Marlene Zuk observes the disputes that arise when nature is explained among various palliative, humanizing, and political viewpoints in Sexual Selections: What We Can and Can’t Learn about Sex from Animals. She has discovered that biologists and sociologists and the society persist to view the behavior of animal as human beings’ behavior. We elucidate such interpretations for our own egoisms, and that results in us being unaware of what’s actually happening with the animals themselves. In this book, she says “The lens of our own self-interest not only frequently distorts what we do not see. It also in important ways determines what we do not see, what we are blind to” (Zuk 2). We cannot see how animals really act if we keeping comparing …show more content…
Zuk highlights that there are risks when we use our analyses of science to approve our own disputes and political philosophies.
As an evolutionary biologist and feminist, Zuk does not consider eliminating biological elucidations of behavior, but rather the preferences and stereotypes that impact them. She concedes that there are variances among males and females, but we should not be connecting values to such variances. Zuk suggests that a feminist viewpoint can propose a different perspective to biology, one that aids eradicating the gender preferences that ‘color’ our insights. In this book, Zuk exhibits a collection of stories about animal behavior from a varied group of species—from bonobos to beetles. She comprises analyses of these behaviors from scientists, ecofeminists, social scientists, and the mass media, showing how stereotypes and mythologies might fog our interpretations. In addition, Zuk addresses the questions behind certain behaviors and characters concerning their connection to evolution or social habituation. Zuk achieves this with an amusing articulation that keeps readers amused in almost all chapters. She succeeds to create laughter while teaching biological science, revealing double standards, and addressing humanizing stereotypes without damaging the significance of these matters.
In three parts split into twelve chapters, Zuk talks about the several preferences, mythologies, and stereotypes that influence the way we view the
“In men, in general, sexual desire is inherent and spontaneous” whereas “in the other sex, the desire is dormant, if not non-existent, till excited” (457). Greg’s terminology is extremely power-laden. “Spontaneous” has the connotation of energy and activity, whereas “dormant” and “victim” imply inactivity. An important concept is the assumption that men, the “coarser sex,” act on women, the “weaker sex” (457).
The feminist movement has been trying to change the idea of traditional sex roles and stereotypes in society for decades, but maybe the issue relies on society instead of biological differences. While these biological differences and research show that there are small differences in cognitive brain activity between the sexes, they also propose a theory that this “is the way it’s supposed to be” (Pollitt 2549). Although these differences exist it does not mean that sexes should have permanently assigned roles in society. Katha Pollitt, a feminist author and high profile activist wrote the essay “Why Don’t Boys Play With Dolls,” published in 1995 in The New York Times Magazine. In the essay, she argues that “biological determinism may reassure some adults about their present, but it is feminism, the ideology of flexible and converging sex roles, that fits our children’s future” (2549). Pollitt raises important ethical problems in her essay, gender roles and stereotyping. Throughout her essay she provides several claims to her argument and builds credibility with her audience by using rhetorical strategies. However, the argument also exhibits some minor flaws, which could in return limit its persuasiveness. This analysis will identify Pollitt’s three main claims and the evidence she uses to support them. I argue that overall Pollitt provides an effective argument by building her credibility and expanding her audience with the use of rhetorical strategies, such as ethos, pathos,
The hierarchical aspect of America’s contemporary gender system is reinforced through the use of language. We frequently associate biology and the sciences with objectivity, but in “The egg and the Sperm,” Emily Martin argues that it is not outside the socially constructed idea of gender (485). The association of gender norms at the cellular level suggests that the process of gendering is natural beyond alteration; yet, this is merely a result of the implantations of social imagery on representations of nature. Literary works can subtly emphasize the stereotypical differences between males and females in a way that goes unnoticed, consequently ingraining these concepts into our brain and thought processes. In many biological texts, the egg is described as “drift(ing)” and being “swept” throughout the process (Martin 489). This denotes passiveness—a clearly feminine characteristic that society would deem to be appropriate for women. On the other hand, the sperm “streamlines” and
According to Garbacik (2013), in Ancient Egypt, Ancient Japan, American Indians and Ancient Sumerian women were held in high regard, taking up “leadership posts” and were not considered “inferior” by their male counterparts. In fact, the terms “misogyny” and “Patriarchy” became more prominent in Victorian Britain, where the concept of “gender roles” were closely linked, which advocated female subordination and male dominance. In particular, through his ground-breaking theory of natural selection, Darwin (1859) depicted women as being inferior to men. Darwin theorised about “natural selection” and he suggested that men were “more courageous, pugnacious and energetic” (Darwin, 1859) than women. Darwin also never included species such as “hyenas, anglerfish, ring-tailed lemurs, black widow spiders, meerkat and praying mantis” (Garbacik, 2013) in his research that never shared dominant male and passive female characteristics, proving that his evidence was flawed, advocating a confirmation bias . What’s more, Darwin’s views of the female and male species, were bolstered in the 19th century, by the Victorian viewpoints that men were more “competitive” and “aggressive” compared to women who were more “altruistic” and “nurturing”. Not only was inequality amongst the sexes
Since the beginning of evolution, females have been subjected and objectified based on their gender. History taught us that when during the 19th century, Charles Darwin, an English naturalist and geologist stated in his papers “The Origin of Man” (1859) and “Descent of Man” (1871) that men were superior to women. Unfortunately, such subjections to women still persist today; in politics, education, labor and surprisingly in science.
