Letters posted here are associated with the following Salon Premium Member:

rtg321

Published Letters: 40
Editor's Choice: 8

Thursday, June 26, 2008 03:00 PM

trailing girlfriend

I guess I'm a trailing girlfriend. My boyfriend finished his PhD (in the same discipline as mine) 6mos before me and got offered a well-paying job a week after he graduated. I had already been applying for jobs, and shortly after he started his job I got an interview (and then job offer) in a different city than he was. The pay at this job was comparable to his, and it was a difficult position to land. But it wasn't my dream job. Had he been in the same city, I probably would have taken it. As it was, I knew I had a very likely offer from a place in the same city (but paid less and was also very good but not my dream job). We decided maintaining two households and the strain of LD wasn't worth the higher pay, so I took the job in the same city as him. I'll admit that it's hard for me to earn less money than him (how's that for switching gender roles?). I'm sure if I adored my job things would be different, but I don't. But he and I have also been long distance, and we know that would be hard as well. so I guess we'll wait and see what happens. As it turns out, most of my dream jobs aren't super well paying, and are in a different city than where we are now. I'm looking at this as an investment. he loves his job and he's getting plenty of good experience and great performance reviews. If I can't find my dream job here, I'll hold off on trying to go elsewhere until he's progressed enough to step into a higher paying positions somewhere else.

My point in sharing this, is that it's never an easy decision...and I suspect on average women's careers suffer more than men's. What we learned though, is that it's important to be honest with yourself first, then with each other. But, given our own situation, money is usually a major factor. And as long as there remains pay inequity, women will probably continue to bear the cost of job-related moves.

Thursday, June 26, 2008 04:22 PM

CeliainSF -- re: pay inequality

I hope you're right regarding pay inequality reducing as more women earn graduate and professional degrees, but I remain skeptical. Many who challenge the idea that pay inequality is a result of discrimination cite the fact that women are often earning less b/c they "make the choice" to take time off for kids. This doesn't address the issue, however, that no matter how gender-balanced a couple tries to parent, only the woman will bear the pregnancy and if they decide to breast feed, only she can do so. And for the time-being, at least, it remains the societal expectation that women will take on the major burden of child-rearing (even if some couples make different choices).

Anyway, obviously as you point out, there are a myriad of reasons that couples make decisions, but pay is an important part of it. And without some more concrete steps to address that (many of which I think have to do with childcare), the inequality in how careers are affected by transfers may persist.

I definitely agree with you regarding recognition of the so-called two-body problem as being potentially helpful. but I also think it can backfire...no matter how family-friendly a company (or university) claims to be, in the back of their mind they're evaluating whether they think you'll take a job before they embark upon the costly process of hiring you. If they make assumptions about you or your spouse's willingness to move (similar to making assumptions about a younger married woman's intention to quit her job after having kids), they might choose to hire someone else. Not saying this will always happen or that it should deter companies from trying, but I don't think it's without its drawbacks.

Thursday, July 17, 2008 03:49 PM

Another risk of not vaccinating

There's another concern w.r.t. not vaccinating. Not only do people who opt out for non-medical reasons put those who do have medical reasons at greater risk of exposure, but they also increase the risks for people who are vaccinated. As we've seen with HIV in recent years, diseases mutate and gain resistance to cures, preventions, and treatments that previously worked. So another benefit of having a high percentage of vaccinations in the population is that it minimizes the number of environments the disease lives. This limits its ability to successfully mutate into a form that is resistant to known vaccinations and/or treatments.

Most Active Letters Threads

426

A key British official reminds us of the forgotten anthrax attack

A vast array of establishment and expert sources do not believe this episode was really resolved.
273

The crazy, irrational beliefs of Muslims

Tom Friedman explains the real problem: stupid Muslims think the U.S. is about war and aggression.
210

Is Obama's civil liberties record understandable?

Was it unreasonable to expect him to adhere to his commitments regarding the Constitution?
111

How dare you criticize wasteful defense spending!

So you think it's only terrorist-appeasing lefties who are down on Pentagon profligacy? Think again
57

Police to talk to Woods

Early morning crash raises questions, and revives tabloid speculation

View all »

Letters Help

Currently in Salon