear, your statement of the true choices apply equally across the genders ... and across the spectrum of participants.

 

Unfortunately (or fortunately if you are at the desired end of the spectrum) the spectrum of trading skills ranges from the hopeless-but-hopeful at one end and the accomplished-and-competent at the other.

 

Any attempt to pigeon-hole traders according to gender is just a waste of time - interesting, but still a useless and distracting exercise. There are some reputable female traders and coaches (Raschke, Toghraie, Horner spring to mind) but really does it matter?

 

I love to chew the fat, but this week I'm all about focusing on my own trading. I really won't have a choice soon - I am near the end of one life's journey, and the boat that brought me here will soon be burning. If I am to survive (and I will) I will need to dispense with this useless chatter and be more disciplined and focused.

 

There is no turning back.

[deanldavis475 10]

First, All generalizations are lies, including this one.

Next, I really think that if indeed there may be a difference it has more to do with following ones own established rules. Believing in them and then following them. I notice that a lot of good traders are pilots and I would think that the same reasoning applies with them.

[MightyMouse 12]

all i say is warren buffet

 

not mrs warren buffet . . .

 

 

what a pile of rubbish that title is - its just used to promote a gender war

 

"the Wright Brothers didn't get the airplane right the first time"

 

and women never bothered in the first place ! - as per usual

 

if women were in charge we'd still be looking for the wheel !

 

 

anyone who believes women are better than men is a pussy whipped fool

 

they support women whilst women think nothing of men especially the

 

loser they hand picked because he was a man they could control and if

 

hes rich , she'll pop a baby out then divorce him and have a "busy

 

life" based on online bingo and ebay . . .

 

the fairer gender is a disgrace

 

they just want an essy life and use their bodies to obtain it for them

 

men have been brainwashed by "manners" to show deference to women

 

look up david deangelo to see how the female "brain" operates

 

also look up "the manipulated man" written by a woman !

 

to quote :-

 

"Men have been trained and conditioned by women, not unlike the way

 

Pavlov conditioned his dogs, into becoming their slaves. As

 

compensation for their labours men are given periodic use of a woman's

 

vagina."

 

i rest my case . . .

 

I hope you are trying to be funny.

 

They only have power to the extent that you have weaknesses. If you are ruled by your mental and physical impulses, then you get what your deserve. It also sounds like you may have vagina envy if there is such a thing.

 

You are pointing to sources where you received your ridicules information as if the fact that they were written makes them correct. With your thinking, you can make clear cases against Jews, Blacks, Muslims, and or any other race or religion or gender not your own.

 

No one should feel as if they wish they were someone else because they are forced into a role that they do not choose to be in because of their race, ethnicity, gender or religion. Choice is freedom.

[minoo 11]

It may be too much to learn from the ladies for some guys here

(I have done more learning from all the ladies in me life than ever will I from any other Gender, including the so call Big One (presumably male too))

 

But for those who have Open Mind (OM!) may attempt a read

Hopefully we provoke no such outburst again

 

What Traders Can Learn From Women

 

Enjoy Minoo

 

Edited:http://www.thestar.com/specialsections/onlinetrading/article/893818--women-are-better-at-trading-online-study-finds

Edited June 26, 2011 by minoo

[FXGirl 10]

Dear Ingot:

 

It's all about choice. Everyone, man or woman, should be able to choose the life they want. Yes, there are differences in biology between men and women, but the spirit is another thing entirely, and the creative dance between the two gives us the possibility of endless variations in the lives that we create.

 

Congratulations to you and your wife for a successful and happy relationship. That's a valuable thing.

[Tradewinds 12]

It may be true that Men Suck and Women Are Better Traders, but I can aim my piss with pinpoint accuracy, and that is what is really important in life. (Sarcasm) :rofl: I like the title of the thread because it reverses the perspective that some people might assume. It's good to turn things upside down once in a while.

