Exactly what I was thinking. I don't understand why it's so hard for people to consider that when social changes are introduced, some of the current ways we value things will change, and current judgements can't necessarily be used as a gauge for future behavior.

Employers looking at 'gaps' and never ever inquiring from anyone remotely interesting why those gaps occurred are just throwing potentially great workers to the competition. "I took 18 months off to care for my dying parents, who passed away last month" is a totally different type of person from "meh - there's just too much quality day time television beckoning me to sit on the couch to bother looking for work".

Ceteris paribus is quite prevalent in economic discussion.

Now, while I agree that gaps are considered way more important than they ought to be, experience is really, really important. Someone who has done a thing for ten years is going to be way better than someone who has done the same thing for only two, all other things being equal. Really, experience makes such a big difference that even without other things being equal, the person with a decade of experience is usually better.

Hell, this is one of those things that the unions and management agree on. All other things being equal, a more experienced worker is going to be more effective and productive.

Gaps matter too. I mean, I agree that they aren't as big of a deal as most employers make them out to be, but all other things being equal, the kid who has been doing the job for the last five years is going to be better than the kid who did the job for five years, then took five years off to catch up on netflix.