I survived (more or less) my travels. I'm not particularly refreshed or well-rested, though, so please excuse any flagrant flaws in my logic. Let me start by trying to clear off my desk from last week. I will get around to everything I promised. In good time.

As you recall, the Wall Street Journal last week put Rebel Dads on the front of their Marketplace segment and detailed the struggle of at-home dad to reenter the workforce. The online daddy boards too a somewhat dim view of the article, suggesting that the story, headlined "Stay-at-Home Dads Fight Stigma," may have reinforced the (largely) untrue stereotype of at-home dads as unemployed gentlemen putting on a good face. And one of the men quoted said that the incidents retold in the piece represented the fringe of the hiring world, not the general attitude of those hiring. I'm not sure I agree with the first charge (that the piece reinforced negative stereotypes) and I'm not too troubled by the second charge (picking only the most extreme examples).

The reality out there is that some people doing hiring right now are short-sighted dolts with a bias against hiring at-home parents. But I think the story made it pretty clear that such execs are indeed dolts. (In talking about one disasterous interview, the story notes: "... although the interviewer never bothered to ask ... about any of his specific technological abilities.") Not the kind of guy I want building my company.