Which Moms Stay at Home?

Real Time Economics, a blog at the Wall Street Journal, looked at a forthcoming Census Bureau report about "...the phenomenon of women voluntarily leaving the workforce after having kids." That the report finds both the poorest and richest families are the ones whose mothers leave the workforce doesn't seem too surprising; what isn't addressed but seems more significant is that the child care industry relies almost solely upon the middle class for its customer base. (What does that say about American family values?)

One of the potential problems with this blog post it that it only addresses the economic factors in this type of decision (more specifically, family income levels); It doesn't address any non-economic reasons for why women might stay at home to raise their children. Likewise, as one woman commented, the report (at least as commented on by the WSJ) only talks about women who stay at home and not about any men who might do the same.

...[M]ost working women return to the work force a year after having a child. With women’s earnings making up a significant chunk of household income, the demographers say, families may find it too costly to punt on a second paycheck or an additional retirement account.

The Census study found that women at the highest income levels (those above $200,000), or whose husbands are at the highest income levels, are slightly more likely than median income earners to opt out of the labor force — meaning that, indeed, some rich women bail out on work to raise their kids.

Another group that was more likely to opt out were women with household incomes less than $50,000 — and among that group the opt-out effect was largest among those with household incomes less than $20,000. In other words, they can’t afford child care so they stay home instead of working.

HT: Economist's View

How to Make a Baby

If only it were that simple.

Watch Your Step!

Well, they'll never forget their wedding day. ;)

Happy Valentine's Day, Milady!

Money's a little tight right now (as I'm sure you know), but I didn't want you to think that I couldn't afford even a rose. So here's the Rosette Nebula (NGC 2237), just for you. ;)

I love you, sweetheart!

On Adultery

The following is a response of mine from some comments over at Rob Wagner's blog, 13 Martyrs. Rob had originally written in response to a previous comment by "anonymous":

And, anonymous, yes, the death penalty for adultry [sic] is hideous, but as a rule not practiced, especially in Arab countries.

To which "anonymous" wrote:

OK. So Arab countries are not, as a rule, following islam. [sic] Good! But would it really be a better world if we sacrelized [sic] murder on grounds of adultery, as is the case with sharia?

My response to "anonymous":

The problem with a lot of people (and not just Westerners) is that they look at another culture through their own cultural perspective without much thought as to the reasoning why something is in another culture. You think that, from Rob's statement, that Arab countries aren't following Islam (correctly). That isn't the case. The shari'ah system is set up to make these types of punishments difficult to implement. On the one hand, the punishment is very severe because it's trying to deter the crime from being done in the first place. Muslims know that if you're not punished in this life, you may be punished, insha'allah, in the next, and that punishment may be much more severe than the punishment today, insha'allah. Better to avoid any punishment whatsoever by not committing the crime in the first place. On the other hand, to convict for adultery requires four witnesses. Unless you're an idiot like Paris Hilton or Rob Lowe, where your sex tape gets distributed publicly, the odds are very low that people may witness your affair. (Still, Allah (swt) knows, and you'll answer to Him.)

Which comes to your supposedly rhetorical question, which you obviously know my answer: yes. Religion is not just about the betterment of the individual, but of society as well. Groups of people ("nations," as they're called in the Qur'an) can and will be collectively punished by Allah (swt), insha'allah, for their transgressions. Both the Bible and the Qur'an make that abundantly clear. (Sodom and Gomorrah? There are other examples in the Qur'an.) Adultery is not just a problem for the individuals concerned or their families. It affects society as well. The transmission of STDs, the breakups of families, the custodial issues about children? These all hurt society and, yet, you'd rather society to continue on its merry way instead of trying to curb the problem? At least Islam makes a serious attempt.

A Girl's Guide to Geek Guys

IZ Reloaded linked to this webpage: A Girl's Guide to Geek Guys. It's an amusing, albeit fairly accurate description about "geek guys." Being into Star Trek (as I have been since my teenage years), I somewhat fit the guide's description, as Milady would no doubt attest. However, I am not the complete geek as described. (Thank God!) Still, I can relate. :) And girls/women, yes, do date and marry geek guys! They'll thank you for it. Some excerpts:

Why Geek Dudes Rule

They are generally available.
Other women will tend not to steal them.
They can fix things.
Your parents will love them.
They're smart.

...

