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

321–330 of 770 posts

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#321

Post by sjtindell »

ad404b8a372f2b9 wrote: post #221
sjtindell wrote: post #25

Thank you for sharing. As I understand it is low risk to freeze eggs. No offense meant, did you consider adoption at all? Is it an option?

Is adoption possible in the U.S? I had a colleague in Europe who wanted to do it (stable high-income, good careers, nice couple all around) and found it to be impossible. I've always heard it was not a thing in rich countries.

It is possible yes. The process is definitely grueling from what I’ve heard (many interviews, lots of documents to furnish, lots of luck) but it is doable.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#322

Post by Karawebnetwork »

africanboy wrote: post #289
Karawebnetwork wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some of my personal idols from the past are Coco Chanel, Estée Lauder and Katharine Graham. That would be women born in the 1880's, 1900's and early 1920's. While few women had the privilege required to focus on their career, it was still present. At what point should we mark something as "tradition"? Remember that the Equal Credit Opportunity Act was not a thing until 1974. Until then, banks required single, widowed…

I'm not American, so I know nothing about the equal credit opportunity, sorry. I also think that traditions in USA is used to mean inertia ("things have always been done that way" etc.), but US are a very bad country for female workers for reasons that go beyond traditions. My country has its share of remarkable women, Miuccia Prada is one of them and she's still alive and well, Fabiola Giannotti is Italian and the f…

> See construction for example, you don't see women in construction.

Three of my close friends are women in the construction industry and my cousin is a car mechanic. My best friend who is male works as a secretary and my uncle is a nurse.

People will works on things that passionate them when they have the freedom to do so. There is no such thing as a gendered job.

I am familiar with the gender equality paradox and personally believe that it's causes are socioeconomic and not about "not having the stress" to "emulate men". Especially since Nordic countries have a higher percentage of women in parliament which I would argue is "traditionally" a man's role.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#323

Post by triceratops »

Nimitz14 wrote: post #297
pc86 wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's zero legitimate reason to gender parental leave either way. Not because "muh equality" or sexism or anything like that, but it should be "new kid == n weeks leave," whether you're the biological mother, father, adoptive parent, had a biological child via surrogate, whatever.

Best of luck calming the baby down without the mother.

Why?

There are times when a baby just wants mom and nobody else will do. But there also also times when a baby just wants dad (or grandma/grandpa/nanny/other caregiver) and nobody else will do. Babies are just weird sometimes.

Other than those specific cases, calming a baby is mostly a matter of your skill and being lucky with your baby's temperament.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#324

Post by klipt »

random5634 wrote: post #236
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…

Yeah, my mom always rebelled at the feminist push to have women do men's work as the goal (without valuing work women already did). Join the military, kill people etc. I'm 100% for that, but it's crazy that a women doesn't get paid for raising kids, perhaps the most important thing for society and with INCREDIBLE costs (if done badly) and benefits (if done well) to everyone. What's even more interesting, upvalue work…

> it's crazy that a women doesn't get paid for raising kids

Effectively they do get paid. In a marriage, mothers own half their husband's income. Outside a marriage, mothers get child support.

The fact it's not taxed as "pay" is a bonus for mothers, not a downside!

It's weird how the myth persists that mothers "not getting paid" a taxable wage is some kind of negative.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#325

Post by steve_taylor »

ksdale wrote: post #239

I agree completely with the premise that most people don't appreciate just how fleeting fertility can be, but I think rather than freezing eggs, the solution is for people to normalize having children at a younger age and designing work and home life around children existing and even being present in certain work contexts. Obviously freezing your eggs is something that you can do as individual without society's input…

Amen. I really don’t understand the stigma around having children when you’re young. It should be the norm.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#326

Post by Ma8ee »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #234
johnzim wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is great advice. I was in a similar position till we moved to the Bay Area, which flipped the financial calculus. Other than breast-feeding, Dads can do everything that's required and pumping works out great for everyone.

>pumping works out great for everyone. Pumping is an enormous pain in the ass compared to breastfeeding. All the moms I know who had to pump wish they never had to pump.

And for some women breastfeeding is a pain (often literally) and pumping at least works.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#327

Post by irae »

Nimitz14 wrote: post #297
pc86 wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's zero legitimate reason to gender parental leave either way. Not because "muh equality" or sexism or anything like that, but it should be "new kid == n weeks leave," whether you're the biological mother, father, adoptive parent, had a biological child via surrogate, whatever.

Best of luck calming the baby down without the mother.

I won't assume you don't have kids, but what you said does not align with my experience at all.

I have two kids from different relationships, and as dad, in both cases, I calmed down my kids better than the mothers did. They both relied on me specially in the worst baby crying situations.

I don't think I am an exception in ability or anything, I just cared to go learn a bit about babies, that's all. Thought a couple of friends how to do it, they also became very good at it.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#328

Post by jelliclesfarm »

Now that we are subsidizing fertility procedures, will SV companies also subsidize nannies because productivity would depend on sleep and outsourcing it to night nannies would help female employees tremendously. Why not?

How much more can we extend this? Let’s be creative here.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#329

Post by AnthonyMouse »

andrepd wrote: post #320
dcow wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

It's really housing and then money only as a prerequisite to that.

To start a family you need somewhere to live. When housing costs are insane you need crazy money to afford it, so everything becomes about money.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#330

Post by kbenson »

frEdmbx wrote: post #272
kbenson wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would suggest something else: have children between 18-25 Let's not undersell how hard it is to have kids when just starting out in life, when you generally have less resources, which may mean less stable housing. Couch surfing or staying with good friends for a week or two because of financial hardship problems is doable when you're single or a couple, it's much harder to swing with children unless you have very…

Having children isn't easy. Having children near peak fertility is relatively easier than later. If a woman has the foresight to know that she would like to have a family first, and then work on her career, she could focus on finding a husband who can provide the resources necessary to both have children between 18-25, and support starting a business later. This used to be common knowledge, and it was so for a reason…

> This used to be common knowledge, and it was so for a reason.

It also used to be much more common for women to wed older and more established men. It also used to be less common for women to go to college. There are lots of societal norms that have changed to make early parenthood less popular than it used to be.

Post reply on HN