A man who takes 6 months of paternity is a loser – Palantir founder Joe Lonsdale(fortune.com)
fortune.com
A man who takes 6 months of paternity is a loser – Palantir founder Joe Lonsdale
https://fortune.com/2021/10/28/joe-lonsdale-parental-leave-six-months-loser-tweet-venture-capital/
72 comments
I don't know if Jon is a father but I would absolutely not be surprised if, when he becomes one, he does take a healthy paternity leave.
Many of these people are very "do as I say, not as i do" types.
Many of these people are very "do as I say, not as i do" types.
Joe has every incentive to convince other people to minimize paternity leave. Morality is for the working class.
This is sad but true.
> "I don't know if Jon is a father..."
The article mentions that he is the father of three.
It's also worth noting that the article title omits part of the tweet; the actual text says "...any man in an important position...", so he's not talking about ordinary workers.
(On a meta level, it's actually kind of regrettable that there's a HN guideline against encouraging posters to read the article before commenting since it's clear that so many don't.)
The article mentions that he is the father of three.
It's also worth noting that the article title omits part of the tweet; the actual text says "...any man in an important position...", so he's not talking about ordinary workers.
(On a meta level, it's actually kind of regrettable that there's a HN guideline against encouraging posters to read the article before commenting since it's clear that so many don't.)
If you've got Jon's money you can just buy help for your family. So from the perspective of a rich guy who can afford a live-in nanny, I'm not surprised he thinks 6 months of paternity leave is extravagant.
But for normal people, you're lucky if you have some family to help out a day or two in the first few weeks. In the case of my wife and I for our son, we were flying solo. And that's assuming a normal birth - if your new baby has to spend time in the NICU... that's extra nerve wracking and emotionally taxing even though technically there are trained staff "taking care" of your baby.
But for normal people, you're lucky if you have some family to help out a day or two in the first few weeks. In the case of my wife and I for our son, we were flying solo. And that's assuming a normal birth - if your new baby has to spend time in the NICU... that's extra nerve wracking and emotionally taxing even though technically there are trained staff "taking care" of your baby.
> from the perspective of a rich guy who can afford a live-in nanny
I'm not arguing for or against Jon but your statement is quite indicative of large social issue. Family. Not long ago after childbirth, aunts, sisters and grandparents would be around to help the young couple take care of the baby - and their sanity - while keeping things moving. Alas, we've reduced family to an expense line item. All in the name of progress. Whatever that means.
So maybe I will stand with Jons of the world, albeit from a different perspective.
I'm not arguing for or against Jon but your statement is quite indicative of large social issue. Family. Not long ago after childbirth, aunts, sisters and grandparents would be around to help the young couple take care of the baby - and their sanity - while keeping things moving. Alas, we've reduced family to an expense line item. All in the name of progress. Whatever that means.
So maybe I will stand with Jons of the world, albeit from a different perspective.
You can buy a nanny for your kid. You can't buy a dad.
True, although in my experience the first 6 months of being a dad is less about being a male role model and more focused on supporting mom and making sure the baby is healthy, safe and comfortable.
It's laying the groundwork, though. You can't be a good role model unless your kid trusts you, and that trust starts being built at birth.
If the father isn't there for the first 6 months of child rearing, but the mother, friends, family, and hired nannies are, is it clear that a child will face lifelong repercussions?
These aren't all-or-nothing effects. Kids are resilient and adaptable, and it's never too late to start building a relationship.
But it is a relationship. If dad hasn't been there in the past, kid's got no reason to go to him for comfort or guidance in the future. That starts at birth, with holding & skin-to-skin contact, and continues through daily caregiving.
But it is a relationship. If dad hasn't been there in the past, kid's got no reason to go to him for comfort or guidance in the future. That starts at birth, with holding & skin-to-skin contact, and continues through daily caregiving.
They’re scared of the imperceivably small dent this would make in their profit.
Asking this guy’s opinion on the matter is like asking the fox about security for the hen’s house.
Asking this guy’s opinion on the matter is like asking the fox about security for the hen’s house.
