Keeping Women in Tech: a worldwide survey

So I've just come back from a wonderful trip to Burma, and am excited to put pictures up. However, I took over 2,000 pictures and haven't even sorted through half of them yet, so it's going to take a few more days before I can make that post (or possibly, series of posts).

For now...

This interesting article popped up in the Washington Post today, and I thought I'd link it here.

I hear a lot of hooey about how there aren't a lot of women in STEM fields because "women jst aren't interested in it", or "it's not as appealing to women" Bullshit. To wit:

"The study finds that gender bias underpins why these women either don’t think they can get ahead or are choosing to leave their organizations. One-third of U.S. women in what the report calls “lab-coat, hard-hat and geek workplace cultures” feel excluded from social networks at their jobs (that number is 53 percent in India). Meanwhile, 72 percent of women in the United States and 78 percent of women in Brazil perceive bias in their performance evaluations."
It's not about these fields not being appealing to women, it's about women feeling pushed out, unwelcome, and purposely stalled/kept back from achieving their best.

I don't think the study included Taiwan, but combining the countries surveyed (including Taiwan's Big Bad Neighbor, China) which are thankfully not all Western, along with my own knowledge and experience interacting with people in the tech industry in Taiwan, I am confident in asserting that this is a problem in Taiwan, as well. 

I've taught classes in which the only woman in that company I've met has been a secretary or HR representative. I've eaten dinner in big-company fabs and office cafeterias where all you see, all around you, is men (maybe a smattering of women in office clothes that hint at their working in a lay department). I've met women in those industries who speak to being the only woman in an office full of men, or who have graphed their performance evaluations to show that there have been dips - despite their best efforts and corporate promises that maternity leave will not impact your performance evaluation - the same years they've taken maternity leave. I've talked to people who admit to doing things like gossiping about new "hot" (or "cute") female hires and using their employee numbers to refer to them (so they, and their employee photo, will be easy to look up). Those same men have not understood why that's undermining to their female colleagues and women in general. When you're judged more on your appearance than abilities generally - and women demonstrably are - and then your appearance becomes a major conversation point (not your abilities), and you're treated differently from male hires, not because you're better or you stand apart based on your work but because of your face, that's a big fucking problem. It further undermines the credibility of your work and puts your appearance, not your work, first and foremost. But that's not something easily understood, and it's taken time for me to get my point across regarding just how big of a problem it really is. 

It's a huge problem, and I'm sick of it being dismissed with "women just aren't interested in STEM." BULL. SHIT. It's time we a.) recognized that the issue is actually one of systemic, institutionalized sexism and b.) did something about it. In Taiwan and around the world.

Delta Module One: The Grand Finale

Well, our Delta Module One course finished last month, and I figured I really should say a bit more about it for those out there who might take it someday, or who are just curious.

Before I get into how the test itself was, I want to note a few things.

1. It's important to separate Cambridge ESOL (which runs the Delta Modules) with The Distance Delta (who offers the online course through International House and British Council). The Distance Delta did a great job preparing us, especially considering the fact that it was entirely online. The course was well-structured, well-planned and well-run with solid tutors giving great feedback. I occasionally disagreed with the feedback (for example, I didn't get a point because I called some text 'engaging' - I was supposed to say 'creative, for the purposes of engaging the reader' - wouldn't that text then also be engaging? Dunno, I don't understand at all why not), but my overall impression was very positive. Occasionally I disagreed with feedback, but not because I disagreed with the tutor, but because I disagreed with the guideline answers for the exam - that's Cambridge's issue, not The Distance Delta's. I would recommend Distance Delta Module One in a heartbeat to anyone interested in doing the modular Delta.
2. The test is too damn short, at least the first paper is. More on that below. Paper 1, in order to be a true, fair exam (if done in an outdated way), really needs to be more like 2 hours. As a result I feel the test - especially Paper 1 - lacks some construct validity. It's constructed so that getting too focused or "in the zone" or being the sort of person who needs to write out their bad ideas before they come to good ones (and can then go back and edit the bad ideas out), or the sort of person who knows a lot and wants to show all of it are all things that can be punished by not having enough time, and therefore not getting all the points they're capable of. It tests your ability to speed-write and have a specific kind of test-taking personality, not your knowledge of the concepts ostensibly tested. If that's not lacking construct validity, I don't know what is. And because I was a taker of that test and I have my doubts, it also lacks face validity! I don't think the score I will get is an accurate reflection of my ability...not at all. 
3. I, however, understand why there are time limits: otherwise people would write whole theses in an attempt to get perfect scores, and the markers would have to go through all that, and discard probably quite a bit of faff. I just feel the time limits on Paper 1 are too short, to the point that they ruin the validity of the test.
4. In the end I learned a lot, as well as having prepared for the exam, so I'd recommend this module to anyone who wants to deepen their understanding of past ideas, concepts and research as well as current theories, trends and debates in ELT. That's part of why I'm disappointed that we probably won't be able to do Module Two this year.
5. The test is not as scary as you may think when you begin to prepare - in the beginning it seems like those evil folks at Cambridge could test you on anything, and there's just no way to know what will pop up or how difficult it will be. In reality, they don't expect you to know everything, and there are limits on how difficult they will make each task. There are limits on how deep they expect you to go, or how deeply the tasks given will let you go. If they give you a task, there must be relevant things there to find and write about. Think of it this way: if you're playing Legend of Zelda, and Link is running all over the level board, looking behind trees or rocks or in rivers, the game creators are going to put things in that landscape for him to find. There will be coins and swords and clues and doorways and whatnot. They won't stick you in a little game-forest with nothing to find, and let you wander around looking behind bushes when there's nothing there. Like that, the exam creators left things for you to "find" as you do these specific tasks. Your job is not to fret that there's nothing to say, nor is it to re-invent the wheel (to use an old cliche), but it's to be Link and to find the things they want you to talk about, and why. If you look at it that way, it's really not that hard at all.

As for the test itself, it goes something like this:

Paper 1:

Part 1 - name five ELT terms from definitions provided
Part 2 - define four out of six given ELT terms
Part 3 - look at a class activity and list five things the students will need to know before they do it (taking their level into account)
Part 4 - some discourse analysis (relevant features of the text) followed by "grammar salad" - lots and lots of language analysis (too much, in my opinion)
Part 5 - authentic student-produced text (written or spoken) - write 3 key strengths and weaknesses of the student from the text and choose one to focus on, giving three reasons why (considering the student's level etc)

The test was not that hard, but the first part was rough. Not because it was difficult, though! I raced through the first and second part (where you have to list or define terminology), skipped part 3 because I wanted to take a good hard look at part 4 (BIG MISTAKE), and got so into part 4 - with so much to say about it even as I cut down my word count to bullet points and sentence fragments - that I lost track of time.

I looked up at the clock one moment and thought "crap, I have ten minutes, then I have to move on". I was in the zone. I had flow. I was killing it. Thoughts were coming to me like beautifully cut diamonds, and I raced to get them on the page. I was zoomed in like I'd chugged Provigil (I hadn't).

I put my head back down and kept chugging through Part 4, looked up again after "ten minutes" only to find that 30 minutes had passed! SHIT. I didn't have enough time to finish, so I did what I could (which was terrible work, because now I was nervous and freaked out, too) and didn't finish. Parts 1, 2 and 4 were grand, beautiful things. Part 5 was a mess; I may get a few points. Part 3 didn't even get looked at (it's worth fairly little, but still).

I blame myself for this - I'm the one who didn't manage time well. It doesn't matter that I didn't manage time well because I was too focused, all that matters is that it happened.

But I also have to add that this test is meant to examine your knowledge of relevant ELT practices and concepts and your depth of understanding, it's not meant to test how quickly you can speed-write or how quickly perfectly-formed thoughts can appear in your head and be jotted down on paper in neatly-packaged summaries. Or at least, it shouldn't test that, because what does that accomplish?

I've been saying this since before we took the test - an hour and a half is not enough time for everything they ask you to do in Part 1. It's just not. It's ridiculous. And I felt that way before I screwed up.

So what ends up happening is that people who really know the concepts tested who have either tendencies to get verbiose (*ahem*), or who benefit from time to edit and re-consider, or who just get really focused and think 10 minutes have passed when it's actually been 30 get punished not because they don't know the material (in fact, they often really, really do!) but because they were in the zone.

