5 ms·

The fruits of the feminist revolution: eight hours a day in a cubicle.

32 points by asciilifeform 17y ago

erlanger 17y ago
It's never been easy to have your cake and eat it too.
- pj 17y ago
  I had a single mother and she loathed the feminist revolution. She said it was because of the feminists going back to work and creating dual income families that it was financially more difficult on single parents. Before the feminist revolution, most families survived just fine on a single income, that of the father.
  - mahmud 17y ago
    Well, that's just a single anecdote isn't it? I am a fucking Arab and I can tell you this; our economies are paralyzed because Arab nations are operating at half speed since women are pretty much outside the work force (or if they're working, they're underpaid, under utilized, or most bloody likely, worked to exhaustion but uncredited.) The fact that here we have a group of men discussing the "problems" of feminism doesn't mean feminism is bad. It just means you guys don't like it; which is fine, you're not supposed to like an ideology that's out to make your social model of a benevolent-patriarch-at-the-helm obsolete. I come from a place where men's judgment and leadership has consistently failed.
    - sofal 17y ago
      Well, that's just a single anecdote isn't it? Was it presented as data? I didn't realize that. Also, I didn't see any real data on your theory of Arab nations being at half speed because of the lack of women in the work force. The fact that here we have a group of men discussing the "problems" of feminism doesn't mean feminism is bad. Did anyone make that conclusion here, even implicitly? You're not supposed to like an ideology that's out to make your social model of a benevolent-patriarch-at-the-helm obsolete. Who are you talking to? Who here has put forward an ideology like that? You obviously have very strong feelings on this subject. Let's keep it real and civil.
      - mahmud 17y ago
        Allow me first to apologize to pj, he bore the brunt of my harsh out pour against a problem that I have to face on a daily basis. And in the same breath, allow me to express my disinterest in discussing feminism as a movement any further, without the presence of a good representation of its sole subjects, i.e. women. Without a sizeable representation of women in this forum there could never be a good dialogue about feminism ("good" here being highly subjective.) I say this because I remember the days of the Bush administration, when an inbreeding of ideas and a biased "discussion" amongst a gang of highly like minded outsiders delivered the final verdict on the future of "us" Muslims, their de facto colonial subjects. I read columns from across the American political "divide" everyday, each supporting the last in mutual self-congratulating orgy, each explaining our "problem" and proposing very similar "solutions" to impose upon us; sometimes threatening, other times sympathetic, but always patronizing and paternalistic in its tone. I never was a feminist, not still (I couldn't be even if I wanted to!) but at least now I understand not to "think" for the Other. Women's demand for self-empowerment is an issue squarely in their hands. They could argue amongst themselves all they want, but I as a man have learned better not to offer any unsolicited "feedback", having never experienced their condition. Now let me answer you sofal. Also, I didn't see any real data on your theory of Arab nations being at half speed because of the lack of women in the work force I said above that I was addressing a "problem that I have to face everyday". The problems of the Arab world are numerous, but one thing we can both be certain of: the total absence of the female voice from every kind of leadership. Even with the lack of sufficient research and data, I can look across the landscape, or at least my Thunderbird contact list of several hundred executives, and I can't help but wonder if things would have been better with just one woman in their midst. Also, asking for data about the Arab world is akin to sophistry, seeing how half of the nations there are U.S.-sanctioned tyrannies, and the other half are closed despotic regimes that would never allow for unfavorable research to see the light of day (you could do it once, but that's the end of your presence there.) Western "press" is safe to ignore the BIG offenders and abusers of human rights, and it can only wiggle its little "democratic" tail against a few, hand-selected and Western-approved "bad guys".
        pj 17y ago
        Hey mahmud, no offense taken. You're just speaking with passion. I don't take it personally.
  - calambrac 17y ago
    I've never crunched the numbers myself or seen any formal studies, but the perception that the second income in dual-income families usually goes right into costs that would have been avoided had someone stayed at home is pretty widespread. I don't mean to be rude by asking, but did your mother have the kind of help that married couples can take for granted (say, from extended family), or did she have to do it all herself?
    - pj 17y ago
      My grandmother helped watching me sometimes. Financially she did it all herself. I had a step dad two times, neither of them worked much though. Contrary to the idea that two parents are better than one, I thought life was better when it was just mom and me. My grandmother was around a while. She watched over me during the summers sometimes and lived with us a while, but she wasn't reliable, so mom paid for baby sitting a couple years. The rest of the time I was latch key. She also finished her degree while I was growing up. She'd take me to the college library with her. I was always frustrated by the lack of books for kids my age, but somehow I endured. From the time I was 5, she had a good job with the government, so life was pretty stable. Except for the name calling, I only felt the effects of not having more money once. We were on the way back from her university and we stopped at a convenience store and I asked for a sandwich. She said we couldn't afford it. They were a special sandwich I really loved and not