Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Stay-at-home dad

facebook.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 203 posts

Re: Stay-at-home dad

#171

Post by jamesaguilar »

withad wrote: post #28
jellicle wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's sad that the top HN comment on this story is sexist bullshit. But I guess not unexpected. But sad.

Sexist and implicitly homophobic. This community really depresses me sometimes.

Basically the whole conversation turned into a men's rights/anti-feminist/heterosexist maelstrom. Somewhere in here some guy defended the claim that china was a matriarchal society (in the sense of having few problems with sexism) and then turned around and complained that stay at home dads are discriminated against.

I guess it shouldn't be terribly surprising because our industry is uniquely filled with people that are both highly privileged and more . . . limited on the empathy front. But it is sad. Hopefully, fifty years from now this conversation will be an outlier rather than the standard occurrence.

Re: Stay-at-home dad

#172

Post by golemmiprague »

Honestly, I got no clue what you all are talking about. Never had problems or felt weird looks in the play ground, never got compliments for changing nappies or anything like that. I think most people are used to dads taking care of kids these days, and I am not even living in some inner city sophisticated place.

Re: Stay-at-home dad

#173

Post by jamesaguilar »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #166
ceol wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you talking about the Mosou? Because they're only about 40,000 strong in a country of 1.34 billion, and aren't even a true matriarchy, as political power tends to be in the hands of men.[0] If you're talking about the rest of China, the absence of modern women leaders has been a concern.[1] I don't see any way you could call China "very matriarchal". [0]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosuo [1]: http://behindthewa…

Leaders of the country are male. Leaders of the family are female. Your point?

Dude, do you even hear what you are saying? Women being required/pressured to stay home and look after the family while men gather political power and control the flow of resources is one of the hallmarks of a patriarchal society.

For example, Western societies in the past, and, to a lesser extent now, were like china in this regard, and are almost universally considered more patriarchal as we go further into the past. If you consider china matriarchal, you mean it in a different sense than almost anyone talking about gender politics ever.

Re: Stay-at-home dad

#174

Post by Tichy »

ecopoesis wrote: post #139
ixacto wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assuming: 150k/yr salary * 0.5 (paid leave) * .33 (4 months) =$24750 for just raising a kid, damn. To be the devil's advocate, why not let people who do not have children take a 4 month paid ($24750) vacation every 5 years? I would like to take a round-the-world vacation for 4 months...

Because promoting round-the-world vacations isn't the business the government is in, but promoting good families is.

Why not, though? Assuming a democratic government represents the interests of it's voters, apparently a significant fraction (ok, at least one) of the population would be interested in paid 4 month vacations.

Re: Stay-at-home dad

#175

Post by Tichy »

tokenadult wrote: post #95
avalaunch wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ripped directly from a rejection letter I received: "I think instead of making a more detailed offer, I should consider certain facts. For starters, you have a family and that'll be the driving force behind all your decisions. Secondly, you will not be able to be here in the program with me. Ideally, I want someone who could be here though not necessary. More importantly, it's the family situation I consider. I've wo…

You received a rejection letter that basically lists illegal reasons (in most states I'm aware of) for rejecting you. You were lucky not to get that job, as the boss is clueless about the legal responsibilities of hiring supervisors. You have a basis for a lawsuit there, if you need the money or want to make a point. If you are not litigious (I am not litigious either, so I respect anyone's decision to decline to exe…

Assuming that having a clue about legal responsibilities of hiring supervisors is the most important skill of a boss :-)

I think it is good if somebody is honest. And his reasoning actually seems sound.

Re: Stay-at-home dad

#176

Post by Tichy »

ixacto wrote: post #126
Tichy wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Granted, I wasn't even thinking about the paid paternity leave. Obviously if the state pays for it, the thought "how much am I willing to pay my babysitter" is not a factor. It's actually fascinating that despite full pay a lot of dads apparently prefer to stay at work? I can only assume that they worry about a negative impact to their career in the long run (ie employer doesn't think they are loyal enough to promote…

Assuming: 150k/yr salary * 0.5 (paid leave) * .33 (4 months) =$24750 for just raising a kid, damn. To be the devil's advocate, why not let people who do not have children take a 4 month paid ($24750) vacation every 5 years? I would like to take a round-the-world vacation for 4 months...

This illustrates very well why you shouldn't become a slave to the money. Earning more money won't make you happier. Spending more time with your kid might.

