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

331–340 of 770 posts

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#331

Post by ansible »

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…

The only solutions to all this I can think of are considered hopelessly "radical" and "socialist".

One thing that would help is having a Universal Basic Income, with Universal Healthcare. This would allow people to work on startups at their own pace, instead of desperately needing to become successful in a relatively short time-frame in order to create some stability.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#332

Post by lotsofpulp »

Ma8ee wrote: post #326
lotsofpulp wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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.

Yes, I should have acknowledged that is a problem for many also.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#333

Post by jbay808 »

jluxenberg wrote: post #302
throw8932894 wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When I mention it to someone that I want to take time off for a couple years > actual equality where we acknowledge that women have different needs and desires I find your view sexist and disturbing. 99% men would love to take couple of years off with kids as well. But face even more obstacles!

Try this: s/women/people/g If taking a break to focus on parenting was more acceptable, anyone (man/woman/nonbinary) who wanted to do this would benefit. Many careers are built around this idea that you spend 5-10 years, with no breaks, in your late 20s and 30s working on something. What if taking a substantial chunk of time off was more common (for anyone)?

That would be awesome.

Unfortunately, young people also don't have money. That's the time period when many people feel a lot of pressure to accumulate savings -- often, that might specifically be so that they can afford to raise a child in the future.

Acceptance of multigenerational households, living with grandparents, and raising kids there, would be an option and allow people in their 20s to become parents before their careers have taken off. But even for those who have loving and supportive grandparents, that also can be a major strain on a relationship.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#334

Post by Consultant32452 »

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…

I don't think these changes are likely because, in my opinion, there is a silent anti-natal movement in Western culture. We have serious issues of an aging population, not enough kids being born to fund social security, etc. and all of our solutions look like bringing people in from other countries with high fertility rates. None of the ideas being tossed around seem to have anything to do with facilitating our own families. There's lots of different sub-sects of the anti-natal movement ranging from the environmental to racial. I have a friend who confided in me she was afraid to have a child because she didn't want to pass on whiteness.

I truly hope you are able to find a partner and employer who supports you in your life decisions.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#335

Post by seneca »

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

Why would women get paid to raise their own kids? You suggest it's because when done well, it has incredible value to society. What is that value to society? It's having functional, productive members. Women already reap the benefits of that by sharing society with other peoples' well raised children.

What I mean to say is that it's a web of mutual benefit. The gap is actually in all the people who don't have children, who are essentially free riders in this scheme, but that is offset by the fact that they pay taxes for things like schools, which they don't themselves consume, and lack of tax breaks that parents receive.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#336

Post by geodel »

dheera wrote: post #32
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

Potentially controversial thought here, but I'd like to bring it up for discussion. I feel like the work ethic I see throughout the industry is extremely toxic to society, and leads to some of this. In China for example there's a so-called "996" work schedule (9am-9pm, 6 days a week) which is basically expected of everyone in tech, unfortunately, and it seems Silicon Valley is heading that direction as well with all…

The one thing I am seeing is non-toxic folks are not opening enough companies that offer great work-life balance, good pay and other perks. So people who like good things are only looking for jobs and not setting up companies and offering these to others.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#337

Post by monoideism »

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 partly that, but it's partly what the GP comment says: the prevalent idea that true equality of the sexes is for women to become exact copies of men. Since women and men are not exact copies, this causes problems.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#338

Post by Digory »

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…

Every human being can value traditional female work (or, more broadly, human obligations to each other) more than money.

But we seem to want to be paid. It's interesting that socializing the payments seems to strike people as more freeing than just social obligation.

This seems like the kind of thinking that eventually requires payments to give up the thrill of killing each other.

Re: Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

#340

Post by ramzyo »

klipt wrote: post #324
random5634 wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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

That’s some creative logic. Being a stay at home parent is a full-time job. If the stay at home parent were being paid, they’d...well...be paid. “Effective” payment isn’t helpful to a full time parent raising a child and losing out on wages they would otherwise get at a job that the economy values with a taxable wage.

Post reply on HN