We tend to think about science as unbiased or unaffected by stereotypes. However, this is untrue as scientists are humans and are well affected by social stereotypes; this can be seen in the way that they describe female and male reproductive processes. Female reproductive processes are depicted as less worthy and useful than that of the male reproductive processes. Let’s take for instance menstruation, this is often described by scientific accounts as being a failure or a wasteful process because the egg has not been fertilized. On the other hand, when it comes to explaining sperm creation this is not seen as a process that is wasteful, instead this comes to be seen as the birth of something, something that is manufactured and a process that’s “amazing” (Martin 1991). …show more content…
In contrast, sperms are described as very active, quick, and as having tails that are “strong” and “effectively powered” (Martin 1991). There seems to be more enthusiasm for male processes and their production, rather than for the female processes and their eggs because according to scientists, one is the production of something, while the other is simply a wasteful process. This is again seen by describing the behaviors of the eggs as submissive and being involuntarily dragged along the fallopian tube. These adjectives are often used to negatively describe women in our everyday lives. Although negative adjectives are used for women, adjectives such as being powerful and energetic are used to describe male reproductive processes and sperms. These adjectives are also used to describe men and their interests, and are embedded in the explanation of biological