Women In Engineering

"In 1947, a determined young woman named Marie Maynard Daly walked into Columbia University and made history. Within three short years, she became the first Black woman in the United States to earn a Ph.D. in chemistry, a feat that shattered barriers and redefined what was possible for women and people of color in science. But Daly’s greatest legacy wasn’t just her title; it was her science. At the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, Daly’s pioneering studies revealed how proteins are synthesized from RNA, a breakthrough so foundational that James Watson later cited her work in his Nobel Prize lecture on the structure of DNA. Long before the world understood genetics as we do now, Daly was already identifying the building blocks of life itself. Her brilliance didn’t stop at biochemistry. Daly turned her attention to a question that continues to haunt millions: why do hearts fail? Through groundbreaking experiments, she became the first scientist to prove the link between high cholesterol, high sugar intake, and artery blockage, as well as how hypertension accelerates heart disease. Every modern cardiovascular treatment, from statins to heart-healthy diet guidelines, traces back to Daly’s trailblazing discoveries. Despite her monumental contributions, Daly’s name has too often been reduced to a footnote in scientific history, remembered primarily as “the first Black woman Ph.D” rather than the architect of modern biochemistry, genomics, and cardiovascular medicine. Her story is one of brilliance, perseverance, and transformation. At a time when systemic barriers tried to define what she could not do, Daly defined what science could become. Her story proves that representation in science isn’t just about inclusion—it’s about innovation. Because when a voice like Marie Maynard Daly’s breaks through, the entire world changes." 🔗: https://lnkd.in/eW3EgVth #WomenInSTEM #GirlsInSTEM #STEMGems #GiveGirlsRoleModels

The “Matilda Effect” In the late nineteen sixties at Yale University, Margaret Rossiter sat in the archives surrounded by boxes of scientific records. She was researching the history of American science for her dissertation. It was supposed to be straightforward academic work, a simple tracing of discoveries and breakthroughs. But something kept unsettling her. In photograph after photograph she saw women standing at benches, working with equipment, included on laboratory rosters. Yet when she read the papers, the award citations, and the official histories, the women were gone, names missing, contributions erased-and it had been happening a long time. Women had been doing scientific work since the earliest days of research laboratories. They had simply not been acknowledged. She found countless examples. Women who designed experiments, only to see male colleagues publish the results without giving them credit, who’s discoveries were assigned to supervisors, footnotes instead of as full authors, passed over for awards that went to male collaborators who contributed less. It was not random & not accidental. It was systemic, she needed a name for what she was documenting. She found it in the work of Matilda Joslyn Gage, a nineteenth century suffragist who had written about this exact pattern. Margaret called it the “Matilda Effect”. Her dissertation became a lifelong mission. she spent more than thirty years researching and writing a landmark three volume series titled Women Scientists in America. She read letters, examined institutional policies, followed individual careers, and gathered evidence that proved women in science had been consistently undercredited and structurally excluded. Her work faced resistance. Many scholars dismissed women’s history as political rather than academic. Others insisted she was exaggerating bias. Margaret did not argue emotionally. She simply presented data. She showed documented cases. She showed patterns repeated across decades and institutions. The evidence became undeniable. Her research helped restore recognition to scientists who had been pushed out of the story. Rosalind Franklin-X ray of DNA. Lise Meitner-nuclear fission (omitted from that Nobel Prize). Nettie Stevens- sex chromosomes. Cecilia Payne Gaposchkin-composition of stars…. The Matilda Effect became standard terminology. Scholars used it to examine how credit is assigned, how publications list authors, who receives awards, and who is left out. Universities updated curricula. Margaret received the Sarton Medal, the highest honor in the history of science field. The Matilda Effect did not end in the past. It continues today. Women scientists still receive fewer citations, fewer awards, and fewer promotions. “Margaret Rossiter AHS, Oxford Univ Press” #womeninscience #genderequity

