Where are the house husbands when we need them?
I’ve never managed to get married. I always wanted to and to have children, preferably several. That’s one reason I went into a field in which the pay is good, I’ll be honest.
Well the pay was all right for a few years. But I think having a family is probably a good thing for a man’s career. The other’s say, “He’s got a family to support, so let’s cut him some slack.” Besides, single life does take a certain amount of time even if a confirmed bachelor like me tends to minimize that time.
Of course as of the past several years I have been working to overthrow everything you ever were told about life and love in favor of something based on evidence. I don’t know if it’s fair to get married and then suddenly change the rule.
I like children. When we have family get togethers I will play with them while the other adults socialize in more adult ways. They think I’m a saint, but it’s not true. I just like to play like a child does, you know, informal rules, lots of action, nobody’s ego on the line.
The redoubtable editor of SCIENCE has pointed out (Marcia McNutt Leveling the Playing Field SCIENCE vol. 341 no. 6144 July 26, 2013 page 317 that women do not advance as far in their careers in science as men do. When a woman has a child she will take time off to be with them, to the detriment of her career trajectory. Men do not face the same penalty.
Well it’s got to be fixed. Either women need to get credit for doing the most important thing there is to do, providing a future, or men need to start being house husbands. It might work, really. I mean men not only suffer no penalty for having children, they get a career boost. Surely that idea can be extended to women or encourage men to mind the children. Children would rather play with children than with adults; I can understand that. But they do seem to do well with adult attention. Maybe next reincarnation I’ll get it right.
There have been 57 visitors over the past month.