being able to afford it, I thought they must have cost $20 or something. Years later, when I was in high school I stopped and got one of those sandwiches for $2 and it hit me all of a sudden that we didn't have a lot of money. Except for that, I always felt like I had all I wanted. Looking back, had we had more money, I probably would have had a computer growing up. Maybe I'd be better at programming, or maybe I'd have gotten bored with it. Who knows. I lived pretty rural, so our house was more than big enough. I worked during the summers as quickly as I could, so I had my spending money. I think it actually helped me to be honest. Not having a lot as a kid and finding happiness anyway has helped me live frugally as an adult as well. I find cheap ways to run my startup as well. I think today, most families have dual incomes and both parents are away most of the day. Mom was at home with me as much as parents are at home now, maybe even more. I never really felt like anything was missing.
    - mattm 17y ago
- mahmud 17y ago
  Feminism gives women the right to choose their destiny in life. If they want grueling 8 hours in a cubicle over the "comfort" of being "taken care of" by a loving, all-providing Man, so be it. Men constantly choose to have their cake and eat it too. They have careers, but they also have families. Men's right to choose the life they want is never questioned, so why are the life choices of women under such scrutiny?
  - wensing 17y ago
    "Men constantly choose to have their cake and eat it too. They have careers, but they also have families." There's not much special about have-ing a family. Almost anyone can create children and/or get married. The question for both men and women is: what are we missing by allowing ourselves to be taken out of the home and sent our separate ways? I (a man) ended up leaving my cube job fully convinced that a startup run from or very close to home is the next step towards my goal of a family business.
    - mahmud 17y ago
      It's in the hands of the couple to choose which one of them needs to stay at home with the kids at any given day. (e.g. a female executive need not quit her high-paying job of if her novelist husband can stay at home during the day with the kids.) However, it's often the case that women end up sacrificing their dreams and quit their jobs to raise kids, when the division of household labor is in fact an artificial one, a remnant of cultures and societies past.
      - deleted 17y ago
        [deleted]
      - wensing 17y ago
        It's a sad day when raising your kids equates to sacrificing your dreams. Sad day for the kids.
  - erlanger 17y ago
    > Men constantly choose to have their cake and eat it too. The point of that expression is that it's impossible. Neither men nor women can stay home with their kids while working a full day at the office.
danteembermage 17y ago
I don't think having children really fits well with the feminist paradigm. While tricky, it's certainly possible to change the world and raise children at the same time, I just get the sense that a personification of the women's movement might say something like "Well you certainly can do that, and more power to you if you can!". It seems like child-rearing is relegated to a hobby that distracts from the real work, like gardening or going to the symphony. I don't think there are many people actively hostile toward mothering, but it just doesn't seem all that valued in society. For example, suppose an individual took child development and nutrition classes because it would help make them a better parent. Would that garner the same lever of respect as, say, studying for the bar or going to french club. If parenting isn't valued, but a lot of it still has to go on, the result isn't a happy contented society.
- arebop 17y ago
  It is relatively easy to measure the outcome of studying for the bar or going to French club. Clear benefits seem like a good explanation for society's willingness to ascribe high value to these activities, compared to activities with less measurable results.
- lionhearted 17y ago
  I learned a lot about parenting from an amazing man I met in Barcelona. His son and he were staying in the same hotel as me, they were traveling Europe together after he just graduated college. His son met a really cute Czech girl in Spain, so Dad rightfully gave him space. But the father and I really hit it off, so we'd sit at a Spanish bar and eat tortilla sandwiches and drink coffee and we had some really interesting chats. He's a very successful real estate developer from Los Angeles, even post-crash. He converts rental properties into vacation properties, which is a lot more work but can generate 3x-7x stable rents. (Of course, you've got to rent/clean/maintain/etc - definitely more active and risky money than standard landlording). He told me about his family. After having his second son was born about 15 years ago, his wife got depressed and wanted to get out of the marriage and family life ASAP. She was breaking down mentally, basically, and wanted to run - fast. So the man says, "I understand, that's fine, but you can't support yourself right now, and you'll need to be able to do that before we can get divorced. Even if I take the kids, they'll still spend a lot of time with you and you need to have a clean, nice place and income so they can have a nice life with you and be proud." She got into a nursing program, and got either a certificate or a degree in nursing. By the time she finished 2-4 years later, she's cleared up. They had another child and went on to both be very happy and successful. She pulls down $80k/year now as a nurse, and they've done very well investing too. His son seems like a hell of a guy, thoughtful, mature, intelligent, cultured, poised. The Dad's a very cool guy too. A good family. One thing he told that made a lot of sense - "Sebastian, you've got to understand, kids are the most selfish, ungrateful creatures in the world when they're young. All they do is demand, demand, demand things, and they're not grateful at all. Later they realize and appreciate what you've done for them, but a woman who just