𝐈𝐟 𝐰𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐧 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐬𝐡𝐚𝐩𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐀𝐈, 𝐀𝐈 𝐦𝐚𝐲 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐰𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐧. “Hey Siri.” “Hey Alexa.” “Hey …” 🤔 Ever noticed how the voice that answers tends to be female? Not only does this reinforce outdated secretarial stereotypes, it is ironic for another reason. The majority of people behind future-critical AI systems are men. Today, only about 12% of global AI researchers are women (Source: UNESCO). AI is already reshaping how we work, learn, innovate, and solve some of the world’s biggest challenges. 𝐁𝐮𝐭 𝐰𝐡𝐨 𝐠𝐞𝐭𝐬 𝐭𝐨 𝐬𝐡𝐚𝐩𝐞 𝐀𝐈? This International Women’s Day is a reminder that ensuring women have a strong voice in the development, deployment, and governance of AI is a responsibility we all share: 👉 It starts with inspiring more girls to explore STEM and technology. 👉It continues with opening pathways into AI careers through education, development, and opportunity. 👉It requires diverse voices helping design and govern the systems shaping our future. The future of AI should be built by all of us, and work for all of us. 🙌 #IWD26

AI systems built without women's voices miss half the world and actively distort reality for everyone. On International Women's Day - and every day - this truth demands our attention. After more than two decades working at the intersection of technological innovation and human rights, I've observed a consistent pattern: systems designed without inclusive input inevitably encode the inequalities of the world we have today, incorporating biases in data, algorithms, and even policy. Building technology that works requires our shared participation as the foundation of effective innovation. The data is sobering: women represent only 30% of the AI workforce and a mere 12% of AI research and development positions according to UNESCO's Gender and AI Outlook. This absence shapes the technology itself. And a UNESCO study on Large Language Models (LLMs) found persistent gender biases - where female names were disproportionately linked to domestic roles, while male names were associated with leadership and executive careers. UNESCO's @women4EthicalAI initiative, led by the visionary and inspiring Gabriela Ramos and Dr. Alessandra Sala, is fighting this pattern by developing frameworks for non-discriminatory AI and pushing for gender equity in technology leadership. Their work extends the UNESCO Recommendation on the Ethics of AI, a powerful global standard centering human rights in AI governance. Today's decision is whether AI will transform our world into one that replicates today's inequities or helps us build something better. Examine your AI teams and processes today. Where are the gaps in representation affecting your outcomes? Document these blind spots, set measurable inclusion targets, and build accountability systems that outlast good intentions. The technology we create reflects who creates it - and gives us a path to a better world. #InternationalWomensDay #AI #GenderBias #EthicalAI #WomenInAI #UNESCO #ArtificialIntelligence The Patrick J. McGovern Foundation Mariagrazia Squicciarini Miriam Vogel Vivian Schiller Karen Gill Mary Rodriguez, MBA Erika Quada Mathilde Barge Gwen Hotaling Yolanda Botti-Lodovico

