Inadvertently becoming the change you wish to see in the world
blogs.msdn.microsoft.com
blogs.msdn.microsoft.com
Yes, role-models tend to be people who are well-known. Yes, Bill Gates is rich. No, not every single dad started to drive their children to school.
The stroy is still about choosing to do something you were not required to do, being a precursor, and initiating change that others emulated.
The secondary harmonics of the moral of the story is still that people are, dozens of years after the fact, holding grudges and bias toward Bill Gates and Microsoft.
In the other, it is someone inconveniencing someone else because they don't want to do something.
This is quite common: (caveat: this link is a UK-specific post) https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2014/feb/12/how-do...
I'm worried about the thinking that 30 minutes isn't far at all. Living a 15 minute bicycle ride from work is worth a lot to me, and not just emotionally: http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2011/10/06/the-true-cost-of-c...
In the grand scheme of things though, I think it is far. We have huge, sprawling cities that serve as the hub for most business, yet barely anyone can afford to live there. Among other things. But that's a discussion for another day.
> It's the right message
What's the right message here, exactly? Because I'm missing it.
I highly doubt it was middle-class dads.
The story basically implies that the dads were acting as a cartel, probably subconsciously, where as long as all of them maintained that the burden of switching contexts from childcare concerns to work concerns was so huge that almost any amount of inconvenience for the wives was a smaller consideration.
Gates inadvertently broke the cartel and showed that even for someone with long hours and a lot of responsibility, there were at least some situations where the burden on the husband driving 2 days a week was smaller than the burden on the wife having 0 days a week without the drive.
It's possible that in fact the burden on even the busiest wife was smaller than the burden on her husband, that Bill and Melinda were a unique exception to this rule, and the wives only succeeded at gaining concessions because of a false analogy (if Gates can do it you can do it).
I don't see why you would choose to believe that though. I the alternative—there were at least a couple wives who were doing more than their fair share, and husbands benefitting from cartel effects—much easier to accept.
I also work full-time. If I wasn't working you can bet your ass I'd be driving the kids to school without complaint. (I don't complain now)
I understand the message that he was trying to portray with this post, but man, does it miss the mark.