The clitoris have existed since people have existed. But it was less than 30 years ago that urologist Helen O'Connell has completely described her for the first time. We have only known for about two years that the clitoris has been much more unimaginated than you have thought so far. For many women, this lack of knowledge had serious medical consequences: While doctors protected their nerves in prostate operations, they were less careful in pelvic operations.
Science journalist Lucia Sillig takes a close look at this and 23 other scientific phenomena in her new graphic essay. In "Science is female" she shows that many scientific assumptions are shaped by prejudices and deeply rooted gender stereotypes. In an interview with her, we spoke about the importance of female perspectives in science.
Why science needs female perspectives
Elle.de: Science has been made and designed for centuries by men and for men. What damage did that do?
Lucia Sillig:We have inherited a biased knowledge with the tendency to present the male dominance as inevitable and to support inequalities. When research is carried out with such blows, it not only tends to justify the status quo, but also leads to the fact that entire areas are insufficiently researched or even ignored. We have big gaps in researching women, which is particularly problematic in medicine.
Under "provider"InstagramActivate to see content
Today there are significantly more women in science. What has changed now?
Lucia Sillig:I think this contributes to the collapse of several age, outdated myths. For example, the idea that men have a innate talent for parking cars and women to bathe their fellow human beings, as well as belief that testosterone is a source of violence and that nothing can be done about it. In a test, my daughter had to label the female reproductive system with all components of the clitoris. In archeology it has now been found that the story of male hunters and female collectors does not have so much to do with the actual distribution of roles of the cave people, but began to explore the history of the 19th century. The arrival of women in the area of primatology has shifted the focus, which until then was mainly aimed at men. In addition to all the exciting findings that this has brought, it has also shown that male dominance is less common in the primate when looking closely than it seems.
Nevertheless, it is still men who win Nobel Prices and obtain fame while women act in the background. Why is that?
Lucia Sillig:All of this is slow and sluggish, which depresses me. Of course, there are now some heroines in science, some inspiring female role models, but the sector reflects our society: As long as there is money and power, the dominant group will occupy the highest ranks.
Under "provider"InstagramActivate to see content
What has to happen so that we break through these male structures in science?
Lucia Sillig:In her book "The Gendered Brain", the neurobiologist Gina Rippon writes that the desire to do what "humans and us" do, girls from a career in science. They prefer to work in areas where "people like them" work because they consider it more convenient and less stressful. The cat bites its own cock: only if there are as many girls as boys in scientific areas will there be as many girls as boys who want to study in these areas. If my book inspires a few young (and not so young!) Women and show them that science can be fun, exciting and accessible, it would be great.
"Science is not feminist" is the first sentence in her book. But could science be theoretically feminist? And what role does science play in our struggle for equality?
Lucia Sillig:In theory, science is neither feminist nor fundamentally sexist. But as we have already determined, it is not immune to bias. Nevertheless, there are elements in the mass of results and scientific data that can help us to better understand and compensate for inequalities. For example, I think of the observation of Bonobos - one of the two types closest to us - where the females dominate. They protect this power thanks to the very strong connections that they maintain with each other. I think that this observation of the sisterhood gives even more weight.
Reproductive rights are more limited again and right parties like to use “natural” gender roles. What role does science play here?
Lucia Sillig:There is everything in "nature": cat fish who keep their babies in their mouths for months to protect them or prayer-prayer fathers who pace their heads on every attempt to reproduce-but strangely, nobody nobody names them as an example. There are also forced copulations that can be fatal for females, such as sometimes with ducks or pairings, in which the consent and even enthusiasm of both partners are necessary, as in 97 percent of bird species. Everyone can choose the example that suits him*best. But that is not the goal in my opinion. Science has to help us understand the world around us better, to better understand ourselves and thus to live better. But it is not your job to tell us what is the best thing for us in our opinion.
