4 ms·

>Interestingly, there have been some unintended downstream impact of this progressive law, such as lower women participation in senior level roles This isn't d

>Interestingly, there have been some unintended downstream impact of this progressive law, such as lower women participation in senior level roles This isn't downstream impact. It's more of a choice. The women choose not to strive for senior level roles. They express this choice by choosing the 4 day work week. We shouldn't call it an unintended downstream impact because it's not something that should be corrected. If women choose not to work as hard as men, then we shouldn't try to equalize their participation in senior roles.

hnbad 3y ago
Interesting to see someone on HN of all places equate longer hours with "working harder" or being more qualified for senior roles. Speaking from personal experience with a cohort of Millenial dads: a lot of "women working less to prioritize family" comes down to women being expected to be caregivers and men typically not having experienced the same socialization from a young age and feeling overwhelmed, thus retreating into work to both avoid care work and be able to justify it by being "the provider". It's pretty telling when we chastise women for "not pulling their weight" at work when they're also typically expected to do most of the household chores, social labor (e.g. keeping track of birthdays, relationships and preferences throughout the family's social circles) and caregiving but don't call out deadbeat dads like Elon Musk who sire new children left and right while being completely incapable of maintaining a relationship with any of the mothers and abandoning any child that calls him out for his bullshit once they get old enough to form an opinion. And as a reminder: Musk holds several official positions including multiple C-tier ones and still spends an ungodly amount of time shitposting on Twitter. If you think that the time he spends on any one of his jobs on average accounts for more than the equivalent of a 4 day work week while also being this heavily distracted and spread thin, you're being ridiculous.
- corethree 3y ago
  >Speaking from personal experience with a cohort of Millenial dads: a lot of "women working less to prioritize family" comes down to women being expected to be caregivers and men typically not having experienced the same socialization from a young age and feeling overwhelmed, thus retreating into work to both avoid care work and be able to justify it by being "the provider". It is not an expectation. It's been part of human behavior across all cultures since history. Men are the workers and women are the care givers and home makers. The behavior is seen so consistently across cultures that it's safe to say it's more then social conditioning. It's biological. Humans are flexible enough to behave outside of biological parameters but you are in utter denial if you deny the evidence that spans across ancient history and all cultures across the world. But this is besides the point. The point is if I run a business, my objective is to succeed. My objective is not to hire some women who wants to do a 4 day work week to support a child. It may be beneficial to the mother to give her advantages but it is not beneficial to me as the person who spent my hard earned cash paying her. >It's pretty telling when we chastise women for "not pulling their weight" at work when they're also typically expected to do most of the household chores, social labor (e.g. keeping track of birthdays, relationships and preferences throughout the family's social circles) and caregiving but don't call out deadbeat dads like Elon Musk who sire new children left and right while being completely incapable of maintaining a relationship with any of the mothers and abandoning any child that calls him out for his bullshit once they get old enough to form an opinion. As a person who risked all my resources on a business how the hell does house hold chores apply to me? If the woman demands to have the same pay and rank as the hard working guy who works 5 days a week because she spent a lot of time caring for some kid that has nothing to do with my business, how is that fair to me? It's asking for a handout. And sure if the government wants to force me to give a hand out to make society a better place than great. I support this. What I don't support is this lie that what was given out is anything but a hand out. It is extra help and it is not something that was earned with fair trade. The person who devotes the most effort and has the best results deserves the most reward. >If you think that the time he spends on any one of his jobs on average accounts for more than the equivalent of a 4 day work week while also being this heavily distracted and spread thin, you're being ridiculous. If you're asking me what I think is ridiculous I would say your response to me is ridiculous. Not being snarky here, your hypothetical implies ridiculousness and I respond with another hypothetical about your statement. What does Elon have to do with anything? If Elon sired 50 children and abandoned them, that's evil and wrong, but that's completely orthogonal to my business. I pay someone for results and Elon delivers. What he does outside of that is a completely different thing. In general Men spend more time and more effort at work so they tend to deliver better results and thus they get more senior positions. It's obvious if women choose a 4 day work week they're just not as into it as men and thus they get paid less and get less senior positions. Not all women make the choice to take care of children. A good number of women choose to do what the men do and when you control for that the data shows that the gender pay gap largely disappears. https://freakonomics.com/podcast/the-true-story-of-the-gender-pay-gap/ https://freakonomics.com/podcast/the-true-story-of-the-gende... I support equal pay and standards for the women who deliver equal results as men. Are you saying you don't support this? You support unequal standards? You support handouts for women when they raise kids? It's a valid thing to support. But don't call it what it isn't. It is a gift and not something women are entitled to.
  - Pyrobyte 3y ago
    I completely agree, so often people claim about this pay gap between men and women, we see that there are complaints about football pay and stuff but really women models get paid more then men models, quite frankly that just makes sense, there are differences between us and simply some jobs are just better done by men and others by women, this is isn't inequal it's just the way it is. Ignore my name by the way
  - twobitshifter 3y ago
    I actually do support handouts for women or men raising kids. This social labor goes unpaid but it’s extremely valuable for society. Instead we are following the economic arrow pointing us towards an arrangement where childcare is farmed out to chaotic day cares.
    - corethree 3y ago
      >This social labor goes unpaid but it’s extremely valuable for society It's valuable to you as a person who has kids. You will note the majority of people in the US will not have kids. Why should I pay for your kid? You have to put yourself in the shoes of the person who doesn't have kids. Or the business owner who actually has to hand out the money. I support the payment because I have kids, but at the same time I'm able to play the devils advocate and see the other side of the equation rather then blindly support something in my own self interest.
      - twobitshifter 3y ago
        I don’t have kids. It’s valuable for the greater good of society not just a child. You have to live with the eventual adults that develop under a system that supports caregivers or one that does not. If we don’t look beyond the first effect we can miss that. To further the point, the decision whether to have a kid can be influenced by how that affects someone’s own finances. These programs put a finger on the scale to encourage having children, something that financially to the individual doesn’t make sense with modern jobs. Many countries have negative pop growth today and that *will* be a national financial problem
isoprophlex 3y ago
> If women choose not to work as hard as men, then we shouldn't try to equalize their participation in senior roles This is a myopic, reductionist take. You're missing the forest for the trees. It is not a matter of women choosing not to work as hard as men, it is a matter of society being structured in such a way that men are disproportionately not involved in raising a family, and women being delegated to the task of caregiver even though they themselves would like more equality. Economically, women are pressured to stay out of the workplace for 6+ months, whereas men get a couple of days-weeks to stay at home.
- corethree 3y ago
  Your the frog living in the well. Think bigger. For eons and millennia society has been structured this way since forever. It's only in the recent three or four decades has there been a cultural shift. Men have been taking home the income since they were hunting, farming and now programming. Women taking home the money is a new thing. That only happened in the last 50 or so years. And the social pressures aren't even forcing them to take home the money. To women, it's just an option. For men the pressure is worse. For men it's a social requirement... the survival of the family unit still rests entirely on their shoulders. But again this is besides the point. The main question here is, how does this new opportunity for women to make money suddenly make women deserve a hand out when they choose divide the time devoted to these new opportunities with care giving? You do less work and as a business owner I have to give you the same pay because you're entitled to it? How does that logic work out? It doesn't. If an employee works 4 days a week and obviously has his/her attention divided to other endeavors how does he/she deserve a promotion? Are you kidding? Maybe in her eyes she deserves a promotion, but as a business owner I'd rather promote the single guy who is 100% dedicated because he's the one that actually deserves it. That being said if society wants to make themselves better and give hand outs to women for caregiving... I'm all for it. But don't twist it any other way. What's going on here is a charity. A kind gift to caregivers who are not entitled to said gift in any way. Don't come to me as if women deserve promotions because they have kids to take care of or social pressures to deal with. That's just garbage. Also don't get me started on the pressures on men, it's magnitudes larger than it is for women, magnitudes and we don't go around screaming for a handout.
HelloNurse 3y ago
It can be considered an imperfect intermediate step towards gender equality: women that are more or less voluntarily burdened with child care are very likely to work part time, instead of quitting completely because part time is out of the question (which is a far worse discrimination than a "glass ceiling" with respect to high level promotions).
- corethree 3y ago
  Yeah this is fair. It makes sense. Equality is about equal pay for equal results. Not handouts. People forget that although the handout might be good for society overall it is unfair to the person giving out the handout. I don't think this step is intermediate. It is the most fair step possible.
  - HelloNurse 3y ago
    Further improvement would involve a more balanced workplace culture than promoting only "dedicated" workaholics (and expecting those workaholics to be men).
    - corethree 3y ago
      No it makes sense to promote dedicated workaholics to the highest echelons. They have maximal impact to business. If those workaholics are women then those women very much need to be promoted as well. The data actually shows this is already happening. It shows that when you control for the choices women make about child care... the gender pay gap is largely negligible. https://freakonomics.com/podcast/the-true-story-of-the-gender-pay-gap/ https://freakonomics.com/podcast/the-true-story-of-the-gende... This is an interesting podcast about the topic if you haven't hear of this concept already. They interview a female statistical professor from Harvard about it.
      - kuchenbecker 3y ago
        > Female Statistics Professor Claudia Goldin, the economic "Nobel" Laurette this year. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claudia_Goldin https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claudia_Goldin