Re: Stay-at-home dad

#177

Post by cheald »

jemfinch wrote: post #165
cheald wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Speaking as a dad, I hate taking my boys to the playground for the same reason. Moms see "man unaccompanied by woman, must be a predator" - I make a big show out of interacting with my boys and obviously being their father, but it's really grating that it's even necessary at all. As to the culture of fear, I blame local news. It's wall-to-wall with alternating RAPISTS EVERYWHERE and LOOKIT THE CUTE PUPPIES, because t…

I take my boys to the playground most days when I pick them up after work: my wife works later than I do, and it gives us something entertaining to burn the time until she gets home. I usually have my DSLR out with some sort of "stalker" lens (e.g. a 70-200mm[0]). If my boys want to play with me, I play--if they don't, I wander around and keep an eye from a distance. If someone else's kid needs pushed on a swing and…

"Hate taking them" was the wrong phrasing. I should have better said "I hate that I have to dread running into someone new when I take them, because then I have to do the I-actually-have-a-legit-reason-to-be-here-dance". The area that I live in isn't very communal (mostly due to weather!), and I don't tend to run into the same people frequently. Seeing new faces is common.

Being recognized alleviates the concerns, absolutely. Once you're known, it's fine. My issue is that the default assumption many moms seem to have about men is that they are dangers until proven otherwise. I think if you took your kids and camera to another park where you weren't known, and were taking pictures without playing Obviously Engaged Dad, it might be quite different. Being Visibly Dad "proves otherwise". No such expectation applies to my wife.

(Your boys are adorable, btw!)

Re: Stay-at-home dad

#178

Post by Dewie »

ixacto wrote: post #126
Tichy wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Granted, I wasn't even thinking about the paid paternity leave. Obviously if the state pays for it, the thought "how much am I willing to pay my babysitter" is not a factor. It's actually fascinating that despite full pay a lot of dads apparently prefer to stay at work? I can only assume that they worry about a negative impact to their career in the long run (ie employer doesn't think they are loyal enough to promote…

Assuming: 150k/yr salary * 0.5 (paid leave) * .33 (4 months) =$24750 for just raising a kid, damn. To be the devil's advocate, why not let people who do not have children take a 4 month paid ($24750) vacation every 5 years? I would like to take a round-the-world vacation for 4 months...

> Assuming: 150k/yr salary * 0.5 (paid leave) * .33 (4 months) =$24750 for just raising a kid, damn.

Chances are if you are making 150k/yr, you're comfortably set in the upper middle class (cost of living complaining notwithstanding). At that point you probably don't have to worry about money, assuming you don't have any expensive hobbies. Taking time out to spend time with your children could be well worth it for a lot of people, since they don't feel they actually need those extra $24750 for anything.

> To be the devil's advocate, why not let people who do not have children take a 4 month paid ($24750) vacation every 5 years? I would like to take a round-the-world vacation for 4 months...

Because society wants to facilitate people having children (and a company might facilitate that if they are forced to by the government, or all of their competitors give the same benefits)? People can complain all day about overpopulation, but fertility rates in western countries are low, many places below 2.1 child per woman. Bringing in people from other countries brings with itself assimilation problems, and simply letting the population decline without interfering can lead to lopsided distribution of age brackets, for example to a disproportionate amount of pensioners that have to be supported by a shrinking workforce.

Re: Stay-at-home dad

#179

Post by rntksi »

sliverstorm wrote: post #145
enraged_camel wrote: post #50

The part about being viewed suspiciously at the playground was particularly awful. Why is it that we as a society are so fucking fearful? We have an irrational fear of communists, socialists, terrorists, serial killers, sex offenders, and of course, child molesters and abductors. Everyone thinks that there is someone out there who is out to hurt them and their family. Like, that is the default assumption , and people…

Why is it that we as a society are so fucking fearful? If you ask me? Because we are hard-wired for fear. Ten thousand years ago, it kept you alive. Today, there is not much left to fear- but we are built to fear, so we find something to fear.

the fear of a pedophile going to kidnap/abduct/molest your kids doesn't happen in other societies today though, so there must be some influence from the differing media, I'm sure.

It doesn't make much sense in the world I live in (Asian country).

Re: Stay-at-home dad

#180

Post by Angostura »

dquail wrote: post #109
enraged_camel wrote: post #50

The part about being viewed suspiciously at the playground was particularly awful. Why is it that we as a society are so fucking fearful? We have an irrational fear of communists, socialists, terrorists, serial killers, sex offenders, and of course, child molesters and abductors. Everyone thinks that there is someone out there who is out to hurt them and their family. Like, that is the default assumption , and people…

Am I the only dad out there that constantly takes my daughter to the park / science center / library alone ... and doesn't feel the least bit weird about it? In 3 years I've received nothing but smiles and conversation for doing this. Maybe it's a Canadian thing ...

Same in the London (UK), never had a problem. Or perhaps I'm just oblivious.
Post reply on HN