Actually, missed by a flying mile but never let a good hysterical ranting get in the way of having to blame themselves.
The feminastie movement have been screeching and mawing over the past couple of years and making ludicrous statements concerning the presence and demand for female board member, claiming they will actually elevate that company onto a new euphoric state. They have stated that not only do "women" have the ability of developing the above estate, but are also capable of generating a complete sense of hypnotic existentialism entwined with endless rapturous, aphoristic, amorphously encapsulated model that only a "woman" can obtain. A sort of "out of body and completely out of their mind" experience.
By listening to their voices, one could almost imagine what level of absolute tripe those feminists are trying to sell by wrapping it up in self centered, unexplainable platitudes, that only a total moron would want to listen to..
So here are the facts those "gender" experts never wanted to hear..
Deutsche Bundesbank No 03/2012
Executive board composition and bank risk taking
First, decreases in average board age robustly increase bank risk taking. This effect is statistically and also economically large. A one standard deviation decrease in board age of approximately 5 years raises the ratio of risk-weighted assets to total assets from 59.88 to 62.54. In terms of policy implications, it appears desirable for regulators to consider changes in age structure of bank’s executive teams following mandatory retirements.
Second, female executives might self-select into stable and well-capitalized banks. However, in the three years following the increase in female board representation, risk taking increases although the change is economically marginal. Our exploration of the underlying mechanism suggests that this result is mainly attributable to the fact that female executives have less experience than their male counterparts.So in reality, in just one paragraph, the process of planting "wimmins" as board members, as demanded by those self interested members of the feminastie movement, who are quite happy and content on bankrupting any corporation or company, by demanding that more privileged princesses are automatically installed..
A separate, but also burgeoning literature analyzes the effects of gender in the context of corporate governance arrangements. These studies do not fully support these results obtained for individual investment decisions. While Farrell and Hersch (2005) find an inverse link between firm risk and female directors, Adams and Funk (2011) show that female directors are more prone to take risks than men.
The effect of female board representation on profitability and value is also negative (Adams and Ferreira (2009); Ahern and Dittmar (2010)). This result suggests female directors engage in excessive monitoring that decreases shareholder value (Almazan and Suarez (2003); Adams and Ferreira (2007)), and that women make poorer investment decisions since they face bigger obstacles than men obtaining information about investment projects (Bharat, Narayan, and Seyhun (2009)).The initial problem that face women is ofcourse the fact that they are given the free ride from birth. A fact they refuse to comprehend or even admit. This ofcourse is enthusiastically encouraged in the education sector as well, also when they finally find their automatic, first option, employment demand, surface. They will scream, moan and complain that they, unlike everyone else, that else being any man ofcourse, has not or did not work even a minutiae as hard as she did to achieve whatever she is bragging about at the moment, it's all because she is a woman. A self delusional claim they carry at all times.
The next step of action in this privileged princesses' life is to ensure that the entire company bends to her will and requirements. It is how she perceives her position should be the most important issue on the table and how everyone else, being the men, must capitulate and lower themselves to her level of narcissism, she can wear whatever she likes but don't stare. She can coerce any male to do her work or fill in on her additional days off. For another promotion she can shag the boss. Standard recommended behaviour and goal seeking opportunity. Meanwhile she brags about her ability and progress..
So she has to be employed by that current establishment. If not, she will sue their arses off at the blink of an eyelid, mascara, false eyelashes and all. As to her thinking, the only reason for not employing her has nothing to do with the fact that she don't know shit, nope it must be misogyny or that imaginary glass ceiling ofcourse, It is now at the stage where this inferior model is actually being paid more per hour than the male (8% more at the moment in the bigger cities, note the crickets about the obvious bias and equality). Tell me this is not political..
This is unfortunately how women have come across over the last few decades. Established a nasty behavioral record, over demanding attitude, without any compromise on her part. If there is any issue that does not comply to her way of thinking then everyone must pay..
Are there women out there who are very good at their job, ofcourse there is and I have met some. Are there women out there who ride the system for all it's worth by using her feminine charm and sexuality to get what she wants, absolutely. has their overall attitude and behaviour sickened the majority of males in the workplace and beyond, completely..
It is where we are at, at this point in time. Yet they demand ever more..