hnbad 3y ago

Interesting to see someone on HN of all places equate longer hours with "working harder" or being more qualified for senior roles. Speaking from personal experience with a cohort of Millenial dads: a lot of "women working less to prioritize family" comes down to women being expected to be caregivers and men typically not having experienced the same socialization from a young age and feeling overwhelmed, thus retreating into work to both avoid care work and be able to justify it by being "the provider". It's pretty telling when we chastise women for "not pulling their weight" at work when they're also typically expected to do most of the household chores, social labor (e.g. keeping track of birthdays, relationships and preferences throughout the family's social circles) and caregiving but don't call out deadbeat dads like Elon Musk who sire new children left and right while being completely incapable of maintaining a relationship with any of the mothers and abandoning any child that calls him out for his bullshit once they get old enough to form an opinion. And as a reminder: Musk holds several official positions including multiple C-tier ones and still spends an ungodly amount of time shitposting on Twitter. If you think that the time he spends on any one of his jobs on average accounts for more than the equivalent of a 4 day work week while also being this heavily distracted and spread thin, you're being ridiculous.

corethree 3y ago
>Speaking from personal experience with a cohort of Millenial dads: a lot of "women working less to prioritize family" comes down to women being expected to be caregivers and men typically not having experienced the same socialization from a young age and feeling overwhelmed, thus retreating into work to both avoid care work and be able to justify it by being "the provider". It is not an expectation. It's been part of human behavior across all cultures since history. Men are the workers and women are the care givers and home makers. The behavior is seen so consistently across cultures that it's safe to say it's more then social conditioning. It's biological. Humans are flexible enough to behave outside of biological parameters but you are in utter denial if you deny the evidence that spans across ancient history and all cultures across the world. But this is besides the point. The point is if I run a business, my objective is to succeed. My objective is not to hire some women who wants to do a 4 day work week to support a child. It may be beneficial to the mother to give her advantages but it is not beneficial to me as the person who spent my hard earned cash paying her. >It's pretty telling when we chastise women for "not pulling their weight" at work when they're also typically expected to do most of the household chores, social labor (e.g. keeping track of birthdays, relationships and preferences throughout the family's social circles) and caregiving but don't call out deadbeat dads like Elon Musk who sire new children left and right while being completely incapable of maintaining a relationship with any of the mothers and abandoning any child that calls him out for his bullshit once they get old enough to form an opinion. As a person who risked all my resources on a business how the hell does house hold chores apply to me? If the woman demands to have the same pay and rank as the hard working guy who works 5 days a week because she spent a lot of time caring for some kid that has nothing to do with my business, how is that fair to me? It's asking for a handout. And sure if the government wants to force me to give a hand out to make society a better place than great. I support this. What I don't support is this lie that what was given out is anything but a hand out. It is extra help and it is not something that was earned with fair trade. The person who devotes the most effort and has the best results deserves the most reward. >If you think that the time he spends on any one of his jobs on average accounts for more than the equivalent of a 4 day work week while also being this heavily distracted and spread thin, you're being ridiculous. If you're asking me what I think is ridiculous I would say your response to me is ridiculous. Not being snarky here, your hypothetical implies ridiculousness and I respond with another hypothetical about your statement. What does Elon have to do with anything? If Elon sired 50 children and abandoned them, that's evil and wrong, but that's completely orthogonal to my business. I pay someone for results and Elon delivers. What he does outside of that is a completely different thing. In general Men spend more time and more effort at work so they tend to deliver better results and thus they get more senior positions. It's obvious if women choose a 4 day work week they're just not as into it as men and thus they get paid less and get less senior positions. Not all women make the choice to take care of children. A good number of women choose to do what the men do and when you control for that the data shows that the gender pay gap largely disappears. https://freakonomics.com/podcast/the-true-story-of-the-gender-pay-gap/ https://freakonomics.com/podcast/the-true-story-of-the-gende... I support equal pay and standards for the women who deliver equal results as men. Are you saying you don't support this? You support unequal standards? You support handouts for women when they raise kids? It's a valid thing to support. But don't call it what it isn't. It is a gift and not something women are entitled to.
- Pyrobyte 3y ago
  I completely agree, so often people claim about this pay gap between men and women, we see that there are complaints about football pay and stuff but really women models get paid more then men models, quite frankly that just makes sense, there are differences between us and simply some jobs are just better done by men and others by women, this is isn't inequal it's just the way it is. Ignore my name by the way
- twobitshifter 3y ago
  I actually do support handouts for women or men raising kids. This social labor goes unpaid but it’s extremely valuable for society. Instead we are following the economic arrow pointing us towards an arrangement where childcare is farmed out to chaotic day cares.
  - corethree 3y ago
    >This social labor goes unpaid but it’s extremely valuable for society It's valuable to you as a person who has kids. You will note the majority of people in the US will not have kids. Why should I pay for your kid? You have to put yourself in the shoes of the person who doesn't have kids. Or the business owner who actually has to hand out the money. I support the payment because I have kids, but at the same time I'm able to play the devils advocate and see the other side of the equation rather then blindly support something in my own self interest.
    - twobitshifter 3y ago
      I don’t have kids. It’s valuable for the greater good of society not just a child. You have to live with the eventual adults that develop under a system that supports caregivers or one that does not. If we don’t look beyond the first effect we can miss that. To further the point, the decision whether to have a kid can be influenced by how that affects someone’s own finances. These programs put a finger on the scale to encourage having children, something that financially to the individual doesn’t make sense with modern jobs. Many countries have negative pop growth today and that *will* be a national financial problem

