Hacker News Reader

Comment by hnaccy | Hacker News Reader

>Crucially, a gap in overtime acceptance rates barely exists for those who are married. As we can see in Figure 10, married male operators with dependents are only 0 to 2 percentage points more likely to accept overtime than married women with dependents. This suggests that those who are married with dependents, men and women, are able to divide up caretaking responsibilities at home in a way that allows them to work overtime at similar levels.

The decline of two parent households and rise of single motherhood strikes again.

View on HN

> rise of single motherhood strikes again.

The study addressed this. There are sexist gender roles at play even among single parents, potentially. (To wit, you didn’t lament the rise of “single fatherhood.”)

From the study,

> These results suggest that single men are able to take care of their dependents by working more overtime, possibly to pay for child support or to finance other forms of child care. Single women, on the other hand, appear to be making the decision to do the caretaking themselves rather than to caretake through additional earnings. It is, of course, possible that for women this situation is not as much a personal preference as it is a constraint.

There are sexist gender roles at play even among single parents, potentially.

How can we determine those aren't preferential choices?

(To wit, you didn’t lament the rise of “single fatherhood.”)

There is an apparent bias against men getting custody of the children. There also isn't a lamentation about men's under-representation in certain medical fields in certain countries.

It is, of course, possible that for women this situation is not as much a personal preference as it is a constraint.

Why is it a constraint? How are they being coerced? Are you implying that some mothers would rather spend more time working, make more money, and have less time with their children, but they are being compelled to do otherwise? There are some wealthy mothers who do this by hiring caretakers.

You are now interrogating a quote from the study. I’m not sure what the Harvard dept. of Economics would think about your “wealthy mother” solution to patriarchal gender roles, but it seems a little weak to me.

I’m not sure what the Harvard dept. of Economics would think about your “wealthy mother” solution

Where did I cite that as a "solution?" You are revealing your biases and projections quite clearly. Rather, it's actually support for your position, with regards to the possible range of natural behaviors observed in our society. You asserted that women would choose to work more, then spend more on child care, but they are somehow less free to make that choice. How is that so?

here is the constraint: if i ask for help watching the kids because i need to work, relatives come running. if my wife asks the same, no-one volunteers.

> The study addressed this. There are sexist gender roles at play even among single parents, potentially. (To wit, you didn’t lament the rise of “single fatherhood.”)

Isn't that mostly caused by a sexist judiciary. I know that as a man in America in the event of a divorce it is very unlikely that I would get majority custody of my children. From what I've seen it takes a lot for a woman to lose custody if she wants it.

The custody gap is largely caused by different desires about custody. This is still an issue, but it is the same issue as the wage gap due to different career choices. When men and women fight for custody equally, they tend to get joint custody.

I agree that there is an interesting and potentially informative symmetry between the custody gap and the wage gap. They both describe situations that different groups find deeply unfair, but can be ascribed in large part to "different choices". It might be fruitful to take a more holistic view to understand why the "individual choice" explanation is so unsatisfying to many.

When I last looked it up, the US data indicated that 91% of custody cases are decided without recourse to the family court system. Of the 9% that go to family court system, 5% are decided after a custody evaluation, and the remaining 4% go to trial. Only 11% of custody cases go to mediation.

It appears that the majority of custody decisions are made by the parents themselves, without recourse to the court, or even to an external mediator. If the judiciary is causing a disparity in custody outcomes, it must be indirectly.

>the US data indicated that 91% of custody cases are decided without recourse to the family court system

The men know that if it does go to trial, it will cost a lot of money and they will probably still lose the kids. There's no point in playing a rigged game.

Reminds me of the (trite?) conservative talk points that if you 1. finish high school 2. don't have children outside of marriage 3. hold down a job, then you should more or less have a successful middle class existence.

1. finish high school 2. don't have children outside of marriage 3. hold down a job, then you should more or less have a successful middle class existence.

What's wrong with that? I think that's a fine way to plan one's life. It's over simplifying some things. Not all high school educations are equally valuable, for one thing, which then also relates to point 3.

People who don’t start out committed to socially conservative ideas are suspicious about the direction of the causality.

I test center-left politically. However, I still think that education and stable family life is quite important for raising children to be successful. As for the direction of the causality, Chinese emigrants the world over have arrived on distant shores with very little money, often less that the general populace and often less even than the local poor. Yet they prospered, maintained a high regard for the value of education, then in subsequent generations have sent their children to good schools. This has been happening for many hundreds of years.

The mother's side of my Cane River creole ex-girlfriend's family had values like this. I knew some very graceful people of African American descent who also had values like that. In my experience, it's such values, however they come about, which are the causal origin.

I find your apparent preconceived notions on who gets to hold which ideas disturbing. Ideas are ideas, not flags or arm-bands.

You seem pretty worked up. I am also left of center politically and a fan of education and marriage and the whole bourgeois shebang. That doesn’t really have anything to do with my comment, which describes the state of the debate.

My apologies. I thought you were labeling me based on which side gets which ideas. I'm very glad that you are not doing that.

I can see how I gave you that impression, sorry. My personal guess re causality is “it’s complicated” (always a good bet).

For anyone who wants to read more about this claim it's most commonly referred to as the "success sequence".

Isn't the quoted passage talking about two parent households as being a phenomenon?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com