And there was a growing consensus that things might not have gotten so bad if there were more ladies in the c-suite. Claims to female superiority came in all directions; one was backed by figures showing out-performance by the fairer sex in the hedge fund industry.

But where you have one theory, there’s always empirical evidence somewhere that backs the opposite.

The most recent addition to the females-are-the-best-bankers argument comes from the New York Times. And it has really gone to town. Here’s a snippet from What If Women Ran Wall Street? to get you going:

NYT: A self-described math nerd, Nancy Davis was head of Goldman Sachs’ proprietary derivatives-trading desk for five years. “I think generally, women are more likely to admit that they’re wrong, faster. I think there’s less ego for whatever reason with women traders, the ones I know at least,” she says. She made a habit of keeping her boss in the loop on every trade—something she calls having “buy-in.” “If there’s a position going sour on me, I’m not going to sit and say, ‘I know what’s best.’ It would make me want to raise my hand and get advice from other people. It’s like asking for directions when driving.”

More>

And the choicest quote to sum up the thinking:

“The banking crisis was caused by doing what no society ever allows: permitting young males to behave in an unregulated way. Anyone who studied neurobiology would have predicted disaster.”