Virginia Hayssen, Mary Maples Dunn Professor of Biological Sciences at Smith, is the co-author of “Reproduction in Mammals: The Female Perspective.” In her 2017 book, Hayssen writes about the shortcomings of the language used when describing reproductive biology.
Let’s take the term “sperm race,” for instance. In an NPR podcast discussing Hayssen’s work, bioethicist and fertility researcher Lisa Campo-Engelstein explains it as a fertilization fairy tale. “The sperm is this shining knight who’s there to save the egg, who is a damsel in distress. The sperm has all the agency and is on a mission to fight off other sperm to be the one to conquer the egg. Whereas, the egg is just sort of passively floating around waiting for the knight and doesn’t do anything itself.” According to Hayssen, this creates a “female-passive, man-active” narrative that is rooted in cultural bias rather than scientific evidence.
What Hayssen’s book tells us about the real so-called “sperm race” is that sperm does not have the energetic resources to get to the ovum by itself. The uterus is the one in charge of orienting, selecting and propelling the sperm to the site of conception via various processes, such as uterine contractions that alter the fluid dynamics of the female reproductive tract. The oviducts, also known as the fallopian tubes, are then responsible for altering the biochemistry of the selected sperm cells. Only then can sperm cells receive the necessary cues to fuse with the egg and to allow fertilization to occur.
Hayssen also feels that the word “fertilization” in itself is problematic. It implies that the sperm is the active party making the egg fertile, which couldn’t be any farther from the truth. The sperm and the egg live in a mutualistic relationship where both make each other “potent” through their interactions.
Every two years, Professor Hayssen teaches a First Year Seminar called “Mammal Reproduction from the Female Perspective” to 16 students. According to Hayssen, the majority of students come in already having learned about reproduction in high school through the framework of the sperm race. For Hayssen, this raises concerns that textbooks often used in introductory biology classes may present information in these biased ways, and pushes her to look for ways to counter these narratives in her own classes. Hayssen uses her own textbook for the class, and assigns her students to look for new primary research articles that could be included in a new edition. Brigitte Walla ’26, who is taking the class this semester, finds that the Socratic method of teaching used by Hayssen matches her learning styles. Hayssen asks questions that help students identify underlying beliefs and fallacies that they otherwise wouldn’t have noticed.
Hayssen says that a reason for erroneous information in general mammal physiology textbooks lies in the fact that their authors may not be experts in the specific subfield of reproductive physiology. If they study some other part of animal physiology, then they may not know about the “sperm race” fallacy since it is such a pervasive myth. Moreover, with thousands of papers being published every day, textbook authors can’t pay attention to all research done in their field, and the decision of which papers to pay attention to is strongly influenced by the meetings they attend and the people who they hear talk. If they don’t happen to hear the feminist perspective, they may not realize how inaccuracies permeate their textbooks.
There are papers dating back to the 90s that draw attention to the bias prevalent in writing about female reproduction. While these papers reach a certain number of people, they aren’t spread enough, Hayssen said.
According to Hayssen, shifting the perspective of both scientists and their textbooks on a topic such as the “sperm race” takes time from the other scientists and students holding them accountable. Hayssen mentions that there has also been no particular agenda to amplify the female perspective amongst past generations of white cisgender male scientists. Female mammals have long been neglected in biological research. Not until 1993 did the National Institute of Health (NIH) require that women take part in human clinical trials. Not until 2016 did NIH require that women be included in pre-clinical trials, and not until this year has NIH begun to require that lab mammal studies include both sexes. Usually, domestic animal research doesn’t even need to follow the same minimum regulations because they fall under the National Science Foundation and not NIH.
Professor Hayssen has done her fair share of work on this issue by presenting at symposia and writing a book on the topic. Her passion for the environment and the organisms inhabiting is reflected in her teaching methods. In her Intro to Biology course, students can write a letter to the editor about some environmental issue and get it published to get an exemption from an exam. That moves what students are learning in the classroom to the outside world. In Hayssen’s words, “there are a lot of things that people need to be aware of in order for the world to be a better place.” The sooner we realize that the science that is presented to us is not always totally objective, the sooner we can take action to improve its accuracy.