Why would you punish someone for getting a little too focused or having too good flow, and reward someone who muddled along and kept looking at the clock because the material was hard to grapple with? If I'd found the material harder I would have looked at the clock too!

The part of the test I finished? I killed. I put a gun to its head and made me give it all its money. I twisted its arm, gave it a wet willy and made it cry for mama. I sucker-punched it like a guy in a cheap dragon costume on the original Star Trek. I was the Incredible Hulk and the test was Loki (I don't know how to embed gifs here). HULK SMASH.

And yet, while I will probably still pass, I probably won't get a distinction or a merit. I do feel, based on the work I was able to finish, that I would have deserved one. Oh well. Life is more than the grade you get - I was just disappointed is all, because I know this stuff and I don't like that I'm being punished for knowing it so well that I stopped thinking about time.

That's why I think the exam lacks construct validity - I don't feel my score will reflect my knowledge of the concepts tested, but rather the fact that I was a little too focused for 20 minutes of my life.

Then there's Paper 2:

Part 1 - you're given a test with background information on what students it is given to and why, and you talk about strengths and weaknesses of the text, using relevant testing terminology as needed
Part 2 - you're given an excerpt from a textbook and you first write about the different indicated activities and their purpose/the intentions of their creators, considering your knowledge of ELT concepts. Then you list at least 6 key assumptions about language learning the textbook authors made in creating those activities.
Part 3 - you take more excerpts from the same text and talk about how they fit together with the previous ones
Part 4 - you're given an extract of some research, article, syllabus, comments, or theory from an educator and you are asked to unpack it using your knowledge of ELT history and other relevant concepts (usually things like giving feedback, the purpose for focusing on certain skills, giving instructions, historical and current theories and practices for language learning, dealing with errors, learning styles/multiple intelligences, that sort of thing).

This is the paper everyone thinks is so hard, and frankly, I disagree. Paper 1 is easier theoretically, but there's simply too much there to do a good job on any of it. Paper 2 has less to do, so if you're rock hard on your theory, then it's really not bad at all. You have time to actually think about what's being asked. I thought Paper 2 was great, and I'm pretty sure I killed it. It's rare, or may even be impossible, to get a perfect score on these papers, but I can't think of anything I wrote that I'd change now. I will get the highest score I am capable of on that paper. It is at least possible I'll get full marks, though unlikely.

I don't have much more to say about that one, because I wrote it out, did a golden job, had 5 minutes to look it over and everything before turning it in. 15 more minutes would have been great to perfect my answers, but I'm happy with the work I did.

In the end, I will probably pass. Brendan and I felt quite differently about the test - he got through every part and gave competent-but-not-brilliant answers (his words, not mine), and will certainly pass. I gave what I think are brilliant answers to what I finished, but didn't finish. Our scores will likely be quite similar. From one perspective, that's fair, as we're of similar intelligence despite our very different personalities. From another, that sucks, because dammit, I gave brilliant answers (or at least I think I did). Why should I get a score similar to others (not just Brendan - I actually have no idea what he wrote so whatever I say about it are his words) who muddled through and did each part well enough?

Oh well. One more month and we get our scores. We'll see then.

Up!

So I have tons of photos from Sun Moon Lake to post, and I'm working on a post about making idli in Taipei and another on the conflicting ideas of "we're all the same around the world" vs. "our cultures make us all diverse" (hint: they're both true and not even all that conflicting).

I'm also working on turning Taipei in Sepia and Blue into a story that could potentially be published somewhere. That's already happened with Spirit Mediums in Donggang, which will be published as a story called Gods Rushing In in an anthology of stories by expat women in Asia which I think is coming out next year (but don't hold me to that). So...at least I know I'm not a terrible writer, even though my blog posts are riddled with errors, run-on sentences, half-sentences and all sorts of organizational problems. Yay!

But I seem to have a fair amount of bloggers' block, because I haven't been able to sit down and hammer any of this out.

It could be partly because I've been in front of the computer too much for other reasons - since I've given notice at work and started up as a freelancer I've managed to secure a pretty good seminar contract, and that required creating my own materials (for giving good interviews in English).

But I think it's mostly for three reasons:

First, I have four or five friends who are leaving or probably leaving Taiwan in the fall or winter. Two want to go back to Canada, one is definitely going back to the USA, one is likely doing the same, and one is moving to the USA to be with her fiance. Of course I'm really happy for all of them and I want only the best for them as they make their way in life! I just can't help but feel a little down that in the near future I am going to lose something like a third of my social circle. Obviously I'm not hanging on any one friend, it's just that losing five (well, not losing permanently, you know what I mean) at roughly the same time is a bit of a blow. As long as I don't guilt-trip or get all mopey-faced around these friends, I think it's fine to admit that this has me a little down, and it's not anyone's fault, and it's not like I would or want to make anyone change their plans. Add to this a friend who is moving to Kaohsiung, and damn.

I also am feeling acutely right now my lack of a female Best Friend - a BFF - (I mean other than Brendan, who really is my best friend, and that's not just a cliche) in Taiwan. It comes and goes - most of the time it's fine, sometimes I'm actually grateful to be relatively free, sometimes I feel like Brendan fits that role so well that I'm covered, sometimes I notice but it's no biggie, and sometimes I just really want someone I can call up and be all "I need margaritas ASAP. You free?" and I know she'll (I feel like this particular role is best suited to a woman in my case) either have time or make time, and that time'll be sooner rather than later. I've had friends who were like this but I don't now, and I'm feelin' it.

I know I'll get through it. I have other friends and I have Brendan.

Second, ever since the great weight was lifted off my shoulders when I gave notice at work, it's been hitting home how really and truly awful my workplace has been. It's not like I didn't know before, but just to keep myself psychologically whole while I toiled for those people, I relegated that knowledge to somewhere in the back-end of my amygdala, where I didn't have to think about it day-to-day. I've known I had to quit ever since they gave Brendan the shaft, and only stuck around long enough to build up a little savings and get permanent residency so they can't touch me visa-wise.

 (they have been known to accidentally-on-purpose screw up paperwork for leaving teachers to cause disruptions in their visas and residency permits, which causes all sorts of immigration issues and renders you ineligible for permanent residency, so this was really something I just had to grit my teeth and do so as to not risk that). Now that I'm mentally free to ponder to the fullest extent just how horrible they are, wow.

I don't even feel bad saying all of this publicly, although I won't name the company (under Taiwanese law they could sue me for that). If I need to work in an officially employed capacity again and a potential employer finds this, I feel that either they should understand what some bosses can be like in this industry in Taiwan, or give me a chance to explain myself further. If they'll do neither, I'm not sure I want to work for them. Or I'll just delete the post when it's time to look for work, if this freelancing thing doesn't work out and I need to seek it.

The problem is, what this is doing is causing me to feel bitter - hopefully temporarily but I can't be sure - about the entire English teaching industry in Taiwan, and about working under Asian (my former boss isn't Taiwanese) bosses in general. I label this as a cultural difference, and the issues here are differences in how we think based on our cultural upbringings. But it has just enough of a shine of racism to it that I don't want this thought lurking in my head to the extent that it is.

It has me not wanting to trust any potential boss who is Chinese (and I mean that culturally, not racially), especially any who own an English school in Taiwan. It has me thinking they're all awful, because every single one I've worked under has been basically awful, and most stories I've heard have also been awful. Awful in that maybe someone from the same culture could deal with all the bullshit, but I just can't.

And that is not good, my dears. That is not good at all. Not good for my career, not good for my psyche, not good for the whole "I don't want to be racist and this could be seen as racist although it's not about race, it's about differing cultural expectations" thing.

Anyway, this could be its own blog post, so I'll save the rest of my rant until then, maybe with a few happy posts - because I'm also happy, I'm not just down - as a buffer.

And third, the fact that lately, everyone I know seems to be having a hard time in Taiwan, or even openly hating it (this is related in some way to the fact that four or five of my friends are leaving or planning to leave by the end of the year).

The reasons range from "it's OK but I'm just not excited every morning to be here" to "I hate this place" to "it'd be great except for all the racism" to "I'm trying so hard to do well at work, save money and have a good time, but it's just not working out for me, I'm miserable and exhausted and I want to go home" to a Taiwanese friend who says her own people irritate the everloving hell out of her and she just wants to go back to Canada to be with her girlfriend.

