7 ms·

Having Babies. Really, being a mother is what skews most stats about women on money issues. There has been policymaking about this in a bunch of european count

Having Babies. Really, being a mother is what skews most stats about women on money issues. There has been policymaking about this in a bunch of european countries, and if they are released from financial constrains (handouts, public housing, whatever) they seem to double down on it. Let's face it, working, for most people, is something you do out of necessity. Why do we really expect women to have a similar behaviour of men about work, when they have a socially aceptable and now economical venue to avoid it. There's probably a small percentage of men that find their work interesting. Even smaller for all their work life. Edit: Please, yeah, I know that raising children is work, pardon my lightly written comment.

aklemm 6y ago
Having babies and raising them fully--especially doing it well--is not avoiding work.
- throwaway0a5e 6y ago
  >Having babies and raising them fully--especially doing it well--is not avoiding work. It was pretty obvious from the context that the person you're replying to meant "working" as in "working a job for money".
- iagovar 6y ago
  You're right, but you ain't making the big bucks. Even then, they seem to find it rewarding enough. If I was woman and I decided to have baby, I'd probably be either very stressed with my current job, or looking for something part time. Now imagine if I live in Sweden or the like where the state hands out money for raising children.
  - jhasse 6y ago
    wait, there are countries where the state does NOT hand out money for raising children?
    - iagovar 6y ago
      Yeah, probably most? IDK, I don't have the stats at hand, but in plenty of places you're alone agains't what it comes to you, no matter your gender. The personal and societal reasoning about parenthood changes, but they still do have babies, despite being on their own. For many people, children is their retirement plan. Anyway, it's not the same to have a nice monthly stipend than a small cheque far in between. Spain, for example, is considerably worse financially-wise for raising a kid than countries more up north. Not only because the country job market is shit (which is important even if you don't work, because your partner has to bring money home), but because the state really doesn't do much about it. Now imagine living in a place where there isn't really a functional state to look for.
    - klyrs 6y ago
      In Canada and the US, the state will take children away from parents in poverty rather than hand out money. But then it gets really weird; they then place the children in foster homes, which get significant handouts.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- scarmig 6y ago
  It's not avoiding work, but it is making a choice to pursue one type of work (child rearing) over another (market labor in shitty, unfulfilling, but well-paid jobs). That's a choice women have substantially more ability to make than men.
- filoleg 6y ago
  I don't think that the parent comment meant that raising children isn't work. It absolutely is, and an extremely massive one too. What they most likely meant by "avoiding work" is "avoiding a paycheck job".
- renewiltord 6y ago
  Having babies and raising them partly isn't avoiding work either. Babies get partly raised for all sorts of reasons.
- aklemm 6y ago
  Some replies might be missing the point that it may well be reasonable to pay people raising children. OP implies it's a handout. I would argue it's an unpaid service to society and those of you relying on a crop of well-educated non-criminals to be your employees and peers are freeloading.
Kluny 6y ago
> Why do we really expect women to have a similar behaviour of men about work, when they have a socially aceptable and now economical venue to avoid it. Baby raising is quite important work. I would argue that raising the next generation of workers, taxpayer, customers and pension fund contributors is the most important work of all.
- bobthechef 6y ago
  Frankly, I would make the stronger point: it's more important than your job (raising children can be difficult, to be sure, but it's not quite "work" in the sense that work by and large tends to be servile while raising children is a higher end for which work is done). The reason people work is overwhelmingly so that they can support their children and their families.
- renewiltord 6y ago
  Sure. You can replace "work" in his text with "work for hire" or something else if it helps you understand what he meant.
  - pseudalopex 6y ago
    Critiquing the framing doesn't mean they didn't understand.
    - renewiltord 6y ago
      Understanding somewhat doesn't mean they can't understand better.
    - ameister14 6y ago
      Sure, but the manner in which they critiqued the framing shows they didn't understand, potentially deliberately.
      - pseudalopex 6y ago
        It's a common rhetorical device.
farias0 6y ago
I'm sorry but why are you so sure they're trying to avoid work? From my experience most women would love to have careers and be financially independent and successful. But babies indeed make it a lot harder -- both from a time/energy perspective and from a discrimination perspective.
- iagovar 6y ago
  I'm too lazy to look for literature (sorry), but I remember studying it, and later read some paper about it. Anyway, whatever is the reason, they do take the tradeoff.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
tshaddox 6y ago
In the United States in the last 30 years, the percentage of women working in computing fields has decreased significantly. In that same time period, births per women has decreased and the age of first-time mothers has increased.
P_I_Staker 6y ago
I'm mostly with you on this, but there's a larger percentage of guys than you think. If you worked in corporate America long enough, especially in tech, you've encountered lots of guys that clearly enjoy being at work more than home. People are complicated. I had a comment along the same lines as yours, but now that I talk about it, I'm not sure what I'd do. It's a total tossup. Moot point because I don't feel like I can leave the workforce, but it's not so clear. I do think you brought up a good point though. It's kind of a forbidden dark point, but still one worth considering. What if it really is better to have less money, and not have to deal with any of this work stuff?
imtringued 6y ago
Before women were allowed to work the few women that did pursue higher education were basically expected to marry immediately after graduation. There was absolutely zero expectation that you would work a job relevant to your education because you were supposed to be a housewife who is busy with her kids. The biological aspect is probably the biggest driving force.
wing-_-nuts 6y ago
>Having Babies. Really, being a mother is what skews most stats about women on money issues. There has been policymaking about this in a bunch of european countries, and if they are released from financial constrains (handouts, public housing, whatever) they seem to double down on it. Curious as to what you mean by 'doubling down on it'? You're not wrong in your statement that having kids kills the career of many women. The question is, why? The drive to reproduce is probably our second strongest in the human species, right after survival. Why, then, is it not easier to have kids and a career? It's about as universal a value as we have. Why is it not more supported? Why don't we have any guaranteed child leave in the US? Why don't we have universal daycare / preK? I say all this as a guy who doesn't even want kids, but I do think it would be better for society if there was more support for parents, even if I paid more taxes to pay for it.
- chlodwig 6y ago
  Why don't we have universal daycare / preK? How about increasing the tax credit that goes to all parent, regardless of they choose to do childcare? Maybe for some parents that would be enough that one parent could quit their job and finally have the joy of spending more of their time with their own kid. I don't see why we should subsidize institutional childcare over other forms of caring for the very young.
  - dec0dedab0de 6y ago
    as a parent I think parents should have to pay more taxes, and it should go up per child.
    - wing-_-nuts 6y ago
      If this is based off of environmental concerns, I'd much rather we implement a carbon tax. Target the thing you wish to reduce.

