Myth of male sperm

2018/10/01 Galarraga Aiestaran, Ana - Elhuyar Zientzia Iturria: Elhuyar aldizkaria

• Giza zientziak
• Berdintasuna
• Historia
• Anatomia/Fisiologia

In sexual reproduction, fertilization is one of the high moments in which the egg and sperm are joined. Actually, more than a moment is a process, and to explain it is very common to use the epic tone, even (or above all) in human reproduction. For example: "In ejaculation, a stream of sperm is poured into the waiting bone. The avalanche of sperm swim towards it, leaving aside weaker sperm and reaching only the best sperm. The only one will get to join the egg." Although without going so far, it is usually to consider the sperm "winner" as the protagonist and to consider a background the oculus, the conqueror and the conquered accepting the classic couple. Robert D, specialist in anthropology, evolution and human reproduction. However, according to biologist Martin, this vision is a consequence of the machista stereotypes that have been imposed in the history of science and that, in addition, it is wrong. Until the 20th century, what scientific men knew about fertilization was based more on convictions and beliefs than on science. The sperm were unknown until they were seen through the microscope made by the trader and inventor Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, around 1680. More than one thought it a witchcraft, but Leeuwenhoek clearly demonstrated it: in the human seed there were living beings. This reinforced the belief that children developed from the womb. In 1876 they knew that fertilization was produced between the sperm and the egg, thanks to the zoologist Oscar Hertwig, but it was already clear that fertilization was a thing of men, for which they had a penis, a pair of testicles and millions of sperm. The woman, her organs and so on were mere receptors. However, as science advances and scientists open their eyes, the gaps in this perspective have become apparent. And these are the ones that Martin has highlighted. For example, remember that the abundance of sperm is not necessarily a good sign: many of them are defective, so they are necessary so much. And they do not swim in search of the oculus: they are driven by the movements of the uterus and the obiduktos. Along with other corrupt convictions, he also mentioned the age of man, since before it was said that the age of man did not matter. As it has been useful to admit that this is wrong, Martin believes that it will also be good to undo the myth of male sperm. The key is to be prepared to accept evidence and change perspective.

Published in the newspaper Berria.