And that has me down. It has me down because it has me questioning why I like it so much, and why my experiences have generally been positive - save my terrible work situation. Why do good things keep happening to me, and not to others? What is it about Taiwan that I see the good in, and they don't? I've had to think a lot about this. Also about the light that went on in my head when a friend of mine revealed that her issues stemmed mostly from her extremely racist boss, not necessarily Taiwan itself (or not only Taiwan itself). I haven't had to deal with that kind of racism, so it was a wake-up call that just because people are nice to me because I'm Paley McCracker, that it doesn't mean things are going to be all positive and happy for foreigners who are not white.

I think this - what do I see in Taiwan that others don't? Why have I had good experience when others haven't? Or why do I see great things where others are merely "meh" about it all? - also deserves its own post so I'll stop there, too.

Oh yeah, and there's a fourth. I've had a minor but distressing health issue these past few weeks that I'm currently being tested for. I'm awaiting the results (don't worry, it's not life-threatening or even long-term threatening) but the likely culprit is a hormone imbalance that is probably wreaking havoc on my emotions without my realizing it.

Anyway, that's where I'm at. A big ol' swirl of emotion. I'm not unhappy. Life is actually quite nice since I've given notice at work. I'm trying to travel more but not succeeding. I'm starting the DELTA Module One in September, online.

I've just got a lot on my mind and some of it is getting me down.

Divided We Beg...or do we?

So, I'm not far from declaring officially, to my company, that I won't be signing a new employment contract. I'm posting this online because with only 2 months to go until my current contract is up, I feel it doesn't matter if they find this (although they probably won't). My decision is final. I'll be willing to work freelance for them if there are a few classes or seminars they want me to take (loyally renewing classes, for example, or seminars where they really need someone as deft with the material as me) but I won't stay on contract.

And that got me thinking: I have a friend who, although he does a lot of freelance work, is fiercely pro-union. He's something of a union organizer in Japan, and believes strongly in job security, well-remunerated workers, company-sponsored training and professional development and benefits packages that include fair compensation of annual leave and overtime limits/pay (he's also pro-single payer healthcare, as most of us Asia expats are). I'm totally with him on this - united we bargain, divided we beg and all that. Don't run, organize!

And yet, I'm still giving up employment under a contract and attempting to go freelance, at least for awhile. Why? If I really believe in all that job-security unionized-workers stuff (and I do), wouldn't I be looking for a job with more security, not less? I can't imagine what sort of work has less security than freelance work, and yet I do believe I can make a successful go of it while I start the Delta (I need time and flexibility for that) and look, at my leisure, for a job I want to take at a pay grade I'm willing to accept, with benefits that appeal to me - if I ever find it.

The thing is, my current job does offer flexibility - to me, at least. Not to anyone else. But if I tell them "no", they respect it. The pay is fair. Not as good as it could be, but my main issue isn't the money. I make enough. They generally stay out of my hair. I have to say, honestly, that this past year they've just about been good to me. They've treated me pretty well. I mean they still constantly screw up all sorts of administrative things and haven't quite figured out how to edit materials and keep the edits updated. It took them nine weeks (9 weeks!) to get a non-camera phone for me to bring to a heavily secure client site (I offered to get my own, but I wouldn't have been compensated for it). And they screwed over my husband vis-a-vis residency and work permits in a way that is totally unacceptable. I've stayed this long only because we agreed I'd stay long enough to get my APRC, run out that contract, and not sign another one.

So it's not really true that I am going freelance "for the flexibility", either, even if I am quitting some time after the fact as a direct result of how they treated Brendan.

I've come to this conclusion after a lot of thought: I'm going freelance because while I wouldn't mind a secure job with a salary and benefits*, I have found so far that there are very few companies to which I wish to be obligated. At least not in Taiwan. I mean, certainly when you agree to take on a course you are agreeing to a certain set of obligations and an amount of cooperation. That's not what I mean. What I mean is all the other stuff often found in foreign teacher contracts in Taiwan - from non-competition clauses to deposits (I didn't have one and would never agree to one, but they do pop up) to "we can sue you if" to all sorts of things that give the company power and give the teacher no agency. There is a lot in there about what the teacher must do, what the teacher owes the company, and what the company can do for itself, but often nothing about what the company must do for the teacher or what the teacher is entitled to as a paid employee.

Basically, so many contracts seem to say "We'll pay you X to do Y, and nothing more. We have the right to do A, B and C to you. You are obligated to provide D, E and F to us. You have no other rights. If you do anything we don't like, we can also do Z to you. If we do something you don't like, deal with it. No complaining." The buxiban I worked for in my first year had a contract like that, and my sister had to wade through quite a few preposterous contracts before she found a school she was willing to work for. Even then, it didn't work out - they still treated her (and everyone else) like wage slaves. (Her current buxiban is generally better, although she does not have two consecutive days off).

Wake up and smell the capitalism, I guess.

Why the hell would I sign something like that again, now that I have an APRC and no longer have to?

And as a result, despite my being pro-union and pro-job-security and pro-employer-employee cooperation, freelancing is more appealing to me than formal employment at one firm. No firm, so far, has proposed a contract that enticed me enough to sign it.

One reason, to be honest, I am not signing a new contract is that I see no reason why I can't do just as well taking classes with other companies. I understand why my company doesn't want employees doing that (I wouldn't either), but other companies pay better, can offer classes when mine does not, and so I don't wish to be an employee anymore.

I've met some good bosses in Taiwan - Brendan's current boss seems like a good guy from what I know of him (might be doing some freelance for them, fingers crossed), and the company I'm currently arranging some freelancing classes with for once I'm free are good guys, but the normal obligations of teaching a class are enough for me. I see no reason to obligate myself further. Fortunately, they're on board with that idea. I talked awhile back to another well-known business English outfit. They came pretty close to what I was looking for: paid time off, year-end bonuses, housing allowance, set hours with no overtime, fair teaching hours. At the time they had no openings - it was just an informational meeting - but I'd consider them, depending on salary offered. One turn-off was the fact that the paid leave was set according to their schedule; you really couldn't take time off outside of it. That would normally be fine as the time off given was quite generous, but if I'm going to go abroad to do my Delta Module 2, it may not work for me.

And for other schools and companies, if they can't or won't offer me a contract that gives me real agency, freelancing is still more appealing. I'll take freedom without security to employment without agency.

So, basically that's it. That's how this pro-union, pro-job security, pro-formal employment with benefits girl decided to forgo job security and formal employment with benefits and hit it up freelance-style. I hope things change job-wise in Taiwan for us qualified teachers (I've got nothing to say regarding 22-year-olds with no experience who are coming over for a few years of fun, although maybe some of them will turn out to be solid teachers and will stick with it, who knows?).

Until then, you can find me in my home office, doing my own thing.

*Some benefits bosses in Taiwan might want to consider when hiring qualified teachers: salary with set working hours, REAL year-end bonuses (not NT$6000, try one or two months' salary), regular performance reviews with REAL raises (NT$25/hour is not a raise, it's a joke), paid annual leave and paid Chinese New Year leave, training support - and not the "unpaid worthless training on a Sunday morning that counts toward no qualifications and isn't run by professionals" kind, but the "we'll support you in getting actual certifications and taking actual courses that count for something" kind). Offer me that and I might want to come work for you.

So...why are so many expat women "trailing spouses"?

Before I begin, a quick link:

Call for submissions - stories from expat women in Asia - deadline is coming up. I just found this, or else I would have posted it earlier. I may submit - it depends on what I can write and be happy with between now and February 28th, with a trip to Sri Lanka in between.

Awhile back I was asked to review a book put out by Expat Women, a site for...well, for expat women. I did so, giving it mostly a positive review, with a few things I had concerns about - mainly that while it was a good resource for one demographic of expat women, which didn't happen to be my demographic. That this was fine by me because hey, that's how any media item has to be marketed. That's true for TV, music, movies, books and more.

The demographic the book was targeted to seemed to be expat women who are "trailing spouses": the wives of men sent abroad for work. They tend to not work - often they can't - are more likely to have children (and obviously be married), and be more concerned about things like finding friends when you're not in your party-smarty youth, raising children abroad, keeping marriages together, dealing with culture shock when you're not hear as per your own life plan, leaving work behind and sacrificing for your spouse's career. There is other advice in the book beyond that, of course (it truly is a good book), but this was clearly the demographic of women it is aimed at.

