25 Years Ago in The Actuarial Review

While comparing old issues of The Actuarial Review to new issues, two quirks consistently jump out. First, the same actuarial concerns are still being discussed. For example, the January 1976 issue has an article arguing the merits of loss reserve discounting and an article regarding the fairness of classification systems. Second, the old publications make it clear how much the CAS has grown in the last 25 years, as illustrated below:

(From Ronald L. Bornhuetter's column)

From the President

"No matter how much we may hate to see it happen, the CAS is growing rapidly. For many, many years we have been a small close-knit group knowing each other quite well and now, soon, virtually overnight, we will become a Society 1,000 members strong."

(From an opinion piece by Norman J. Bennett)

Bennett was discussing the fact that there were then 36 women in the CAS.

Maunderings

"Dropping my pose as an actuary and adopting a bent that is more familiar to me, I instead wondered about these women and who they are. I know so few by name and face. A full 25 of the 36 have become Associates since 1971. My itinerary is typical of many actuaries but I guess I have so far crossed paths with fewer than 10 of these younger members. I am more familiar with those whom I must refer to—for comparative purposes only—as older members. Of all those I've met or worked with, however, the only common characteristic I've discovered is that they're women. From my limited sample, their range in talent, personality, and sense of humor is typically actuarial and peculiarly casualty actuarial.

"But again I'm falling back on statistical jargon. It's easier for me to talk for instance about Ruth Salzmann, the doyenne of the Schedule P crowd, than about random variables. One of my wisest decisions was made some years ago when I refused to follow one of my macho friends onto the tennis courts with Ruth. Or of Carole Banfield, the sloe-eyed corps commander at ISO, who has so intimidated me since the early days at the MLIRB that I've never really dared to address her as other than Mrs. Banfield. Or of Anne Kelly from the redoubtable New York Department with all that tradition to follow and uphold."