Female Founder Secrets: Fertility • Hacker News Board

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#121

Post by core-questions » Thu, Mar 04, 2021, 6:41 PM UTC

smoldesu wrote: post #14

And people wonder why the birth rate is continuing to decline. Our nation-wide workaholism is making family life an increasingly distant fantasy. I've had this discussion with my S/O before, and we've always come to the same conclusion: it would be irresponsible for us to adopt while both of us are working. That's a difficult place to be in, considering we're both quite passionate about our jobs. It makes me quite de…

> it would be irresponsible for us to adopt while both of us are working.

Why have you convinced yourself of this? You do realize that the vast majority of families have both parents working. Is it irresponsible for all of us to have done so?

I too struggled with the fear before having children. Fear that it would ruin my personal life, my fun, my recreation; fear that lack of sleep would kill me; fear that I wouldn't be any good at it. All of it unfounded, as the instincts we are all born with kicked in and gave me the strength I needed to adapt.

You can do both. In fact, if your work is already taking over your life to the extent where you can't imagine having the time for children, there's a strong chance your quality of life will improve because the children will force you (and give you an emininently socially acceptable excuse to) step back and change how your time is allocated.

Specifically, as far as adoption is concerned, you're also faced with knowing that you could provide an excellent home for someone who may very well end up in a much worse situation otherwise. The horror stories of people who adopt children just to get a cheque... you personally can make a difference on this front.

All of this wealth flows to us working in tech, more than most of our ancestors ever had... to not use our security to raise good children is at once both a waste of ten thousand years of sacrifice, and also a shirking of our own personal responsibility to society. I know that social contract feels like it's breaking down, but it is only through our actions that we can mend it, and raising good children who still believe in civil society is probably one of the best ways of doing that.

Your chance is not over unless you choose for it to be.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#122

Post by Baeocystin » Thu, Mar 04, 2021, 6:42 PM UTC

mberning wrote: post #8

I just recently had my first at an age closer to 40 than 30. I think freezing your eggs and having kids later is not such a great idea. Sure, you can have the kid well outside your prime or even use a surrogate. But that is just the beginning. Your child is not going to get the experience of being raised by a more youthful and energetic version of yourself . I think there is a lot to be said for that. I wish I had st…

My Mom was well in her 40's when I was born, my Dad in his early 50's.

I wouldn't trade the childhood I had with them for the world. By the time I came around, they were able to provide a wise, warm, stable and loving home in a way that even the best-intentioned younger folks wouldn't have known how to do. That I played fewer games of toss the ball or the like in exchange doesn't matter a whit. FWIW.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#123

Post by poopoopeepee » Thu, Mar 04, 2021, 6:43 PM UTC

mattnewton wrote: post #70

poopoopeepee wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another alternative is to design your startup around a very low burn rate and change nothing else in your life. I mean, if it is going to take 5-10 years as the blogger claims, what's 8-12 years if you get to tick all the other boxes in life?

8-12 years of child rearing is very expensive. That's without even taking into compounding returns from working longer hours, seniority, experience, and investments.

The blog post starts with your same premise: pull out all the stops on working hard. It's just a choice. Why not have a startup that takes longer to grow?

To make the point clear: children raised by young and growing parents and different from children raised by old and established parents. Slow startups are different from fast startups. No judgement, they are just different. But the premise that a fast startup is the only way to do a startup is false. It's just choices for different outcomes.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#124

Post by munificent » Thu, Mar 04, 2021, 6:43 PM UTC

dehrmann wrote: post #19

rantwasp wrote: post #3

I empathize with how hard it is for a female founder in particular and for a woman in general when it comes to mixing children with a career. That said the advice to freeze your eggs (ie work now, live later) rubs me the wrong way. I wish we could live in a society where people would not have to work themselves to death and were able to... you know... enjoy life

> wish we could live in a society where people would not have to work themselves to death and were able to... you know... enjoy life While I do agree, this is where I draw a distinction between "job" and "career." A job is something you do to make money. A career is an end in itself. Balancing a career and parenthood is incredibly hard because they're both large time commitments. Despite what the 90's told women (tho…

I think the initial intent of feminism was that "have it all" meant "here is a buffet of life paths and each individual is free to pick which ones they want in order to live a meaningful life."

But somehow that's turned into, "we put all of the life paths on your plate and if you don't eat them all, you're a failure". We went from "you can" to "you must".

Maybe there's something fundamental in the nature of esteem and prestige that leads to this. We don't see to be good at building cultures that understand there can be many entirely disparate ways to live that are equally successful.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#125

Post by core-questions » Thu, Mar 04, 2021, 6:44 PM UTC

dcow wrote: post #116

I think women have largely been presented a false promise by progressives: value and purpose is derived from work, go do what men do to be their equal. It’s not necessarily anybody’s fault, we live in a society where money is valued. But I wish we could structure society in a way such that the value of raising children, homemaking, is clearly communicated and understood. Being a mother without a snazzy career is frow…

> Of course women should follow their heart and we should build a society that allows them to do so on equal terms, but we should not discourage homemaking and stigmatize people who want to raise children.