Article says that he's a father of 3 but is committed to defending traditional gender roles.
i mean, all the effort you put in and the owner puts in goes to making the owner richer, so yea it makes sense for the owner to say that but it doesn't make sense for workers to believe it.
This rings very true for me as well. Family time never feels wasted but staying up all those extra hours to ship better code never seems to be worth it in the end.
Well he probably thinks the same of "mere employees" who could do better with this time, such as founding a compagny as his
In fairness, I doubt you ever switched jobs with billions in the bank. I assume as a Palintir founder, Joe has.
Beware of men who soapbox about masculinity. Often, they lack confidence and are doing it as a result of their own personal struggles with masculinity.
If you value masculinity, look for the "quiet professional" type role models. The ones doing masculine things and not posting brags, rants, and videos on YouTube or social media about it. And do[1] your own masculine things[2].
One positive role model I can refer people to is Pat McNamara on YouTube. He's got tons of "masculine cred" (retired Delta Force operator, killer workout regime and work ethic) but is in touch with his feelings, enjoys gardening and bird watching, and is humorously self-deprecating, which I respect tremendously.
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=pat+mcnamara+ba...
1. If you want to do masculine things. You don't have to. There are a huge variety of people out there and a huge variety of personal and cultural definitions of what being a man, or their particular identified gender, is.
2. My masculine things are BJJ, sewing, cooking (exploring Thai currently), smoking meats, woodworking, not belittling others, and lifting weights. Yours may or may not be different.
If you value masculinity, look for the "quiet professional" type role models. The ones doing masculine things and not posting brags, rants, and videos on YouTube or social media about it. And do[1] your own masculine things[2].
One positive role model I can refer people to is Pat McNamara on YouTube. He's got tons of "masculine cred" (retired Delta Force operator, killer workout regime and work ethic) but is in touch with his feelings, enjoys gardening and bird watching, and is humorously self-deprecating, which I respect tremendously.
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=pat+mcnamara+ba...
1. If you want to do masculine things. You don't have to. There are a huge variety of people out there and a huge variety of personal and cultural definitions of what being a man, or their particular identified gender, is.
2. My masculine things are BJJ, sewing, cooking (exploring Thai currently), smoking meats, woodworking, not belittling others, and lifting weights. Yours may or may not be different.
I'm pretty sure that when I'm on my deathbed, I won't wish for just one more zoom meeting, but I am sure I will wish for a few more minutes with my son.
Yes, that is exactly the scenario to imagine.
It was that line of reasoning that had me switch off the TV two decades ago. (Now I just need to also dial down my internet attention.)
It was that line of reasoning that had me switch off the TV two decades ago. (Now I just need to also dial down my internet attention.)
The outrage cycle is strong with this one.
Is this what social media amplifies? Some dude who makes a statement that is clearly atypical gets hyper focused on while internet “pundits” scream at each other about it?
It’s clearly an extreme statement, made with the perfect intent to stoke outrage, that gets amplified, then Fortune writes an article and it gets linked on HN.
Whatever happens to “wow that’s a dumb statement” then moving on?
Is this what social media amplifies? Some dude who makes a statement that is clearly atypical gets hyper focused on while internet “pundits” scream at each other about it?
It’s clearly an extreme statement, made with the perfect intent to stoke outrage, that gets amplified, then Fortune writes an article and it gets linked on HN.
Whatever happens to “wow that’s a dumb statement” then moving on?
I am some dude. Perhaps you are some dude. Joe Lonsdale and Joe Rogan (in the same Twitter discussion) are not mere dudes — they are opinion leaders. People respect the opinions of successful founders, and hence PG is quoted all the time. Joe Rogan makes insane money simply by discussing his opinions.
You characterize the statement about paternity leave as dumb and clearly atypical, but is it? Paternity leave still appears to be an unpopular idea in the US, or else why hasn't the US moved towards the EU direction?
IMO this tweet was calculated not just for outrage but also for rallying. Rallying is more important than outrage.
You characterize the statement about paternity leave as dumb and clearly atypical, but is it? Paternity leave still appears to be an unpopular idea in the US, or else why hasn't the US moved towards the EU direction?