𝘈𝘳𝘦 𝘸𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘯 𝘭𝘪𝘷𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘯 𝘢 𝘮𝘢𝘯-𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘱𝘦𝘥 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘭𝘥? Yes. Without thinking twice, yes! The world was not designed for women. Not in the cars we drive. Not in the phones we hold. Not even in the way we plan cities. For decades, the gold-standard crash-test dummy was modelled on a 5′9″, 171-lb male body. The global average woman, at about 5′3″ and 137 lb, is far smaller - yet safety tests still rely on male defaults, putting women at greater risk in real-world crashes. This means that:  1. Women are 17% more likely to die and  2. 47% more likely to be seriously injured in a crash     All because the ergonomics weren’t designed with them in mind. Also, as per the WEF report, it’s shocking but only 5% of R&D funding in the healthcare sector is spent on women’s health needs globally, despite women making up 50% of the population. From medicines to AI, a lot of products and services were tested and trained on males.  It’s a pattern in how the world is built. Male is the default. Products, systems, and policies that are less safe, less effective, and less accessible for women. In India, women didn’t have equal property rights until the Hindu Succession Act of 1956, and it was only in 2005 that daughters were given equal inheritance rights as sons.   Globally, women are expected to control $5 trillion in assets in the near future. For the first time in history, women are becoming primary decision-makers for major financial choices. And yet, most products and services still treat women as an afterthought. Women influence over 80% of global consumer spending, yet while they’ve been relentlessly marketed to, they’ve rarely been truly designed for. Femtech is often misunderstood as “women-only” products. But in reality, it’s about intentional design for women’s needs, whether that’s a wealth management app tailored for first-time female investors, healthcare platforms reimagining maternal care, or everyday products built for different body types and lifestyles. This harsh reality points to a larger opportunity: • Move beyond token pink packaging and actually solve for women’s lived realities. • Build personalised, curated experiences that reflect women’s independence and decision-making power. • Rethink how we design, from finance to transport to healthcare.    As Caroline Criado Perez wrote in the book Invisible Women: “When we exclude half of humanity from the design process, we also lose half of the potential solutions.” The question lingers: Will the next decade of innovation still make women adapt to the world, or will we finally design a world that adapts to women? Video Source: World Economic Forum #Innovation #Startup #Women 

She was scrubbing floors at Harvard when her boss made a bet that would change astronomy forever. In 1857, in the gray industrial city of Dundee, Scotland, Williamina Fleming was born—an ordinary girl in an ordinary world. By fourteen, she was already a teacher. By twenty, she was married, full of hope, boarding a ship to America with her husband and dreams of a brighter life. But in Boston, those dreams fell apart. Her husband abandoned her, leaving her alone and penniless with a newborn son in her arms. Desperate to survive, Williamina took the only job she could find—cleaning floors and dusting furniture for Edward Pickering, the director of Harvard College Observatory. While she scrubbed and swept, she watched men in suits study the night sky, their heads bent over telescopes and glass plates. But Williamina had a sharp mind and a quiet fire. Pickering noticed. Tired of his male assistants making mistakes in their calculations, he decided to test a theory. He told his colleagues, half in frustration and half in challenge, that his maid could do better work than they could. And then, he gave her the chance to prove it. In 1881, Williamina Fleming—former schoolteacher, abandoned wife, and housekeeper—became one of the first women ever hired to work at the Harvard Observatory. The men laughed at first. A maid doing science? Impossible. Day after day, she sat before stacks of glass photographic plates—thin sheets that captured the faint light of stars. She studied each one, examining the patterns and brightness, the hidden language of the cosmos. Slowly, patiently, she began to understand that stars could be classified by their light. Over the years, she catalogued more than 10,000 stars. She discovered 10 novae—stars that suddenly flared into brilliance—59 nebulae, and more than 300 variable stars that changed brightness over time. Her careful system of classification became the foundation for the Harvard Classification System, still used by astronomers today to study the stars. But perhaps her greatest legacy wasn’t just what she discovered—it was who she brought with her. As supervisor of the “Harvard Computers,” a team of brilliant women who analyzed the universe from photographs, Williamina opened the doors that had always been closed. These women, often underpaid and overlooked, mapped the heavens with more precision than the men who dismissed them. In 1906, the Royal Astronomical Society made Williamina Fleming an honorary member—a rare honor for a woman in an age when science belonged to men. It was a quiet victory, but it changed everything. When she died in 1911, Williamina had mapped more of the sky than most astronomers ever would. She had gone from scrubbing telescopes to commanding them. Her story isn’t just about stars. It’s about courage. About refusing to stay in the place the world assigns you. When life pushed her down, Williamina looked up—and in doing so, she helped humanity see further than it ever had before.