raises kids pours in so much effort for so little gratitude and appreciation and respect...." He goes on to explain how the regular praise, promotions, and the steady paycheck are instant rewards and validations from work, and help a person's self esteem. He thinks any woman would do well to have at least some part time work or project that she gets respect, appreciation, and validation from - because kids won't provide that until they're 20+, and you need to not go crazy in the meantime. Maybe now in the West, society doesn't value parenting as much as traditionally, so women get even less respect for being a good parent now. Not sure about that myself - if that's true, then it's even harder to raise children than historically. But his points really resonated with me - I've talked about it with all the girls I've dated. I personally date two types of women - hyper-driven, top of the game, ambitious high performance girls, and quite traditional, feminine, nurturing girls - and usually not much in between. But all of them, with some talking to, come to agree about keeping a part time project to help women stay sane. If I make my life with a traditional woman who is happy to be just a good mother and keep a good household, it'll still be good for her to do a little bit of work for the validation that comes from that. Even something small like teaching a one hour class twice a week, or doing some flower arranging for a couple local small businesses. Same with driven women - they'd go crazy if they completely hung up their spurs and only raised kids. I'm probably a bit more traditional than most American men from the international cities - I place a lot of respect and value on having a woman who is very in tune with my emotions after a long day, can cook well, can clean and mend clothing well, and has mastered the other domestic skills, which I consider quite invaluable. It's less important to have hyper-intellectual conversations with my girl or play Chess with her - I get plenty of that with my male friends anyway. But even if I take the most traditional, old world European or Japanese girl to make a life with, I still think something that provides her that instant positive feedback is very good for happiness.
arithmetic 17y ago
What an insanely long, winding article. Get to the point already!
- bkovitz 17y ago
  In these post-Lisa-Belkin-New-York-Times-Magazine-“Opt-Out” years, we’ve now learned the worst: even female Harvard graduates are fleeing high-powered careers for a kinder, gentler Martha Stewart Living. Not only does the Problem Have a Name, it has its own line of Fiestaware! What? Huh? This article is written in such überhip language, I can't tell what it says.
  - nickpp 17y ago
    Same here - after trying hard to read each long, pointless paragraph I was wondering: what is she saying? I gave up after the first third of the article.
    - Gormo 17y ago
      There are few things worse than reading an article consisting almost entirely of obscure references, proper names, and (presumably) complex ideas, linked together by an extremely subjective thought process, and expressed in such an idiosyncratic style that only the author herself is likely able to make sense of it, while to anyone else it resembles the output of a victim of Wernicke's aphasia.
      - pj 17y ago
        For those curious, as I was: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Receptive_aphasia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Receptive_aphasia (also known as Vernicke's aphasia). Basically, these patients get words mixed up and speak funny sentences like the article. I too thought it was superfluous hipster talk and got bored reading it. The point of the article in my mind was that after women's fighting for the choice to work, now they want to choose not to work.
wyw 17y ago
Upvoted for the title. The article not so much.
- alex_c 17y ago
  What an incredibly succinct way to sum up how the decline in quality on social news sites occurs. Thank you, I'll have to remember that phrase.
mynameishere 17y ago
So much naval-gazing. Feminism is on Darwin's chopping block. Simple as that. Unfortunately, the cleaver is mighty slow.
nico 17y ago
Men are not better than women or the other way around. But we are different, that's just a fact. We have to behave accordingly then, instead of trying to ignore those differences.
- likpok 17y ago
  http://www.psy.fsu.edu/~baumeistertice/goodaboutmen.htm http://www.psy.fsu.edu/~baumeistertice/goodaboutmen.htm Interesting article talking about gender differences.
  - whimsy 17y ago
    This was also on HN a while back: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=589346 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=589346 I find the version linked on HN, from dennisdutton.com, much more readable. EDIT: Your link could be considered "closer to the source," though, seeing as it's the author's webpage rather than Dutton's.
jimbokun 17y ago
"it does not take well-developed political skills to rule over creatures smaller than you are, weaker than you are, and completely dependent upon you for survival or thriving." Truly spoken as someone who has not spent much time caring for children. At least, I hope not. The implication that being smaller than you gives you more power, only makes sense if you are going to consistently use physical force to ensure compliance. The fact they are completely dependent on you only gives you power if you are willing to keep basic necessities from them to coerce them into compliance. Otherwise, political skills are going to be pretty darn handy at times.
Tichy 17y ago
Isn't the talk about feminism mostly useless? I think technology is what really drives things forward. Frozen food, washing machines, dishwashers, industrially produced cheap clothes and stuff like that is what "frees" women, not some philosophical discussions. In former times it was not just evil, suppressive men that constructed society as it was. The role models were necessary for survival.
sielskr 17y ago
Let's not forget that the OP does not reveal what women think, it reveals what women who went to Harvard and live in Manhattan think.

