Quote:
Women have it bad actually. They get the short end of the stick more often then not simply because if they want kids, they have to sacrifice a portion of their career to do it. A man doesn't need to take off work to carry around a 6lb parasite for a few months and then spend another 6+ months looking after the damn thing. All he needs to be is supportive and buy the mother shiny things occasionally to be a good husband.
Meanwhile the woman gets passed by in the corporate ladder or loses out on experience and opportunities. In the end, this results in lower pay, less opportunities for growth and a general hinderence to their career.
Yeah, women have a choice if they want kids. It's not feminism or mysoginy that holds them back, it's biology and the nature of the game.
|
That is the woman's side what about the business? The woman can decide to have children at any time and take 8-12 weeks off and possibly not even come back. What if she is in a critical role for you company what do you do? You have time, effort and training invested in this person and you cannot replace them if they go... by law. I have seen many women who were smart, savvy, and on the fast track leave to have their first child and come back and say sorry I am staying home. Not a real risk with the man. I know female managers that are gun shy of promoting younger women just for that reason. Even if they do come back they are never the same hard charger they were before.
I alway thought feminism was about choices. They wanted the option of a career, staying home or both. They pretty much do. Men have no other real option except work. As much as the article says other women are the ones that look down on her for being careerist, men are much less kind to the stay at home dad as well as the ingraned stigma associated.
Sounds to me like she interpreted can with must and has had a career chip on her shoulder for a long time. What is the point of all the success if you have no one to share it with.... duh...