IMO this tweet was calculated not just for outrage but also for rallying. Rallying is more important than outrage.
The person who made the statement isn't just some random person. He's someone who is in charge of a company that has employees and an HR department. It's a disqualifying statement as a leader.
Strongly disagree that because someone is rich or has a fancy title that their opinion matters.
I mean look at the occasional bizarre tweets from Elon Musk.
It’s ok to look at a tweet and say “thats fucking stupid” and move on.
I mean look at the occasional bizarre tweets from Elon Musk.
It’s ok to look at a tweet and say “thats fucking stupid” and move on.
[deleted]
I followed this on Twitter and think some clarification is in order.
1 - Joe immediately regretted using the word "loser" https://twitter.com/JTLonsdale/status/1453420638832635904
2 - The headline is missing "in an important position." Joe's statement applies to the top leaders of a company/country, not everyone. He's saying people like the CEOs/SVPs of a company, or the presidents/cabinet members of a country, shouldn't take six months off without staying involved even part time. That's a reasonable take that I think most boards and top executives agree with.
It's not like you have to spend your entire life at work and can never see your child. It's just that top leaders at a company have commitments to the company that shouldn't really be dropped for six whole months. If you're in one of these positions, and you take time off (for any reason), it either needs to be a short vacation, or you need to stay involved at the same time (like a vacation where you're still checking in for important meetings).
1 - Joe immediately regretted using the word "loser" https://twitter.com/JTLonsdale/status/1453420638832635904
2 - The headline is missing "in an important position." Joe's statement applies to the top leaders of a company/country, not everyone. He's saying people like the CEOs/SVPs of a company, or the presidents/cabinet members of a country, shouldn't take six months off without staying involved even part time. That's a reasonable take that I think most boards and top executives agree with.
It's not like you have to spend your entire life at work and can never see your child. It's just that top leaders at a company have commitments to the company that shouldn't really be dropped for six whole months. If you're in one of these positions, and you take time off (for any reason), it either needs to be a short vacation, or you need to stay involved at the same time (like a vacation where you're still checking in for important meetings).
The challenge there is that the rest of the org will look to leadership to take cues for what is normalized, what is rewarded, what do the decision-makers value, etc. And if you, as a leader, are not willing and able to take 6 months off for paternity leave, the rest of the organization will take home the message that it is not acceptable for them to take 6 months off. It's the same reason that good leaders avoid sending e-mails or visibly working after hours: if they do it, the message to the org will be that everyone has to do it, and then you burn out your people.
In a well-functioning organization, you (as a leader) should be developing leaders underneath you in all the time that you are not on paternity leave. That way, when you do have a family commitment, they can step into your position and the organization is just fine. This is handy for a lot of reasons other than paternity leave: it increases your bus number, it generates a deep leadership bench in case the organization wants to take on additional initiatives, and it reinforces the idea that leadership is a role and not a person, such that many potential leaders could step into the role and do it well.
In a well-functioning organization, you (as a leader) should be developing leaders underneath you in all the time that you are not on paternity leave. That way, when you do have a family commitment, they can step into your position and the organization is just fine. This is handy for a lot of reasons other than paternity leave: it increases your bus number, it generates a deep leadership bench in case the organization wants to take on additional initiatives, and it reinforces the idea that leadership is a role and not a person, such that many potential leaders could step into the role and do it well.
My kids will be there long after my employment ends. I feel sorry for this guy's kids.
I suppose he never considered that not all men are the bread winners of the family these days.
[deleted]
[deleted]
"In the old days men had babies and worked harder to provide for their future - that’s the correct masculine response."
I think it's pretty clear what he thinks of men who aren't the family bread winners, too.
I think it's pretty clear what he thinks of men who aren't the family bread winners, too.
Without love, all you have to show your worth is money.
Another way to look at this is anyone who can take that much leave is absolutely privilege compared to typical working class people. Back when I was working minimum wage or near minimum wage it was rare to even see women take more than a month off.