32 points by asciilifeform 17y ago

erlanger 17y ago

It's never been easy to have your cake and eat it too.

pj 17y ago
I had a single mother and she loathed the feminist revolution. She said it was because of the feminists going back to work and creating dual income families that it was financially more difficult on single parents. Before the feminist revolution, most families survived just fine on a single income, that of the father.
- mahmud 17y ago
  Well, that's just a single anecdote isn't it? I am a fucking Arab and I can tell you this; our economies are paralyzed because Arab nations are operating at half speed since women are pretty much outside the work force (or if they're working, they're underpaid, under utilized, or most bloody likely, worked to exhaustion but uncredited.) The fact that here we have a group of men discussing the "problems" of feminism doesn't mean feminism is bad. It just means you guys don't like it; which is fine, you're not supposed to like an ideology that's out to make your social model of a benevolent-patriarch-at-the-helm obsolete. I come from a place where men's judgment and leadership has consistently failed.
  - sofal 17y ago
    Well, that's just a single anecdote isn't it? Was it presented as data? I didn't realize that. Also, I didn't see any real data on your theory of Arab nations being at half speed because of the lack of women in the work force. The fact that here we have a group of men discussing the "problems" of feminism doesn't mean feminism is bad. Did anyone make that conclusion here, even implicitly? You're not supposed to like an ideology that's out to make your social model of a benevolent-patriarch-at-the-helm obsolete. Who are you talking to? Who here has put forward an ideology like that? You obviously have very strong feelings on this subject. Let's keep it real and civil.
    - mahmud 17y ago
      Allow me first to apologize to pj, he bore the brunt of my harsh out pour against a problem that I have to face on a daily basis. And in the same breath, allow me to express my disinterest in discussing feminism as a movement any further, without the presence of a good representation of its sole subjects, i.e. women. Without a sizeable representation of women in this forum there could never be a good dialogue about feminism ("good" here being highly subjective.) I say this because I remember the days of the Bush administration, when an inbreeding of ideas and a biased "discussion" amongst a gang of highly like minded outsiders delivered the final verdict on the future of "us" Muslims, their de facto colonial subjects. I read columns from across the American political "divide" everyday, each supporting the last in mutual self-congratulating orgy, each explaining our "problem" and proposing very similar "solutions" to impose upon us; sometimes threatening, other times sympathetic, but always patronizing and paternalistic in its tone. I never was a feminist, not still (I couldn't be even if I wanted to!) but at least now I understand not to "think" for the Other. Women's demand for self-empowerment is an issue squarely in their hands. They could argue amongst themselves all they want, but I as a man have learned better not to offer any unsolicited "feedback", having never experienced their condition. Now let me answer you sofal. Also, I didn't see any real data on your theory of Arab nations being at half speed because of the lack of women in the work force I said above that I was addressing a "problem that I have to face everyday". The problems of the Arab world are numerous, but one thing we can both be certain of: the total absence of the female voice from every kind of leadership. Even with the lack of sufficient research and data, I can look across the landscape, or at least my Thunderbird contact list of several hundred executives, and I can't help but wonder if things would have been better with just one woman in their midst. Also, asking for data about the Arab world is akin to sophistry, seeing how half of the nations there are U.S.-sanctioned tyrannies, and the other half are closed despotic regimes that would never allow for unfavorable research to see the light of day (you could do it once, but that's the end of your presence there.) Western "press" is safe to ignore the BIG offenders and abusers of human rights, and it can only wiggle its little "democratic" tail against a few, hand-selected and Western-approved "bad guys".
