Emily Martin does an amazing job of depicting for us the more profound different meanings for the egg and the sperm as in her books title The EGG AND THE SPERM: HOW SCIENCE HAS CONSTRUCTED A ROMANCE BASED ON STEREOTYPICAL MALE-FEMALE ROLES. Going back to what we discussed today in class about how science has contributed to helping society believe it is only NORMAL for there to be 2 genders not 5 like Fausto-Sterling said. We see science YET AGAIN trying to incorporate an idea of normality into society by saying that the romance between a male and female has to be with male dominance. For some reason (one i never thought) Martin explains that not only is it because of our shape, attitude, and the existentialism placed on men however it is also because of the reproductive organs we have. In page 487 Martin says “the male, who continuously produces fresh germ cells, and the female, who has stockpiled germ cells by birth and is faced with their degeneration.” With this the author is trying to show how people think the difference in beauty between both reproductive organs is, saying that one (the males) is good because is does not degenerate like the woman’s eggs who go to waste every time. But this is not the end of it, the beauty is not the only thing society categorizes and views a certain way between male and females, they also base the productive organs to prove masculinity. On page 489 the author says “It is remarkable how "femininely" the egg behaves and how "masculinely” the sperm.“ These words show that society has places a certain view on the productive systems of the male and female organs as well. That because the egg moves in a passive way such as the author explains that makes it more feminine. Also the author goes to explain that because the sperm is ”invariably active" that makes it more masculine. These are certain things that make up societies views on certain things and the ignorant ways people see it. The author later also shares with us that the male sperm could also be seen as useless because of the amount that is released and therefore could be seen as “Wasteful”. These words from the author helped me to take a different look on these ideas and see how with just about anything a new idea can be formed about male, female, masculinity, and femininity. 

Lexicon of Debates by Kolmar and Bartkoskis

After reading Kolmar and Bartkoskis piece Lexicon of debates one is more open to a new mentality of feminist work through history and today; as well as societies ideas of feminist theories. From the introduction we learn that this piece will mostly deal with wide debates which many people (if not all) have continued to argue about an how feminist have put their opinion out there and what it exactly means. One important topic that jumped out to me was the debate bout woman’s Body and how “its uses” depend firmly on the social class of these women. The author expands this by saying that typically women of the middle class are used for “decoration, or protection” while women of the working class are used for “labor and exploitation” (Page 3). These very powerful words are in a sense used to show how men view and categorize women more in depth based on their economic stability and to just there body types. Further in the reading we see an argument about how a woman’s body should mean more and be treated with more dignity,respect, and value because it is what “creates gender”. According to (Butler) it is “through which gender is performed” (Page 4).

In another debate presented to us in the reading we begin to see how woman are under appreciated according to many feminist. We see that as a society we view what Men say to be more important or more knowledge-full than that of which women would say. However this is not true, in my opinion women are equally intelligent and capable of writing interesting and very knowledge packed papers and much more. The authors poses the ides of how certain tricks “deny(ing) the relevance of the identity and social location of knowers, so they fail to notice how they perpetuate the world view of privileged” (Page 6) actually should not be used as opposed to revealing a woman wrote an article and having other people try challenging her piece or knowledge. Many woman argue that this is wrong and to an extent it is true because through this technique women still aren’t being acknowledged for their work. Yet another argument was about the language used in today’s societies. Many woman believe it is very offensive that they have to be called different names in different opportunities because of their gender. The author gives them example that instead of “flight attendant they are called stewardess. Instead of actor, actress” (Page 10). The author even finds this to be derogatory terms towards women because they are not being equal to men.

Finally a piece of the authors work that struck me the most was in page 14-15 where the author speaks about the “Sexual division of labor”. Here the author goes on to say that in many cultures women have often been socially exempt from working at certain careers all through history because of their gender. They are not allowed to participate in certain job occupations because they are seen as unfit for the job. Today we can say that this hasn’t gone completely away, we still see some jobs are mostly for men or even though some jobs are for both Men AND Women, mostly men or only men work in this particular job. This is true in the army where Moran aren’t allowed to do combative Jobs and in my other places, and the author views this as “de-valualizing” women.