That got me thinking - why? Why are there so many "trailing spouse" wives, and not more "trailing spouse" husbands or women who come over independently? I know quite a few, but there aren't many (any?) resources directed at us: the scale seems to be tipped in favor of the non-working trailing expat wife. There is nothing wrong with being that, mind you - I just wonder...why is it the norm? Why when these employees are sent abroad, is it assumed that the man was the one sent over, and his wife is the one coming along? Why does it happen that it's so often men, and not women? Where are the trailing husbands? (I've already asked where the independent women are - although I've met more since I wrote that post). Where is the advice for the working woman abroad, the female breadwinner expat, the woman trying to make it on her own, or as someone who makes a equal or greater economic contribution to her family? Where is the advice for the woman who decided to go abroad on her own and met someone there, or who was the driver of that decision in a family or couple? Where is the advice for working couples abroad where the challenges of expat life (especially the kind I live, without company-paid drivers and maids) commingle with the challenges of both spouses working?

I've tried to do this for expat women in Taiwan - looking at rape, divorce and abortion legislation, socializing, dating and marriage, sexism in society, in the expat community and at work, working generally and resources for women, but I'm just one woman in one country with advice targeted at this one small island nation, and there truly are a dearth of other resources out there.

I'm asking these questions because that's who I am. I decided to come to Taiwan on my own. I didn't come with a company and get a sweet expat package (I wouldn't want to give my life over to a company to get that sort of package a few decades later, so that's fine). Brendan and I got together here, and I have generally been either an equal economic force in our relationship, or the breadwinner. I didn't sacrifice to come here: this is where I've built my career, because I want a career. I have no idea what it would feel like to be a trailing spouse, and so advice aimed at "expat women" that is actually aimed just at the trailing wives doesn't do much for me. I don't have the time for "coffee mornings", the issues associated with coming over for someone else's job, or access to play groups or various clubs aimed at wealthier expats.

Here are a few things I've come up with to investigate why this might be - why the 'expat woman' is so often reduced to an assumption of being here for her husband's job and not working herself, and why that assumption is so often correct:

Companies that send people abroad fear sending a female employee to countries with sexist work cultures (or just cultures full of sexism generally):

I do think this happens more often than people like to admit. They have an opening in, say, Tokyo or Korea, where drinking too much and going to "special KTV" or girlie bars are all a part of doing business. They figure "well, we could send this really qualified woman, but for that kind of networking people would be more comfortable with a man, so let's send this other really qualified man." It's not that someone less qualified gets the job, necessarily (although that may happen), it's that equally qualified women get passed over.

And that's just for East Asia - imagine what it's like for positions open in places like Riyadh.



Sexism in regional offices makes it harder for the head office to send a woman over:

This kind of ties in to the previous heading: sexism in the home office might be a part of what keeps women back, but sexism in the regional offices where they'd be working also likely has a lot to do with it. Just as the head office might think "she can't network with key people in that culture, because there, that's what men do", and the regional office might be thinking the same thing, and doing what they can to keep women from being transferred over.

I haven't heard of this being an issue in Taiwan - but that's just me, so I do welcome other observations - but I have heard of it being an issue in Korea, China, Japan and the Middle East.


Women just aren't going for these jobs...

1.) ...because they are less likely to decide to uproot their families for work

I see this a lot. More and more women are breadwinners and are dedicated to their careers, but the balance is still tipped in favor of men. A lot of women get to the point where they might be offered highly skilled and well-paid work abroad, or an overseas transfer through their company, but they decide not to do it. What will their husband do (I would say "this is the same question as "what will my wife do?", but we seem as a society to have a different answer for that, and that's not right)? What about kids' schooling, if that's an issue? What about extended family? What about our home? What about... ... ...?

That, at least, is one popular narrative, and one I'd argue is more expected from women by society than men, who are still more likely to see it as "I have this great new work opportunity, it could be amazing for my career, we'll make it work and the family will survive."

Something similar happened with a Taiwanese family I know: a husband and wife I know - the husband was looking at job opportunities abroad (with the idea that he'd bring his family, although it would not necessarily be ideal for them). The wife had had similar opportunities, but chose not to take them for the sake of her family - his "it wouldn't be ideal" was her "I'm not going to go". He put his career first, with the blessing of his wife. While his wife probably would have gotten her husband's blessing to take the opportunities she had, she didn't. I am sure that this was the right decision for her on an individual level, but it is an example of why there's a problem on a larger scale.

I don't think that's a difference in attitude inherent in male and female biology or instinct, or if there is some root in such things, I don't think it's the main reason. I blame nurture, not nature, for this gendered narrative. I blame socialization into gender roles and societal expectation of how a woman relates to family and career vs. how a man relates to them. The only way around it is to change - naturally, because you can't force these things - how we socialize our daughters vs. our sons. When a generation of women grows up both consciously and unconsciously confident that if she so desires, she can take those career plunges and her family will be OK, things will change. But only then.


2.) ...because they fear sexism in other countries

This is a real concern, because there is sexism in other countries. There is also sexism in America: I guess it's sort of "the beast you know" in your own culture, whereas in a new one it's big and scary and impenetrable, and seems impossible to fight. I can see how a woman who might have otherwise been open to moving abroad might get scared off by hearing about the sexism there. There are probably Western women avoiding parts of the Middle East for fear that she'll have to dress in a way she doesn't wish, or interact with men in ways that make her feel uncomfortable: sometimes, it makes you uncomfortable to be too modest - it makes you feel like you're being put in your place, shoved down, made lesser, by the culture forcing you to interact "modestly" with men, or not at all. After the gang rape on a Delhi bus made international news, a lot of women I know are concerned about life in not just Delhi, but India as a whole. Many are shocked that I've traveled there alone and been there so many times.

I can imagine it putting you off going for pleasure or study, or independent work - "why live in a country where there isn't even lip service to female equality, and I truly am considered lesser?" - or as an overseas transfer - "I'm not sure I want to go to Korea if I have to go toe to toe in drinking with colleagues and counterparts".

Yet another reason to battle sexism globally, not just locally.


3.) ...because they "simply don't want them"

I don't actually buy this, but I've heard it said (by men, and some older women), so I'll address it here. If you do hear this, it's more a function of the reasons above (#1 and #2) than any actual innate lack of desire to work abroad. There will always be individuals who do or don't want to live abroad, for whatever reason. That, however, is not determined by gender beyond that point that socialization attempts to make a distinction. Don't believe the evo psych whackjobs on this one.


There are too few women at positions high enough to be considered for overseas transfers:

Kind of similar to not uprooting family to an overseas location, but with a broader, deeper undercurrent. Women are more likely to sacrifice their careers for family - if they keep working, they're more likely to take fewer hours, be offered and take fewer promotions, get smaller raises, and just plain not make it to high enough positions in their companies to get themselves transferred abroad. Women who want to move abroad for their own reasons, who intend to find their own work there, tend to do better in this area, but for women in established positions in international firms, this is yet another thing the "you can't have it all"/"nobody asks a man how he balances a career and a family" glass ceiling has taken away from us.


A wife/family is more likely to acquiesce to her husband's overseas assignment than vice versa:

How often have I heard it said among friends back home - "I had some opportunities abroad, but I didn't take them because my husband didn't want to go. I didn't want to be long distance, so I stayed"? More than you'd think, and more than I'd like. One of my friends once talked of traveling the world and moving abroad for a time (yet another of our friends had taken the plunge and moved to Morocco). She didn't go because her boyfriend (now husband) was really not interested, and hates flying. I like the guy, he's great, and very supportive of her otherwise. He's solid. But it can't be denied that she didn't try the expat or world traveler thing, even for a time, as a sacrifice for her relationship. I am sure it was the right decision for her in a personal sense, but if the personal is in some way political, it is one example of why we don't see that many women abroad.


Women feel more social pressure to settle closer to "home":

I already wrote about this - but my point still stands. In a world where women are socialized to prioritize family and men are socialized to prioritize independence and breadwinning, many women find it more difficult to uproot and leave home for farflung locales (although many do).

The Old Boys' Network of cushy expat assignments makes it difficult:

I think this also happens more often than you'd think - not a big issue with women like me who come over and find work independently - I wasn't interested in being tethered to a company that could send me or return me home on a whim, based on what was best for them, and not what was best for me (I'm doing more of my own freelance thing these days for that reason - I'm sick of career decisions that impact me being made by companies looking out for themselves, and not for their employees. I understand that that's just how business works, but I'm not interested in participating).