The Trek factor

If you're not up on your Star Trek, you can forget about getting or keeping a geek dude. And I'm not just talking vintage-era Captain Kirk and Spock either. You've got to be up on your The Next Generation, your Deep Space Nine, your Babylon 5. Armed with your own knowledge of Federation policies, you can better gauge when and how to act. The sexual politics of Star Trek are pretty blunt: the men run the technology and the ship, and the women are caretakers (a doctor and a counselor). Note the sexual tensions on the bridge of the Enterprise: the women, in skin tight uniforms, and with luxuriant, flowing hair. The men, often balding, and sporting some sort of permanently attached computer auxiliary. This world metaphorizes the fantasies of the geek dude, who sees himself in the geeky-but-heroic male officers and who secretly desires a sexy, smart, Deanna or Bev to come along and deferentially accept him for who he is. If you are willing to accept that this is his starting point for reality, you are ready for a geek relationship.

...

Geeks are sensitive and caring lovers and husbands. If you can hang with the techno-lifestyle, they make the best mates. They are the most attractive people, not flashy or hunky, but the kind who get cuter and more alluring over time. ... Definitely give geeks a chance.

...

One Last Thing

Because they have been so abused and ignored by society, many geeks have gone underground. You may actually know some and just haven't noticed them. They often feel resentful, and misunderstood, and it is important to realize this as you grow closer to them. Don't ever try to force the issue, or make crazy demands that he choose between his computer and you. Remember, his computer has been there for him his whole life; you are a new interloper he hasn't quite grasped yet.

Geek dudes thrive on mystery and love challenges and intellectual puzzles. Don't you consider yourself one? Wouldn't you like a little intellectual stimulation or your own? We thought so.

He Loves Me... He Loves Me Not...

A strange story out of Texas: The Houston Chronicle reports of a man who, while cheating on his wife, had the receipt for the flowers - along with his romantic message to the mistress - sent to his home, which his wife discovered. The wife, of course, is filing for divorce, but the man is suing the flower company, 1-800-Flowers.com, for breach of contract, saying that a company representative promised him that they wouldn't send anything (such as the receipt) to his home. Now that they have, he feels they should pay the extra amount of money he will owe to his wife because she now has written proof of his infidelity.

Leroy Greer meant to say it with flowers to his girlfriend, but his wife heard about it too, and now the whole arrangement is in federal court.

Claiming 1-800-flowers.com made his life considerably less rosy, Greer sued the flower delivery company, alleging it made his divorce case thornier by faxing his wife a receipt for flowers he had sent his girlfriend — along with the romantic words he wrote for the card.

The suit, filed this week in Houston, asks that the company pay for his mental anguish and for the increased amount he figures he'll have to pay in his divorce case, pending since 2005 in Fort Bend County, because his wife has new evidence against him.

Greer, a luxury car sales manager, complains the florist breached the contract made when he called and ordered long-stemmed red roses and a stuffed animal for his girlfriend. He says the florist broke its own privacy policy and a specific promise that nothing would be sent to his home.

The company said it will not comment on the lawsuit but also will not take responsibility "for an individual's personal conduct."


Written 'proof'

His conduct isn't the issue, said one of Greer's lawyers, Tara N. Long. "Our client is not saying the circumstances of his relationship are not his fault," she said.

But Long said 1-800-flowers.com harmed Greer, who alleges that what had been an amicable divorce case bloomed into a hellish fight, and that he could lose more money because his wife now has written proof of his relationship with another woman.

"We didn't file this frivolously. We tried to talk to 1-800-flowers.com. All indications were they were willing to settle, then they stopped communicating," said Kennitra M. Foote, Greer's other lawyer. They asked for $1 million in a demand letter to the florist. They said the extra divorce costs alone could be more than $300,000.

1-800-flowers.com, a publicly traded company based in Carle Place, N.Y., responded to an inquiry about the suit Thursday with a written statement from Steven Jarmon, vice president for brand communications and partnership marketing:

"At 1-800-flowers.com we take pride in creating relationships with our customers by recognizing and thanking them for their business. We take all matters relating to our customers seriously; however, we are not responsible for an individual's personal conduct. Beyond this, it is the company's policy not to comment on pending litigation and legal matters."

The lawsuit alleges that when Greer sent posies to his girlfriend in April, he was promised that the florist would send nothing to his home. But 1-800-flowers.com sent a discount coupon and a thank-you card to Greer's house.

Greer's wife saw it, called the company and was faxed the receipt, according to the lawsuit. On the receipt was the name of the woman who received $100 in gifts, invoiced as "Occasion: Love & Romance."

And the message on the card: "Just wanted to say that I love you and you mean the world to me! Leroy."

This receipt is attached to Greer's lawsuit, along with a handwritten note on the bottom of the page: "Be a man! If you got caught red handed then don't still lie."

Greer said Thursday that his wife included that note when she faxed the receipt to him at work.

