Female Founder Secrets: Fertility

Post by samr71 » Fri, Mar 05, 2021, 2:58 AM UTC

sjwalter wrote: post #429

samr71 wrote: post #394

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure most of the people working in Tech in the Bay Area could go get a job at some firm in Cincinnati, with substantially lower COL. Of course, they would have a substantially lower salary as well, probably low enough to make the Bay Area the better option economically, even including the high COL. Of course, that doesn't mean we can't lower the COL of the Bay Area! Make Silicon Valley as dense as Tokyo, and I as…

See, you're looking purely in terms of financial economics. But, just as there are other forms of wealth than financial wealth, there are other forms of economics, like social economics. Your decision to take the XX% improved pay in the higher COL area surely will improve your balance sheet over a decade. But what will your peers look like after that decade? Will they be a bunch of 40yo millionaire single people all…

Post by paledot » Fri, Mar 05, 2021, 3:05 AM UTC

lettergram wrote: post #612

john_moscow wrote: post #571

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's an unpopular thought: raising kids, motivating them to learn, helping them mature, teaching them your values, helping them get out of bad influence, is a full-time job. It requires education to explain the right things and show good examples. It requires soft skills to be patient and persuasive. It requires people skills to counter out bad influencers. It requires time, dedication and patience. It's not the sa…

I think most of the people HN haven’t spent much time with people out of the “bubble”. “Trigger warning” This is my experience from my wife, our friends, and my community & family. But it might provide some insight. 90% of women I speak to would love not to work and would like to raise kids (most men too). It’s more about the wage gap. Most of the people I speak with believe (and I agree) believe the lack of wage gro…

Post by souprock » Fri, Mar 05, 2021, 3:09 AM UTC

wayoutthere wrote: post #176

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…

Fixing this would require raising wages to the point where a single income can support a family. Until that’s the case, both parents have to work unless you’re wealthy (not a high earner; actually wealthy). I would just ask yourself who in society benefits from this situation and who loses. It doesn’t have to be this way, but we keep electing politicians who promise to keep it this way (on both sides of the aisle). I…

Post by kaitai » Fri, Mar 05, 2021, 3:10 AM UTC

hycaria wrote: post #490

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 am female too and I really don’t relate to this kind of discourse. If you’re really that into high pressure job and grinding the ladder why would you be so attracted to raising a family as a sahm ? You can’t do everything at once. No one is stopping you from raising children but yourself. Many don’t go for the business route and that’s a respectable choice but of course you can’t have it all. If in the end your fer…

Post by Chris2048 » Fri, Mar 05, 2021, 3:12 AM UTC

sbierwagen wrote: post #560

as300 wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately I just don't think it's a tenable position to assert that women (or men) should be able to take 2-4 years off of work and not be disadvantaged in their career for doing so. I wholeheartedly support the idea that, as a society, we ought to value childcare/child-rearing and (perhaps monetarily) support those who perform this service. But I don't believe corporations ought to be the ones making a space for…

>But I don't believe corporations ought to be the ones making a space for that. Something of a chicken and egg problem there. If you want companies to stop talking about gender, you need to get the NYT to stop writing articles about how a gender ratio any lower than 50:50 in any role at a company is proof positive that the company is evil and must be destroyed. This would require that culture, broadly, stop believing…