Through they portray egg production as inferior because

this reading, The Egg and the Sperm: How
Science Has Constructed a Romance Based on Stereotypical Male-Female Roles by
Emily Martin, Martin clarified that amongst several experiments,
researchers still came across the typical generalizations between the male and
female in their examinations in light of tests they have directed. While reading
this article, Emily Martin attempts to explicitly talk about how the standard
method for living is depicted as the sperm being masculine or active while the female
egg passes by as feminine or more passive. Martin wants to “shine a bright
light” on the gender stereotypes hidden within the scientific language of
biology (Martin 324). Furthermore, this reading argues, in light of their actual
evidence, researches and science describes males being more superior over
females due to the stereotypical image being portrayed.

Emily Martin’s states
from the reading, The Egg and the Sperm, “To avoid the negative
connotations that some people associate with the female reproductive system,
scientists could begin to describe male and female processes as homologous”
(Martin 325). which is imperative as they demonstrate the negative affiliations
associated with females and the positive affiliations associated with males,
giving confirmation that supports the male power. Likewise, cited by Martin she
says, “The texts celebrate sperm production because it is continuous from
puberty to senescence, while they portray egg production as inferior because it
is finished at birth” (Martin 326). In this statement, it additionally
references the disparity among the male sperm and female egg as it keeps on
adulating the males as being better than females making a dilemma in the imbalance
of gender equality.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

 Emily Martin’s article, The Egg and the Sperm: How Science Has Constructed a Romance Based on
Stereotypical Male-Female Roles, represents many strengths as one of them
being the supporting evidence given towards the reading’s argument. As noted, there
are always two sides to a story and keeping in mind that Emily Martin talks
about how the male is stereotyped as being predominant over female, she goes to
clarify how the female can in reality appear to be similarly as powerful. The reading’s
argument is obviously how the way male sperm and the female egg is embodied,
the typical is the male is masculine and the female is feminine, and the
evidence demonstrated grandstands the strength of this argument. Martin’s central
point was to alert everybody about the specific metaphors intricated in the
article, and she did as such effectively. Regardless of that strength that
Martin portrays, she commits the either/or fallacy. Purdue OWL defines the
fallacy as “a conclusion that oversimplifies the argument
by reducing it to only two sides or choices” (Weber and Brizee). It is demonstrated
in the course reading when the author declares that either you can learn how through
research that the male’s sperm is identified as ‘masculine”, while the female
egg passes as “feminine” displaying stereotypical associations or you can open
your mind about the exposure intricating a female carries no lesser weight than
a male.


I'm Simon!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out