Many new fathers would only take one or two days. So at least with my working class background this is a couple of privileged people, from an extremely privileged class complaining about how much they should use their privilege.
The landlord doesn’t care all that much, while you can get three or four months of unpaid leave no working class person can afford to take all that much time.
Many new fathers would only take one or two days. So at least with my working class background this is a couple of privileged people, from an extremely privileged class complaining about how much they should use their privilege.
The landlord doesn’t care all that much, while you can get three or four months of unpaid leave no working class person can afford to take all that much time.
It is also a privilege to have a roof over your head and running water. There are billions of people who don't have those things. I don't see how such ultra-woke comments add to the discussion.
All I'm saying is for most people taking 6 months off is a pipe dream. It's almost insulting for them to even have this argument. These are ultra billionaires who if they wanted to could just stop working to focus on being a parent. None of us normal people can do that
What is possible is always changing. Nothing is static in the world and its always up to people with privledge to stir the pot cuz they arent as dependent on the landlord as the slaves.
Typical for the USA but not for the EU.
Everyone is different, saying someone is x because y just shows he has lots to learn about life.
Au contraire, a man who is able to take 6 months of paternity—in the US at least—has already won.
A man in an important position (as if any other would have the choice) who is able to but chooses not to for fear of being seen as a loser is a chump, though.
A man in an important position (as if any other would have the choice) who is able to but chooses not to for fear of being seen as a loser is a chump, though.
[deleted]
A lot of people believe this (gender essentialism/determinism, evo-psych), but it's still a rare opinion relatively speaking. Mildly interesting but not worth getting upset over (or a Fortune.com piece).
Well, priorities change over time. It's important to be a whole person, and that should mean a healthy family life as well
In this thread, I notice a lot of comments talking about how men who don't take six months off (or don't see the point) lack 'love', want to leave mom 'exhausted', not wanting a 'healthy family life', etc.
These are all misguided.
Indeed, I levy the exact same claim on all those comments.
To claim that men not seeing the point of taking six months off don't want a healthy family life is a symptom of an American / Western family life gone horribly wrong. Mom should have lots of family, friends, etc, who are able to help her with the female aspects of being a new mom, such as breastfeeding, post-birth care, etc. Try as I may, as a husband, I cannot fully give my wife what her mom, my mom, and her female friends can give her. I'm useless at practical breastfeeding advice (and frankly, most lactation consultants are too), don't know how to advise her on vaginal healing, etc. I can read all day long about these things, but I would never think of the stuff her practiced friends and family would tell her.
Because we have a strong family and community, mom doesn't need to rely on dad for child care help. Dad can instead do other things, which are also useful for the family (like making sure mom has enough food to eat). That many women are relying on their husbands for this sort of support just shows the problems with the isolation of the American family.
When I took paternity leave with my youngest daughter (four weeks, and will probably do less next time), I was still working with my eldest daughter. She would help me with various tasks around the house, various projects that I needed help with, etc. In fact, I think I was out of the house more during paternity leave than when I'm working (since we're all WFH during COVID anyway).
Instead of overly long paternity leave (and again, I am not against paternity leave in general, just the months long ones), we need flexible hours for new fathers (way more useful than full day leave) and a culture that embraces actual community (not the forced government community either, but actual human connection).
These are all misguided.
Indeed, I levy the exact same claim on all those comments.
To claim that men not seeing the point of taking six months off don't want a healthy family life is a symptom of an American / Western family life gone horribly wrong. Mom should have lots of family, friends, etc, who are able to help her with the female aspects of being a new mom, such as breastfeeding, post-birth care, etc. Try as I may, as a husband, I cannot fully give my wife what her mom, my mom, and her female friends can give her. I'm useless at practical breastfeeding advice (and frankly, most lactation consultants are too), don't know how to advise her on vaginal healing, etc. I can read all day long about these things, but I would never think of the stuff her practiced friends and family would tell her.
Because we have a strong family and community, mom doesn't need to rely on dad for child care help. Dad can instead do other things, which are also useful for the family (like making sure mom has enough food to eat). That many women are relying on their husbands for this sort of support just shows the problems with the isolation of the American family.
