> And why should someone who wants to be a mother and a careerist have to accept more career penalties than someone who wants to be a father and careerist? Bec

> And why should someone who wants to be a mother and a careerist have to accept more career penalties than someone who wants to be a father and careerist? Because of clear biological differences you can’t simply substitute a man for a woman. As such this article is suggesting that we can make men worse off career wise to even things up. But that only makes sense from a narrow gender-equality perspective. It makes much more sense to look at it from a family unit perspective where it’s a good thing for the man to take on the career burden to help his family. > And why should a woman who doesn't want children have to pay a penalty for the choices of those who do? Because it is critical to the basic maintenance of our society. The same reason I pay a penalty for a large number of government services I don’t use.