4 ms·

These sex differences always conspire to keep women out of important social and economic roles. Such a coincidence!

malvosenior 8y ago
That's not true. Teaching is a very important social role and it's very much dominated by women. Of course there's the most important social role of all: parenting. Stay at home dads do not receive the support and admiration mothers do.
- glhaynes 8y ago
  Note that neither teaching nor parenting are remotely lucrative. The opposite, in fact - my understanding is that much of the income gap is not from managerial discrimination (though that is a factor too, of course) but because of time women spend away from employment to have and support children. I agree that it’s arguably the most important social role but our economic system is upside-down in its valuation of it. Stay at home dads do not receive the support and admiration mothers do. Yes! Patriarchy harms us all.
  - malvosenior 8y ago
    > Note that neither teaching nor parenting are remotely lucrative. The opposite, in fact - my understanding is that much of the income gap is not from managerial discrimination (though that is a factor too, of course) but because of time women spend away from employment to have and support children. I agree that it’s arguably the most important social role but our economic system is upside-down in its valuation of it. There's more to life than money. In fact the quest to make everyone an office drone has lowered salaries for all workers. It's also lowered women's happiness, eventhough their earning potential has greatly increased: https://www.nber.org/papers/w14969 https://www.nber.org/papers/w14969 > Yes! Patriarchy harms us all. Please don't do this here. No need to bring in gendered insults. Labeling something that harms men the "patriarchy" is nonsensical.
    - glhaynes 8y ago
      "Patriarchy" isn't a gendered insult, it's a description of the perceived traits of a social and economic system. But, if you'd prefer, feel free to substitute "Our social system and values" for the word. Regardless of the terminology, the idea that power is held disproportionately by one group in no way implies that every member of that group is purely benefitted by that imbalance. Even as many men reap the benefits of our system, many of us are also harmed by it, as you pointed out. The expectation that women will parent and men will earn money causes a lot of men to miss out on or feel undervalued in parenting roles.
- MyHypatia 8y ago
  There is more to life than money, but the United States is a capitalist country, where nebulous concepts like "value" are measured in dollars. Teaching is an important role, but it is not valued. If it were valued in our economy, it would be backed by more dollars. So where does that leave women who work in these roles that are simultaneously "important" but not "valued"? It's like when politicians say, "being a mother is the most important and difficult job", but then no one actually backs and elects women whose primary identity is being a mother. Isn't it strange that we don't want people with supposedly "the most difficult and important job" to represent us? It's because we as a society don't actually value it, we just pretend to. That leaves women economically poor and underrepresented in political decision-making. Being economically and politically poor doesn't translate into happiness for women.
  - malvosenior 8y ago
    Every politician, ceo, leader... had a mother. Most of them were raised and shaped by that mother who helped them grow into the person they are today (good or bad). Being a mother is powerful because you shape the trajectory and tactics of all of your offspring, some of whom will go on to influence society at large.
    - MyHypatia 8y ago
      The whole point is for the mother herself to directly influence society at large. Not wait around for 30-40 years to see if maybe her offspring agrees with some of the things that she cares about and maybe or maybe not implements it. Fathers also influence and shape the trajectory of their offspring, and we don't have the notion that fathers should be preoccupied with "fathering" and wait around and see if their offspring influence society at large.
      - malvosenior 8y ago
        I think that's really short term thinking. The world doesn't need more workers (especially with automation coming), it needs better parents. Very few people will have an impact beyond their generation through work. All parents will though. Just today there was an article on HN about the lack of jobs for STEM graduates: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19657087 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19657087

That's not true. Teaching is a very important social role and it's very much dominated by women. Of course there's the most important social role of all: parenting. Stay at home dads do not receive the support and admiration mothers do.

glhaynes 8y ago
Note that neither teaching nor parenting are remotely lucrative. The opposite, in fact - my understanding is that much of the income gap is not from managerial discrimination (though that is a factor too, of course) but because of time women spend away from employment to have and support children. I agree that it’s arguably the most important social role but our economic system is upside-down in its valuation of it. Stay at home dads do not receive the support and admiration mothers do. Yes! Patriarchy harms us all.
- malvosenior 8y ago
  > Note that neither teaching nor parenting are remotely lucrative. The opposite, in fact - my understanding is that much of the income gap is not from managerial discrimination (though that is a factor too, of course) but because of time women spend away from employment to have and support children. I agree that it’s arguably the most important social role but our economic system is upside-down in its valuation of it. There's more to life than money. In fact the quest to make everyone an office drone has lowered salaries for all workers. It's also lowered women's happiness, eventhough their earning potential has greatly increased: https://www.nber.org/papers/w14969 https://www.nber.org/papers/w14969 > Yes! Patriarchy harms us all. Please don't do this here. No need to bring in gendered insults. Labeling something that harms men the "patriarchy" is nonsensical.
  - glhaynes 8y ago
    "Patriarchy" isn't a gendered insult, it's a description of the perceived traits of a social and economic system. But, if you'd prefer, feel free to substitute "Our social system and values" for the word. Regardless of the terminology, the idea that power is held disproportionately by one group in no way implies that every member of that group is purely benefitted by that imbalance. Even as many men reap the benefits of our system, many of us are also harmed by it, as you pointed out. The expectation that women will parent and men will earn money causes a lot of men to miss out on or feel undervalued in parenting roles.
MyHypatia 8y ago
There is more to life than money, but the United States is a capitalist country, where nebulous concepts like "value" are measured in dollars. Teaching is an important role, but it is not valued. If it were valued in our economy, it would be backed by more dollars. So where does that leave women who work in these roles that are simultaneously "important" but not "valued"? It's like when politicians say, "being a mother is the most important and difficult job", but then no one actually backs and elects women whose primary identity is being a mother. Isn't it strange that we don't want people with supposedly "the most difficult and important job" to represent us? It's because we as a society don't actually value it, we just pretend to. That leaves women economically poor and underrepresented in political decision-making. Being economically and politically poor doesn't translate into happiness for women.
- malvosenior 8y ago
  Every politician, ceo, leader... had a mother. Most of them were raised and shaped by that mother who helped them grow into the person they are today (good or bad). Being a mother is powerful because you shape the trajectory and tactics of all of your offspring, some of whom will go on to influence society at large.
  - MyHypatia 8y ago
    The whole point is for the mother herself to directly influence society at large. Not wait around for 30-40 years to see if maybe her offspring agrees with some of the things that she cares about and maybe or maybe not implements it. Fathers also influence and shape the trajectory of their offspring, and we don't have the notion that fathers should be preoccupied with "fathering" and wait around and see if their offspring influence society at large.
    - malvosenior 8y ago
      I think that's really short term thinking. The world doesn't need more workers (especially with automation coming), it needs better parents. Very few people will have an impact beyond their generation through work. All parents will though. Just today there was an article on HN about the lack of jobs for STEM graduates: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19657087 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19657087