4 ms·
There are a lot of other things too. We live in what I call the "economic order of fake-gender-neutrality" where women get ahead by foregoing having families.
by einhverfr 13y ago
There are a lot of other things too. We live in what I call the "economic order of fake-gender-neutrality" where women get ahead by foregoing having families. This means that a certain kind of woman is going to be interested in taking high-risk long-hours work like being a tech founder. Not someone like my grandmother who was a tenured astrophysicist while raising four children.
I know this is probably not going to go over well on HN given the connections to VC's but a major part of the problem is that "tech founders" means businesses caught in the VC exit strategy. But I think a lot of the really disruptive businesses of tomorrow are going to be lifestyle businesses, and if you want to attract women to coding, I think that lifestyle businesses are a better deal for most people. The potential payoffs are lower, it is true, but the freedom is higher, and the security is better in many cases. And with a lifestyle business, the freedom to have a family, and to integrate family and work time, makes the challenges that face child-rearing men and women (but they affect women at a younger age) easier to handle.
I think that as one starts to show that these lifestyle businesses are really viable in technology, that we will see women come (and truth be told, probably become the majority of coders in open source software).
- vezzy-fnord 13y agoWe live in what I call the "economic order of fake-gender-neutrality" where women get ahead by foregoing having families. I wouldn't really call this a women's issue, so much as a universal issue for people of all backgrounds. Having a family simply requires a drastic lifestyle shift no matter what (well, if you intend on being a decent spouse and/or parent, at least), as well as certain sacrifices to one's career. I like the proposal of lifestyle technology businesses, though I'm not entirely sure how they would work. Unless you're self-sufficient, in which case it's never been a problem.
- bjelkeman-again 13y agoWe run something which could be considered a lifestyle tech business. Several of our staff, including women, have had kids and come back to work with us. One of our developers is in fact coming back from 6 months paternity leave this month.
- einhverfr 13y agoBTW, I am referring to lifestyle business specifically as one not tied to the VC exit strategy. I.e. a business is a lifestyle business as long as you are neither trying to be an acquisition target nor trying to build up to go public. The point is that you don't have the same kinds of relentless pressure in that environment that you do in a vc-backed start-up. Those are different environments. If you are running one, great. I wish you the best of luck.
- bjelkeman-again 13y agoThanks and yes. We have no exit strategy nor would we be able to go public, as we are non-profit foundation. Fast growing and doing good in the world is a good place to be.
- quinnchr 13y agoYes having a family is something that affects everyone. But on average the burden of childcare is significantly biased towards the mother. Men spend about 33% as much time on house work and about 42% as much time on childcare as women do.
- einhverfr 13y ago> "Having a family simply requires a drastic lifestyle shift no matter what (well, if you intend on being a decent spouse and/or parent, at least), as well as certain sacrifices to one's career." This is true. However two things: 1. Men can delay that shift longer than women and still have families, and 2. The burdens are more flexible for men even at their worst. Men can, for example, reschedule paternity leave shifting it around by a few days in a crisis. Women cannot do the same for maternity leave. So the burdens are not the same even when you get rid of social questions of family structure and gender impacts of that.