The early stages of scientific research involved the objective goal of viewing all biological life form as specimens at Carnegie University (Morgan 50). Physicians donated embryos and fetuses of various stages and voluntary hysterectomies were conducted for women ‘married and living with their husbands, intelligent, and to have demonstrated prior fertility by delivering at least three full-term pregnancies (Morgan 51).’ The collection not only showcased the stages of human development, but also how the origin of the fetus did not matter as much as what the fetus itself was to contemporaries; an extraordinary collection of specimens. The human fetus was an object of curiosity that was and still viable to representations that fit into cultural perspectives. The strict guidelines for women eligible for hysterectomy is considered a controlled scientific study in which the “knowledge” of how the fetus develops. This “knowledge” is based on what scientist assumed it to be. The “materialization” of the fetus into a “person” continues to be set within changing cultural frameworks. Everyone, including scientist who study fetuses are part of the larger society who makes science reflect our own cultural values and norms. The very fact that society may not be aware of the tendency for cultural projection onto science makes it problematic to define what “true” knowledge is or what “science” is, especially if science should be objective and neutral. One of the traditional biases projected onto science is the inclination to better understand abstract concept as something tangible in which we could “see” nature at work (“seeing is believing”). This tendency is one example of the values and norms that distinguish humans from other mammalians and possibly the West from nonwestern nations.
The beginning of “materializing” the fetus into a “person” began with the perceived mechanics of “how” fertilization happens. As 21st century scientific technology made it possible to see the egg and the sperm’s interactions, scientist and writers of science for the general public began to describe the phenomenon as a romance story (Martin 490). Science interpreted to the public in a romantic narrative is the manifestation of cultural beliefs. Ideally love is what we expect from relationships and in this context, the egg and the sperm are “material” representations of the relationship between man and woman. To “show” love is to show the greatest human emotion.
Where else can this magnificent emotion be found? If we think back to our earliest years of childhood development, it is evident that we were taught to fantasize about “love” and happiness from fairytales. Fairytales are stories to help children engage in their imagination on the surface level. However even if we regard them as fictionalized stories, than why would each one of our childhood fairytales teach a morale lesson? Fairytales are intangible and fake, but are made “real” as they function to they reflect societal ideals. They represent “real” people and showcase people’s inclinations, deceit, honesty, vulnerability, chivalry, and wickedness. On a grandeur scale fairytales not only represent “real” people, but also the vision of how society should function. Hence, the projection of a vision infers that society cannot fully represent the reality. Society includes and excludes individuals and communities. The inability to be inclusive is attributable from the tendency for culture to change. It can also be argued that it is impossible to fully represent the human thoughts and motivations since everyone does not fit into distinct categories. To highlight the excluded individuals of society, the vision of how society should be must first be addressed. To engage in this discourse fairytale characters and their relationships to each other and society needs to be analyzed.
The structure of most fairytales including stories in general categorizes characters into “good” and “bad” guys. There are a couple things wrong with this representation. If fairy tales are to teach society a lesson then, this particular grouping is an oversimplification of reality. In reality many people are driven by certain rational motives to become “bad” guys, but in fairytales the motives are generally superficial and lack the substance, and complications people face. Even the interpretation of the egg and sperm interaction does not merely fit into the model. The egg has been both described as a “security system (Martin 496)” and “devouring (Martin 498)” sperm. So how has fairytales come to create an analogy to accommodate for opposing views?
The topic of gender is intertwined into this chameleon characteristic of the egg. Who it is that seems to be having these attributes? Women who represent the egg tend to have both roles of being the protagonist and agonist? Women have the role of being the princess but also the evil villains such as Snow White’s stepmother-the Queen. In this particular fairytale, the Queen has everything malignant associated with her. Firstly she is a stepmother, who is usually expected to be ruthless to a the step daughter; secondly she is superficial in that she desires to have the beauty above all; thirdly she practices black magic and is willing to become a crone to seduce Snow white to eat the apple; and lastly she does defies the family structure.
The step mothers in both Snow White and Sleeping beauty are widows who capriciously try to control or enslave their stepdaughters. Why is it that the single female parent is portrayed as manipulative and tyrannical if she is widowed? We do not see Cinderella’s widowed father portrayed likewise. The same imagery of the “spiderlike” quality (Martin 498) given to the female eggs have also been depicted in the Little Mermaid’s evil octopi character Ursula. These descriptions of women which are also applied to the egg suggest that the female “biological processes are less worthy than their male counterparts (Martin 486).” When the male parent is present with the mother, a balance of stability and nurturance is established through the equilibrium of masculinity and femininity. There are never two female parents or two male parents, but the gender roles are also almost never reversed. It is impossible to have the union of the egg and sperm from parents of the same gender from a biological perspective, yet it can also be assumed that human reproduction could not happen if men are not masculine enough to take on his role as the fertilizer; as the heroic figure to save the egg!
Gender stereotypes on a basic level are “stereotypes.” They reflect the norm but not the entirety of what it is supposed to describe. The idea that America itself is democratic, in which the majority rule also reflects the idea of how norms are weighed more heavily than the actual equal representation of the entire body. Therefore how “true” is science if there is a tendency to project cultural norms to biological processes?
The female model represented by fairytale princesses or princess to-bes are underrepresented as the active participant in the quest to find happiness. Snow White is representative of this stereotype because she becomes “Sleeping Beauty” until prince charming kisses her. Snow White is as passive as the cumbersome, large, dormant egg that relies on the egg to make life (Martin 490). If both the female and the female biological processes are to be pictured this way, then men are to be chivalrous and must win the female emotionally to physically unit with her. There are other depictions of the “heroic” sperm and passive, yet also assertive eggs that add more “human” dimensions to such analogies of societal visions and representations. Disney has come up with other fairy tales to add more variety to the female and male character, but there is still an underlying theme; stereotypes could never clearly be egalitarian, in which the role of both sexes is equally important and valued.