"Yes, it was my conduct," Greer said of the relationship and the gifts.

And he accepted the florist's conduct, to a point. "The thank-you note was fine. It was sending all that information to my wife that's the problem," Greer said.

L. Mickele' Daniels, the divorce lawyer for Greer's wife, declined to comment on the lawsuit, and said nothing has happened on the divorce since February 2006. Greer's wife also did not want to comment.

County records show the couple filed and withdrew divorce actions twice previously.


Damages?

Greer said he expects this divorce to go through and to cost him a lot more than it would have before 1-800-flowers.com sent that fax.

Richard Alderman, a consumer law expert and University of Houston Law Center professor, said lawsuits against companies that break promises can have merit.

"But the real question here is are there any damages, is he entitled to anything?" Alderman said.

He said under contract law Greer has to show his damages were foreseeable. Under the deceptive trade practices law, he would have to show the florist made a promise it knew it wouldn't keep. And Greer would have to prove the divorce, if ever finalized, cost him more because of the fax.

As for sending flowers you want kept secret, Alderman said: "I'm a big consumer advocate, but in this case I'd have to go with caveat emptor" — let the buyer beware.

The Economist: The Frayed Knot (2)

I hadn't forgotten about The Frayed Knot series that I had started last month. However, before I move into the next section that I want to discuss, I thought I'd C&P a few paragraphs from the article that I think are interesting but not necessarily comment-worthy:

In her book “Marriage and Caste in America”, [Kay Hymowitz of the Manhattan Institute, a conservative think-tank] argues that the “marriage gap” is the chief source of the country's notorious and widening inequality. Middle-class kids growing up with two biological parents are “socialized for success.” They do better in school, get better jobs and go on to create intact families of their own. Children of single parents or broken families do worse in school, get worse jobs and go on to have children out of wedlock. This makes it more likely that those born near the top or the bottom will stay where they started. America, argues Ms. Hymowitz, is turning into “a nation of separate and unequal families.”

A large majority—92%—of children whose families make more than $75,000 a year live with two parents (including step-parents). At the bottom of the income scale—families earning less than $15,000—only 20% of children live with two parents. One might imagine that this gap arises simply because two breadwinners earn more than one. A single mother would have to be unusually talented and diligent to make as much as $75,000 while also raising children on her own. And it is impossible in America for two full-time, year-round workers to earn less than $15,000 between them, unless they are (illegally) paid less than the minimum wage.

But there is more to it than this. Marriage itself is “a wealth-generating institution”, according to Barbara Dafoe Whitehead and David Popenoe, who run the National Marriage Project at Rutgers University. Those who marry “till death do us part” end up, on average, four times richer than those who never marry. This is partly because marriage provides economies of scale—two can live more cheaply than one—and because the kind of people who make more money—those who work hard, plan for the future and have good interpersonal skills—are more likely to marry and stay married. But it is also because marriage affects the way people behave.

American men, once married, tend to take their responsibilities seriously. Avner Ahituv of the University of Haifa and Robert Lerman of the Urban Institute found that “entering marriage raises hours worked quickly and substantially.” Married men drink less, take fewer drugs and work harder, earning between 10% and 40% more than single men with similar schooling and job histories. And marriage encourages both spouses to save and invest more for the future. Each partner provides the other with a form of insurance against falling sick or losing a job.

Marriage also encourages the division of labor. Ms. Dafoe Whitehead and Mr. Popenoe put it like this: “Working as a couple, individuals can develop those skills in which they excel, leaving others to their partner.” Mum handles the tax returns while Dad fixes the car. Or vice versa. As Adam Smith observed two centuries ago, when you specialize, you get better at what you do, and you produce more.

Why Am I Still Single?

A local women's magazine has a prominent headline on this month's cover: "Why am I still single?" With 30 minutes to think about why a woman might ask this question during this morning's commute, I came up with a list of possible answers. But first, a couple of caveats: yes, I've been burned by some women through a few of these reasons; no, I haven't been burned by all of them; nor am I going to say which one's I have and haven't been burned by. And yes, of course, many of these apply to the guys as well. Here's a dozen, in no particular order:

Because you smoke like a chimney, and no one wants to kiss an ashtray mouth. (This was my #1 criteria in determining whether I'd ask a woman out when I was single.)

Because you're too high-maintenance; you're not the princess you think you are.

Because you bought into the feminist myth that a career and financial independence will bring you a lifetime of happiness.

Because guys who are interested in a long-term relationship don't necessarily go out clubbing - or even drink, for that matter.

Because you don't go to church, the masjid or other place of worship, where lots of other women and/or the priest, minister, paster, imam, etc., know tons of eligible men.

Because you've filed one too many sexual harrassment complaints at work when the guy was just asking you for a date.

Because you don't eat healthy foods - or exercise.

Because you lack social skills, especially the art of making conversation.

Because you deluded yourself into thinking you can tame "bad boys."

Because you've set your standards so high, you ignore the guys who may be average looking but are great husband/father material.

Because you've rejected every guy your girlfriends - and mother - have set you up on blind dates with.

Because you don't call him first.

Any others that I've missed that you can think of?

The Economist: The Frayed Knot (1)

First in a series.

In late May, there was an interesting article in The Economist about marriage and divorce in America. The main thesis of the article is that "As the divorce rate plummets at the top of American society and rises at the bottom, the widening 'marriage gap' is breeding inequality." The article has a lot of information that is pertinent to both Islam and marriage and divorce trends among Malays and Muslims here in Singapore (and worldwide), so I thought I'd share a number of the more interesting parts of the article. Due to the length of the original article, I'll be splitting this post up into several segments, insha'allah.

There is a widening gulf between how the best- and least-educated Americans approach marriage and child-rearing. Among the elite (excluding film stars), the nuclear family is holding up quite well. Only 4% of the children of mothers with college degrees are born out of wedlock. And the divorce rate among college-educated women has plummeted. Of those who first tied the knot between 1975 and 1979, 29% were divorced within ten years. Among those who first married between 1990 and 1994, only 16.5% were.

At the bottom of the education scale, the picture is reversed. Among high-school dropouts, the divorce rate rose from 38% for those who first married in 1975-79 to 46% for those who first married in 1990-94. Among those with a high school diploma but no college, it rose from 35% to 38%. And these figures are only part of the story. Many mothers avoid divorce by never marrying in the first place. The out-of-wedlock birth rate among women who drop out of high school is 15%. Among African-Americans, it is a staggering 67%.

Clearly, education is a significant factor in the likelihood of whether a couple will get divorced or not. As the side graphic shows, even the difference between attending college vs. obtaining a Bachelor's degree is significant. In fact, divorce rates for couples married between 1990-94 are almost equal for women who went to college but didn't graduate vs. women who never went to college at all. Less significantly, women who had obtained a Bachelor's degree and those women who obtained a post-graduate degree have an almost equal percentage for divorce. In other words, it doesn't really matter whether a woman has a Bachelor's degree or a post-graduate degree, that couple's divorce rate will be roughly 15-17%. However, without that Bachelor's degree in her hands (notice that the study focuses on the woman's level of education, not the man's), the divorce rate jumps dramatically to about 36% for women who've gone to college but didn't get their degree, 38% for those women who've only gotten a high school diploma, and a whopping 46% for women who are high school dropouts. So, women should be strongly, strongly encouraged to complete their college degree prior to marriage if a society is to keep the divorce rate down.

Now, unfortunately, Statistics Singapore, which normally analyzes everything (and does a wonderful job at it), doesn't have any stats on divorce rates with level of education. They do have some of those statistics with regard to marriage, and they have divorce rates with the occupations of the bride and groom, but neither of those sets will work in this case. So, we'll look at several other sets of statistics and make our own conclusions.

Some base numbers to keep in mind: Among the resident population, the Malay community makes up 13.64% of the population (per the most recent, 2005, study). The Chinese make up 75.56%, the Indians 8.70% and "Other" (such as us Caucasians) are 2.10%. The number of Muslims in the country make up 14.9% of the country (per the 2000 census). The reason why the Muslim number is higher than the Malay number is because there are a significant number of Muslims who are of other ethnicities. 25.6% of all Indians here are Muslim, as are 22.3% of the "Other" (only 0.3% of all Chinese have become Muslim).

Now, in Singapore, there are two laws by which couples may become married or divorced: the Women's Charter and the Muslim Law Act. Obviously, we're concerned with the latter. In 2003, 2004, and 2005, the percentage of all marriages done under the Muslim Law Act was 17.63%, 18.47%, and 17.18% respectively. Not bad; all three years' percentages are above the percentage of Muslims (14.9%) in the country. We Muslims in Singapore are getting married a little more frequently than people of other religions. The bad news is, we're getting divorced far more often as well. The percentages for divorce under the Muslim Law Act are 32.08%, 29.04% and 27.11% for the same years. Almost twice as many divorces as marriages; that's far too many a number to be comfortable with.

Let's look on the educational side of things. The government splits out the non-student population (aged 15 and older) by their highest qualification obtained and by ethnicity. In 2000, among the Malay community, the number whose highest qualification was a secondary (high school) diploma was 32.1% (compared to the national average of 24.6%). Among those whose highest qualification was a university degree, the Malay community came in at a mere 2.0%, compared to the national average of 11.7% (the Chinese percentage is 12.6, the Indian is 16.5%, and "Other" comes in at 27.5%).

Generally speaking, most Malays in Singapore get through high school, but only 17.8% go on for an Upper Secondary, Polytechnic or University education. This is in contrast to the national average of 32.8% of the country that further their post-high school education.

Moreover, the situation isn't likely to get better any time soon. In 2005, Malays made up 2.48% of the Singapore university students. Remember, Malays make up 13.64% of the population! Compare this to the other ethnic groups: Chinese university students: 81.05% compared to 75.56% of the country; Indian university students: 11.54% compared to 8.70% of the country; and "Other": 4.93% compared to 2.10% of the country.

If the study mentioned in The Economist's article applies to Singapore as much as it applies to the U.S. (and I have no reason to think that it doesn't), then the Malay/Muslim divorce rate in Singapore is likely to remain at a very high rate for many years to come. The Malay/Muslim community in Singapore (and other countries) needs to drum into the heads of Malay/Muslim children - especially girls - that they MUST go on for a university education. Only then, maybe 15-20 years from now, may we see the Muslim divorce rates dropping, insha'allah.

The Accounting of Love

So I'm teaching one of my accounting classes, and I get an SMS from Milady.

Milady: I love you. :)

JDsg: I love you, too! :)

JDsg, speaking to his students: "Even in the accounting of love, we must make sure our debits equal our credits." :)

"Stealing" a Few from IZ Reloaded

I've often thought my own blog was fairly eclectic in its own way, but the S'pore blog IZ Reloaded is quite eclectic (and a pleasure to visit). So I'm going to "steal" a few of his posts, so to speak.

First, we have "Frog," a Bollywood midget who dances pretty well, as this Youtube video (run time: 1:26) attests:



Frog, which is the English equivalent of his stage name, Thavakalai, has his own Myspace page, where there are a few other Youtube clips you can watch.

Second was a post on a guy who transforms regular watches into beautiful, wood-face watches. (Click on the link to see an excellent example.) Cool stuff!

Last, IZ linked to an article about a 5000+ year old grave in Italy of a couple who was buried hugging each other. Eternal love.

Beloved Wives Day

In case you missed this news story, yesterday was Beloved Wives Day. A small organization in Tsumagoi, Japan, Nihon Aisaika Kyokai (NAK) or the "Japan Doting Husbands Association," had declared January 31st to be the day when Japanese men would return home from work by 8:00 p.m.

"On that day, a husband must prove himself by returning home before 8 p.m., sitting down to a family dinner, and telling his wife how much he appreciates her for all that she does every day for him and the family.

"The project was dubbed Otokono kitaku daisakusen or 'The great mission for guys to get home early.'"

According to the NAK website, "Many men can't put their feelings of gratitude toward their wives into words. Work is No. 1 for them. This attitude is putting Japanese marriages under great pressure."

The group urges men to improve the marital mood through five "golden rules," including going home early, calling wives by their given name and looking them in the eyes when talking. Many Japanese husbands call their wives "you" rather than addressing them by name, or in some cases merely grunt.

The group's homepage includes a column where husbands can write down either feelings they are too shy to say out loud or that they hope to say to their wives in the future, a trial run of sorts to see how the phrases look in advance.

'Your partner is your mirror. Let us respect each other forever and ever, and together lead a life filled with happiness and gratitude.'

'Though we fight from time to time, I feel very happy when I am with you.'

'I'm sorry I had a car accident. I'm sorry I'm away so much on business trips. I'm sorry I end up sleeping at the office so often. Thank you for loving me just the same.'

NAK was started by 45-year-old Kiyotaka Yamana, who runs his own business in Kawasaki. "Yamana was not always a doting husband. He used to work for an advertising company, a typical workaholic who cared little for family life. He never questioned his all-work, no-play lifestyle, until one day his wife confronted him.

"'You never took me seriously, ever,' she said. 'We never talked.'

"They soon divorced. When Yamana remarried three years ago, he felt he had learned his lesson. His vows with his new wife reflected his new state of mind: 'Let us grow old together, and become a great couple.'"

Ironically, Yamana's ex-wife has now said to him, "You've started something really interesting."

Sources:
Nihon Aisaika Kyokai
Beloved Wives Get a Holiday to Call Their Own
Japanese Men Declare 'Wives Day: Group Hopes to Show Men Care