Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Saturday September 07 2019, @05:39PM   Printer-friendly

In a Twitter discussion on Sept. 5, Rosa-Maria Ryyti (Miss Universe Finland 2015 winner), argued Bitcoin's risk factor made it more appealing to men.

She was responding to a query by analyst and Cointelegraph contributor, Filb Filb, who asked followers why the Bitcoin community was overwhelmingly male.

"Women are more risk-conscious in general and often go for a 'slow & steady' investment strategy," Ryyti wrote, adding:

"The current general perception of Bitcoin in the msm makes it even less probable for the average women (and men) to get involved."

https://cointelegraph.com/news/miss-finland-bitcoins-risk-keeps-most-women-away-from-cryptocurrency


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Saturday September 07 2019, @08:12PM (9 children)

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Saturday September 07 2019, @08:12PM (#891075) Journal

    Nothing wrong with your statement. But, in context, women have always been more risk averse than men. That's why we do crazy things like riding motorcycles like madmen, and trying to take corners on two wheels when driving the family car. The difference in male and female auto insurance rates reflects that risk aversion.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Interesting=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by legont on Sunday September 08 2019, @02:13AM (8 children)

    by legont (4179) on Sunday September 08 2019, @02:13AM (#891141)

    women have always been more risk averse than men

    If true, women should be paid less for the same job.

    --
    "Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
    • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday September 08 2019, @03:54AM (7 children)

      by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday September 08 2019, @03:54AM (#891168) Journal

      I disagree. Employees who take risks with the boss's assets are of less value than employees who protect the boss's assets.

      • (Score: 3, Interesting) by lentilla on Sunday September 08 2019, @12:58PM (4 children)

        by lentilla (1770) on Sunday September 08 2019, @12:58PM (#891270)

        Made me think of the Parable of the Talents [wikipedia.org]. Short version: the boss returns home and rewards the risk takers and punishes the guy who played it safe. (I have always wanted to know what would have happened to an employee who took a risk but ultimately lost.)

        • (Score: 3, Touché) by Runaway1956 on Sunday September 08 2019, @01:38PM

          by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday September 08 2019, @01:38PM (#891283) Journal

          I have wondered the same. I suppose the moral of the story is, you have to risk it all while blindly trusting in God. If you lost all your money in risky investments, then you had to be listening to the devil. :^)

        • (Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 08 2019, @02:50PM (1 child)

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 08 2019, @02:50PM (#891310)

          The boss would have smote him, because a Jew is supposed to make money, not lose it.

          • (Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 08 2019, @04:22PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 08 2019, @04:22PM (#891336)

            No, that would be sinful. The boss should have sent him on a quest to collect 100 philistine foreskins in the hopes he would be smote by someone else in the process.

        • (Score: 2) by legont on Sunday September 08 2019, @04:06PM

          by legont (4179) on Sunday September 08 2019, @04:06PM (#891330)

          Yes, this is exactly the underlying problem. Our society rewards the result without much considerations of the risk taken. This screws a lot. Women underpayment is just a relatively minor example. Some scientists working on the bomb believed it may ignite the whole earth, but the bomb was tested. Some guys create black holes using particle smasher and say nothing could go wrong.

          Perhaps we do need to push it and take those risks because if we stop for a moment, Chinese will enslave us, or aliens with higher tech come and kill us all. Or a rock. Or a supernova. If this is the case, we should accept it and reward men taking risk. If not, we should go the current way wich is removing the risk from our lives for the price of faster progress.

          Men vs women discourse is a strategy decision about risk. We got to realize it.

          --
          "Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
      • (Score: 2) by legont on Sunday September 08 2019, @03:54PM (1 child)

        by legont (4179) on Sunday September 08 2019, @03:54PM (#891326)

        If this is true, the original statement means that women are smarter than men - able to get the same done with less risk - and should be paid more for the same job than men.

        I don't take sides with either statement, mind you. What I was trying to say that a politically acceptable statement "women are more risk averse" is a different way of phrasing a politically questionable statements such as women are smarter or not.

        --
        "Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 09 2019, @09:55AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 09 2019, @09:55AM (#891609)

          I pay for results, not for anything else.