Restarting my career after motherhood • Hacker News Board

Re: Restarting my career after motherhood

#161

Post by paulcole » Sun, Jun 05, 2022, 6:35 PM UTC

lotsofpulp wrote: post #124

knorker wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Parenthood is by far the most subsidized personal choice in the universe. Let's not pretend it's not. Some countries give more than a year paid parental leave, in what can only be described as vote purchasing. Parenthood is compensated.

I have seen what women go through to bring children into the world and feed them, and a year’s parental leave does not come close to making up for the toll it takes on their body not to mention the myriad risks of complications like perineum tearing, separation in abs, death, and maybe even having to care for a special needs child.

The question isn’t whether it makes up for it. It’s whether there’s any other life choice that leads to similar compensation (regardless of whether that compensation is “worth it.”)

Re: Restarting my career after motherhood

#162

Post by mmcnl » Sun, Jun 05, 2022, 6:41 PM UTC

Why is at always the mothers who choose to be stay-at-home mothers, and very rarely fathers? In my opinion this makes things extra hard for mothers who want to resume their career, because men are used to working with men who don't take breaks from their career to raise their children.

Taking time off to raise your children is a personal choice, but it doesn't make any sense that it's almost never the fathers who stay at home.

The mother from the article writes: being a stay-at-home mum came at the cost of my career.

But why doesn't the father write: not staying home for my children came at the cost of their mother's career.

Children have fathers and mothers. Both fathers and mothers should carry this responsibility equally. It's not impossible. As long as raising a child is seen as a responsibility of the mother and less of the father, mothers will always face more difficulties in their career.

Disclaimer: ofcourse there are exceptions where there is only one parent who is availabile to carry the responsibility, but in general when the mother stays at home it's not due to external circumstances, but rather a personal preference.

Re: Restarting my career after motherhood

#163

Post by pavel_lishin » Sun, Jun 05, 2022, 6:45 PM UTC

mmcnl wrote: post #162

Why is at always the mothers who choose to be stay-at-home mothers, and very rarely fathers? In my opinion this makes things extra hard for mothers who want to resume their career, because men are used to working with men who don't take breaks from their career to raise their children. Taking time off to raise your children is a personal choice, but it doesn't make any sense that it's almost never the fathers who sta…

> Why is at always the mothers who choose to be stay-at-home mothers, and very rarely fathers

Because on average, fathers tend to make more than mothers. That's not the only calculation, but it's a big one.

Re: Restarting my career after motherhood

#164

Post by lotsofpulp » Sun, Jun 05, 2022, 6:45 PM UTC

FastEatSlow wrote: post #132

lotsofpulp wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I appreciate having fewer humans to compete against for resources, including carbon emissions.

The process of shrinking to fewer humans is painful however: less people working, more people old and unable to work.

Painful for who? Maybe asset owners and the few deciles below them who live a decent life due to globally cheap labor.

For the young and poor who only have their labor to sell, the situation would seem pretty decent.

Re: Restarting my career after motherhood

#165

Post by throw827474737 » Sun, Jun 05, 2022, 6:48 PM UTC

cowpig wrote: post #33

knorker wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Parenthood is by far the most subsidized personal choice in the universe. Let's not pretend it's not. Some countries give more than a year paid parental leave, in what can only be described as vote purchasing. Parenthood is compensated.

What a strange perspective to take. A "subsidized personal choice," as if there is some higher economic power that we are in service of, and those who decide to dedicate a third of our adult existence to the next generation are making some luxurious lifestyle choice.

??? What is it then? Your duty you owe to society? If that would be the case and people would do all this sacrifices just for society and this wouldn't be a deeply ingrained wish to replicate, put oneself into the next generation and have to do a lot with self-realization, then our societies would be much better.

But fact is our world is overpopulated, it would.be better if we'd size down, and we have superegoistic societies in general. (But who would push our wheel chairs if we all wouldn't be so superaltruistic and raise children? Simple answer is there still would be enough, because people want children, even if it is a lot of sacrifice. I fully agree that it costs a lot and is a huge sacrifice, still its a free personal (if you so want lifestyle) choice that most won't regret.. or do you?