But with women who do go that route, they may find themselves shut out to some extent. Those jobs, where they still exist (and I am not convinced they should exist, with more and more qualified local talent able to take such positions), can be pretty sweet. It's not unusual (although it is becoming more so) to have the house provided for you - and the digs are nice, often downtown luxury apartments with hotel-like amenities or full-on houses with pools and views, company cars and drivers, maid service, a competitive salary by American, not local, standards (unless that place is Europe), home leave, paid-for airfare and relocation costs and more. I can see how those in charge - mostly men, still - would want to get their buddies into such positions.

The stereotypes about expat life cause women to internalize the idea that these jobs are not open to them:

Books by expat women for expat women tend to focus on women who stay abroad for a few years, not long term, who travel rather than work (although some stories involve women working), and advice tends to center, as I said above, on trailing spouses, not on breadwinning wives abroad. Conversation on these topics still assumes man-as-breadwinner is the norm, book clubs, craft clubs, children's play groups and coffee mornings are all for women (who are assumed to not be working), articles and news spots that involve expats tend to involve men, and media and resources tend to assume male-breadwinner-female-homemaker. When they're geared at women, they tend to be specifically for women, rather than being a resource for all that women can also enjoy.

What women do get are things like this (skim right past the idiotic, sexist and horrifying intro to the copy of the WSJ article) and this CNN piece, which just assumes that most female expats in Thailand are trailing wives. (Expat Ladies in Bangkok is a fairer and better resource, by the way. It acknowledges the many trailing wives who make up its readership, while also assuming that many readers are there on their own or are breadwinners in their families, the driving forces behind why those families are in Bangkok at all).

There's also this (yet it does acknowledge the need of things to change - it doesn't take the issue with a grain of salty acceptance), this (not a fan) and this, which does treat it as a two-gender issue, but the example in the lede is still a woman moving for a man and his job.

A cursory Google search for "trailing spouse" will turn up article after article in which lip service is paid to male trailing spouses, but the ledes, examples and basic assumptions still seem to be that of women taking such a role. One is actually called "Trailing Wife", and all firsthand accounts are written by women in that role.

When women see images of expat men that evoke bars, cars, offices and women, and then see images of expat women that evoke coffee mornings, play groups, book clubs and directing housekeepers, and when advice for expats aimed at men is all about work and travel, and advice aimed at trailing spouses is all aimed at women, it's not hard to internalize those images to the point where that's just what you picture when you picture an expat of either gender. And yes, it may well be a part of what keeps women from going after these jobs, or just making the jump.


Single women are more likely to not want to stay that long if the dating scene doesn't work in their favor:

Already covered this here and here.


Women are "not as adventurous as men":

I think this is straight-up bullshit. I'm only including it here because I've heard it said. From a friend of mine, no less (Taiwanese and male, if it matters). A friend I've lost touch with for unrelated reasons, but still.

It's just not true.


And so, now what?

I've become more aware of these issues recently, and thought to myself: OK, I can write about why this might be the case, but am I prepared to back it up, and to do a better and more thorough job of writing posts of interest to expat women, especially those in Taiwan, who are here independently or who are breadwinners? Women who are the driving force behind why they are here, rather than trailing behind (again, nothing intrinsically wrong with that)? Am I prepared to try harder to even things out a little bit?

Yes, I am. Although I'm not here on a cushy expat job, and have never lived that kind of lifestyle, I am here through my own maneuvering and I am a breadwinner. I may not be uniquely qualified, but I am a voice.

That's one of my resolutions for the new year: more articles for the expat women in Taiwan who are here of their own volition. Let's see if I can keep to that.

Throwdown: Taipei vs. Shanghai

So, last month we took advantage of the 48-hour transit visa allowance for foreigners transiting between countries via Shanghai. It was a great way to see the city without all the expense and trouble of getting a Chinese visa. Which, you know, is a lot of expense and trouble (I know, I'm American, I can't imagine how difficult it must be for a lot of Chinese to get visas to the USA - glass houses and all).

Before our trip had really begun, as we left Shanghai for New York, I was casually offered a job there while stretching my legs at the front of the plane and chatting with other passengers. Another friend said that during her visit to Shanghai, she had a job opportunity pop up too. Both would have been very well paid. For all the speculation on the Chinese economy, one thing is for certain: if you're talented and want to make it in Shanghai these days, you can.

And yet, this post is not my announcement that we're moving to Shanghai. I'm still here in Taipei. The thought though - the fact that it would be so easy to just make that happen, prompted me to consider the relative merits of the two cities. Why do I choose to stay in Taipei? What's the pull? What about Shanghai would be better? Let's take a look.

Because that's how my photos appeared, let's start with architecture/general environment:



That's a classic shot of The Bund, but people generally don't go to The Bund every day. That said, Shanghai is peppered, and not just in the French Concession, with gorgeous old buildings that have mostly been preserved:





These two are at the popular spots of Nanjing E. Road (above) and the heart of the French Concession (below). But there's more to it than that:



I love Taipei's older buildings and Japanese-built brick shophouses. I love the charm of the Western end of the city. And yet, I have to give this one to Shanghai: Taipei has its share of heritage buildings and charming architecture, but Shanghai has more of it, and it's more accessible throughout the city. Sorry Taipei.

Tourism:

The famous Yuyuan Gardens

Yuyuan Gardens' Starbucks gives you a good view of the tourist mayhem outside

Shanghai isn't the most tourism-site packed city in China. It's got a few great things (a fantastic museum, some shopping areas, People's Square, Yuyuan Gardens, Nanjing E. Road, The Bund, the river cruises) but it doesn't have, say, a great, I dunno, wall or anything like that. You could fill up a few days in Shanghai doing touristy stuff, but beyond that, it's a city to live in rather than visit.

That said...everyone seems to visit it anyway. I don't blame them - it really is a cool city. What this means, though, is hordes of tourists - more than you'll see at the National Palace Museum, Sun Moon Lake, Taroko Gorge or Taipei 101 - jammin' up Yuyuan Gardens and bringing out the touts. We got approached so many times by people who would just not leave us alone: "HEY LADY! Watch? You buy watch! WATCH WATCH WATCH WATCH WATCH! Watch!!!!" "Excuse me, can you take our picture?" (as a ruse to get you into a teahouse that will extort huge sums from you for a 'tea ceremony'), people approaching us with everything from fancy laser pointers to changepurses to in line skates (?) every minute or so. It got tiring. One thing I like about Taipei is that while there are tourists, I can enjoy the city unmolested. Point: Taipei.

Money Money Money $$$:

 

There are a quadjillion job opportunities in Shanghai, and with some of 'em you can make bank. Especially in recent years, a lot of my students who used to take business trips to Guangzhou now take them to the Shanghai area (more like Kunshan). It is, basically, the closest thing the world has to a Land of Opportunity right now. I don't know how long-termers deal with visas (can one even get permanent residency in China? Not Hong Kong - I know that's possible after 7 years - but China?) but if that's what you want - make it here, so you can make it anywhere - Shanghai's the place for you. I could quite possibly land my white butt up at the airport and get myself a corporate training or in-house position like...snap. That quick.

On the other side, my poor beloved Taipei. I *heart* you, Taipei, but your job market sucks. Unemployment is low, but underemployment is ridiculous (I'd emphasize that with a "ricockulous", but I'm pretty sure that went out of style 8-10 years ago. Young ones, what say you?). Almost everyone I know, including several of my colleagues and peers, and pretty much every Taiwanese person I know, is both underpaid and underemployed, with the bonus of being overworked. There's no end in sight: the government clearly doesn't give a damn. They think cut-rate skilled labor makes Taiwan "competitive". No, it just causes brain drain, stagnation and unrest. What I wouldn't give for a minute with Ma Ying-jiu to tell him exactly what I thought of his governance. I know I'm not the only one.

I mean, just don't even get me started on the job market for English training in Taipei. There are opportunities, but a lot of companies seem to think skilled corporate trainers should be happy with NT$60,000 or so a month (that's not my wage, if you're curious, but I'll stop there) or less than $1000 an hour depending on the contract offered. No, dude. I've worked my way up in this career and acquired mad skillz so I could get paid, not so I could be your butt monkey. I figure either freelance work or in-house training would be a better deal, so that's what I'm keeping an eye out for. I'm done with companies that would farm me out to different businesses and then pay me a (laughable) cut of the fee.