      - pj 17y ago
        Hey mahmud, no offense taken. You're just speaking with passion. I don't take it personally.
- calambrac 17y ago
  I've never crunched the numbers myself or seen any formal studies, but the perception that the second income in dual-income families usually goes right into costs that would have been avoided had someone stayed at home is pretty widespread. I don't mean to be rude by asking, but did your mother have the kind of help that married couples can take for granted (say, from extended family), or did she have to do it all herself?
  - pj 17y ago
    My grandmother helped watching me sometimes. Financially she did it all herself. I had a step dad two times, neither of them worked much though. Contrary to the idea that two parents are better than one, I thought life was better when it was just mom and me. My grandmother was around a while. She watched over me during the summers sometimes and lived with us a while, but she wasn't reliable, so mom paid for baby sitting a couple years. The rest of the time I was latch key. She also finished her degree while I was growing up. She'd take me to the college library with her. I was always frustrated by the lack of books for kids my age, but somehow I endured. From the time I was 5, she had a good job with the government, so life was pretty stable. Except for the name calling, I only felt the effects of not having more money once. We were on the way back from her university and we stopped at a convenience store and I asked for a sandwich. She said we couldn't afford it. They were a special sandwich I really loved and not being able to afford it, I thought they must have cost $20 or something. Years later, when I was in high school I stopped and got one of those sandwiches for $2 and it hit me all of a sudden that we didn't have a lot of money. Except for that, I always felt like I had all I wanted. Looking back, had we had more money, I probably would have had a computer growing up. Maybe I'd be better at programming, or maybe I'd have gotten bored with it. Who knows. I lived pretty rural, so our house was more than big enough. I worked during the summers as quickly as I could, so I had my spending money. I think it actually helped me to be honest. Not having a lot as a kid and finding happiness anyway has helped me live frugally as an adult as well. I find cheap ways to run my startup as well. I think today, most families have dual incomes and both parents are away most of the day. Mom was at home with me as much as parents are at home now, maybe even more. I never really felt like anything was missing.
  - mattm 17y ago
mahmud 17y ago
Feminism gives women the right to choose their destiny in life. If they want grueling 8 hours in a cubicle over the "comfort" of being "taken care of" by a loving, all-providing Man, so be it. Men constantly choose to have their cake and eat it too. They have careers, but they also have families. Men's right to choose the life they want is never questioned, so why are the life choices of women under such scrutiny?
- wensing 17y ago
  "Men constantly choose to have their cake and eat it too. They have careers, but they also have families." There's not much special about have-ing a family. Almost anyone can create children and/or get married. The question for both men and women is: what are we missing by allowing ourselves to be taken out of the home and sent our separate ways? I (a man) ended up leaving my cube job fully convinced that a startup run from or very close to home is the next step towards my goal of a family business.
  - mahmud 17y ago
    It's in the hands of the couple to choose which one of them needs to stay at home with the kids at any given day. (e.g. a female executive need not quit her high-paying job of if her novelist husband can stay at home during the day with the kids.) However, it's often the case that women end up sacrificing their dreams and quit their jobs to raise kids, when the division of household labor is in fact an artificial one, a remnant of cultures and societies past.
    - deleted 17y ago
      [deleted]
    - wensing 17y ago
      It's a sad day when raising your kids equates to sacrificing your dreams. Sad day for the kids.
- erlanger 17y ago
  > Men constantly choose to have their cake and eat it too. The point of that expression is that it's impossible. Neither men nor women can stay home with their kids while working a full day at the office.