aklemm 6y ago

Having babies and raising them fully--especially doing it well--is not avoiding work.

throwaway0a5e 6y ago
>Having babies and raising them fully--especially doing it well--is not avoiding work. It was pretty obvious from the context that the person you're replying to meant "working" as in "working a job for money".
iagovar 6y ago
You're right, but you ain't making the big bucks. Even then, they seem to find it rewarding enough. If I was woman and I decided to have baby, I'd probably be either very stressed with my current job, or looking for something part time. Now imagine if I live in Sweden or the like where the state hands out money for raising children.
- jhasse 6y ago
  wait, there are countries where the state does NOT hand out money for raising children?
  - iagovar 6y ago
    Yeah, probably most? IDK, I don't have the stats at hand, but in plenty of places you're alone agains't what it comes to you, no matter your gender. The personal and societal reasoning about parenthood changes, but they still do have babies, despite being on their own. For many people, children is their retirement plan. Anyway, it's not the same to have a nice monthly stipend than a small cheque far in between. Spain, for example, is considerably worse financially-wise for raising a kid than countries more up north. Not only because the country job market is shit (which is important even if you don't work, because your partner has to bring money home), but because the state really doesn't do much about it. Now imagine living in a place where there isn't really a functional state to look for.
  - klyrs 6y ago
    In Canada and the US, the state will take children away from parents in poverty rather than hand out money. But then it gets really weird; they then place the children in foster homes, which get significant handouts.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
scarmig 6y ago
It's not avoiding work, but it is making a choice to pursue one type of work (child rearing) over another (market labor in shitty, unfulfilling, but well-paid jobs). That's a choice women have substantially more ability to make than men.
filoleg 6y ago
I don't think that the parent comment meant that raising children isn't work. It absolutely is, and an extremely massive one too. What they most likely meant by "avoiding work" is "avoiding a paycheck job".
renewiltord 6y ago
Having babies and raising them partly isn't avoiding work either. Babies get partly raised for all sorts of reasons.
aklemm 6y ago
Some replies might be missing the point that it may well be reasonable to pay people raising children. OP implies it's a handout. I would argue it's an unpaid service to society and those of you relying on a crop of well-educated non-criminals to be your employees and peers are freeloading.