And why is all the skilled labor in Taiwan willing to work so hard for so little? Why? They think they have no choice. I hope it does erupt into real unrest. Maybe a rash of organizing, unionizing and strikes. Like "The Jungle" except without the mutilations and canned meat. Then maybe something will change.

In short: I love you Taipei, but no. Shanghai wins. Stay in Taipei if you love Taipei. I do. But if you want to really make it...go to Shanghai.

Food:

Shanghai has more and better Western and international options than Taipei, but the convenience store food can be downright gross (do NOT buy a sushi roll in a Shanghai Family Mart - and don't say you weren't warned. JESUS.) There aren't a lot of convenience stores, and there are very few street food choices. As a colleague once said to me: "in Taiwan it's like, if you want food, good food, just walk out on the street. It's practically on display - 'look at all our food! Come eat! Food!' In China it's like a mile of wall and then some dead buildings. Maybe a bank or some other shop. But no food. I was walking around and I was all like, 'where...where...is the food?' Even searching for breakfast - near People's Square so we weren't sequestered off in the middle of nowhere or anything - I had to walk for several minutes longer than I would have in Taipei to pick up food and coffee, and even then I ended up at a Cafe 85.

We ate well in Shanghai - that dinner at Jesse was truly memorable, the crab changed my life - but otherwise, Taipei wins. Better food and more of it. You don't even have to look for it. And you can get that crab in Taipei if you want.

I mean, even when there is street food, they imitate Taiwan!



See?

People:



Both cities have their interesting characters - just see above - but I don't think anyone would argue that Shanghai has friendlier people, or even as friendly people - in Taipei. A friend of mine went to Shanghai for five days recently and said that people were not only brusque and unsmiling, they were downright rude - brushing her off even after asking something in Chinese. People warned us that service in restaurants was not exactly like what we've come to expect in Taipei. There are those ever-irritating "WATCH WATCH HEY LADY YOU BUY WATCH" people, too.

I didn't find Shanghai people quite that rude, however. Employees at restaurants and bars were mannered enough, although maybe not as inherently nice as those in Taipei (and let's be honest, there are some real jerks in Taipei). Nobody openly brushed me off. I did get the sense, however, that if I lived in Shanghai people would generally not be as friendly or welcoming as Taipei. It might well take me a lot longer to make local friends. I also get the feeling that there's a larger contingent of shady expats, just because there are more expats overall. I got the feeling there'd be more "I'll be polite to you, but we'll never be close because you foreigners can't understand our 5,000 years of Chinese culture" than in Taipei.

Winner: Taipei. Not even a contest.

Transportation:

Shanghai's subway is fine, but it closes far too early in a city with more expensive cabs. Some trains leave their origin station as early as 10:30. What the what? Taipei isn't much better, but the buses make some sense, the trains close at midnight, the MRT system is beautiful and clean, and taxis are cheap. Taipei wins.

Nightlife:

Glamour Bar at M on the Bund

This is a tough one. Shanghai has cooler bars, a more international scene, more places to go, and a greater variety of choices. That said, those choices seem to be overrun with expats (not always a bad thing unless it's a meat market, which in Taipei it often is), are definitely too crowded and cover charges and drink prices are ridiculous. They rival New York. You have to wait awhile to get into some places. I've never had to wait in Taipei, and I rarely have to pay a cover charge. Drinks are not cheap, but not horribly expensive either. You can go out for a night in Taipei and not ruin yourself. The only time we went and got truly ripped at Saints & Sinners (a friend had just lost her job and was in a bad place) with a group, and got the insane bill, it was $8000NT ($260 US or so) for 5 people. That's not too bad, seeing as I collapsed on a pool table at one point.

But...but...cardamom mojitos! Try finding a regular mojito in Taipei! (you can, by the way: China White has them. But at that place you feel like you should be doing lines in the bathroom or the staff'll kick you out).

But..Taipei has a whiskey bar and I can actually afford to go to it!

Score: tie.

Pollution:

Don't even get me started. You can't see the end of the runway at the airport most days in Shanghai. It's not as bad as Beijing, but Taipei wins.

Freedom:

Well, I couldn't check Facebook or Blogger and had trouble with gmail (it worked on my iPhone app but not via regular Internet connections). You can see those sites, if you're willing to circunvent the law (and I was, because screw that, but with just one day it wasn't worth figuring out how). You can more or less say what you like in Shanghai, but you can't necessarily say it to a public audience and you certainly can't publish it consequence-free.

In Taipei I might be pissed at the current state of things, but at least I can say so. I can even protest. I can go online unfettered. Taipei wins.

Shopping:

Another tough one. Shanghai's got more Chinese-style stuff that foreigners like, and more options. Both cities have a varied and fascinating design scene. There are more choices in clothing for foreigners of different sizes in Shanghai, and more stores not available in Taiwan (Sephora, The Gap - not that I would go to The Gap). But everything is more expensive, and those super nice teapots and silk scarves can be found in Taipei if you hunt...and for less. Also, Taipei has night markets, but Shanghai has more "stuff from around China". While there's more variety and more to appeal to tourists in Shanghai, you can afford more in Taipei and still get some pretty cool, locally-made stuff. I think I'll give this one a tie.

One thing both cities have in common - people with tiny dogs:




In conclusion:

Shanghai gets points for nightlife, money, shopping and architecture. That's 4.
Taipei gets points for food, people, nightlife, shopping, transportation, freedom and pollution. That's 7, but I'm going to take away one point because wage stagnation and underemployment in Taiwan is so damn bad that it deserves to lose a point, because f*** you, government for not doing anything. Like, not even trying. Like, trying to keep it that way. So that's 6.

In sum: Shanghai's got a lot going for it, but I'll stick with Taipei. It wins 6-4. I do love it here. So friendly. So much cleaner. So much easier to get around. And...food.

Some Links

A few links for ya:

Myth Busting the Gender Pay Gap - if one more person tries to tell me it's because "women have children and then work fewer hours so it makes sense that they'd earn less", then Imma Get Violent.

It reminds me of a discussion with a local friend that someone related to me once: she (the local friend) was earning about 20% less than her male colleagues for the same work at some company in Taoyuan. Not only was she not a mother, she was single. My friend (a foreigner) asked if there was anything she could do about that, or if she might complain or work to change things.

"No, I can't. I'd get fired, and then they could go and tell the other companies not to hire me," she said (in short - blacklisting). "There's nothing I can do, that's just the way it is."

Schools Blasted Over Sexist Uniform Policy - apparently, some schools were trying to force girls who wanted to wear pants to provide proof of gender identity disorder. Leaving aside the aesthetic qualities of most school uniforms, especially in Asia, it's ridiculous to decide that a girl who wants to wear pants (because, hey, pants are more comfortable) must provide medical proof of a "disorder". That's not only ignorant toward those who are dealing with gender identity issues, but toward the simple fact that it's not weird for a girl to want to wear pants.

In Chinese: Taiwanese Woman Must Go to India to Wed Her Indian Fiance - aaaaaaannnddd apparently India is an "extremely high risk country" when it comes to international marriages, so Taiwanese who wish to marry Indians must, if this is taken as precedent, go to India to do so. First, why is India an extremely high-risk country in terms of marriage? Sure, it's not as developed as Taiwan, or even China (although, to be honest, I enjoyed my time in India far more than China and while it was pure chaos in India, the process of how things worked wasn't so maddening. I didn't find China to be that much cleaner than India, either, but I lived in rural China). But I don't exactly see massive numbers of Indians trying to marry their way into Taiwan for a better life, so what gives? I realize that around the world there are problems of "marriage for a visa" and "mail order marriage" - the second one being a tricky and complex issue in Taiwan - but come on. Secondly, this exposes a problem worldwide - in a sometimes-overzealous attempt to crack down on bride-buying and marriage-for-visas, a lot of couples who love each other and just want to get married have to jump through a lot of labyrinthine and migraine-inducing paperwork, go to some very expensive lengths (often including periods where one person can't work in the country in which they live, or one has to go abroad for awhile regardless of whether they can afford it), and at the end, risk being denied the right to marry. Any country can do this - it's not just a problem in Taiwan. Shame on you, Taiwanese government, but also shame on you, too, governments of the world.

