Sir

Marlene Zuk and Gunilla Rosenqvist, in their Correspondence “Evaluation bias hits women who aren't twice as good” (Nature 438, 559; 200510.1038/438559c), give an interesting view of women in science. Having been married to each other for almost two decades while raising two children and becoming professors at our respective universities in Taiwan, we would like to offer our perspective.

We agree that the under-representation of women in science, especially at higher levels, is primarily the result of bias in academic evaluation. The first author of this Correspondence was warned by her female adviser early in her career that women “have to try harder and do better than men, just to be able to compete with men”.

Actions intended to benefit women can also be used against them. A few years ago, the Taiwan legislature passed a workplace sex-equality law, in effect imposing quotas for women sitting on academic evaluation committees in Taiwan. One unhappy male faculty member questioned this quota by raising the question, in his university congress meeting: “Does a sex organ help a person to think [when evaluating]?”

Perceptions of male–female interactions can affect women in science too. At a faculty meeting determining the shortlist for hiring last year, Y.-H. H. spoke on behalf of the only eligible female candidate. Afterwards, he was asked by a junior faculty member whether the hiring of this young woman would “spell trouble” for his wife in the future.

Stavros Busenberg, a former professor of mathematics at Harvey Mudd College in California, who died in 1993, once commented on racism in the immediate aftermath of the 1992 Los Angeles riot: “In order not be a racist, one must consciously try not to be one.” We would say this applies to discrimination of all types.