Dueling Fools
Gender-Specific Investing
April 14, 1999

Gender-Specific Investing Bear's Rebuttal
by Yi-Hsin Chang ([email protected])

I'll agree with an interpretation of Virginia Woolf that says a woman needs "money and a room of her own" if she is to invest. The problem for Selena is that Woolf was talking about a woman's independence and financial freedom, not a chat room with other women. Why, even in Woolf's day (A Room of One's Own was published in 1929), women could get together and chat in their own rooms. What they couldn't do so easily was to converse with men on "serious topics" on an equal footing.

Selena has already rightfully conceded that the nuts and bolts of investing are no different for men than they are for women. So, really, what we're talking about is something non-investment related -- that some women feel "more comfortable" discussing financial topics with other women. This is the type of "rationale" given when some men argued for keeping schools and clubs all-male and all-white. Where would such an attitude come from? As Selena would say, from history.

Now think about it, can you honestly say you'd like to see investment books written specifically for men? -- Savvy Investing for Men or Men's Financial Wisdom? Of course not, so why the double standard? Why is it OK for women to separate themselves, yet it's sexist and exclusionary if men do the same?

When I did a search for "men" and "investing" as I did with "women" and "investing" on Amazon, the first title that surfaced was an etiquette book, Attention to Detail: A Gentleman's Guide to Professional Appearance and Conduct. There are no investment books designed for men because the idea of gender-based investing is just plain silly. Investing books designed for women do nothing but suggest that women can't handle general investment concepts the way men can, which is, of course, ridiculous.

Selena uses the example of a book on carpentry and how some women might respond or relate best to the subject if the book were written by a woman. Fine, then it should be OK for me to say -- even as a woman -- that I respond or relate best to investment advice from male sources, right?

I guess what bothers me most about gender-based investment guides and online forums is that they take us back in time rather than forward. After the decades it took to break down the social barriers, all we need now is to segregate ourselves based on gender or race.

Different people -- individuals, not different groups of people -- have different interests, but that doesn't mean that men and women, in general, have different interests. I have more in common with some men than many women -- easily. I also know that I can have quite a lot in common with someone who isn't Chinese, who didn't graduate from the University of North Carolina, and who hasn't lived in Hong Kong.

As for online forums, the Fool's message boards, for example, are divided up by subject -- mostly by companies and also by topics such as initial public offerings, retirement, living below your means, and discount brokers. So if you're looking for specific investment advice and discussions, you're naturally better off going to the individual boards dedicated to a particular company or topic.

From the "testimonials" Selena included in her argument, it sounds like participants in the women and investing boards are seeking a support group, a sewing circle, a place, in the words of one poster, "to discuss issues and thoughts on life that may not be perceived as relevant to investment." That's great, but let's be clear about the real purpose of these boards then. I can certainly see that there's a demand for boards dedicated to women; there's just no need for them.

As I said from the outset, money is money, and investing is investing. There's no more need for investment advice "for her" than investment advice "for him." Women don't need to be talked down to. Let's keep political correctness out of investment guides and off financial websites, and stop "womanizing" investors.

Next: Vote Results