It’s just such a non sequitur between the two points he seems to attempt to make. Is he angry about women ‘listening to their body clock eventually’ and then going off on mat leave and the costs this has to his business? Or does he genuinely think that these warrior women who push entire humans out of their vulvas/ have them surgically cut out (both methods coming with their own herculean challenges) suddenly overnight become feeble little flowers who have had their strength sapped like Samson after a head shave? It’s, as you say, baffling.
There is a valid and less inflammatory point which he doesn’t raise which is that parenthood affects everyone to quite a large degree and most people are never the same again (more often IMO in a good way, but not always). An employer needs to accommodate that, and I don’t doubt it can be hard sometimes. In many (maybe even most) cases (using a hetero example here), because of the way our society is structured the biggest changes are felt by the mother rather than the father, and there ARE big adjustments to be made when you go back to work. Priorities change, hormones are rampant, and your body IS different.
But he doesn’t say any of that or suggest what we can do to help women return to their work. What a silly man.
