4 ms·

That’s a very sexist take, and not supported at all by the data. There are plenty of very successful women raising families. I have a relative where both the f

That’s a very sexist take, and not supported at all by the data. There are plenty of very successful women raising families. I have a relative where both the father and mother are very successful engineers working full time. Their two girls are doing amazing and going to top schools. Raising children is full time, but both parents can and should be a part of it.

geraldwhen 3y ago
Two girls. 2.1 is replacement rate. Some do manage to have 2-3 kids! But many do not. And the cultures that do not push women into careers are more able to grow their population. Is there any country on earth with a neutral or positive population growth where women are encouraged to pursue careers? As far as I know, not a single country that has a significant female career participation rate has a 2.1+ child rate per family outside of immigration.
- crazydoggers 3y ago
  Okay, well I did a little googling and came across this data.. it does seem having 3 or more children equates with negative effects on women being able to have a career. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/women-three-children_n_895517/amp https://www.huffpost.com/entry/women-three-children_n_895517... But it seems to me the issue is not that women are choosing to have careers, but that the work/career culture is not supporting women choosing to have children. So things like better maternity and paternity leave, allowing women to take years off, or part time without consequence to career, etc. So takeaway should be, support our population by better supporting working mothers.
  - flextheruler 3y ago
    I’d love to live in a world where I can take years off from work without consequences to my career. Let me know if you find one.
  - Rapzid 3y ago
    That's a very sexist take. We should support working fathers allow them to take years off work with no consequences.
  - Jensson 3y ago
    > But it seems to me the issue is not that women are choosing to have careers, but that the work/career culture is not supporting women choosing to have children. So things like better maternity and paternity leave, allowing women to take years off, or part time without consequence to career, etc. Countries that did all of those things as much as possible still fall below replacement rates, so no that isn't a sexist take that is just reality. I'm not saying we should force women to not have careers, just that the women who have careers will eventually go extinct, which is their choice and I fully support that. I don't see a reason to force people to spread their genes. Instead of forcing career women to be unhappy at home with children, the women who are happy at home with children will eventually replace them.
  - giantg2 3y ago
    "So things like better maternity and paternity leave, allowing women to take years off, or part time without consequence to career, etc." A lot of these have been implemented in some European countries. They don't seem to be that effective on fertility rate given they are still below replacement.
llm_trw 3y ago
There is no industrialized society at replacement fertility. So far the west is getting by on immigrants from countries it has destroyed. What happens when all of Africa falls below replacement rates in the next 15 years? Keep in mind that _you_ will need doctors and nurses to keep you alive once you're past 60. At this point soylent green is the only retirement policy people with less than 10 million in the bank can expect.
SunlitCat 3y ago
Although it is pretty sexist by itself, that statement contains interesting points to talk about. Motherhood by itself can be a full time job, if the partner and the society doesn't help. Like enough (and affordable) daycare centers, kindgartens, schools that take care of children after school hours, i.e. offer all-day care or activities. And as you said "very successful engineers". What's about not so successful people, making good money but not being able to afford the options around them? Yeah! So you are totally right, that statement was pretty sexist, but to really help couples raising children there is still a lot of work do to.
- geraldwhen 3y ago
  Countries with better support for working women have even lower birth rates. It is my belief that you are fundamentally misunderstand the issue.
  - SunlitCat 3y ago
    Fair point, I was talking about the statement that "Motherhood is a full time job" not the other point you made about women choosing careers over motherhood. You are right that there are studies showing that especially in Northern European countries where women receive more support in raising children have lower birth rates. But there was no statement as to why this is so (at least that was the last time I was interested in the topic, maybe there is something new?). So yeah, I didn't feel confident enough to tackle that point of yours, sorry.
    - geraldwhen 3y ago
      There is no passing the buck. Raising children is a full time job, mother or father aside. And it is a rewarding job, unlike many middle management paper pushing “bullshit” jobs talked about here frequently. Someone has to raise children. I believe a loving, caring parent would want to do that themselves and or with their immediate family structure. I would not want strangers raising my children.
AdrianB1 3y ago
I have seen a few cases of successful women at work. But what surprised me was to find out that most of them took a break of 10-15 years to raise the kids, then returned to the workforce with full focus. I have a friend that did that after 14 years and found that Project Management is the same as before she left, so ramping up to full speed was very easy. She was promoted (again) less than 1 year after her return to work.

geraldwhen 3y ago

Two girls. 2.1 is replacement rate. Some do manage to have 2-3 kids! But many do not. And the cultures that do not push women into careers are more able to grow their population. Is there any country on earth with a neutral or positive population growth where women are encouraged to pursue careers? As far as I know, not a single country that has a significant female career participation rate has a 2.1+ child rate per family outside of immigration.

crazydoggers 3y ago
Okay, well I did a little googling and came across this data.. it does seem having 3 or more children equates with negative effects on women being able to have a career. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/women-three-children_n_895517/amp https://www.huffpost.com/entry/women-three-children_n_895517... But it seems to me the issue is not that women are choosing to have careers, but that the work/career culture is not supporting women choosing to have children. So things like better maternity and paternity leave, allowing women to take years off, or part time without consequence to career, etc. So takeaway should be, support our population by better supporting working mothers.
- flextheruler 3y ago
  I’d love to live in a world where I can take years off from work without consequences to my career. Let me know if you find one.
- Rapzid 3y ago
  That's a very sexist take. We should support working fathers allow them to take years off work with no consequences.
- Jensson 3y ago
  > But it seems to me the issue is not that women are choosing to have careers, but that the work/career culture is not supporting women choosing to have children. So things like better maternity and paternity leave, allowing women to take years off, or part time without consequence to career, etc. Countries that did all of those things as much as possible still fall below replacement rates, so no that isn't a sexist take that is just reality. I'm not saying we should force women to not have careers, just that the women who have careers will eventually go extinct, which is their choice and I fully support that. I don't see a reason to force people to spread their genes. Instead of forcing career women to be unhappy at home with children, the women who are happy at home with children will eventually replace them.
- giantg2 3y ago
  "So things like better maternity and paternity leave, allowing women to take years off, or part time without consequence to career, etc." A lot of these have been implemented in some European countries. They don't seem to be that effective on fertility rate given they are still below replacement.

llm_trw 3y ago

There is no industrialized society at replacement fertility. So far the west is getting by on immigrants from countries it has destroyed. What happens when all of Africa falls below replacement rates in the next 15 years? Keep in mind that _you_ will need doctors and nurses to keep you alive once you're past 60. At this point soylent green is the only retirement policy people with less than 10 million in the bank can expect.

SunlitCat 3y ago

Although it is pretty sexist by itself, that statement contains interesting points to talk about. Motherhood by itself can be a full time job, if the partner and the society doesn't help. Like enough (and affordable) daycare centers, kindgartens, schools that take care of children after school hours, i.e. offer all-day care or activities. And as you said "very successful engineers". What's about not so successful people, making good money but not being able to afford the options around them? Yeah! So you are totally right, that statement was pretty sexist, but to really help couples raising children there is still a lot of work do to.

geraldwhen 3y ago
Countries with better support for working women have even lower birth rates. It is my belief that you are fundamentally misunderstand the issue.
- SunlitCat 3y ago
  Fair point, I was talking about the statement that "Motherhood is a full time job" not the other point you made about women choosing careers over motherhood. You are right that there are studies showing that especially in Northern European countries where women receive more support in raising children have lower birth rates. But there was no statement as to why this is so (at least that was the last time I was interested in the topic, maybe there is something new?). So yeah, I didn't feel confident enough to tackle that point of yours, sorry.
  - geraldwhen 3y ago
    There is no passing the buck. Raising children is a full time job, mother or father aside. And it is a rewarding job, unlike many middle management paper pushing “bullshit” jobs talked about here frequently. Someone has to raise children. I believe a loving, caring parent would want to do that themselves and or with their immediate family structure. I would not want strangers raising my children.

AdrianB1 3y ago

I have seen a few cases of successful women at work. But what surprised me was to find out that most of them took a break of 10-15 years to raise the kids, then returned to the workforce with full focus. I have a friend that did that after 14 years and found that Project Management is the same as before she left, so ramping up to full speed was very easy. She was promoted (again) less than 1 year after her return to work.