[Rande Howell 10]

Before I would accept, as an assertion, that women make better traders than men, I would have to see the source of that info to make sure that it is a grounded assessment. Noting that many purveyors of trading present a real "blue sky" vision of trading, my deepest suspicsion is that this statement is more of an attempt to lure women into trading than an actual statement of fact.

 

That said, women (as a gender within a species of social mammalians) have a genetic predisposition to build nest and protect it. That certainly can be an advantage in limiting losses and managing risk. And generally women are not trying to prove their worth or their mattering using the vechicle of trading as men often do. The biggest problem I see with men is that they are not initially prepared to face their fears that they are confronted by in trading. Whereas women tend to have a much richer emotional language that always them to understand themselves when they enter trading. When men awaken the internal courage to confront themselves, they learn how to emotionally manage risk much better.

 

Rande Howell

[Ingot54 13]

Before I would accept, as an assertion, that women make better traders than men, I would have to see the source of that info to make sure that it is a grounded assessment.

 

The biggest problem I see with men is that they are not initially prepared to face their fears that they are confronted by in trading. Whereas women tend to have a much richer emotional language that always them to understand themselves when they enter trading. When men awaken the internal courage to confront themselves, they learn how to emotionally manage risk much better.

 

Rande Howell

Before I would accept, as an assertion, that

"men ... are not initially prepared to face their fears"

and

"women tend to have a much richer emotional language that always (sic) them to understand themselves when they enter trading,"

I would have to see the source of that info to make sure that it is a grounded assessment.

[Tams 20]

FYI

 

The Gender Genie

[Rande Howell 10]

Before I would accept, as an assertion, that and I would have to see the source of that info to make sure that it is a grounded assessment.

 

Ingot54. This is really standard stuff. Search alexithermia in men. Then seach women's emotional achetecture. Not really worth the effort to respond beyond that.

 

Rande Howell

[Ingot54 13]

Ingot54. This is really standard stuff. Search alexithermia in men. Then seach women's emotional achetecture. Not really worth the effort to respond beyond that.

 

Rande Howell

 

Silly me!

 

I found nothing under "Alexithermia" in men, but I guess "*thermia" in men might mean he's a hot guy ... and for females, she might be a hot chick! :rofl:

 

But if we are discussing "Alexithymia" then that is also something I had never heard of until you threw it up just now.

Thanks ... you have enriched my knowledge.

 

The Google article I read on it: NORMATIVE MALE ALEXITHYMIA had this to say:

 

"In light of these claims we must ask is it really true that men have an "inability to identify their feelings"? Or that they cannot sense inwardly and "feel feelings" as most women purportedly can? In one of only a few studies which found a higher prevalence of alexithymia amongst males, the following Finnish study found that men assessed with the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) scored higher than women on factor 2 (difficulty in describing feelings), but there was no gender difference in factor 1 scores (difficulty in identifying feelings).

 

This is an important finding in regards of alexithymia because an inability to identify feelings constitutes the heart of the alexithymic deficit in emotional cognition, from which the secondary difficulty in describing feelings naturally arises.

 

If the difficulty in describing feelings does not result from the prior inability to identify feelings, but rather from repression or cultural proscription to "keep your feelings inside" then we are dealing with a different phenomenon altogether from alexithymia proper. Men may have the words, but they keep them inside."

 

According to your own theory (Alexithymia) Rande, this article seems to reveal it does NOT hold water.

 

So it seems: " ... men are (generally) less skilled than women in their ability to describe feelings, he is demonstrably incorrect in claiming that men are less able to identify specific feeling states in self or others in the true clinical sense of alexithymia. Here it would seem that Levant has failed to discriminate between the separate factors of (1) identifying and (2) describing feelings."

 

I submit that your flash-word, "Alexithymia," is nothing but a red herring in this conversation Rande, and designed to boost the awe in which we are supposed to hold you, as an erudite psychologist, resident on this forum.

