 |
 |
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
 |
|||
Los Angeles Times: Stocks the wrong place for nest egg
It may be tempting to invest retirement or savings money in the stock market, but Americans are overly optimistic about the equity market because of its strength in the past couple of decades, says Zvi Bodie, an SMG finance and economics professor, in the January 23 Los Angeles Times. “People are being sold a fallacy — that in the long run, stocks are safe,” he says. History shows, however, that “just as things can get better and better for stocks, they also can get worse and worse.”
Religion News Service: Aid workers may spread faith
Aid workers inspired by faith, such as the thousands doing humanitarian work in tsunami-devastated Southeast Asia, typically vow to not proselytize, according to a Religion News Service article on January 20. Yet, humans tend to be open to spirituality in times of tragedy, experts say, so religious aid workers might reasonably expect those they help to be curious about what inspired them, making church growth possible. That dynamic dates back to the Roman Empire, when Christians ministered to diseased outcasts, says Dana Robert, an STH professor and Truman Collins Professor of World Mission. “Because Christians believed in the resurrection of the body and in Jesus as a healer, they went in and nursed the sick,” says Robert, who also codirects the Center for Global Christianity and Mission. “Those who were nursed were more likely to become a Christian. Was that a strategy? No. It was part of what it meant to be a Christian: to nurse the sick.”
Boston Globe: Women still face glass ceiling
The debate prompted by Harvard president Larry Summers’ controversial remarks last month questioning whether women are genetically equipped to succeed at the highest levels of math and science has missed a salient point — men systematically shut out women from the senior job pyramid, writes David D’Alessandro in a January 28 Boston Globe op-ed. The Board of Trustees co–vice chairman argues that in business, government, nonprofits, and educational institutions alike, women face a “treacherous environment” because men are more comfortable with other men in leadership positions.
“If a man leaves work early to watch his son play in Little League, he is lauded for being a balanced guy who has his priorities right,” writes D’Alessandro, the former CEO of John Hancock Financial Services and the chair of the BU presidential search committee. “If a woman leaves work early to care for a sick child she is perceived as ‘not in control of her life.’ When a top job demands extensive travel, women, not men, are questioned about their ability to be away from their families. And, if they eagerly agree to the travel schedule, they are seen as ‘overly ambitious’ while men are perceived ‘as sacrificing team players.’ . . . Men can respond to criticism with a bit of anger, but God forbid if a woman cries. It spreads like wildfire that ‘she lacks control’ or the ever-damning ‘she’s too emotional.’
“How important are these types of innuendos?” the piece continues. “When the decision-makers’ doors close, these kinds of ‘antiwomen’ notions do more to derail careers than any other factor. . . . Until powerful men are challenged and there is a change in backroom biases, it will be another hundred years of women struggling for their rightful place.”
4
February 2004
Boston University
Office of University Relations