Article on women gaining ground in banking fails miserably

Let’s break this piece up a bit. Reinhard Krafft, head of private banking at Sal Oppenheim jr. & Cie, contends:

‘If we service a family, you not only have a patriarch, you have the mother, daughter, son at the table. Whom are you talking to? Whole families.’

Translation: Because all families are hetero, nuclear and patriarchal, of course. The article continues:

Rich women, often widows or heirs, are seen as taking a larger role, but their involvement varies across countries.

Translation: Women can be powerful clients, but only after their rich husbands die.

And women bankers can sometimes be more perceptive when dealing with couples. ‘In some cases what we find … (that) if you have a couple a male adviser will oftentimes look to the male and have the whole discussion with the male and it could be that the female is the decision maker around this area or it could be even their (her) wealth that we are talking about,” Junkans [Dean Junkans, chief investment officer at Wells Fargo’s private client services division] said. Typically a female adviser will not make that mistake.’

Translation: Women bankers may make less sexist assumptions than male bankers, but let’s just rephrase them as “relationship managers.”
Any women in the banking world want to weigh in on this?