As graduation season comes to a close, the yes123 online job bank at the end of last month surveyed 1,260 college graduates to gauge their experiences as they seek jobs, often for the first time. The results were shocking. It turns out that many graduates’ welcome into working life is a litany of harassment, starting at the hands of interviewers.
In the survey, 30.2 percent of respondents said they had been sexually harassed by an interviewer, either verbally or physically. It is not like they have had years to encounter a few “bad apples” — most of these jobseekers have only just started interviewing this year.
That is just the start of a lewd laundry list. Another 31.8 percent of respondents said they were asked if they had any “unmentionable diseases” or “experienced pain during their periods,” 27.3 percent said interviewers made inappropriate jokes, 25.2 percent said they were asked about their sexual orientation and 23.9 percent said they were asked about their measurements, height or weight.
As for physical intrusions, 21.8 percent said that interviewers had put their hands on their shoulders, 20.5 percent said interviewers had touched or tried to hold their hands, 18.4 percent said that interviewers caressed their backs and 9.4 percent said interviewers groped their buttocks.
By far the most common was invasive questioning, with 87.7 percent saying they were asked private questions, including 60.3 percent who were asked about their relationship status.
Despite the figures, to many, these results are not surprising. If this batch of graduates is facing such pervasive harassment, imagine the countless more before them who experienced all this and worse, setting dismal expectations as they began their foray into adulthood. The figures help paint a picture of the kind of normalized harassment only now seeing the light of day, helping to elucidate why #MeToo is necessary and why it took so long to gain ground.
Job interviews also provide a distilled case study of the power dynamics at play in so many harassment cases. The setup is classic: Someone with power and authority (the interviewer) has something (a job) that another with less authority (the interviewee) wants. Is the interviewee going to make a fuss when the interviewer brushes their knee or asks about their plans for marriage? Or are they more likely to shake it off as something they will just have to put up with to pay the rent and put food on the table? It seems a small indignity to bear for the benefits, but as these tableaus play out en masse, it creates hostile environments that often escalate into something worse.
As the government heightens incentives for people — particularly women — to return to the workforce, it is clear that throwing money at the problem is not enough. Overt harassment aside, these data also expose a less sinister, but more pervasive disregard for any semblance of work-life balance. When employers ask about a woman’s plan for marriage (and it is nearly always a woman), they are enforcing a false dichotomy between having a career and having a family, and forcing her to choose, even straight out of college. How could any young woman imagine having a healthy personal life when she is repeatedly told it would harm her career?
The implication behind employers’ probing questions is that any pursuit outside of work is an unacceptable distraction, justifying the unsustainable working hours and conditions that plague workplaces in Taiwan, and poison well-being along with productivity.
It might only be one survey, but its jarring figures add another irrefutable piece of evidence to what the champions of the #MeToo and labor movements have been saying all along.
Three in 10 interviewing graduates facing sexual harassment is no aberration — it is symptomatic of a rot that needs to be cut out at its source.
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS