So you are talking about leaving work to give birth and recover from it? That indeed is required, but I'm talking about leaving work to _raise_ the children that one gives birth to.
I'm saying that it's only women who leave work to _raise_ their children and that _that_ is sexist. There is no reason to abandon your career to raise your children, there is no reason that this is never done by men (who can do it just as well as women because it does not involve special biological characteristics) and there is no reason that women are expected to do it.
In the western world of course we have such things as maternal leave and in some countries even _parental_ leave which is an attempt at a solution to exactly the problem we're discussing here: that women are expected to leave their careers _permanently_ to raise their children even though they only need at most a few months or so to recover after giving birth (a year is an absolute extreme), and that men are not expected to do the same.
EDIT: So, I say "in the western world" but it turns out that's not _all_ the western world. From wikipedia's article on parental leave:
The United States, Suriname, Papua New Guinea, and a few island countries in the Pacific Ocean are the only countries in the United Nations that do not require employers to provide paid time off for new parents.[6]
EDIT 2: "You are missing purposely the fact".
I'm not and I could assume you are wilfully misunderstanding _me_. And where would that get us?
> that women are expected to leave their careers _permanently_ to raise their children even though they only need at most a few months or so to recover after giving birth (a year is an absolute extreme), and that men are not expected to do the same
1) This is a conversation concerning those in a relationship as to who will be raising the child (if it's not a shared effort)
2) I know a few guys that are stay at home dads, share the responsibility with their spouse of parents, or use caring services and nobody needs to be a stay at home parent.
3) If they are permanently leaving their career then it sounds like there's something completely unrelated that's affecting this other than some sexist issue.
4) How's what you're saying any different than some women expecting the man to be the bread winner and provide for the family? Or expecting them to be the one to defend the family if there's an intruder in the house? Or expecting the guy to fix things around the house or be the one to hire a contractor to do it? Or expecting the guy to take the garbage out or change a tire or talk to their son about sex, etc.
Yes, some (many? few? I don't know) women do have that kind of expectation from a man. More to the point, there are societal norms that nurture those expectations in women and in men themselves. There's no question to my mind that this is exactly the same kind of sexism that is keeping women from having successful careers in STEM academia (and elsewhere).
Like I say in another comment, sexism harms men too.
It really is not a matter of men-vs-women, here. My understanding is that these are traditional ideas about manhood and womanhood, that were useful in the past because they helped ensure societal stability and perhaps a sensible use of limited resources. But, in today's world, especially in the Western world, where the majority of men and women don't e.g. have to work the fields or do the washing by hand, these traditional ways of seeing each other only help to restrict our options. In the end, most women and most men have loved ones in the other sex (wives, sisters, mothers, daughters, husbands, sons, brothers and fathers) and it just doesn't make sense to stick to archaic ideas that want us to be somehow adversaries. Most women want the men they love to do well in their life and vice-versa. So why not work to maximise each other's options, rather than restrict them? We can work together rather than against each other to achieve our full potential, as individuals and as family units.
I'm saying that it's only women who leave work to _raise_ their children and that _that_ is sexist. There is no reason to abandon your career to raise your children, there is no reason that this is never done by men (who can do it just as well as women because it does not involve special biological characteristics) and there is no reason that women are expected to do it.
In the western world of course we have such things as maternal leave and in some countries even _parental_ leave which is an attempt at a solution to exactly the problem we're discussing here: that women are expected to leave their careers _permanently_ to raise their children even though they only need at most a few months or so to recover after giving birth (a year is an absolute extreme), and that men are not expected to do the same.
EDIT: So, I say "in the western world" but it turns out that's not _all_ the western world. From wikipedia's article on parental leave:
The United States, Suriname, Papua New Guinea, and a few island countries in the Pacific Ocean are the only countries in the United Nations that do not require employers to provide paid time off for new parents.[6]
EDIT 2: "You are missing purposely the fact".
I'm not and I could assume you are wilfully misunderstanding _me_. And where would that get us?