ThinkHer

Since the Nobel Prizes were first awarded in 1901, more than 600 men have received the honour in the sciences—physics, chemistry, and physiology or medicine—while fewer than 30 women have been recognised. The imbalance is particularly striking in physics, where, out of over 200 laureates, only four have been women: Marie Curie (1903), Maria Goeppert Mayer (1963), Donna Strickland (2018), and Anne L’Huillier (2023). That means women make up less than 2% of all Nobel laureates in physics—a field that still struggles with gender parity at every level, from classrooms to laboratories. In 2018, when the Nobel Committee announced Donna Strickland’s name, it had been 55 years since a woman last won the Nobel Prize in Physics. Strickland’s recognition didn’t just mark a scientific milestone—it became a moment of reckoning for the discipline itself, forcing the world to ask why it takes decades for women’s brilliance in physics to be acknowledged. Donna Stickland in her lab  Courtesy of Uni...

Most people imagine that the choice of what to study springs from personal passion — a love for numbers, ideas, or discovery. But history shows that this decision is rarely untouched by the politics and economics of the time. Across the world, waves of educational enthusiasm have mirrored national priorities and market demands. During the Cold War, for instance, government funding for defense and space research triggered a surge in students choosing physics and engineering, seen as patriotic and prestigious. In contrast, the 1990s and 2000s saw the rise of finance, management, and computer science, reflecting globalization and the digital economy’s pull toward data, coding, and markets. Every generation’s “hot field” is a mirror of its moment and is defined as much by geopolitics and money as by intellectual curiosity.   Against this backdrop, veterinary science seems to stand apart — often seen as a field chosen out of personal affection for animals rather than political or e...

Earlier this month, Venezuelan opposition leader María Corina Machado received the 2025 Nobel Peace Prize, a recognition for her “tireless work promoting democratic rights for the people of Venezuela and for her struggle to achieve a just and peaceful transition from dictatorship to democracy” The award shines a light on her decades-long struggle to restore the principles of free expression, fair elections, and civic participation in a country where dissent often comes at a heavy cost. María Corina Machado @ ThinkHer Venezuela, once among Latin America’s wealthiest nations, has endured years of economic collapse, corruption, and political repression under Nicolás Maduro’s regime. In this backdrop of crisis, Machado — an industrial engineer turned activist — emerged as a powerful and controversial figure. She co-founded Súmate, a citizen movement for electoral transparency, and later became the boldest voice of the opposition. Her outspokenness has earned her admiration from many Venezu...

In the pursuit of objectivity, science has often asked us to keep our emotions in check — to measure without feeling, to know without belonging. This detachment, while ensuring precision, has also made science feel distant and harder to connect with on a human level. Jane Goodall showed that empathy, too, can be a respectable tool of inquiry — a way to understand and a ground from which our questions arise. To study chimpanzees, she chose not to observe them from afar, but to live among them — to be accepted as part of their world. In Gombe, she did not number them as data points but named them — David Greybeard, Flo, Fifi — recognising their individuality and inner lives. Through patience, empathy, and deep attentiveness, she revealed a side of science rooted in connection rather than detachment. Jane Goodall ⓒ National Geographic It is interesting how she began her work with chimpanzees. In 1957, Louis Leakey, eager to study chimpanzee behaviour and sceptical of prevailing attitu...