[hksh]

I agree with much of what you say except that "women have different needs". I would say each person has different needs and to divide into the male/female binary is a fairly restrictive definition of gender as I have come to understand it.

My wife and I have twins a little less than 2 years old, we are both ~35, but we live in rural-ish NH not SV. She has taken the last 2+ years off for the pregnancy and to function as primary caregiver while I continue to work. While I don't feel a need to work (perhaps a "need to project" would be closer) I do feel a need to provide for my kids while being with them as much as possible. As such I have chosen a low-stress, 9-5 SWE role optimizing for family time over career advancement. At least for the foreseeable future.

From what we can tell she seems to be the only woman from her MBA class that has taken so much time off from career to have children. I don't want to speak for my wife but my impression is that she feels torn by desires to have a high-power career and to spend all the time with the kids (though pandemic parenting in NE with no third spaces available means that some days it would be an easy choice). Maybe that is society having an outsize impact on her internal valuation of family rearing, but I am not sure.

The point I am making is that kind of gender bifurcation doesn't fit the mold that I (a cis-gendered, white man) fit so I find it less plausible that a less-represented person would match it either as my "group" [more accurate term requested] has largely set the social norms.

I acknowledge I could be an outlier.

[vxNsr]

> The point I am making is that kind of gender bifurcation doesn't fit the mold that I (a cis-gendered, white man) fit so I find it less plausible that a less-represented person would match it either as my "group" [more accurate term requested] has largely set the social norms.

I don’t understand this conclusion at all. You just described a fairly standard situation, and then said trying to apply historical understandings of gender don’t work... and yet they fit perfectly within the story you provided.

To me the issue has always been allowing other to define success for you.

If you find success is being a high powered executive who spends 90hrs a week working, then do that, and don’t let someone else tell you that having kids is the only metric of success.

If your definition of success is raising children who are normal humans and can function in society and make it a better place, then do that; and don’t let anyone tell you that success can only be found in working and being valued at ever higher dollar amounts.

Your definition of success is exactly that: YOURS not anyone else’s and you shouldn’t take anyone else’s definition and try to apply it to yourself.

I think most of society’s current problems stem from everyone using some amorphous societal understanding of success that no one has defined, but thinks everyone else knows. You be your best as you understand that to be. That’s the only path to happiness. Trying to conform to some gender philosopher’s definition is a rabbit hole that leads no where good.

[hksh]

Fair point. You are totally right that my description of myself aligns with historical understandings of gender. I was failed to be explicit about my inclusion of my experience of our work/domestic/(implicit and explicit) power balance in my usage. That I "don't feel like I fit" traditional roles definitely contains bias as that is also the view I would like to have of myself.

The reason we appear to have the 1950s responsibility split is my wife sold her business (not HN-levels of success, hence me keeping my job) concurrent with discovering she was pregnant. She didn't have the next thing lined up so she has decided to enjoy being a full-time mother. When she finds the right fit there is a good chance that I will jump to being a full-time parent to support her career aspirations from the domestic side. Presently I do 5 hours of childcare on a normal workday (0600-0900[alone], 1700-1900[with wife]). I would far prefer to do 10 (the entirety of their waking hours).

> To me the issue has always been allowing other to define success for you.

I still find it embarrassingly easy to fall subject to "keeping up with the Jonses" thinking. I hope that ends as some point as I don't want to pass that on to my kids the way it was to me. It sounds like you have gotten over this hurdle so I would definitely like to hear how you did it.

[throwawayboise]

You have describe a situation where you and your wife decided on priorities in your life and acted accordingly. You both decided that personal career goals were secondary to raising your kids. It's a mystery to me why this is not seen as normal. Everything involves trade-offs. It's not possible to be present, involved parents and spend 60-80 hours a week on a career. Choose one or the other, and don't complain about how unfair it is.

[centimeter]

"Women have different needs" is both extremely accurate and extremely predictive. Taking issue with the statement because it's not perfectly correct 100% of the time is, at best, exceedingly pedantic.

[hksh]

I should have used the full statement "...and desires" as it is the desires part that I quibble with the most.

If you are mean predictive from the perspective of big data, e.g. differences in search term rates of those that identify as men vs those that identify as women (in as much as search terms represent the modern capture of an individual's needs), maybe. I can believe without presented evidence that there is positive predictive power there and that it is currently being used/exploited.

It is worth calling out that is reductive with the hope that it will trigger a shift in language used to be more inclusive.