Interesting article. I tend to agree with a lot of the points; but I'm not really knowledgeable in the subject so I can't really say I have a good opinion either way.

"But after decades of feminism and Nordic engineering, the continuing female tropism toward shorter work hours suggests that that view is either false or irrelevant. Even the determined Swedes haven’t been able to get women to stick around the office."

That conclusion can not be drawn, because the presented data doesnt cover these "decades". In fact, there isnt a single line in this article that adresses any temporal development of the wage gap or the employment rates of women in full- and part-time jobs. Unless I missed something.

I've heard similar things in the past- my dad did a lot of hiring for his old company at one point, and said he was more likely to hire men or single, childless women, because
a) they are easier to move around, and
b) they're more likely to spend extra time at the office.
This seems perfectly reasonable to me.
Personally, (if my future husband agrees) I plan on being a stay at home mom from the time my children are born until the youngest one enters elementary school. I might work part time as I have fewer young children (my mom taught music at the preschool my younger sister went to). Once they're in school all day, I'll probably go back to work. At least, that's the plan. :)

Good article. Especially the parts where it explains how statistics were being misinterpreted/ misread.

"This seems perfectly reasonable to me."

le sigh

jp, I understand your sigh there, but did you read the actual article? I'd be curious to hear your thoughts.

The man sighs at the woman's response.

LOL

I agree that women have it tough in the business world, but businesses have it tough too when they invest time in an employee that ends up being out on maternity leave for 6 months......or even worse, goes out on maternity leave for 6 months, then she decides to be a stay-at-home mom.

Of course, all businesses and business owners are evil, greedy, chauvinistic fucks (especially ones run by white males).


It's pretty interesting that a relatively conservative woman is OK with this disparity while a liberal man is not.

yeah Ive only read about half, wasn't going to post my thoughts till I get the time to go through it all - I don't see anything wrong with breaking down the numbers, but I do see a problem with promoting acceptance of discrimination as if its inevitable. Not saying that's the point of the article, but it might be a consequence. Anywho, like everything, there's a balance there somewhere. I wont be able to go through it today unfortunately, so give me time to digest it.

I'm surprised that you find that obvious, thrax...

Most conservatives I know want a very clearly defined role of what a woman should do/ be like: namely stay at home and raise many children, while it should be very clear that the person who (hunts and kills animals or nowadays) earns the money is the caring husband.
This "earning gap" between men and women is more or less a historical product (?) of that conservative view...

In my opinion...