The Egg And The Sperm
The roles of men and women in our society have always been a topic of controversy. Men are seen as powerful and dominant while females are seen as the passive house wives. This is not only part of our regular sociocultural life, but its also perceived the same way in the human reproductive system according to Emily Martin’s article, “The Egg and The Sperm”. She focuses on exposing the gender stereotypes behind the “scientific language of biology”. Martin also emphasize on her research, the functions and characteristics of both the egg and the sperm.
Emily Martin argues that both the eggs and the sperm have an important role in the fertilization process, but it is not seen in such way even after all the research done by biologists. The egg is described to behave “femininely”(489) and the sperm behaves “masculinely” (489). The given characteristics of the egg is large, calm, and inferior, who is waiting to be trapped or “rescued” (490) by the sperm, while the sperm is described as being small, powerful and energetic giving the sperm stronger traits through out the whole process. However, the egg is criticized and consider wasteful and less worthy than sperm due to the nature of women analogy. Women are born with all the germ cells she would ever need. The fact that “the egg slowly sit on the shelf, slowly degenerating and aging like overstock inventory” (487) creates a wasteful image of the egg. On the other hand, millions of new sperm cells are produced each day, once again, giving the sperm a better role. This is another form of representing what i stated in my introduction, the stereotypes between genders.
Through out her research, Emily Martin states a newer discovery on the topic. The sperm is not the one who now penetrates the egg since its not as powerful as they once though. It comes to show that the eggs outer shell (the zona) is designed to trap the sperm forcing it past its surface. Even after this discovery, the egg is still seen as an “aggressive sperm catcher” (493). In reality, neither the egg nor the sperm can do their labor without the help of the other. It is unfair that the egg is seen as a waste, since the sperm cant really do much without the function of the egg, but i also believe that this shouldn’t be compared to our sociocultural problems. Emily Martin wants to grow awareness on the metaphors such as “the aggressive sperm catcher” used in science and the wrong imagery they create.
I agree with many the points that Emily Martin made throughout her article. I believe that the inferior characteristics of the egg given by society have to do with science mostly being dominated by males until recently as of 100 or so years ago. However, articles like these continue to shed light upon the injustice that many women go through, all though some individuals can argue that the arguments made by Martin can be seen as extreme but this is wrong. Martin correctly highlighted the discrimination women face even from a biological level.
You are correct in Emily’s intentions of creating awareness of sexism in the sciences, facts we know to be true. However, I do not believe Emily is so hung up on the “aggressive sperm catcher,” although I do believe you intended to say ‘digger’ here. Rather, there is a larger issue here, that sexism is not being reversed in older institutions, and that sexism in categories that are known to be mainly facts can even exist. Not only are the writers of these educational texts biased, but it takes intentional effort, or a really strong male dominated upbringing, to skew the facts in a way favorable for men.