In the article, author Vern L. Bullough provided an in-depth look at the research done by sexologist Alfred Kinsey and explaining the contributions he made in the field. The article claimed how Kinsey studied taboo topics and interviewed his students about their lives, a practice never conceived of being done before. The author explained how Kinsley’s controversial work was challenged by Thurman Rice, a, “bacteriology professor who had written extensively on sex, primarily from the view of eugenics” (Bullough 56). These claims were meant to display how society viewed sex as a topic that was not an area of interest for many, but the research done by Kinsley helped push the boundary on the topic and inspire other sexologists to pursue the field.
Around the mid-nineteenth century until today’s times, three beliefs about women and men has become a major aspect for part of biology
After his opening statements, Brooks begins to explain his point of view concerning each gender’s “well-known” pleasure in literature. He describes that men tend to enjoy books about isolation while women prefer books concerning people’s relationships with one another. While it is positive to point out the differences each gender portrays, Brooks’ presents them in a way that offends. He relies heavily on the stereotypes of society as a whole, and the weaving of gender in society. In a study conducted by two scientists, Laia Beclares and Naomi Priest, it was found that the stereotypical comments made in public has a significant effect on the actions of an individual, both negative and positive. It is stated that “Stereotype threat posits that awareness of a social stereotype that reflects negatively on one's social group can negatively affect the performance of group members” (13). This refutes the points made in Brooks’ essay concerning the many aspects gender plays in society. Many might say this is to do with that fact that biological factors interfere with
taking a dark turn in society. The truth brought to one’s eyes, concerning the cruelty that can be brought to this world, including all past events that we had suffered through, is traumatizing; especially witnessing connections from Waknuk to Earth. The horrors of Waknuk, was illustrated through the way the community treated other. However, the realism, that reflects on the monstrosity of our society is uncanny. With the characteristics of racism, ignorance, and fear, it shows how our two realities are similar.
Human sexuality is a common phrase for all, and anything, pertaining to the feelings and behaviors of sex for the human race. Sexuality has been a topic that has been discussed and studied for as far back as 1000 years B.C. and is still being studied today. As the discussion of sexuality has progressed through history, theories have been created based on research and experiments that scholars have implemented, based on their own perceptions of human behavior. Out of the many theories that pose to explain sexual behavior, Sexuality Now explained ten that are seemed to be the most overlapped, and built off of theories. Of these theories, two that were discussed in the text were the behavioral and sociological theory. These two theories cover some of the basic ideas of what could possibly influence a person’s sexuality.
New research conducted by Canadian experts at the University of Lethbridge suggests that new behavioral trends are manifesting among primates, which has interesting implications about how the behavior of all animals undergoes its own sort of evolution, including that of human beings. The study shows apparent sex acts on the parts of female, Japanese macaques on sika deer. These acts of interspecies relations were observed in Minoh, Osaka—a city in central Japan. As uncommony documented as interspecies relations can be, they are a known phenomenon, and it’s been observed as early as the Holocene epoch or even the Pliocene epoch by way of the extinct mammoth.
One common perception of nature is that it is something raw, untouched by human civilization. This point of view suggests that humans are completely separated by nature and that our cultures and technologies are in some way unnatural. However, I believe that not only are we a part of nature, but our cultures are also deeply entwined with how we view nature. In this paper, I will review Emily Martin’s The Egg and the Sperm: How Science Has Constructed a Romance Based on Stereotypical Male-Female Roles as well as Michael Pollen’s Why ‘Natural’ Doesn’t Mean Anything Anymore in order to examine how nature, culture, and power relate with each other. Martin asserts that gender stereotypes affect biologists’ description of the natural world, particularly in the human reproduction process. Pollen makes a case that nature in fact lacks any meaning yet is often used as strong rhetoric. I argue that nature is constructed through cultural values and is used for rhetorical purposes, which shows that people manipulate facts in order to gain authority.
Dr. Tatiana’s Sex Advice to All Creation, written by Olivia Judson, mimics a Dear Abby column in a newspaper, in which her audience, ranges from a honeybee to spotted hyena, write-in and ask for help with their sex lives. She covers a slew of different sex topics, some more pleasant than others, such as incest, cannibalism, promiscuousness, and asexual reproduction. The book is truly a witty yet entertaining excursion of the natural history and the evolutionary biology of sex. Judson’s objective is to teach her audience about biology, specifically sexual biology.
Males and females differ considerably in how much they each invest in order to make offspring and a result of this, they approach mating with different methods. Researchers and scientists learn and examine these varying mating systems to explain how males and females pair up. A mating system explains the techniques males and females use to pair up when selecting a mate. It is important to begin by reviewing and understanding the reproductive strategies among primates. The major types of mating systems found in primates are monogamy and polygamy. Monogamy is a practice of mating in which one male pairs with one female. Polygamy also known as bisexual, is a pattern of mating in which a male mates with more than one female and a female mates with more than one male (Wong , 2010). Polygamy is then clarified into polygyny and polyandry. Polygyny is when one male mates with multiple females. Polyandry is when one female mates with multiple males. Recognizing the diversity of mating systems will help in understanding the interactive relationship of sexual size dimorphism and behavior in primates.
Gender stereotypes have existed since the beginning of modern man. We've all heard them before; male dominance and female weakness, a controlled male and a flustered female, aggression and passion, and many others that all basically boil down to the same thing. Emily Martin, in her essay entitled The Egg and the Sperm, takes this problem of gender stereotype to a new and much more serious level. As an anthropologist, Martin is concerned with the socio-cultural impacts on many different aspects of everyday life, including biology. In doing her research for this article, Martin was trying to uncover suspicions she had about socio-cultural gender stereotypes, and the affects they had on the diction used to describe egg and sperm