Throughthis reading, The Egg and the Sperm: HowScience Has Constructed a Romance Based on Stereotypical Male-Female Roles byEmily Martin, Martin clarified that amongst several experiments,researchers still came across the typical generalizations between the male andfemale in their examinations in light of tests they have directed.
While readingthis article, Emily Martin attempts to explicitly talk about how the standardmethod for living is depicted as the sperm being masculine or active while the femaleegg passes by as feminine or more passive. Martin wants to “shine a brightlight” on the gender stereotypes hidden within the scientific language ofbiology (Martin 324). Furthermore, this reading argues, in light of their actualevidence, researches and science describes males being more superior overfemales due to the stereotypical image being portrayed. Emily Martin’s statesfrom the reading, The Egg and the Sperm, “To avoid the negativeconnotations 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 affiliationsassociated with females and the positive affiliations associated with males,giving confirmation that supports the male power. Likewise, cited by Martin shesays, “The texts celebrate sperm production because it is continuous frompuberty to senescence, while they portray egg production as inferior because itis finished at birth” (Martin 326). In this statement, it additionallyreferences the disparity among the male sperm and female egg as it keeps onadulating the males as being better than females making a dilemma in the imbalanceof gender equality.
Emily Martin’s article, The Egg and the Sperm: How Science Has Constructed a Romance Based onStereotypical Male-Female Roles, represents many strengths as one of thembeing the supporting evidence given towards the reading’s argument. As noted, thereare always two sides to a story and keeping in mind that Emily Martin talksabout how the male is stereotyped as being predominant over female, she goes toclarify how the female can in reality appear to be similarly as powerful. The reading’sargument 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 theevidence demonstrated grandstands the strength of this argument. Martin’s centralpoint was to alert everybody about the specific metaphors intricated in thearticle, and she did as such effectively. Regardless of that strength thatMartin portrays, she commits the either/or fallacy.
Purdue OWL defines thefallacy as “a conclusion that oversimplifies the argumentby reducing it to only two sides or choices” (Weber and Brizee). It is demonstratedin the course reading when the author declares that either you can learn how throughresearch that the male’s sperm is identified as ‘masculine”, while the femaleegg passes as “feminine” displaying stereotypical associations or you can openyour mind about the exposure intricating a female carries no lesser weight thana male.