 Amazon reviews for "binders" (full of women).

I realize that the actual phrase R-Money used was just as poorly stated as Obama's "You didn't build that" and he was trying to say he was interested in hiring more qualified women to his cabinet. I'm not hating on the idea that he tried to source qualified women because he didn't know where to find them already. The problem is, he didn't - he didn't ask for those binders, they were given to him, and his admittedly not bad stats on appointments of women after he was elected governor didn't stick around - they slid to levels lower than when he initially took office.

In the end, though, trying to have a conversation and effect real change in how women are treated, how bad the pay gap really is, and how underrepresented we are in the higher, more influential levels of business and politics has done nothing. As the Department of Labor blog notes, it's been 50 years since the first push for equal pay, and we still don't have equal pay. It's not working, or at least not well enough. So...it's time to get snarky. Maybe then people will wake up and realize what we're trying to say.

I LOVE MERYL STREEP

And finally - apparently Next Media is outta here. Sad. For all their occasionally ridiculous coverage, I liked 'em. Does this mean no more hilarious cartoons on international news topics?

The State of Women: Two Links

Just a couple of articles worth reading:

Chinese officials free mother who was imprisoned for lobbying for harsher sentences for the men who raped her daughter

Company fined for gender discrimination in Taiwan

As a friend noted, it is progress that they were investigated and fined at all: a lot of gender discrimination goes on openly and unapologetically. I feel the fee was on the low side, but it is a warning to other small, local companies that this sort of sexism at work is not legal and won't be tolerated under the law.

Here are some hot guys for you

I figure since we're back on Computer Xiaojies (or "booth babes"), that if we can't have a fair world in which women
never fear the fine line of admiration vs. objectification, then I'll give a little somethin' to the other team. I'd prefer that we objectify nobody, but as long as the playing field is not fair, I don't see why I would need to play fair.

My friend Steven and I are fighting over bottom row, second guy from the right. I guess it depends on which side of the Strait he's on.

Har har. See what I did there?

From here - no, I don't subscribe. Blame Steven.

In the spirit of my continued interest (and hopefully yours) on the topic of women in tech, here are two more things worth reading:

Klaus on "Booth Babes" (thanks for the quote shout-out, Klaus - glad someone cares about this issue and is approaching it honestly without calling women who are concerned about it bitter harridans or whatever)

And Slate talking to Genevieve Bell on women in tech.

Success and Having Children in Taiwan

Go read this now.

Why Women Still Can't Have It All

This is really a USA-based article, but still worth a read, very thorough and very articulate. A lot of it holds for Taiwan, too, but then I also think a lot of women in Taiwan choosing not to have children are doing so not for work related reasons (most jobs, let's face it, are not really worth the sacrifice, and those include a lot of low-to-mid-level Office Lady positions - although I fully recognize that a job that may not be "worth it" to me might well be very much worth it to another woman, so take my words with a Himalayan salt lamp-sized grain of salt).

I touched on this a bit the last time I wrote about the low birth rate in Taiwan - on how the main reasons are a feeling that they can't afford to have children, that they want to enjoy now-possible freedoms and comforts their parents didn't have, and gender-based expectations of who is going to take on more work raising kids is still a huge issue. It's huge in the USA, too, but, err, huger here. If that's a word. I also mentioned that the working world, if you work for a larger or international company, is actually friendlier to women, with guaranteed maternity leave and a culture where grandparents are more likely to provide free childcare (the same does not hold for smaller companies, where women are routinely kept back because of a fear they'll have kids and stop being useful to the company).

I didn't touch on what this article covers - women at the absolute top and their decisions on choosing to have kids...or not to.

In the course of my daily work I'm exposed to a lot of women at the top of their careers. CFOs, heads of departments, Taiwan CEOs, legal counsel, physicians and researchers, general managers. While I'd say it's 50-50 regarding whether those women have children, it's also far more likely that you'll find unmarried women and married women without children in those positions.

I'd say that of these - speaking only from my experience - about half don't have children, and of those about a quarter are unmarried. The unmarried women at the top that I know of seem to have no desire to tie the knot (good for them - marriage is not the be-all and end-all of a woman's life or the most important of her accomplishments): I can't come up with any examples of very successful Taiwanese women who are unmarried but have a desire to be. Far more common is marrying and not having children. One woman, who was at the top but has recently resigned from a very high-level job in finance (it even made the United Daily News), is unmarried with a child. Not notable in and of itself, but worth noting in a reflection on high-ranking women in Taiwan and the family decisions they make, especially as her departure was big enough to be reported on (I've met her - she is a very decisive woman).

The striking thing is that you'd expect, if you were so minded, to hear these women say "I would have liked to have had children, but I put my career first", or "I had always intended to have children, but then when I was finally ready it was too late" (something you do hear in the USA - at least in online comments: women who had always thought they'd have kids and then woke up one day and realized they'd never actually done so and it was either too late or almost to that point).

But they don't - most of them will very matter-of-factly tell you, if they are so inclined to tell you anything, that they had never really wanted children, or had decided early on not to have them.

I can't speak for the husbands of these high-powered women I know who do have children; I don't know them. I've been told that they're not that different from the sort of (stereo)typical "allows gendered expectations of child-rearing to continue" man you'd expect, but I don't have that on first-hand knowledge.

That's something - and seems to me to be a strong difference in attitude. A lot less ambivalence, and a lot more decisiveness. I guess if you live in a society where it's more expected that you'll have children (and a son at that! Gah!), you are more likely to be more decisive if you decide not to have them. This may have influenced a decisiveness in my own tone regarding not having children - had I stayed in the USA I might have continued to be a bit more ambivalent, because I would have had the social room to do so.

This leads me to believe that women in Taiwan who reach the top of their fields who don't have children are choosing not to not because being at the top of your field requires so much sacrifice that they forgo this kind of family life, but because they're the sorts of women who wouldn't have wanted children regardless. It's just who they are. I can relate to that - I don't want children, but it's not because of my career. I could realistically have both. It's just who I am (I might write more about that in a future post, or not).

In that way, they may be more like Peggy on Mad Men (bear with me - I've barely seen the show - please do correct me if I'm wrong and Peggy's wanted children all along) than the all-too-common-on-Internet-comment-threads American women who wanted children but wanted a career more, or who had intended to had children but ran out of time while chasing a career. My experience has shown that Taiwanese office culture is not nearly as much like America in the '60s (ie, Mad Men) as a lot of people assume it is, but still, this says something. It says something about the pressures and expectations women face in Taiwan and, as a result, who gets to the top and who doesn't.

In the end, this is true for women in Taiwan, the USA and elsewhere:

We currently live in a world where men make more money for equal work. This means that it's all too common that the parent who stays home or takes a hit to their career is the wife - because, hey, you've gotta earn a good wage for the family.

We also live in a world where, in order to get to the top (at least in the corporate world), you have to basically sacrifice yourself to your company. This is true everywhere. In Taiwan, I feel that many people have to do that anyway, even if they don't get to the top - in the USA you have more of a choice to work reasonable hours (but if you want to be "successful" in the typically expected sense, you'd better make the sacrifice). This means that the parent or parents who take that path will be giving up something - you can't have a real commitment to family and work those hours.

The difference? Women might be more likely to cut back as a result. It's not true that the working men of yore could have a career and a family - he could, but unless he was truly 9-to-5, he probably didn't get to spend as much time with that family as he would have liked. They couldn't have it then, and they certainly can't have it now, with working hours what they are.

So "making it" in the traditional sense, where you have to give up time with your family, isn't going to work if we want a truly equal world.

And we can't change things until we admit that and create a working culture where you can succeed and still have enough control over your schedule to spend real time with your family, and get rid of gender-based expectations of who will do the brunt of the child-rearing and who will take the hit to their career to make that happen.

Then, we need to create a world where a woman who wants children can discuss how it will work with her husband without the lingering expectation that she'll make the sacrifices. She'll be able to enter that discussion knowing that they'll work something out together and he's just as likely to take the hit as she is, and that the hit, importantly, won't be that bad, or that career-damaging.

Then, and only then, will we have equality, or something like it.

