In late January the presidents, vice presidents and deans of nine top US universities, along with 25 female professors, held a conference at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) to discuss the equitable treatment of women in science and engineer-ing. Afterwards, representatives of the universities signed a joint statement and agreed to work within their institutions toward four goals.
Those were: One, to analyze the salaries and the proportion of university resources provided to women. Two, to work toward a faculty that reflects the diversity of the student body. Three, to reconvene in a year to share the specific initiatives undertaken to achieve these objectives. Four, to recognize that this challenge will require significant review of, and changes to, the procedures within each university and within the scientific and engineering establishments as a whole.
This appeal, made by the heads of top universities, has resonated far and wide at other US schools. It has also swept away the anguish and worry aroused by wage inequality for women at MIT.
What moves one deeply is that although most of the administrators who attended the conference were male, discussion focused on four matters: What are the issues in your institutions and the successful or failed strategies you have pursued? What are the systemic causes of the problems we face? What new actions could each institution take? What might we do collectively?
In the US there are more and more talented female students and teachers studying or teaching at top universities. Male students and faculty in these universities are glad to see women strive for further improvement and are proud of women's achievements. Take Harvard Medical School for example. It posts the significant achievements of female graduates outside the classrooms, a practice which is in line with late Beijing University (
I remember that after one of my university classmates, who is now married with children, received her master's degree in civil engineering from the University of California, Berkeley, her school adviser called her every year for almost 10 years to urge her to pursue a PhD -- until the year before he retired. After-wards, he frequently passed work opportunities to her, encouraging her all the time to take on greater challenges. His intention to treasure female talent was admirable.
Every successful woman in today's world has usually benefited from the encouragement and support of her family, teachers and friends -- so that she could march forward courageously. After all, when women are striving for higher goals, they are often challenged by traditional social values, vicious competition from men and an unfair system as well. Such challenges can hardly be understood by men, who can freely utilize their talents.
The only real difference between the sexes is in the chromosomes. Because women are patient, considerate, able to make careful observations, attentive and have strong will and the capacity for self-reflection -- they often make greater contributions to society than men while taking relatively more idealistic professions. According to Women Administrators in Higher Education, recently published by the State University of New York Press, because of their high sense of mission, women university presidents and administrators throughout the history of US higher education have usually made extraordinary contributions to their communities and have encouraged students to pay attention to human welfare issues. Consequently, male presidents and administrators now look at them with new eyes and male students and teachers in their schools also tend to assist female students and teachers more willingly.
In Taiwan, however, the number of female graduate students is much lower than that of female undergraduates. Many women's talents are often stifled and wasted, or they are torn between their commitment to their families and that to their supervisors. Some male managers seldom accept female professionals' points of view. No wonder many women teachers and doctors face difficulties being promoted. The situation is even worse in areas where education and social and economic standards are lower.
More discussion and promotion -- regarding cultivation of young female talent, women's health and communication between men and women -- is needed. We should enable women, with their outstanding intelligence, talent and enthusiasm, to continuously contribute to society. Finally, I'd like to show my sincere appreciation by dedicating this article to all gentlemen who have encouraged and promoted women in the past.
King Chwan-chuen is a professor in the College of Public Health, National Taiwan University.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS