Science has for a long time been credited for presenting facts even in matters of high debate. Many people believe that scientific information is based on empirical evidence and cannot be disputed. Researchers in science are known to conduct exhaustive experiments, analysis as well observations over satisfactory periods of time to arrive at accurate conclusions. Unfortunately, The Egg and Sperm tends to reveal otherwise. This book forms the basis of the discussion of this essay.
Thesis: Gender based stereotypes have obsecured the way different phenomena is analyzed in the world
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Emily Martin discusses how science has fallen prey to stereotypes about male and female roles in the society. She further alleges that science has build romance based on the stereotypes. In her analysis, Emily follows the process of fertilization step by step and reveals exciting facts that have otherwise been ignored (Martin 1991). She argues that many aspects involving men and women have been treated as assumptions for a long time. The truth is never let out until interested individuals do the research themselves, just the way she does the investigation.
In her text, Emily Martin begins by criticizing the way biological scientists describe the phenomena they find in the natural world. She suspects that culture plays a significant role in the description. She questions the way the egg and the sperm are usually drawn in biology classes as well as how other biological accounts are represented. The Egg and Sperm argue that these are all stereotypes that have distorted the truth and only serve to support how the mainstream culture defines male and female roles. The gender stereotypes have been concealed within science.
All main science books portray male and female reproductive organs as vital systems that produce crucial substances, such as the sperm and the egg (Emad, 2006). The monthly cycle in women is widely said that it is made to make eggs and prepare a favorable location for them to be fertilized. In this case, the female cycle is viewed as an enterprise for production and therefore the process of menstruation means it is a waste. The way the menstruation process itself is described and defined leads to this view. It is often described as the uterine lining debris as well as the death of tissue. This description alludes that the system makes products that have no value
On the contrary, a whole new narrative is employed on the part of the male reproductive system. The process of sperm manufacture has been highlighted using hyperboles. Spermatogenesis ( the method of manufacturing sperms) has been depicted as having a sheer magnitude in that the male reproductive system can produce hundreds of millions of sperms every day as compared to the female where only a single gamete is shed each month. The male ability is further emphasized by being said to be able to span almost a third of a mile when uncoiled and placed end to end. The primary limitation of the two comparisons is that spermatogenesis is not the opposite of menstruation. It ought to be ovulation. Therefore, it is biased to compare two processes that are not analogous. As much as ovulation is a critical process just as spermatogenesis, it does not evoke enthusiasm. Many authors suggest that ovarian follicles containing ova are not produced the way sperms do (Fisher, 2011). Instead, they usually exist at birth and age and degenerate slowly.
Many researchers glorify the sperm production process and castigate ovulation. The continuous production of sperms from puberty to senescence is seen as a good thing. On the other hand, the ovulation process is viewed as being inferior because it ends at birth. The females are seen as unproductive and even wasteful (Jordanova, 1993). Many authors reveal that of the seven million egg germ cells that are produced in the female embryo, many of them degenerate in the nucleus. At birth, there are only two million eggs that are in the ovary. The others would have deteriorated. This process goes on, and by puberty, there will just be about three hundred thousand eggs and only a few during menopause. Only four hundred to five hundred eggs are released during the forty or so years of the reproductive life of a woman. The authors also allege that it is a mystery for so many eggs to be formed and then die in the ovaries.
In comparison with the rate of sperm production in males, one wonders why it is not depicted as wasteful. An average man produces about two trillion sperms during his lifetime, and for each baby a man creates, there is a wastage of more than one trillion sperms. On the other hand, a woman wastes only about two hundred eggs for every baby she makes. The egg is often given feminine features while the sperm is delivered masculine features. The sperm is described as being able to move swiftly, have muscular tails and have the energy to push the semen into the furthest recesses of the vagina (Martin 1991). The egg, however, is seen as being massive and passive with no ability to move but is transported along the fallopian tube.
The egg is portrayed as dependent to the sperm for rescue. It is seen that without the sperm, the egg will die. The sperms have to make the long journey to reach the passive egg which usually lies in wait for them. Some of the sperms become exhausted and perish while the stronger ones reach the egg where the strongest ‘breaks’ the wall of the egg and penetrates. Despite the small size of the sperms, many texts represent them as being more significant than the eggs. It is usually a deliberate attempt to make them look superior to the eggs, which one can be able to see with naked eyes.
New research has begun to bring into light, unknown truths. The old narratives have come out as perceptions and assumptions. For instance, numerous texts depict sperms as the ones responsible for solely penetrating the egg with no assistance with particular features on their heads that are described as binding to the egg. But studies in the Johns Hopkins University biophysics lab overruled the above analogy and made the egg the active party. The researchers found out that the forward push of the sperm is significantly weak which nullifies the assumption that sperms can penetrate the egg forcefully. The researchers then were able to conclude that the egg and the sperm cling together due to adhesive molecules on each of their surfaces. The egg is the one that is responsible for trapping and holding tightly onto the sperm. The sperm is described as being weak and not able to break even one chemical bond. Even after this discovery, some of the researchers did not want to undervalue the role of the sperm and also wrote papers still depicting the sperm as the one taking the active part in the process.
Another researcher, Wasserman, gives credit to the coat of the egg and argues that it has more functions than the ones of a sperm receptor. His research shows that the egg coat acts as a natural security system that scrutinizes the incoming sperm, chooses just those that are compatible with fertilization, readies the sperm for insemination with the egg and defends the embryo from fusion with another sperm (Martin, 1991). The roles given to the egg as having the ability to choose her mate, prepare him for fusion and offering protection can be seen as courtship and mating behavior. The egg is given the role of a servant and a mother in the fertilization process.
Although the Johns Hopkins as well as the Wassarman’s accounts give active roles to the egg, there is another aspect that arises. The egg is painted as being very aggressive. It is defined as having sticky zona and made to look like a spider waiting for her prey in her web. Wasserman describes the surface of the egg as being covered by plasma membrane projections in their thousands that reach out to clasp the sperm (Martin 1991). This description presents the egg as being aggressive and spiderlike. On a broad perspective, as is popular in the Western literature and culture one can envision the image of a dangerous and offensive woman.
The emergence of new facts did not stop scientists from discarding stereotypes that have been propagated through the ages, in their description of scientific processes such as the case with the egg and the sperm. The attitude by scientists to refuse to lay facts as they are shows that the society is not yet ready to entirely drop archaic stereotypes on roles of the two genders. If cells can be assigned tasks basing on cultural beliefs by scholars, then the society is far from dealing with real issues.
Analysing the Egg and Sperm , there are lots of inferences and comparisons that can be made with real life. Gender construction is not a new concept in America as well as around the whole globe. In fact, almost all societies in the world allocate roles based on the gender construction of an individual (Lorde, 1997). But no single person is born with innate concepts of gender. Instead, people’s gender preferences are acquired through experience with social structures of stipulated gender roles. The society plays a pivotal part in the determination of individual gender roles and identity. Males are required to be aggressive and are even rewarded for such traits while women are expected to be passive and are discouraged from participating in aggressive behavior.
Favorite images of America in the 1950s show a simpler and happier period after the events of the Second World War. Families relocated to the suburbs and build a comfortable life of family unity in which everybody played a particular role (Cohen and Jackson, 2016). Women were automatically taken to be family caregivers charged with the task of taking care after children while men were providers. The notion of the ‘ideal woman’ presented a direction to women of what they were expected to adhere to as their appropriate gender role in the society. Women started to build their identities around this notion and are likely to continue doing so even today and in future.
In the film industry, women are often assigned minor roles as compared to their male counterparts. Women are mostly seen as sexual objects that are supposed to spice up the movies. Men are always portrayed as heroes who still carry the day. Women are usually weak and emotional (Murphy, 2015). They are typically trapped or scared and require the indulgence of men to save them from their predicament.
Finally, it can be deduced that gender stereotypes exist in every sphere of the society. The Egg and Sperm reveal that even scholars who have conducted extensive research tend to distort facts so that their narratives can fit into archaic perceptions. Mainstream constructions about gender roles are far from changing because of lack of honesty and the voice of reason. Only bold and courageous individuals can stimulate the process of change.
References
Cohen, C. J., & Jackson, S. J. (2016). Ask a Feminist: A Conversation with Cathy J. Cohen on Black Lives Matter, Feminism, and Contemporary Activism. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society , 41 (4), 775-792.
Emad, M. C. (2006). Reading Wonder Woman's body: Mythologies of gender and nation. The Journal of Popular Culture , 39 (6), 954-984.
Fisher, J. A. (Ed.). (2011). Gender and the science of difference: Cultural politics of contemporary science and medicine . Rutgers University Press.
Jordanova, L. J. (1993). Sexual visions: Images of gender in science and medicine between the eighteenth and twentieth centuries . Univ of Wisconsin Press.
Lorde, A. (1997). Age, race, class, and sex: Women redefining difference. Cultural Politics , 11 , 374-380.
Martin, E. (1991). The egg and the sperm: How science has constructed a romance based on stereotypical male-female roles. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society , 16 (3), 485-501.
Murphy, J. N. (2015). The role of women in film: Supporting the men--An analysis of how culture influences the changing discourse on gender representations in film (Doctoral dissertation).