isoprophlex 3y ago

> If women choose not to work as hard as men, then we shouldn't try to equalize their participation in senior roles This is a myopic, reductionist take. You're missing the forest for the trees. It is not a matter of women choosing not to work as hard as men, it is a matter of society being structured in such a way that men are disproportionately not involved in raising a family, and women being delegated to the task of caregiver even though they themselves would like more equality. Economically, women are pressured to stay out of the workplace for 6+ months, whereas men get a couple of days-weeks to stay at home.

corethree 3y ago
Your the frog living in the well. Think bigger. For eons and millennia society has been structured this way since forever. It's only in the recent three or four decades has there been a cultural shift. Men have been taking home the income since they were hunting, farming and now programming. Women taking home the money is a new thing. That only happened in the last 50 or so years. And the social pressures aren't even forcing them to take home the money. To women, it's just an option. For men the pressure is worse. For men it's a social requirement... the survival of the family unit still rests entirely on their shoulders. But again this is besides the point. The main question here is, how does this new opportunity for women to make money suddenly make women deserve a hand out when they choose divide the time devoted to these new opportunities with care giving? You do less work and as a business owner I have to give you the same pay because you're entitled to it? How does that logic work out? It doesn't. If an employee works 4 days a week and obviously has his/her attention divided to other endeavors how does he/she deserve a promotion? Are you kidding? Maybe in her eyes she deserves a promotion, but as a business owner I'd rather promote the single guy who is 100% dedicated because he's the one that actually deserves it. That being said if society wants to make themselves better and give hand outs to women for caregiving... I'm all for it. But don't twist it any other way. What's going on here is a charity. A kind gift to caregivers who are not entitled to said gift in any way. Don't come to me as if women deserve promotions because they have kids to take care of or social pressures to deal with. That's just garbage. Also don't get me started on the pressures on men, it's magnitudes larger than it is for women, magnitudes and we don't go around screaming for a handout.

HelloNurse 3y ago

It can be considered an imperfect intermediate step towards gender equality: women that are more or less voluntarily burdened with child care are very likely to work part time, instead of quitting completely because part time is out of the question (which is a far worse discrimination than a "glass ceiling" with respect to high level promotions).

corethree 3y ago
Yeah this is fair. It makes sense. Equality is about equal pay for equal results. Not handouts. People forget that although the handout might be good for society overall it is unfair to the person giving out the handout. I don't think this step is intermediate. It is the most fair step possible.
- HelloNurse 3y ago
  Further improvement would involve a more balanced workplace culture than promoting only "dedicated" workaholics (and expecting those workaholics to be men).
  - corethree 3y ago
    No it makes sense to promote dedicated workaholics to the highest echelons. They have maximal impact to business. If those workaholics are women then those women very much need to be promoted as well. The data actually shows this is already happening. It shows that when you control for the choices women make about child care... the gender pay gap is largely negligible. https://freakonomics.com/podcast/the-true-story-of-the-gender-pay-gap/ https://freakonomics.com/podcast/the-true-story-of-the-gende... This is an interesting podcast about the topic if you haven't hear of this concept already. They interview a female statistical professor from Harvard about it.
    - kuchenbecker 3y ago
      > Female Statistics Professor Claudia Goldin, the economic "Nobel" Laurette this year. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claudia_Goldin https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claudia_Goldin