I think that many women do actually have the desire to be mothers in their hearts, and that they repress this desire in the current social context because having children is no longer something that confers high status upon you.

Changing that would fix the birth rate. As a man, I do actually feel empowered and somehow more complete and grounded by virtue of having a family; but I know that before I had kids, I didn't really look at dads that way. Changing that perception, returning the family to a position of honor rather than just portraying it as a drag that stops you from doing all the great fun stuff out there in the world, would do wonders on that front.

Sometimes it feels like a concerted effort has taken place to knock the family off of the pedestal.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#126

Post by yomly » Thu, Mar 04, 2021, 6:46 PM UTC

sokoloff wrote: post #86

kgybcehbx wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well we used to have a society with a division of labor and stable institution of marriage so that women didn't have to work themselves to death through the child rearing years but we decided as a society that in order for women to be truly free, they need to be trapped in the same work to death life that men have been in since prehistoric times, to the detriment of their lives and the lives of our children. But it'l…

"We" didn't decide as a society. Rather individual people (and couples) in society decided that they'd prefer to have additional income [and stimulation] by choosing to work outside the home. Collectively, that dramatically increased the labor supply as compared to 100 years ago as well as increased the demand for goods and services. I don't want to have us go back to the old way where it was looked down upon or judg…

But now I have to be twice as financially successful to provide the equivalent level of support my parents did while my wife opts to be a full time parent.

We both made free choices, but the environment has now made that considerably more expensive.

Don't get me wrong, this isn't a value judgment but, sadly, being a stay at home parent isn't economically "valuable" and so the incentives have shifted over the years.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#127

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Mar 04, 2021, 6:46 PM UTC

Miner49er wrote: post #15

austincheney wrote: post #7

The only logical answer here is youth. The younger you are the more fertile you are. This is true for both men and women, but more true for women. If you want children at some point in life then prioritize children first and early. I know, this puts your ambitious career on hold for a while and start ups require huge ambition. Still, start up opportunities will not be hyper critically different in the future than the…

This advice is likely economically bad though. Capital now is better than capital later. I would think money made early and saved by not having children and invested will end up being much more then what will be spent on a fertility clinic later.

[deleted]

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#128

Post by madamelic » Thu, Mar 04, 2021, 6:46 PM UTC

dcow wrote: post #116

I think women have largely been presented a false promise by progressives: value and purpose is derived from work, go do what men do to be their equal. It’s not necessarily anybody’s fault, we live in a society where money is valued. But I wish we could structure society in a way such that the value of raising children, homemaking, is clearly communicated and understood. Being a mother without a snazzy career is frow…

>I think people have largely been presented a false promise: value and purpose is derived from working outside the home.

FTFY.

As you state further in, it's not women's exclusive job to be child-rearing nor is it not 'work' to maintain and run a house.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#129

Post by rcpt » Thu, Mar 04, 2021, 6:46 PM UTC

dcow wrote: post #116

I think women have largely been presented a false promise by progressives: value and purpose is derived from work, go do what men do to be their equal. It’s not necessarily anybody’s fault, we live in a society where money is valued. But I wish we could structure society in a way such that the value of raising children, homemaking, is clearly communicated and understood. Being a mother without a snazzy career is frow…

In other nations where the state provides good childcare women have historically entered the workforce just fine.

It's the US (and especially California) that drains everything possible from young families.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#130

Post by jurassic » Thu, Mar 04, 2021, 6:46 PM UTC

I feel like the moonshot or bust VC startup mindset is the problem here. The startup fantasy is that you're going to take investment to build a multi-billion dollar company. But most people don't need anything close to a billion dollars to do everything they want in life, so it's unfortunate that many peoples' idea of entrepreneurship is tangled up in this unicorn playbook. This version of entrepreneurship is just a status game for young white men, and the rest of us should probably consider other options.

Most middle class people would be radically more secure and happy with only a few million dollars over our current level of wealth. It sounds like a tall order, but it's a pretty low bar in the world of business. There's a huge range of financial outcomes that would be amazing success for individuals that would be miserable failures for a VC-funded company. Those are the sweet spot, because they change your life without attracting VC-backed competition.

So I see the question as: What is the easiest and most predictable way to reach my wealth target in the next 3-4 years instead of the next 30-40 years? Trading time for money won't get me there. The best answer I've come across is to create a simple idea for subscription physical product or micro-SaaS, validate the customer need, presell, then build/manufacture, and sell the shit out of it. Emphasis on selling not building.

People like to look down on the "lifestyle" business, but this seems like the best option for most people because it can be a vehicle to accumulate a life-changing amount of wealth (millions not billions) without the expectation from VC gatekeepers that you will be sacrificing every other part of your life at the alter of the business. As long as you're not yolked to the expectations of investors, you can scale your effort on the business up or down as your life and ambition dictate.