 

Further, if your textbook is telling you otherwise, I suggest you read a little more widely:

 

"According to College of New Jersey psychologist Mark Kiselica, past president of the American Psychological Association's Society for the Psychological Study of Men and Masculinity, most men are not alexithymic: “it is not a 'norm'”. Kiselica reports that a literature review showed only a few studies found that males have slightly higher rates of developing the disorder, while the majority of studies found no differences between the genders, with overall about one in 10 people of either gender showing any significant level of alexithymia."

 

Is there any greater authority than the American Psychological Association's Society for the Psychological Study of Men and Masculinity?

 

Your attempt to dazzle the forum with little-known science, and buzz-words may have come a little unglued, Rande.

But I recognise your contribution was a good attempt to influence people.

 

Now, imagine if some poor trader actually thought that you understood what you are talking about, and signed up for your therapy. Thousands of dollars worth of theoretical stuff - DVD's, workbooks, one-on-one time and so on ... but it has been my contention all along, Rande, that until YOU actually become a trader YOURSELF - even on demo - then you have very little to contribute towards the success of any individual in his trading activities.

 

What would you possibly be trying to tell them, when you don't and can't, trade yourself?

 

I leave the last word to the researchers:

 

"In the final analysis this superficial conflation of alexithymia with maleness may reflect the influences of contemporary gender stereotyping more than it does the findings of rigorous scientific method."

 

Do you still hold that it is: "Not really worth the effort to respond beyond that."

 

I think you have quite a bit of responding to do.

 

Make the effort! Standard stuff indeed!:haha:

[GARYTL 10]

"You are pointing to sources where you received your ridicules information as if the fact that they were written makes them correct"

 

er , what ?

 

of course i'm going to post items that back me up - hello ?

 

still cant get over the wright brothers comment - if they knew someone was going to write that about their achievements they wouldnt have bothered

 

so basically dont bother doing anything - hope your listening Mr Edison !

 

get a grip men !

 

[Rande Howell 10]

Silly me!

 

I found nothing under "Alexithermia" in men, but I guess "*thermia" in men might mean he's a hot guy ... and for females, she might be a hot chick! :rofl:

 

But if we are discussing "Alexithymia" then that is also something I had never heard of until you threw it up just now.

Thanks ... you have enriched my knowledge.

 

The Google article I read on it: NORMATIVE MALE ALEXITHYMIA had this to say:

 

"In light of these claims we must ask is it really true that men have an "inability to identify their feelings"? Or that they cannot sense inwardly and "feel feelings" as most women purportedly can? In one of only a few studies which found a higher prevalence of alexithymia amongst males, the following Finnish study found that men assessed with the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) scored higher than women on factor 2 (difficulty in describing feelings), but there was no gender difference in factor 1 scores (difficulty in identifying feelings).

 

This is an important finding in regards of alexithymia because an inability to identify feelings constitutes the heart of the alexithymic deficit in emotional cognition, from which the secondary difficulty in describing feelings naturally arises.

 

If the difficulty in describing feelings does not result from the prior inability to identify feelings, but rather from repression or cultural proscription to "keep your feelings inside" then we are dealing with a different phenomenon altogether from alexithymia proper. Men may have the words, but they keep them inside."

 

According to your own theory (Alexithymia) Rande, this article seems to reveal it does NOT hold water.

 

So it seems: " ... men are (generally) less skilled than women in their ability to describe feelings, he is demonstrably incorrect in claiming that men are less able to identify specific feeling states in self or others in the true clinical sense of alexithymia. Here it would seem that Levant has failed to discriminate between the separate factors of (1) identifying and (2) describing feelings."

 

I submit that your flash-word, "Alexithymia," is nothing but a red herring in this conversation Rande, and designed to boost the awe in which we are supposed to hold you, as an erudite psychologist, resident on this forum.