Ready for some groundbreaking discoveries? This isn’t just science. It’s seismic. Some discoveries crack open the Earth. These exposed the forces inside it. Volcanoes, tectonic shifts, buried impact craters— They traced how our planet changes, and why. Their tools? Isotopes, satellites, and stubborn questions. This isn’t surface science. It goes deep. Meet 12 women who moved mountains—with data. 📌 Ida Noddack She asked: what if atoms can break apart? That idea explains Earth’s internal heat. And how we trace its age through decay. 📌 Marie-Anne Paulze Lavoisier She ran the lab that named Earth’s elements. Pioneered early mineral analysis and methods. Her work made chemistry map the planet. 📌 Julia Lermontova She decoded how minerals form and break down. Studied oil chemistry when few understood it. Her data powered early resource science. 📌 Alice Eastwood Saved geological collections in a quake’s ruins. Catalogued plant and rock records of the West. Worked in the field when women weren’t allowed in. 📌 Ellen Gleditsch Used radioactive decay to date the Earth. Helped prove our planet is billions of years old. Built Norway’s first radiochemistry lab. 📌 Adriana Ocampo Found the crater that ended the dinosaurs. Buried deep—until her maps revealed it. Led NASA research linking space and Earth. 📌 Aradhna Tripati Traces past climates using ancient isotopes. Her work sharpens our models of climate change. She builds labs—and access—for future scientists. 📌 Mariya Zuber Mapped the Moon’s gravity in fine detail. Her methods help us read Earth’s crust. She leads science from orbit to institution. 📌 Katharina Lodders Models how planets and meteorites are built. Her research decodes Earth’s elemental origins. It’s used from labs to launchpads. 📌 Darlene Lim Leads Earth-based missions to prepare for Mars. Studies extreme ecosystems to guide exploration. Brings field science to the future of space. 📌 Sian Proctor Geoscientist who trained in planetary volcanoes. Then flew to space—piloting a private mission. Her work spans lava flows to lift-off. 📌 Beatrix Potter Studied fossils and minerals before she wrote. Her illustrations taught geology before she was heard. Now her science is shelved in museums. They mapped the Earth—and modeled other planets too. Their data shaped how we build, adapt, and explore. 120 stories shared. 504 to come. If we terraform one day—will we credit the groundbreakers?

Innovation knows no gender. Reflecting on my journey as an engineer over the past 25 years, from stepping into the workforce to witnessing the remarkable strides women have made today, I am struck by both the progress achieved and the many challenges that persist. When I started my career in the late 90s, women engineers were a handful and today, I'm heartened to see more women not only entering the field but also pioneering innovations and driving meaningful change. ➡️ However, looking at the numbers, in 2023, men outnumbered women in global engineering by 86.3% to 13.7%. And despite the demand for tech skills, women constitute only 28% of engineering graduates globally. In STEM fields, they make up 33% of researchers but hold just 12% of national science academy memberships. ➡️The leaky STEM pipeline begins early and persists over time. It is not just enough to keep feeding the pipeline by increasing the number of female students. It is imperative to work towards breaking gender stereotypes through early investment in reskilling and the promotion of STEM education. Apart from making STEM education more fun and engaging, introduction to female role models and mentors can help change stereotypical perceptions related to these subjects and inspire more girls to choose and work in the area. ➡️I see technology as an enabler here. Achieving equal representation of women in the tech industry requires a collaborative effort from organisations, academia, and government bodies. At the organisational level, tech firms should focus on creating supportive structures that not only attract but also retain and nurture female professionals. Flexible working policies, improved leave and well-being benefits, and support networks serve as key factors in promoting women in the workplace. Investing in training and mentorship programs is essential to equip high-potential women technologists with the necessary skills for leadership roles. Initiatives like involving female employees in the recruitment process, hosting career fairs, and offering internship programs can help organisations move towards a more gender-balanced workforce. The future of engineering is bright, and women are an integral part of that future. By continuing to support and celebrate women in engineering, we are investing in a world where innovation knows no gender, and where the contributions of all are valued and recognized. #InternationalWomenInEngineeringDay 🎉✨

