What exactly does this mean? I prioritize A LOT over work. My back hurts, work can suck it. I get into an accident, again, work takes a hell of a back seat. If a family member is having issues, guess what, work may not be my highest priority. I'm a human, not a robot.
> Having kids is a lifestyle choice that is at odds with other choices.
That is self evident, what is your underlying non analogy point?
> If you want society to subsidize having children, then the government should do it, not individual software teams.
Software teams are a part of society are they not?
I'll be blunt, I'd rather generally have the people with kids on my team than the humans that think Arbeit macht Frei (had to be done, far too apropos in this specific instance). Having time off from work tends to mean you focus more on work when you're there. I love programming, but I have other things in life I want to pursue. It also means I can compartmentalize work for work, not "oh i was thinking of doing xyz at work, i should spin up a bunch of cloud instances at home tonight and test this shiny new thing out to make my job hopefully a bit easier in the week". That mindset is just doing training for work outside of work. Which is simply, more work, and the end result of that kind of stuff from what I have seen, is guys end up snapping and go insane or worse.
Sure, but those are unexpected and hopefully rare events. We're talking about things that take priority over work every single day.
> > Having kids is a lifestyle choice that is at odds with other choices.
> That is self evident, what is your underlying non analogy point?
What I mean to put it bluntly is that having kids means less time for other things, including work. Make that tradeoff if you want, but don't to make the negative consequences of your choice my problem.
> > If you want society to subsidize having children, then the government should do it, not individual software teams.
> Software teams are a part of society are they not?
Sure they are, what's your point?
Society should probably help out homeless people, but that means collecting taxes and providing services, not expecting individual families to invite them into their homes and feed and clothe them, etc.
> I love programming, but I have other things in life I want to pursue
Same here, but I'm not the one complaining that a team of people who don't share that requirement isn't hiring me, bending over backwards to accommodate me, and paying me the same as their top performers.
I also believe it can make you better at work, in ways you currently may not appreciate. Coding more at home can make you a better coder, but it's a diminishing return. At some point you will get more from being good at communications, making better choices, finding compromises, reflecting, seeing the whole picture, avoiding errors caused by constant typing with tired brains.
It's a great pleasure (for me) to work with people in 30s-40s, with children and hobbies: healthier environment, less stress, usually less ego and drama, focus on working smart and thinking twice before typing, less chance to see and clean shitty code, also, very interesting conversations at lunch.
"they don't have anything _higher priority_ than work" it's too much, man. It is not in the same league with coding at home, it's sacrificing your life for an organisation, shareholders that will never sacrifice their lives for you in return. In fact, they will not even sacrifice potential profit for you, and make you redundant despite your commitment.
Why wouldn’t I put many things as a high priority than work? I don’t have any equity in the company and even if I did, it’s statistically likely to be worthless if it isn’t a publicly held company. If it is a publicly held company, my contribution isn’t going to make or break it.
The company definitely doesn’t put me as a high priority.
Presumably, because you expect to get paid more than someone who doesn't.
> programmer that never goes out to socialize.
I never said that someone has to live and breathe work, only that they don't have anything _higher priority_ than work.
If I have social plans with my friends I'll likely cancel them if there's a bona fide work emergency. If I have family obligations I cannot and will not.
> I'd rather meet and make friends
OK, and I'd rather ski for an hour or two every weekday morning, then come home and shower and finally start working at noon.
I just don't see why I would expect the work opportunities available to me, and the compensation, to be no less than someone who doesn't have that requirement.
Having kids is a lifestyle choice that is at odds with other choices. If my preferred lifestyle is to be a starving artist/musician, or a ski bum, but I also want to have kids and so might have to suck it up and take a soul-sucking corporate job, no one is going to shed a tear for me.
But if instead of rocking out I just want to get the same jobs and paid the same salaries as people who are actually much more productive than myself, that's somehow not only reasonable but unimpeachable.
All it really is is another in a long line of examples of people with kids expecting special privileges and support for their personal lifestyle choices, not only from society at large (maybe reasonable) but from everyone, individually (not).
If you want society to subsidize having children, then the government should do it, not individual software teams.