Re: Restarting my career after motherhood

#166

Post by analog31 » Sun, Jun 05, 2022, 6:54 PM UTC

pavel_lishin wrote: post #163

mmcnl wrote: post #162

Why is at always the mothers who choose to be stay-at-home mothers, and very rarely fathers? In my opinion this makes things extra hard for mothers who want to resume their career, because men are used to working with men who don't take breaks from their career to raise their children. Taking time off to raise your children is a personal choice, but it doesn't make any sense that it's almost never the fathers who sta…

> Why is at always the mothers who choose to be stay-at-home mothers, and very rarely fathers Because on average, fathers tend to make more than mothers. That's not the only calculation, but it's a big one.

That was the case in my family. Similar backgrounds, 2x salary difference.

Re: Restarting my career after motherhood

#167

Post by tomp » Sun, Jun 05, 2022, 6:54 PM UTC

mmcnl wrote: post #162

Why is at always the mothers who choose to be stay-at-home mothers, and very rarely fathers? In my opinion this makes things extra hard for mothers who want to resume their career, because men are used to working with men who don't take breaks from their career to raise their children. Taking time off to raise your children is a personal choice, but it doesn't make any sense that it's almost never the fathers who sta…

Because biology. Mothers have to take time off work (to give birth), fathers don’t. Freedom of choice is important, but so is specialisation (so the couple can be more efficient), so it makes more sense for mother to specialise for family (sacrificing career), and father to specialise for career (sacrificing family).

Re: Restarting my career after motherhood

#168

Post by jseban » Sun, Jun 05, 2022, 6:54 PM UTC

random-human wrote: post #158

jseban wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> It's just more communism and less freedom. How does women entering the work force (from your previous post) equal less freedom? Less freedom for whom? Certainly not women. Since you equate more communism with less freedom, I will assume you agree that money provides freedom, if women can only work as unpaid housewives, they have no freedom. It has nothing to do with their husband, cruel, unfair, or otherwise. This…

> How does women entering the work force (from your previous post) equal less freedom? Less freedom for whom? Certainly not women.

Less freedom for those who happen to like traditional gender roles, now they are forced to work more and adapt to more "modern" gender roles. Otherwise they will lose out massively because the single earner has so much lower salary now.

Less freedom because an almost doubled amount of total working hours for a family. Free time = freedom.

Less freedom for childless people because they have much lower salaries now because of the larger supply of workforce (which is somewhat compensated by subsidies to people with children). Now they compete against couples with double income on everything on the market.

A single childless person would previously have the same buying power as a single breadwinner, now they have half.

Less freedom because this creates a much higher pressure and financial incentives for people to have children and to have modern gender roles, and anything else is discouraged.

> if women can only work as unpaid housewives, they have no freedom.

Well, are you more free if you trade free time for working hours? You are literally only more free to slave more.

This freedom only manifests in the case when you want/need to leave your husband.

Re: Restarting my career after motherhood

#169

Post by Dracophoenix » Sun, Jun 05, 2022, 7:04 PM UTC

kelseyfrog wrote: post #101

photochemsyn wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really we should allow parents to sell their children into slavery, that would be a means of maximizing short-term return on investment for parents who can't afford to provide food, education and clothing to their children. Remember, the free market is the ultimate selector for maximum efficiency, and to quote Milton Friedman, 'corruption is government interference into market efficiencies in the form of regulation'.…

Economists working from first principles can reach horrendous conclusions[1]. 1. https://mises.org/library/children-and-rights

After reading the article, I don't see what's horrendous about it. Yes, having children has a market effect and is even a market unto itself. There's rarely any controversy to think in terms of the financial costs and legal obligations (or lack thereof) when discussing abortions, adoptions, disinheritance, estrangement, etc. All of these actions are connected by a single thread: Generally speaking, no person is owed anything for merely existing.

Re: Restarting my career after motherhood

#170

Post by paulcole » Sun, Jun 05, 2022, 7:04 PM UTC

paulryanrogers wrote: post #159

paulcole wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, but that wasn’t the point being made. Regardless of the ROI, choosing to be a parent is something that’s compensated.

Said another way, the compensation is pitiful. And one gives up so much time and energy being a parent, unless you're wealthy enough to outsource large chunks of the work. (Daycare in the US is 10-25K per year.)

> Said another way, the compensation is pitiful.

The whole point is that being a parent is compensated in a way that no other choice is.

Parents take on a significant burden. They are compensated for it. There is no choice I can make as a non-parent that will provide me with similar compensation.