danteembermage 17y ago

I don't think having children really fits well with the feminist paradigm. While tricky, it's certainly possible to change the world and raise children at the same time, I just get the sense that a personification of the women's movement might say something like "Well you certainly can do that, and more power to you if you can!". It seems like child-rearing is relegated to a hobby that distracts from the real work, like gardening or going to the symphony. I don't think there are many people actively hostile toward mothering, but it just doesn't seem all that valued in society. For example, suppose an individual took child development and nutrition classes because it would help make them a better parent. Would that garner the same lever of respect as, say, studying for the bar or going to french club. If parenting isn't valued, but a lot of it still has to go on, the result isn't a happy contented society.

arebop 17y ago
It is relatively easy to measure the outcome of studying for the bar or going to French club. Clear benefits seem like a good explanation for society's willingness to ascribe high value to these activities, compared to activities with less measurable results.
lionhearted 17y ago
I learned a lot about parenting from an amazing man I met in Barcelona. His son and he were staying in the same hotel as me, they were traveling Europe together after he just graduated college. His son met a really cute Czech girl in Spain, so Dad rightfully gave him space. But the father and I really hit it off, so we'd sit at a Spanish bar and eat tortilla sandwiches and drink coffee and we had some really interesting chats. He's a very successful real estate developer from Los Angeles, even post-crash. He converts rental properties into vacation properties, which is a lot more work but can generate 3x-7x stable rents. (Of course, you've got to rent/clean/maintain/etc - definitely more active and risky money than standard landlording). He told me about his family. After having his second son was born about 15 years ago, his wife got depressed and wanted to get out of the marriage and family life ASAP. She was breaking down mentally, basically, and wanted to run - fast. So the man says, "I understand, that's fine, but you can't support yourself right now, and you'll need to be able to do that before we can get divorced. Even if I take the kids, they'll still spend a lot of time with you and you need to have a clean, nice place and income so they can have a nice life with you and be proud." She got into a nursing program, and got either a certificate or a degree in nursing. By the time she finished 2-4 years later, she's cleared up. They had another child and went on to both be very happy and successful. She pulls down $80k/year now as a nurse, and they've done very well investing too. His son seems like a hell of a guy, thoughtful, mature, intelligent, cultured, poised. The Dad's a very cool guy too. A good family. One thing he told that made a lot of sense - "Sebastian, you've got to understand, kids are the most selfish, ungrateful creatures in the world when they're young. All they do is demand, demand, demand things, and they're not grateful at all. Later they realize and appreciate what you've done for them, but a woman who just raises kids pours in so much effort for so little gratitude and appreciation and respect...." He goes on to explain how the regular praise, promotions, and the steady paycheck are instant rewards and validations from work, and help a person's self esteem. He thinks any woman would do well to have at least some part time work or project that she gets respect, appreciation, and validation from - because kids won't provide that until they're 20+, and you need to not go crazy in the meantime. Maybe now in the West, society doesn't value parenting as much as traditionally, so women get even less respect for being a good parent now. Not sure about that myself - if that's true, then it's even harder to raise children than historically. But his points really resonated with me - I've talked about it with all the girls I've dated. I personally date two types of women - hyper-driven, top of the game, ambitious high performance girls, and quite traditional, feminine, nurturing girls - and usually not much in between. But all of them, with some talking to, come to agree about keeping a part time project to help women stay sane. If I make my life with a traditional woman who is happy to be just a good mother and keep a good household, it'll still be good for her to do a little bit of work for the validation that comes from that. Even something small like teaching a one hour class twice a week, or doing some flower arranging for a couple local small businesses. Same with driven women - they'd go crazy if they completely hung up their spurs and only raised kids. I'm probably a bit more traditional than most American men from the international cities - I place a lot of respect and value on having a woman who is very in tune with my emotions after a long day, can cook well, can clean and mend clothing well, and has mastered the other domestic skills, which I consider quite invaluable. It's less important to have hyper-intellectual conversations with my girl or play Chess with her - I get plenty of that with my male friends anyway. But even if I take the most traditional, old world European or Japanese girl to make a life with, I still think something that provides her that instant positive feedback is very good for happiness.