 

Further, if your textbook is telling you otherwise, I suggest you read a little more widely:

 

"According to College of New Jersey psychologist Mark Kiselica, past president of the American Psychological Association's Society for the Psychological Study of Men and Masculinity, most men are not alexithymic: “it is not a 'norm'”. Kiselica reports that a literature review showed only a few studies found that males have slightly higher rates of developing the disorder, while the majority of studies found no differences between the genders, with overall about one in 10 people of either gender showing any significant level of alexithymia."

 

Is there any greater authority than the American Psychological Association's Society for the Psychological Study of Men and Masculinity?

 

Your attempt to dazzle the forum with little-known science, and buzz-words may have come a little unglued, Rande.

But I recognise your contribution was a good attempt to influence people.

 

Now, imagine if some poor trader actually thought that you understood what you are talking about, and signed up for your therapy. Thousands of dollars worth of theoretical stuff - DVD's, workbooks, one-on-one time and so on ... but it has been my contention all along, Rande, that until YOU actually become a trader YOURSELF - even on demo - then you have very little to contribute towards the success of any individual in his trading activities.

 

What would you possibly be trying to tell them, when you don't and can't, trade yourself?

 

I leave the last word to the researchers:

 

"In the final analysis this superficial conflation of alexithymia with maleness may reflect the influences of contemporary gender stereotyping more than it does the findings of rigorous scientific method."

 

Do you still hold that it is: "Not really worth the effort to respond beyond that."

 

I think you have quite a bit of responding to do.

 

Make the effort! Standard stuff indeed!:haha:

 

Ingot54

 

Good luck with your life. After 20 years of couseling couples and watching males avoid dealing with emotional conflict by attacking their fears with their spouses and those spouses seeking to reconnect emotionally to their distant husbands, any person with an observant mind can see the pattern emerge also in trading. I don't see anything different here. You're proof.

 

Rande Howell

 

Rande Howell

[Ingot54 13]

Ingot54

 

Good luck with your life. After 20 years of couseling(sic) couples and watching males avoid dealing with emotional conflict by attacking their fears with their spouses and those spouses seeking to reconnect emotionally to their distant husbands, any person with an observant mind can see the pattern emerge also in trading. I don't see anything different here. You're proof.

 

Rande Howell

 

Rande Howell

After 50 years of dealing with self-opinionated professionals, and listening to their psycho-babble, I have become pretty good at spotting frauds. You're proof.

 

Thank you for the free assessment though Rande - about the same value as much of your other stereotyping and generalising.

 

Look, I suggest that rather than losing your cool over what I write and attacking me, you might dig a bit deeper into your ability as a reasoning human being, and see if there is actually anything of truth and substance in what I wrote. You might notice that wherever I have called you to account on this forum (and there have been several instances of it) it has not been personal - it has always been in response to something ridiculous you have written, that is pseudo-scientific in sound, but baseless in fact.

 

Your mis-representation of the true state of "Alexithymia in males" in your post #35 above, is a classic example of your tendency to attempt to dazzle the masses with a sprinkling of terminology that is used infrequently on trading forums. It is this that I take exception to - not any legitimate and caring attempt by you to provide an intervention that might actually assist traders to succeed.

 

The authoritative literature appears to be in conflict with your views on this occasion ... why is that? Have you had a falling out with the American Psychological Association's Society for the Psychological Study of Men and Masculinity and the other authorities?

 

You seem to have a fixation with being correct - and any trader will tell you that this is a definite negative trait to have as a trader. What must you be teaching your students with a mindset that you are the authority?

 

And you not even a real trader?

 

Might I suggest that as a wannabe counselor for losing traders, you ditch the "I'm right - you're wrong" mentality, and develop some humility. That way you will blend in better with those you are attempting to win over to your psychology coaching or whatever it is that you do.

 

Stop the narcissism and get real with yourself - then you might come over a bit more legit than you do.

 

Did it ever occur to you that: "After 20 years of couseling (sic)couples and watching males avoid dealing with emotional conflict ..." you were only dealing with a miniscule sample of "males with emotional conflict?" Your assessment is therefore biased according to the pathology of the males you counseled. Yes?