When I took paternity leave with my youngest daughter (four weeks, and will probably do less next time), I was still working with my eldest daughter. She would help me with various tasks around the house, various projects that I needed help with, etc. In fact, I think I was out of the house more during paternity leave than when I'm working (since we're all WFH during COVID anyway).
Instead of overly long paternity leave (and again, I am not against paternity leave in general, just the months long ones), we need flexible hours for new fathers (way more useful than full day leave) and a culture that embraces actual community (not the forced government community either, but actual human connection).
Yeah, the devil is in the details. I have a workmate that surprised me saying he's taking a year off paternity leave, getting a monthly paycheck from the state.
The catch ... his wife is working from home. So in fact she is doing all the hard work child care. He... essentially took a paid-off sabbatical B-)
The catch ... his wife is working from home. So in fact she is doing all the hard work child care. He... essentially took a paid-off sabbatical B-)
If she's working from home, why do you think she's doing all the child care? You think he's just sitting around while she both works and cares for the child?
That's what I imagine. Wife cooking and cradling the baby with one hand while the other types on the computer. Husband in armchair smoking a pipe while reading newspaper.
Why? Has your workmate said anything about sitting in an armchair smoking a pipe while reading a newspaper? Have you observed him doing that?
If your workmate is taking a year of paternity leave and his wife is working from home, my assumption is that he'd be the primary caregiver for diapers, holding the baby, putting him down for naps, cleaning up around the house, and his wife would be nursing the baby and possibly sleeping with it (which is basically a full-time job itself in the newborn phase). That was roughly how we divided responsibilities when I was on paternity leave.
If your workmate is taking a year of paternity leave and his wife is working from home, my assumption is that he'd be the primary caregiver for diapers, holding the baby, putting him down for naps, cleaning up around the house, and his wife would be nursing the baby and possibly sleeping with it (which is basically a full-time job itself in the newborn phase). That was roughly how we divided responsibilities when I was on paternity leave.
Well, doing all those chores would kinda make him... a loser.
I'm very impressed if she was able to take care of an infant alone while working from home. Our family and friends assumed we would be doing that, but the reality was that the baby needed constant attention and so did work!
The rhetoric is harsh, but I can sympathize with him. I would rather my children see how hard I work (it never went unnoticed), and now that they are older I happily include them in on what I do. But those early years should be dedicated to learning how to be social and nice - things women are better at than men on average. Traditionally men have been the workers, women have been the caregivers. This model has worked for centuries.
We are talking about the first 6 months (I don't think your 6 month old will appreciate how much you were working that first 6 months).
I'm no history major but I am pretty sure woman have been as much the workers as men (think the gather component of hunter/gatherer).
I'm no history major but I am pretty sure woman have been as much the workers as men (think the gather component of hunter/gatherer).
This was not a comment on who is or could be better workers. I was simply pointing out what has traditionally worked, and that it's been pretty successful. Also I think your boxing this in to the context of the article by referring to the first six months (and that's fair to do) but I wasn't (I should have made myself more clear).
I'm not a history major, but I'm pretty sure the entire concept of parental leave is completely alien to all of history. Historically, the majority of people were unemployed and worked for themselves on their own farm / craft. Having children just meant doing farm work / artisanship with your children around, not taking a break.
Historically, many children died in the first year. Historically, most family’s had the idea of “heir and a spare”. Historically, women were the only people to provide child care. Historically, women didn’t have a separate career, nor went to school.
Thankfully, we don’t need to be beholden to history.
Thankfully, we don’t need to be beholden to history.
> Thankfully, we don’t need to be beholden to history.
That was kind of the point of my comment. I think my snark went over your head.
That was kind of the point of my comment. I think my snark went over your head.
I'm impressed because nothing you say makes any sense. A 6-month-old child won't understand that you are working, but will feel the mother being exhausted. Early education is not just about being social and nice, and the exclusion of males from early education gets more criticism these days. What has been "traditional" is meaningless today: many women earn more, don't want to have kids etc. Also, saying "this model worked for centuries" is meaningless - you can say the same about slavery, all kinds of discrimination etc. Moreover, we are talking about the freedom to rather than being forced to take a paternity leave. Having more options is always positive.