Other stereotypes include the less passive, bookworm, knowledge-craving Bell from Sleeping Beauty. In fact she is said to be “not” normal in the fairytale for not wanting to be with an extremely masculine man who demands to have many children and expects her to be the typical housewife. In the end she finds true love and releases the prince from his beast-character; however, he repeatedly saves her to win her heart. Therefore she becomes a passive character to the prince. This depiction employs the typical female attributes of being too “picky,” which has been used to describe why only one sperm out of the millions would win the egg (Martin 490). The opposite model could also be represented by the male model. The male model does not have to be a muscular, physically intimidating man; he could in fact, be an average man who becomes the “hero” for his bravery and wits such as in the pauper in the Prince and the Pauper. In this particular story the female character is not even present! This imagery parallels Woody Allen’s film “Everything you always wanted to know about Sex…” in which the weak sperm is destined to face his fears of being ejaculated (Martin 491). More modern Disney tales such as Mulan magnify the role of the women, but does this actually bring “equal” representation of male and female and how much of this modern fairytale is historical anyways?
Words similar to “peril” have been used to describe the female reproductive system (Martin 498) while eggs have been described as “old” and vulnerable to “death. This denotes that females are less useful or active. Even the uterus and the vaginal canal become “materialized” into something as “foreign, dangerous, mysterious” territory for the sperm or “prince” to brave through with the above connotations. However, when the sperm is expressed as “barbaric” in which it “harpoons” the egg; the sperm becomes accredited for having this ability (Martin 494). The sperm like the Beast from “Beauty and the Beast” may go through stages of being marginalized before becoming a hero.
The women’s reproductive system has been described as “wasteful (Martin 488).” In Fairytales, the princess and soon to-be princesses are not lavish. In fact, she may start out destitute like Cinderella. The comfortable and extravagant lifestyles are generally given to the evil stepsisters and stepmothers. Historically women have been seen as “wasteful” and men as “productive.” The fairytale reality of the 1950’s came to be the ownership of a suburban home, nuclear family consisting of a husband, wife, and children, and also the collection of material goods by housewives. The man is to “make” money much like he is expected to make sperm, as women were expected to “spend” or “waste”-parallel to how menstruation “wastes” the egg’s fertile potential and “kills” it. The projection of femininity verses masculinity was heavily exaggerated in colors. Wives were to be social and associate with other wives. Her “nature” as women makes her more flamboyant in her choice of colorful bloom skirts.
There are definitely limitations to how much of reality can be portrayed. The human psyches can be unpredictable and our imagination helps us to step out of the real world. If there are such limitations, do we have the authority to blame the exclusiveness of stereotypical portrayals that will always showcase and add new fads to existing stereotypes? Isn't it only natural for society to reflect what it is inclined to like? In fact, even film media have separated genres such as film noir and experimental film that are less popular because they have the potential to "shock" viewer's expectations. There also must be limitations of material aspects that easily sets the path for the egg and sperm to have similar endings as fairytales? Such material aspects include the fact that eggs are significantly larger and must rely on the sperm's travel to fertilize the egg. Representations may hold some truth as much as stereotypes do; however, stereotypes are false since they only portray part of society. There are also other problems underlying the meaning of stereotypes and norms to society.
Today there is still that presumption that such cultural values are inherent. This becomes apparent when a flamboyant man is labeled as a “freak” because of his speech and physical appearance. When he acts and dresses flamboyant he “assumes” the female characteristic of “wastefulness.” In the case of women, lesbians have been harassed and raped for speaking out or “acting” out in public. Although even though cultural values are perceived to be inherent because they are norms, it is also assumed that culture and values can change. It is hard to define where the boundary of a set of cultural values and stereotypes end in a timeline, but it is easier to observe how societies do not adapt too well to changing to one discreet set of norms. Norms do not just appear as something completely new. They continue to be revised with new diction and meaning. Due to observable characteristic of norms as a progression into something similar or different over a period of time, norms do not always completely become too outdated in which no one upholds them. Contemporary norms can be associated and linked to norms of the past. Norms most importantly can obscure the meaning of “truth” when it muddles with what we consider as “knowledge.” What is “real” knowledge if we constantly work to create knowledge with our own biases? Knowledge must come to be accepted as knowledge for us to accept who we are since biases could not be avoided.
Sources:
Morgan, Lynn. Materializing the Fetal Body, Or, What are those Corpses doing in Biology's Basement? In , Morgan, Lynn and Michaels, Meredith. eds. Fetal Subjects, Feminist Positions. (pp. 43-60). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1999.
Martin, Emily. Signs. The Egg and the Sperm: How Science has Constructed a Romance based on Stereotypical Male-Female Roles. (pp.485-501). Maryland: John Hopkins University Department of Anthropology, 1991.
Sources of images listed in order presented
The Human Body. 3 July 2009
"Snow White and Prince." Behind Every Great Woman. 2 July 2009. <http://www.retrojunk.com/details_articles/2006/>
"The Queen from Snow White." The Big Life. 2 July 2009. <
Veloso, Bryan. "Ursula." Fat feminism. 2 July 2009. <
Fertility-Treatment.org. Causes of Infertility. 2 July 2009. <http://www.fertility-treatment.org/causes-of-infertility.php>.
"One woman, many men." 2 July 2009. <
Kueber, Pam. "Women in Kitchen." 2009. Time Warp Wives. 2 July 2009. <
