3 ms·
Then what about the gap that will now emerge between men who have kids and have been forced to take leave, and the people who have not had kids? Is that a gap t
by fighterpilot 5y ago
Then what about the gap that will now emerge between men who have kids and have been forced to take leave, and the people who have not had kids? Is that a gap that doesn't matter simply because it doesn't show up in gendered statistics but is instead hidden?
I am extremely against enforced handicaps on people as a way to achieve equality. I can't think of precedent where this has led to anything positive (I'm reminded of the Harrison Bergeron short story as a write this). If the man (or woman) can afford childcare, then why should the government force them out of the workforce, exactly who is benefiting from this handicap?
- adrianN 5y agoThe children probably benefit from having their parents around.
- fighterpilot 5y agoThen the parents can take leave if they think this is true. That's separate from forcing men to take leave in order to reduce inequality.
- parineum 5y agoThe gap isn't from the actual leave, the gap is from the threat of future leave. Young women don't get promoted before they have kids and that hurts their future earnings. To answer the second question, I think the children would benefit. I am, however, pretty nonplussed about the idea of forcing people to... do anything really. I'm with you on that.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- jokethrowaway 5y agoWe're are already handicapping white males with "positive discrimination" (which has to be the worst oxymoron ever written in any law). Ask any recruiter or whoever is doing hiring at your company. Eg. In the UK it's illegal to discriminate by gender / race, unless it's done in favour of a category that is deemed unrepresented. We routinely had recruiters bringing only female / non-white candidates to make our quota look good.
- galoisgirl 5y agoIn men's case, you're talking several months over a lifetime. Childless people will still get sick, depressed, burned out, they'll quit... They're not robots. How much more productive will they be, 1%?
- bregma 5y agoFrom a Darwinian perspective, those who do not have any offspring are complete failures. Dead ends in the gene pool. Don't worry about it: in just a few generations the problem will take care of itself.
- rightbyte 5y agoBulldogs that could breath properly were dead ends in the gene pool. One should be careful with what is selected for in the "Darwinian perspective".