 

ALL MALES don't necessarily have these kinds of conflicts. Do you?

 

Did it ever occur to you that just because you may be seeing a few males like this, it does not mean that ALL males are alexithymic? (Thanks for the new word - you will see that I am using it correctly too:) )

 

You seem to have a problem with generalisations, and an obsession with being right.

Is this correct? Please contact me privately and we may be able to deal with some of these issues. I have a course ... some DVD's ... a work-book ...

And if you knew me, you would know that luck is the last thing that influences my life, though the well-wishes were appreciated - thank you.

 

Your validation of me as "proof" needs further clarification:

 

1) Proof that my spouse is trying to reconnect to me?

2) Proof than I am emotionally aloof from my spouse?

3) Proof that I have an observant mind?

4) Proof that you don't see anything different?

 

Please clarify ...

 

You see Rande, I am not attacking you personally, and I am not wishing you "good luck" or "have a good life" .... the sorts of comments made by petulant little boys when caught out telling whoppers ... no - I avoid that stuff.

 

What I want you to do, as a professional, is to hold a debate ON TOPIC, and to desist from throwing in red-herrings or straw men every time someone asks you for proof of what you are saying. If your credibility is taking a dive, you have to look no further than the mirror for the reason.

 

Traders have been lied to for so long over the past 15 years and more, by marketers and charlatans, that they spot one a mile off today.

 

You sir may not be one such ... but you are surely dressing like one.

 

Please answer the comments about Alexithymia as I posted, and clarify why your statement:

This is really standard stuff. Search alexithermia (sic) in men. Then seach (sic) women's emotional achetecture (sic). Not really worth the effort to respond beyond that.

is at odds with the scientific and psychological literature on the subject.

 

Maybe it is time you DID bother to enter into some discussion, instead of pontificating, then running hard in the other direction, or hiding behind deflections. No one cares if you got it wrong - they do care if you lie about it.

[Rande Howell 10]

Men have to deal with testosterone (that man-up thing) whereas women don't feel possessed by having to prove their womanhood as men often do. Testosterone, left to its own devices, will cause men to minimize risk in their thinking. However, they "feel" sure of themselves. Getting that under control with a dose of humbleness is really important in a man's trading constitution.

 

Women, on the other hand, will often leave their perfectly fine analysis on the sideline and follow the trading advice of a man even when she feels she knows better. She is not sure of her confidence (that men are often full of)

 

Both have work to do in managing predisposition. It would be interesting to get an eunuch's take on this....

 

Rande

[MightyMouse 12]

Men have to deal with testosterone (that man-up thing) whereas women don't feel possessed by having to prove their womanhood as men often do. Testosterone, left to its own devices, will cause men to minimize risk in their thinking. However, they "feel" sure of themselves. Getting that under control with a dose of humbleness is really important in a man's trading constitution.

 

Women, on the other hand, will often leave their perfectly fine analysis on the sideline and follow the trading advice of a man even when she feels she knows better. She is not sure of her confidence (that men are often full of)

 

Both have work to do in managing predisposition. It would be interesting to get an eunuch's take on this....

 

Rande

 

Rande,

 

Maybe you would like to volunteer to be the example. I think those operations are covered by health insurance so your out of pocket to provide us the information would be minimal.

 

MM

[DbPhoenix 42]

Given that this thread is two years old, do you have nothing to add other than sexist remarks? If not, perhaps those new to this thread would enjoy your immediately preceding debate with Ingot.

[zdo 20]

...It would be interesting to get eunuch's take on this...

:haha: guys, this thread has been turned over to the eunuchs, so unless you are a ...

 

... and you eunuchs (wtf is a eunuch anyways?) out there - please! not everyone at once!

[Galacticus 10]

Given that this thread is two years old, do you have nothing to add other than sexist remarks?

 

Don't Pitch The Bitch :crap: