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

Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

femfosec.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 770 posts

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#311

Post by irae »

gnicholas wrote: post #262
xenihn wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not clear what you're asking for exactly, but the solution is obvious: give whatever it is that you want to provide to EVERYONE, regardless of their gender, and whether or not they actually have children. Special treatment for everyone.

This is a nice sentiment, but doing so would have unintended consequences. For example, in most top universities, they give roughly the same leave to new fathers as new mothers. New mothers use this time to care for their baby, but many new fathers use this time as an extended sabbatical/research leave. Their wives take care of the baby for the most part, and they work on their next book. Then when it comes time for…

> Their wives take care of the baby for the most part, and they work on their next book.

I was under the impression people had kids to build a family together, not to compete with their partners for achievements. I don't think at all the situation you described is bad in any way. In fact, it would be a huge step forward.

You know what is better then a new father stressed at work, absent from home, worried his career is not growing fast enough? A new father excited about the future, doing something that is quite easily interrupted to help with the newborn and building a future for the family.

I do agree giving everyone the same things would be the best, but it is easier said than done. Easier for large corporations to support larger universal parental leaven than to for startups to do the same.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#312

Post by retrac »

onetimeusename wrote: post #307
astan wrote: post #67

Your whole blog resonates deeply with me. All this corporate grifting and women's empowerment months will do jack shit until we figure out how to make workplaces and lives more equitable for mothers and allowing for gaps, breaks and destigmatizing time off for parents of both genders. Instead, we talk about how sexism is the biggest problem. Sure, sexism might be annoying, but in the west, it is hardly something that…

> "equitable to mothers" > "actual equality where we acknowledge that women have different needs and desires". I can't see any other meaning besides equality of outcomes split across employees by fertility lines regardless of inputs. I think this is unfair. What do you tell someone who did not take X amount of time off when their outcome is equated with someone who did? Increasing paternity leave for all people doesn…

It's no less fair than me having to pay school taxes when I have no children. Healthy families and adequate children so the population pyramid doesn't implode (more of an issue in other developed countries than North America) is a pressing issue that affects everyone in those societies. We should pay our part of it.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#313

Post by yourapostasy »

dcow wrote: post #180
elliekelly wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 fr…

100% agree that any stigma against being a stay at home dad (viewing the issue from the opposite angle as you ask) is also unhealthy. In my personal journey, at least, I have not encountered men who stigmatize my desire to be a stay at home dad but I have (surprisingly often) encountered women who stigmatize female homemakers (or the concept thereof). I guess it’s only anecdata there, but I don't think I’m wildly off…

> ...encountered women who stigmatize female homemakers...

I've read plenty of rants from both genders of stay-at-home dads getting snubbed by stay-at-home moms from their play groups, brunches, and other social activities. I think the stigma against stay-at-home dads hasn't gone away, just shifted to different venues.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#314

Post by LeonardMenard »

throw8932894 wrote: post #219

> Startups take much longer than you’d think before they become successful. 90% of startups fail, they NEVER become successful. Gambling on some theoretical future success is just bad advice. Also egg freezing and late age pregnancy is VERY expensive and complicated. Author herself had three miscarriages. I would suggest something else: have children between 18-25, and start self funded company while working at home.…

Having kids between 18-25 is very, very difficult, if you want to raise them in a financially stable 2-parent home.

I worked very, very hard to build both a financially stable life and have a family "young." I had my first kid at 28, was married at 24, and am the youngest mother I know in my professional social circle.

The only women I know who had kids 18-25 had accidental pregnancies with flings or short-term nonviable relationships, the fathers bailed, and the mother spent many years living with her parents while struggling to have a much more basic career than those discussed on this board. None of them had time, money, social support, or educational resources as single mothers to "start a self funded company while working at home."

Ideally if a woman wants to have kids, she can make a plan to have them with a committed partner at sometime around or just before 30. If she also wants to be a start-up founder, frankly she should look for a non-traditional relationship where her husband takes on most of the childcare after those early baby months, and hopefully he also has a stable but flexible corporate or blue-collar job to give them a bit of financial buffer.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#315

Post by mbgerring »

ernst_klim wrote: post #298
mbgerring wrote: post #134

In the United States, it's economically difficult verging on impossible for young people to have and raise children. Between the increasing costs of housing, childcare, and education, it shouldn't surprise anyone that more and more people are putting off starting a family until they're able to earn and save a substantial amount of money. That leads people like the author of this post to the very rational decision to…

>In the United States, it's economically difficult I doubt that until you pretend to have living conditions on par with these in Pakistan. I bet people simply are ambitious, and have way higher expectations regarding living standards, hence this feeling of struggling in pursuing the expected standards. > you need to fix things up from the material conditions Birth rates: Pakistan: 3.51 India: 2.22 US: 1.73 Denmark: 1…

OK, now show me the average percent of a person's income required to secure a roof over your head in Pakistan. We could also talk about the difference in availability of childcare in Pakistan, or any country where strong family ties and multi-generational households are common, vs higher-income countries without these features. We would also have to consider that in many high-income countries it is literally illegal to live below a certain standard of living without running the risk of having your children taken from you by the state.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#316

Post by bartvk »

throw8932894 wrote: post #219

> Startups take much longer than you’d think before they become successful. 90% of startups fail, they NEVER become successful. Gambling on some theoretical future success is just bad advice. Also egg freezing and late age pregnancy is VERY expensive and complicated. Author herself had three miscarriages. I would suggest something else: have children between 18-25, and start self funded company while working at home.…

Yeah, the writer of the article first states "The focus that’s required at first will probably force you to cut back on almost everything in your life". Then it's almost like she describes how you can also cut back on fertility. Loving my kid so much, I didn't feel great after reading the article.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#317

Post by bigyikes »

ZephyrBlu wrote: post #149
munificent wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it would be irresponsible for us to adopt while both of us are working. You are falling into the classic nerd trap which is doing an absolute evaluation when you should be making a relative comparison. The question is not, "Can I raise this adopted child in the optimal way?" The question is, "Will I raise this child at least as good as the other parents they are likely to end up with instead?" It's not like if you…

I have learned that making relative comparisons is useless if you are not at the average. If you are more capable than the average person, sure you can settle for an around average outcome, but that is very unsatisfying. The way I perceive things is that I'm going to do something, I'll do it really well or not at all.

I generally agree with your sentiment. However, I would say that this type of consideration is only useful when deciding to birth a child, not if you are considering adoption. In the latter case, the child is assumed to already exist in below-average circumstances.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#318

Post by triceratops »

gnicholas wrote: post #262
xenihn wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not clear what you're asking for exactly, but the solution is obvious: give whatever it is that you want to provide to EVERYONE, regardless of their gender, and whether or not they actually have children. Special treatment for everyone.

This is a nice sentiment, but doing so would have unintended consequences. For example, in most top universities, they give roughly the same leave to new fathers as new mothers. New mothers use this time to care for their baby, but many new fathers use this time as an extended sabbatical/research leave. Their wives take care of the baby for the most part, and they work on their next book. Then when it comes time for…

> many new fathers use this time as an extended sabbatical/research leave.

How do they even focus with a crying baby in the next room? And how do their marriages survive such an abdication of responsiblity?

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#319

Post by vecplane »

bradleybuda wrote: post #250
vecplane wrote: post #207

Wait, why is the advice to 'do something invasive, risky, and unnatural' when the actual advice should be 'have children when you're younger, not older.'

You shouldn't refrigerate your food. It's risky and unnatural. For the first 300,000 years of human history, people got along fine without refrigeration - why don't you just hunt and gather like you were intended to? IVF, egg and embryo freezing, and related technologies are modern miracles that allow people to live better lives by increasing their fertility options.

That's an obvious false equivalence. While technically 'unnatural' refrigeration is not 'invasive and risky.'

The vast majority of pre-modern humans were likely starving or malnourished, and those problems are mostly solved in the modern era, thanks in part to refrigeration.

We don't really have good solutions for women trying to have children into their 40s, though I fully support the advancement of fertility technologies! But still the *best* advice is to have children when you're younger.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#320

Post by andrepd »

dcow wrote: post #211
astan wrote: post #67

Your whole blog resonates deeply with me. All this corporate grifting and women's empowerment months will do jack shit until we figure out how to make workplaces and lives more equitable for mothers and allowing for gaps, breaks and destigmatizing time off for parents of both genders. Instead, we talk about how sexism is the biggest problem. Sure, sexism might be annoying, but in the west, it is hardly something that…

> When I mention it to someone that I want to take time off for a couple years to have children in silicon valley, they look at me as if I'm an alien. As if wanting to be pregnant and not working at the same time as being sleep deprived and wanting to spend time with my own baby when they are at their youngest is some strange outlandish fantasy. And this happens way more than people lead on and for the exact BS reaso…

I don't want to sound like an extremist but this is what happens when everything in life is mercantilised. Money becomes king.
Post reply on HN