4 ms·

Probably the better faith argument is that it should impact both genders equally, but it's a lot harder problem to solve, with multiple layers of interaction in

Probably the better faith argument is that it should impact both genders equally, but it's a lot harder problem to solve, with multiple layers of interaction in a dynamic system.

godelski 5y ago
If it affects both equally that's equivalent to no effect when comparing the difference. I think if we're discussing in good faith then you and the parent agree but are using different perspectives.
- DFHippie 5y ago
  > women having and raising children should result in no interruptions of their career growth or earnings is different from > affects both equally Perhaps the first should have been "women having and raising children should result in no interruptions of their career growth or earnings greater than those experienced by men".
  - s1artibartfast 5y ago
    >women having and raising children should result in no interruptions of their career growth or earnings greater than those experienced by men". Greater than men in general, or men who make the the same choices as the impacted women?
epicureanideal 5y ago
Well, if the parents are married all the earnings typically accumulate as common assets. In the event of a divorce those common assets are divided, and usually for a period of several years or more the higher earner is required to transfer further income from their paycheck to the lower earner. This doesn’t show up in the statistics I assume. It’s possible this doesn’t create a 100% balance, but it’s also not 100% balanced that one partner was able to spend far more time with the children (and usually both parents want to despite what some debate participants will say), and other non financial costs and benefits. One way to solve this would be to require all marriages to have a pre negotiated divorce agreement with experienced advisors on both sides to discuss what would be fair compensation in case of divorce.
- lotsofpulp 5y ago
  > but it’s also not 100% balanced that one partner was able to spend far more time with the children That can easily be balanced via legislation. What cannot be balanced is one partner having to take on all the health risks and lifelong consequences of childbirth and breastfeeding, etc.
  - odshoifsdhfs 5y ago
    So you are ok that Ukranian women atm to also not be able to leave the country and have to fight? Because there are also a lot of consequences for being a man that just keep being ignored (famous Hillary Clinton's quote that the real victims of war are the widows of the fallen soldiers springs to mind)
  - scarmig 5y ago
    In general, men get the short end of the stick with the current setup of household gender roles. They work more hours, at jobs they like less and are more stressed at, and experience far more on the job fatalities and permanent disabilities than women do. The net result of this is that men are more likely to die any given year during their careers and have a life span shorter by several years than women do.
  - epicureanideal 5y ago
    > one partner having to take on all the health risks Sure, but let’s be careful not to cherry pick the statistics. It’s still true that the average life expectancy for men is about 5 years shorter than women. I notice that there are attempts in our society to balance some areas of risk but not others. Breast cancer funding is much greater than prostate cancer funding despite the latter killing more people, etc.
    - klipt 5y ago
      Yeah if we really cared about equality of outcome we'd be funding men's health to the tune of trillions to reduce the life expectancy gap.
  - 5y ago
s1artibartfast 5y ago
Even, you would need to define a specific problem. If you are talking about overall career impact post birth, you would only expect equal outcomes if men and women are making the same choices and have the same preferences. If the "problem" is simply different numeric outcomes between men and women, it ignores any differences between the wants of men and women.

Probably the better faith argument is that it should impact both genders equally, but it's a lot harder problem to solve, with multiple layers of interaction in a dynamic system.

godelski 5y ago

If it affects both equally that's equivalent to no effect when comparing the difference. I think if we're discussing in good faith then you and the parent agree but are using different perspectives.

DFHippie 5y ago
> women having and raising children should result in no interruptions of their career growth or earnings is different from > affects both equally Perhaps the first should have been "women having and raising children should result in no interruptions of their career growth or earnings greater than those experienced by men".
- s1artibartfast 5y ago
  >women having and raising children should result in no interruptions of their career growth or earnings greater than those experienced by men". Greater than men in general, or men who make the the same choices as the impacted women?

epicureanideal 5y ago

Well, if the parents are married all the earnings typically accumulate as common assets. In the event of a divorce those common assets are divided, and usually for a period of several years or more the higher earner is required to transfer further income from their paycheck to the lower earner. This doesn’t show up in the statistics I assume. It’s possible this doesn’t create a 100% balance, but it’s also not 100% balanced that one partner was able to spend far more time with the children (and usually both parents want to despite what some debate participants will say), and other non financial costs and benefits. One way to solve this would be to require all marriages to have a pre negotiated divorce agreement with experienced advisors on both sides to discuss what would be fair compensation in case of divorce.

lotsofpulp 5y ago
> but it’s also not 100% balanced that one partner was able to spend far more time with the children That can easily be balanced via legislation. What cannot be balanced is one partner having to take on all the health risks and lifelong consequences of childbirth and breastfeeding, etc.
- odshoifsdhfs 5y ago
  So you are ok that Ukranian women atm to also not be able to leave the country and have to fight? Because there are also a lot of consequences for being a man that just keep being ignored (famous Hillary Clinton's quote that the real victims of war are the widows of the fallen soldiers springs to mind)
- scarmig 5y ago
  In general, men get the short end of the stick with the current setup of household gender roles. They work more hours, at jobs they like less and are more stressed at, and experience far more on the job fatalities and permanent disabilities than women do. The net result of this is that men are more likely to die any given year during their careers and have a life span shorter by several years than women do.
- epicureanideal 5y ago
  > one partner having to take on all the health risks Sure, but let’s be careful not to cherry pick the statistics. It’s still true that the average life expectancy for men is about 5 years shorter than women. I notice that there are attempts in our society to balance some areas of risk but not others. Breast cancer funding is much greater than prostate cancer funding despite the latter killing more people, etc.
  - klipt 5y ago
    Yeah if we really cared about equality of outcome we'd be funding men's health to the tune of trillions to reduce the life expectancy gap.
- 5y ago

s1artibartfast 5y ago

Even, you would need to define a specific problem. If you are talking about overall career impact post birth, you would only expect equal outcomes if men and women are making the same choices and have the same preferences. If the "problem" is simply different numeric outcomes between men and women, it ignores any differences between the wants of men and women.