You are saying that people who want to be in IBD don't have a choice, while negating the fact they are choosing to stay in IBD. There is a choice regarding whether the toxic environment is worth the money. Apparently the analogies regarding real life situations that are obviously wrong are not connecting the dots so I will abstain from dropping another one, but the connection imo makes it clear how the context of abuse determines whether we view it as worthy of enduring or not.pay and prestige are two of the main drivers for kids to enter this field, when both are diluted, you no longer attract the top prospects which also dilutes the brand of the company. it's a self-fulfilling circle. GS can say they have all these harvard, Stanford, princeton kids working there - they become sought after from clients because they supposedly have the brightest people working for them, and when these kids can say they work at the elite GS, with all the other kids from the ivy's, and that hey got one of 200 openings that year, they benefit from the prestige factor as well.
like i said, we have a different idea of what rationalizing is.
where there are options, you rationalize, where there are no options, there are logical reasons for the status of said choice.
making the choice to work in high finance has an unavoidable entry, if you dont like that entry role, you cannot stay in high finance, thus a logical reason to stay.
making the choice to have a man, even a rich man, has multiple paths - when one is unsatisfactory, you can rationalize (make up illogical) reasons to stay or you can go and still find another.
The analogy seems pretty on par to me... They are also situations where the people lowest on the totem pole need to prove their worth by being treated as replaceable, being underpaid (or at least feeling like the compensation still isn't worth it), and being pushed to their mental breaking point.No, I do not. Internships are vast and vary not only from industry but even company to company, hardly comparable to a widely known industry practice. Again, hazing is not isolated to all fraternities or greek organizations nor in the cases where it is, does it look the same - this is another apples to oranges comparison.
Psychologically, it's the same approach that the military takes towards soldiers. From there, you have putty that you can mold into whatever you want with minimal resistance.
The question is whether this is healthy, actualizes the full potential of those involved, etc. Finance arguably is known for its toxic culture, and these type of actions reinforce it. Looking at the other examples (the military, fraternities), they clearly struggle culturally as well so.... yeah.
True. You got it, and I won't question your perspective moving forward.I'm sorry but this is a weird comparison that seems more personal than anything else, maybe someone else is willing to touch this but I don't see the correlation to the topic and just see thread derailment on the horizon.