Academia - The perpetuation of the 60h week workloads myth for PhD students

I think the best you can do is write an answer that shares your perspective. I'd read the existing answers, though, and check to see that they don't already do this.

For example, the most upvoted answer here: https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/151639/63475 as of right now starts with:

First of all, I know many PhD students (also myself) who did exactly that and finished their phd: They worked 40 hours a week (or less)

The most upvoted answer here: Is it true that PhD students need to work 10-12 hours a day every day to be productive? says

The answer is no.

This question: Is it typical to work 60 hours per week as a PhD student? includes at least one counter-example, and the first answer agrees with you that it is a problem though it also argues that it's still a reality:

The experience of working long hours, for little pay and little power is, unfortunately, an almost universal experience for science PhD students ... However 60 hours a week is not normal for the simple reason that very few people can be productive for 60 hours a week on a long term basis

I think the number of votes those answers get is indicative that others also see it as a reality.

Overall, the consensus I get from the community is that working long hours in academia is common but not necessary. It is clear that some people are working long hours and see others around them doing the same.

If you view things differently, you can offer answers that fit your views. I think you'll find the community responds positively if you say long hours are not necessary; I think you will find less of a positive reaction if you say they don't happen, and I think that claim might actually be covering up a problem you intend to surface.

Echoing @AzorAhai's comment, I did not notice this sentiment:

"Yeah, welcome to the world of superstars, you need to work 60h/w or you will never get your PhD"

in any of the answers receiving a lot of up votes on those questions. If you want to point some out, I'd be happy to take a look and probably downvote them if indeed that is what they say, because I disagree and am myself one of those people who got a PhD while working fairly relaxed hours.

The problem is that this myth has nothing to do with PhD students or academia. Most people who have unstructured jobs overestimate how much time they spend working productively.

I think, this has something to do with the survivors' dilemma. It's a sampling bias.

Basically, most people here are still interested in an academic career, have mastered it, or are somehow related to academia. Now, most PhD students leave the academia the one or the other way.

So, although those questions rather state "workload as a PhD student", the subliminal understanding of the most, including myself, is "how I nearly worked myself to death, but got tenure".