Kluny 6y ago

> Why do we really expect women to have a similar behaviour of men about work, when they have a socially aceptable and now economical venue to avoid it. Baby raising is quite important work. I would argue that raising the next generation of workers, taxpayer, customers and pension fund contributors is the most important work of all.

bobthechef 6y ago
Frankly, I would make the stronger point: it's more important than your job (raising children can be difficult, to be sure, but it's not quite "work" in the sense that work by and large tends to be servile while raising children is a higher end for which work is done). The reason people work is overwhelmingly so that they can support their children and their families.
renewiltord 6y ago
Sure. You can replace "work" in his text with "work for hire" or something else if it helps you understand what he meant.
- pseudalopex 6y ago
  Critiquing the framing doesn't mean they didn't understand.
  - renewiltord 6y ago
    Understanding somewhat doesn't mean they can't understand better.
  - ameister14 6y ago
    Sure, but the manner in which they critiqued the framing shows they didn't understand, potentially deliberately.
    - pseudalopex 6y ago
      It's a common rhetorical device.

farias0 6y ago

I'm sorry but why are you so sure they're trying to avoid work? From my experience most women would love to have careers and be financially independent and successful. But babies indeed make it a lot harder -- both from a time/energy perspective and from a discrimination perspective.

iagovar 6y ago
I'm too lazy to look for literature (sorry), but I remember studying it, and later read some paper about it. Anyway, whatever is the reason, they do take the tradeoff.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

tshaddox 6y ago

In the United States in the last 30 years, the percentage of women working in computing fields has decreased significantly. In that same time period, births per women has decreased and the age of first-time mothers has increased.

P_I_Staker 6y ago

I'm mostly with you on this, but there's a larger percentage of guys than you think. If you worked in corporate America long enough, especially in tech, you've encountered lots of guys that clearly enjoy being at work more than home. People are complicated. I had a comment along the same lines as yours, but now that I talk about it, I'm not sure what I'd do. It's a total tossup. Moot point because I don't feel like I can leave the workforce, but it's not so clear. I do think you brought up a good point though. It's kind of a forbidden dark point, but still one worth considering. What if it really is better to have less money, and not have to deal with any of this work stuff?

imtringued 6y ago

Before women were allowed to work the few women that did pursue higher education were basically expected to marry immediately after graduation. There was absolutely zero expectation that you would work a job relevant to your education because you were supposed to be a housewife who is busy with her kids. The biological aspect is probably the biggest driving force.

wing-_-nuts 6y ago

>Having Babies. Really, being a mother is what skews most stats about women on money issues. There has been policymaking about this in a bunch of european countries, and if they are released from financial constrains (handouts, public housing, whatever) they seem to double down on it. Curious as to what you mean by 'doubling down on it'? You're not wrong in your statement that having kids kills the career of many women. The question is, why? The drive to reproduce is probably our second strongest in the human species, right after survival. Why, then, is it not easier to have kids and a career? It's about as universal a value as we have. Why is it not more supported? Why don't we have any guaranteed child leave in the US? Why don't we have universal daycare / preK? I say all this as a guy who doesn't even want kids, but I do think it would be better for society if there was more support for parents, even if I paid more taxes to pay for it.

chlodwig 6y ago
Why don't we have universal daycare / preK? How about increasing the tax credit that goes to all parent, regardless of they choose to do childcare? Maybe for some parents that would be enough that one parent could quit their job and finally have the joy of spending more of their time with their own kid. I don't see why we should subsidize institutional childcare over other forms of caring for the very young.
- dec0dedab0de 6y ago
  as a parent I think parents should have to pay more taxes, and it should go up per child.
  - wing-_-nuts 6y ago
    If this is based off of environmental concerns, I'd much rather we implement a carbon tax. Target the thing you wish to reduce.