A Chacun Son Paradis

 Je suis au septieme ciel

Ma tour est plus belle que celle de Babel
Je vais à l'école buissonnière.
Je gère. Et dans la ville j'erre

You didn't know I spoke French, did you? Hah. That's because I only sort of speak it. I used to be pretty good, though. This song brings me back to the late '90s and early naughts, when I was something more akin to fluent in French, and also has a few lines that add, I dunno, chiaroscuro to how I've been feeling these days.

So I was sitting on the MRT this morning, coming back from my morning class, and WHAM!

It occurred to me that, as much as I might seem alright, and as much as I might have convinced myself that I'm alright, that these days I'm really not. I don't mean I'm depressed - I'm not - or even unhappy. Just that, after five plus years of life in Taiwan, I've convinced myself that I'm totally fine, I basically get it (as much as any foreigner in any country can really "get it"), no problem, and pessimism is for the weak, unless it's something really worth critiquing.

Except I was wrong, and I've been wrong for awhile, stuck up in a tower somewhere.

The truth is, I've succumbed in the time since I've returned from Istanbul to an insidious form of culture shock, where you feel like you've assimilated fairly well and gotten things on track, without realizing that there's still a lot that shocks you, a lot that angers you, a lot that you don't understand and a lot that you're not sure you want to understand lest it upset you further.

Instead of acknowledging that consciously, I've been clinging to the things I think are right, and snarking too much on the things I think are wrong, without stopping to think that maybe, sometimes, what I think is wrong.

It's come out in a weird two-barrels-blazing shoot-em-up where half the time I'm Suzy Sunshine, Queen of Optimism About Expat Life, and the other half I'm totally judgmental and close-minded, when really I should know better. At points it's been situational: when you talk to a bunch of sketchy foreign guys in one week, those skankbags make it all to easy to get a little too judgey about foreign guys in Taiwan generally. When Computex is going on and you're teaching classes of mostly male tech guys (who are great guys, mind you) and reading articles about booth babes (I call them Computer Xiaojies), it can make you uneasy about the entire tech industry and sexism in the country where you live - - which isn't going away soon. But then it's not going away in my own country, either.

At other points it's a generalized, simmering anxiety. For example - watching my students work themselves to death and having very little other than my own opinion when asked for - and sometimes when not - to fight back against this systematized and seemingly intrinsic exploitation. While working yourself to the point of exhaustion is a personal choice on the surface, it stops becoming a choice when almost every office job in Asia requires you to do so. In the USA plenty of people give themselves over to work and suffer the consequences of their own volition - but you have the choice not to. Here, you don't. Or rather you do, but it's much, much harder to come by and not possible for everyone. I don't know what to do about that, and have my own work frustrations (love what I do, hate the office), and it does set me on edge more than it should.

I've realized that, half the time, I have no idea what a lot of my local friends think. (I wrote out a bunch of examples here and then deleted them - I have local friends who read this blog and I don't want to be too specific). The only one whose mood and thoughts I feel I can confidently intuit is the very outspoken one who will always tell you what's on her mind.

Add to that a feeling like no opinion I express can be truly "right", and a feeling that, as disgusted as I am with the USA right now, at least it's my culture and country of citizenship so there are more ways for me to get involved. In Taiwan I have opinions, but not always the full story, and very few ways to get involved (and surprisingly little standing to do so). I don't feel detached totally - I feel a strong connection to my friends, my neighborhood, my students and my familiarity with the city - but it does create a feeling of hanging about like some old bit of cloth that has no real use but still hangs around the house anyway because nobody thinks to throw it away.

I don't know where it came from, when exactly it started and definitely not why. My first thought was that Istanbul, in a way that no other city I've visited recently has managed to accomplish, won my heart in a way. I'm not planning to up and move to Turkey, but it's created a weird duality where I'm happy in Taipei and want to stay, but also, oh, to go back to Istanbul. Can't I live in both? In Istanbul I dreamed of riding my bike down the riverside trail and eating wontons in fiery red chili oil. In Taipei, I'd give my left foot for some Turkish fig pudding and good baklava. Also, yoghurt, olives, Turkish coffee and pekmez that don't cost a fortune.

That said, I felt similarly about Cairo - though I like Istanbul more because it's somewhat less polluted, among other reasons -  and got over it more quickly.

So, while that could be it, I also wondered if maybe it's not my mother's health that's causing this. Her diagnosis is the first incident since moving to Taipei that caused me to seriously consider moving home, and mapping out how that would feel and what it might accomplish. It's the first incident that has really shaken me, reminding me that I will eventually have to move home, even though my life is here (or, if not here, then somewhere outside the USA). It's caused me to re-evaluate my life in Taiwan in a different light: as in, Taipei compared to home, not simply Taipei for Taipei's sake.

I don't know how to get over it - all I can say is that I'm going to try. It'll probably be OK in the end. I love Taiwan enough (perhaps my glasses are too rose-colored?), despite its faults (which perhaps I judge overly harshly or incorrectly?) that I am applying for permanent residency. I've figured it out before - how to be happy in Washington, DC when DC had a vibe that absolutely does not work for me - and getting over far more core-shaking culture shock in India. I can do this too.

Anyway, j'ai plein de tours de magie
Pour faire de l'enfer un paradis.

Big Pharma

Cyanide & Happiness @ Explosm.net


Back in the USA I hated Big Pharma.

Now I work (in part) for them.

My reasons back home were due to, well, events like those discussed in this article - affording drugs is a problem around the world, and a two-pronged issue. On one side you've got areas so poor that even low-priced drugs cost too much, and on the other you've got the USA, where people generally have more money, yet drugs are so astronomically expensive that many still can't afford them despite their exponentially better overall standard of living.

From people I know in Big Pharma back home, I can say that the argument does ring true: drugs are sold in the USA at exorbitant prices, and at far lower prices elsewhere, because companies both want to recoup clinical testing costs and make a tidy profit (a little too tidy if you ask me), and feel that the USA is the market to milk, because we can apparently "afford it". Except we can't.

It also bothers me that they throw so much money behind lobbying the government in their own interests, which mostly counter the interests of the American people, but pretty much all industries do that.

Working at a lot of pharmaceutical companies in Taiwan, though, makes me dislike the whole industry a lot less. I wouldn't go so far as to say "like" or "trust", so I'll stick with "dislike less".

I think it has a lot to do with regulation. I know the health system in Taiwan is imperfect, but it's about ten kachillion times better than the travesty of a "system" in the USA. Don't even bother arguing with me on this, I have a mother who is facing cancer that is not going to go away, and the possibility of losing her company-backed health insurance and very few options after that, so seriously, do not even start. I will tear you to shreds.

Here, we have our imperfect-but-wonderful national health insurance, and a heavy hand in regulating drug prices. I don't agree with some of the laws: the idea that doctors are forced to give certain medications first and others can only be tried later, and that some can't be tried until certain symptoms or issues occur or criteria are met, ties doctors' hands unfairly: it takes away from them what should be their expert judgment regarding what would be best for the patient and puts it in the hands of people who can't necessarily make that call: either because they're bureaucrats, not doctors, or because even if they are doctors, they're not there with that individual patient assessing that patient's needs.

The price regulations, however, I support completely. A dearth of price regulation in the USA has brought unconscionable drug prices for things people need - seriously, it's not like you have a choice sometimes, so supply and demand doesn't apply - prices people can't afford and insurance companies don't want to pay. Regulations in Taiwan have kept most prices for the same drugs at reasonable levels.

You can argue this hurts the company, and many who work in pharmaceuticals in Taiwan would agree, but the fact is that those companies are still in Taiwan, still making a profit and still see being in the Taiwanese market as something worth doing. The price controls haven't scared them away. If it were truly unbearable, companies would pull their products and shutter their offices and Taiwan would be SOL. That hasn't happened.

Those same people in the industry, while they might tell you that the price controls are an issue, would generally not argue that there shouldn't be any regulation or any cost control. In my experience (and I have a lot of experience talking to people in many different firms), while they'd like more freedom, they'd agree that keeping drugs affordable is important, and that wouldn't be lip service: they mean it. They wouldn't say it the way a PR schlub for Big Pharma back home would rattle it off a press release and then look the other way as "reasonable prices" became "$1000+ for what should be a $30 compound".

Even if they would - business is business & all - the regulations are there, and it keeps things reasonable. Not perfect, but reasonable. People get their medicine, companies make a profit, and it becomes an industry that does not inspire so much hatred and animosity. Everybody wins.

So what is all this anti-regulation hullaballoo back home? Phooey.