There are many reasons to believe that children are better served by having a stay at home Mom (or Dad), and that is the reason for the bias. I also disagree that it requires "big bucks" to be able to have a stay at home Mom. Many of our friends simply live more modestly, because having a stay at home Mom is more important than the additional income. It is a question of values. People who choose NOT to use day care can always find a way to make staying at home work, and the payoff is obvious. Of course, many families have no choice. Two incomes are the only way they can get by. But parents who choose to send both both parents to work are doing their kids a disservice. Parenting IS a full time job.

What Joanna Weiss really means to state is that: What we don't hear, so much, is the ex-wife's point of view — maybe because it isn't always pretty. A new research paper posits a controversial, ex wifes' explanation for why men are so underrepresented on receiving child custody in family court cases: What if family courts are unfriendly to men because they're run with females judges? we also don't get much comment about the female's point of view on serving in combat. Chances are they are not advocating any change here either.

What's the next study - "Is grass green?" Of course this is an issue. I work in tech, and almost without exception all management is male with stay-at-home wives (if they are still married - many are divorced, and their ex-wives still bear nearly all child-related responsibilities). The rare women exec tends to be unmarried and/or childless, or occasionally has a SAH husband (I think I've met one in twenty years). Really, this study should be no surprise to any working mother.

Let's see...I am in the workforce and compete for jobs with both male and females. Personally, as a male, any recruiter who is going to push for the advancement of women seems to be doing so at my expense. I too would be in favor of the neutral recruiter who doesn't mention any preference - whether by sex, race, age, etc. I want a shot too. And also - if anyone takes a long period of time off work to raise a child and I stay and keep working - why should that person come back with more pay to be equal to my pay when they haven't been here. That seems to me the biggest reason why women are paid less - they left their job for a long period of time. I could say the same about bring your daughter to work day, rather than bring your child to work day (actually, please leave them home - LOL). Last I have heard, women are doing far better these day in school while men are falling behind. No one seems too concerned by that - not in the media anyway. I am all for equality but making one group suffer for the advancement of another is not the right solution.

I went to the "study" website and took one of the "tests." The questions are desinged to skew your answers, e.g., allowed ONLY to choose to attribute something to "male" or "female" and the coupling clearly male or female names with various other attributes, like "management." NO OPTION to choose "both" or neutral. Another psuedoscience trying to parade as something substantive and valid. Bogus. Not defensible. Why does the press keep encouraging these things by gicing them "press?" Does no service for anyone but the authors of these so-called "scientific" studies who simply are looking for some publicity, tenure, whatever. Not credible.