Feminist hysteria is causing the infantilization of women

[monkeygirl]

TL;DR

 

[Odine]

TL;DR

 

Probably should. Both were quite interesting posts

[Destiny Skywalker]

Two really good articles that I've read today (they link to each other) on how women really can't have it all.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/20/opinion/almeling-radin-richardson-egg-freezing/index.html?hpt=hp_bn7 (Apple's covering egg-freezing for their female employees)

 

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2012/07/why-women-still-cant-have-it-all/309020/?single_page=true (on how work-life balance really isn't possible and how feminists need to quit pretending it is, it's an either/or)

 

I find myself in the same position as the second author. My husband is actually in the same position, too, in terms of work-life balance. I recently passed up an opportunity to apply to a management position that I'm pretty sure I would've gotten. Part of it is because I'm more technically inclined. Management sounds incredibly boring to me. But I'm good at it, and I think I would do it for the right reasons (the good of my people and the company, rather than for myself like so many looking to go into management). The other reason is that I have no desire to be attached to a phone at all hours of the day and weekends and to basically be owned by my company. I've told my managers that I can't do mandatory overtime like some people have been asked to in the past, for the simple fact that my husband already works 50-60 hours a week and someone has to pick up the kids by 5:30 PM. I want to have a life outside of my career, and quite honestly, I think 40 hours a week at my job is plenty. I want to enjoy my children and pursue my own interests outside of work. Instead, I've chosen the technical career path, which is something I enjoy and I find it easier to have that work-life balance I desire. If I move far enough up that ladder, I will likely need to be "on-call" more, but from what I've seen of our senior technical people, it's nowhere near as bad as it is for the managers. Part of my reasons are admittedly couched in my experience as the child of a small business owner.

 

My husband is struggling with his desire to spend time with our kids while they're little, and to be successful in his career. His dad is VP of Production and Manufacturing at his company (you've probably heard of some of their products, but would be unfamiliar with their parent company), so I think he feels like he has to live up to that. He's told me his real career goal is to make as much money in as little time as possible so he can retire earlier. That sets alarm bells off for me, because it's not like he doesn't get paid decently and he could definitely put in less "effort" and still retire well. He works his tail off, and he does not allow himself to fail, at his own personal cost (mostly lack of sleep right now). He's setting himself up to get into management in a few years, and it will likely involve a great deal of travel. I've warned him that the kids are only little for so long, but also that the "little" years are not the only important ones. It's important that he be around while they're teenagers, when they're pre-teens, etc. I would honestly rather he hit his career stride later in life, which is what his bosses had the benefit of. But I think he's well on track to hit it in his late 30s/early 40s instead of mid-50s. I don't want him to regret that when the kids have left the house, and we're retired. I think my dad feels like he missed out on my childhood, and now I live across the country and he STILL has to work so it's not like he can come visit me whenever he likes. It's there for men, too.