I have twin two year olds. Early on, I had to do a significant amount of work because there is two of them. But even with that work helping my wife, I still did not need any parental leave. Newborns are easy for a father... Just change the diaper, feed a bottle, and comfort them. Now that my kids are two years old, I need to spend more time with them teaching them things and I am sure that will grow. Maybe mothers should get leave right after birth and father's should get it as the kids get older to teach them more things?
> Maybe mothers should get leave right after birth and father's should get it as the kids get older to teach them more things?
Absolutely agree. My toddler is much more difficult than my newborn, and much more likely to behave with me than my wife.
Absolutely agree. My toddler is much more difficult than my newborn, and much more likely to behave with me than my wife.
I think women should get more leave than what has been traditionally given. If a child is not properly socialized by the age of four, good luck after that. Women are just naturally better at doing that.
Now that my kids are older I spend a lot more time with them than when they were too young for school. All of them are very good gardeners - theyve been helping me in the garden since they were old enough to move around in there without hurting themselves. My oldest daughter can swing a hammer better than most men. I enjoy spending time with them and showing them how to do things.
Now that my kids are older I spend a lot more time with them than when they were too young for school. All of them are very good gardeners - theyve been helping me in the garden since they were old enough to move around in there without hurting themselves. My oldest daughter can swing a hammer better than most men. I enjoy spending time with them and showing them how to do things.
> If a child is not properly socialized by the age of four, good luck after that. Women are just naturally better at doing that.
I respectfully disagree. Men are better at socializing children. Children without fathers have lower levels of empathy, more likely to engage in anti-social behavior, and more likely to be narcissists.
Mothers indulge children, and care for them, which is great, but leads to self-centeredness. Fathers set boundaries, enforce rules, and stop playing with children when they get mean. Many traditional cultures see the father's role as introducing children to the outside world and teaching them their place in it, and I believe this is backed by empirical data.
[1] https://www.fox26houston.com/houstons-morning-show/fathers-i...
[2] https://www.theguardian.com/society/2001/apr/05/crime.penal
Mothers are certainly better at providing for the immediate physical and emotional needs for children.
I respectfully disagree. Men are better at socializing children. Children without fathers have lower levels of empathy, more likely to engage in anti-social behavior, and more likely to be narcissists.
Mothers indulge children, and care for them, which is great, but leads to self-centeredness. Fathers set boundaries, enforce rules, and stop playing with children when they get mean. Many traditional cultures see the father's role as introducing children to the outside world and teaching them their place in it, and I believe this is backed by empirical data.
[1] https://www.fox26houston.com/houstons-morning-show/fathers-i...
[2] https://www.theguardian.com/society/2001/apr/05/crime.penal
Mothers are certainly better at providing for the immediate physical and emotional needs for children.
It's always dangerous to generalise too much from your own experience. I had 6 weeks off when my son was born and would have taken more if it was possible. He didn't sleep or feed very well so my wife certainly could have used the extra support.
Now that my kid is nearly four I would also love more time off. How about more family friendly, or just less time-demanding, jobs in general?
[going off topic a bit it seems to me like post-Covid lockdown more and more people are looking for this, and are leaving jobs that can't provide it]
Now that my kid is nearly four I would also love more time off. How about more family friendly, or just less time-demanding, jobs in general?
[going off topic a bit it seems to me like post-Covid lockdown more and more people are looking for this, and are leaving jobs that can't provide it]
I wish I spent more time with my dad growing up. He loved his work. I’m sure he believed in his mind he was working hard for his family. If I ever have children, I’ll make sure to be there for them.
Same here. However according to some voices here and in the media, we are "losers" for thinking that way.
When it comes to my son though, I've never once regretted the time and effort I dedicated to him.
Sounds like the real loser is Joe Lonsdale. I hope he'll come to understand what's truly import during the short time on this planet before it's too late.