New BMJ Global Health Commentary: Governing Health Systems With a Gender Lens I’m pleased to share a new BMJ Global Health commentary, written with my colleagues Aya Thabet and Anna Cocozza, on a topic that urgently needs attention: How health system governance can close—or widen—the women’s health gap. Women around the world experience, on average, nine additional years of poor health compared with men. This disparity is not just a clinical issue. It is a governance issue. For decades, health systems have relied on a narrow definition of women’s health, focusing predominantly on maternal and reproductive care. This has left significant gaps in areas such as chronic disease, mental health, menopause, autoimmune conditions, gender-based violence, and more. Our article argues that governance itself must change if we want health systems to deliver for women. Using the WHO’s Six Governance Behaviours framework, we examine how governments, regulators, and purchasers can integrate a gender lens into the rules, incentives, and decision-making processes that shape health systems. Here are some of the key insights: 1. Deliver strategy with measurable commitments Clear definitions, dedicated budgets, and accountability mechanisms across both the public and private sectors must back equity goals. 2. Build understanding through sex-disaggregated data If systems don’t collect it, they can’t govern it. Mandatory sex-disaggregated data and transparency are essential to closing gaps. 3. Enable stakeholders by aligning incentives Financing arrangements—particularly strategic purchasing—can reward equitable, women-centred care rather than perpetuating neglect. 4. Align structures through gender-responsive regulation Licensing, training, essential medicines lists, and facility standards must explicitly reflect women’s health needs across the life course. 5. Foster relations with meaningful partnerships Women’s organisations, professional associations, and patient groups are indispensable partners in designing governance arrangements that work. 6. Nurture trust with strong accountability systems Women must have access to safe, responsive grievance and redress mechanisms—and regulators must consistently enforce protections. Why this matters Health systems are not gender-neutral. Without intentional design, the rules and incentives that govern them will continue to reproduce inequalities. By applying a gender lens to governance, we can reposition women’s health as a core system priority, not a side issue—and build accountability for equitable, respectful, high-quality care. Governing Health Systems With a Gender Lens BMJ Global Health – Clarke, Thabet & Cocozza https://lnkd.in/dwXNka4a Join the conversation #WomensHealth #GenderEquity #HealthSystems #GlobalHealth #HealthGovernance #HealthPolicy #UniversalHealthCoverage #UHC #DigitalHealth #HealthReform #HealthEquity #Accountability #Regulation #StrategicPurchasing #BMJGlobalHealth

“It’s not only a question of fairness. It’s a question of quality.” Ms Lidia Brito said during her opening address. This message resonated strongly with me during the International Day of Women and Girls in Science discussions at UNESCO HQ— because the data is clear: gender balance is not a social luxury; it’s a performance driver. Multiple global studies confirm it: • McKinsey found companies in the top quartile for gender diversity on executive teams are 25% more likely to outperform on profitability. • BCG showed that companies with diverse leadership generate 19% higher innovation revenue. • Deloitte reports that inclusive teams make better decisions up to 87% of the time. And the impact goes far beyond boardrooms. When women are underrepresented in research, the quality of science itself suffers: • Emmanuelle Valentin-Fouchs from Sanofi reported that women are often diagnosed up to 4 years later than men for several diseases because clinical data has historically been male-biased. • In car crashes, women are significantly more likely to be seriously injured or killed — partly because crash-test dummies were long modeled on male bodies. These are not abstract inequalities. They are design flaws in systems built without full representation. Gender balance is not about optics. It is about accuracy. It is about excellence. It is about building a world that works — for everyone. #EveryVoiceInScience #WomenInScience #Leadership #DiversityDrivesInnovation #Inclusion #STEM #EvidenceBasedLeadership