arithmetic 17y ago

What an insanely long, winding article. Get to the point already!

bkovitz 17y ago
In these post-Lisa-Belkin-New-York-Times-Magazine-“Opt-Out” years, we’ve now learned the worst: even female Harvard graduates are fleeing high-powered careers for a kinder, gentler Martha Stewart Living. Not only does the Problem Have a Name, it has its own line of Fiestaware! What? Huh? This article is written in such überhip language, I can't tell what it says.
- nickpp 17y ago
  Same here - after trying hard to read each long, pointless paragraph I was wondering: what is she saying? I gave up after the first third of the article.
  - Gormo 17y ago
    There are few things worse than reading an article consisting almost entirely of obscure references, proper names, and (presumably) complex ideas, linked together by an extremely subjective thought process, and expressed in such an idiosyncratic style that only the author herself is likely able to make sense of it, while to anyone else it resembles the output of a victim of Wernicke's aphasia.
    - pj 17y ago
      For those curious, as I was: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Receptive_aphasia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Receptive_aphasia (also known as Vernicke's aphasia). Basically, these patients get words mixed up and speak funny sentences like the article. I too thought it was superfluous hipster talk and got bored reading it. The point of the article in my mind was that after women's fighting for the choice to work, now they want to choose not to work.

wyw 17y ago

Upvoted for the title. The article not so much.

alex_c 17y ago
What an incredibly succinct way to sum up how the decline in quality on social news sites occurs. Thank you, I'll have to remember that phrase.

mynameishere 17y ago

So much naval-gazing. Feminism is on Darwin's chopping block. Simple as that. Unfortunately, the cleaver is mighty slow.

nico 17y ago

Men are not better than women or the other way around. But we are different, that's just a fact. We have to behave accordingly then, instead of trying to ignore those differences.

likpok 17y ago
http://www.psy.fsu.edu/~baumeistertice/goodaboutmen.htm http://www.psy.fsu.edu/~baumeistertice/goodaboutmen.htm Interesting article talking about gender differences.
- whimsy 17y ago
  This was also on HN a while back: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=589346 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=589346 I find the version linked on HN, from dennisdutton.com, much more readable. EDIT: Your link could be considered "closer to the source," though, seeing as it's the author's webpage rather than Dutton's.

jimbokun 17y ago

"it does not take well-developed political skills to rule over creatures smaller than you are, weaker than you are, and completely dependent upon you for survival or thriving." Truly spoken as someone who has not spent much time caring for children. At least, I hope not. The implication that being smaller than you gives you more power, only makes sense if you are going to consistently use physical force to ensure compliance. The fact they are completely dependent on you only gives you power if you are willing to keep basic necessities from them to coerce them into compliance. Otherwise, political skills are going to be pretty darn handy at times.

Tichy 17y ago

Isn't the talk about feminism mostly useless? I think technology is what really drives things forward. Frozen food, washing machines, dishwashers, industrially produced cheap clothes and stuff like that is what "frees" women, not some philosophical discussions. In former times it was not just evil, suppressive men that constructed society as it was. The role models were necessary for survival.

sielskr 17y ago

Let's not forget that the OP does not reveal what women think, it reveals what women who went to Harvard and live in Manhattan think.