“The pen is mightier than the sword”, I suppose if Pierce Brosnan could use it as a deadly weapon to eliminate a dangerous computer programmer in 007 Goldeneye, it is pretty mighty. Jokes aside, the lesson to be learned here is that the words you use can truly cause harm to others, so can metaphors and messages that you can convey through your language in reputable publications. A situation that can represent this concept can be clearly discerned in David H. Freedman’s article “New Theory on How The Aggressive Egg Attracts Sperm”.
Written in 1992, this article brings to light an unnerving reality about the world of research, that metaphors and preconceptions that many researchers may have can have genuine effects on the types of research being performing or more alarmingly, the interpretations of results. At it’s essence, this article describes a series of observations and reports done by an Emily Martin, researcher at John Hopkins, revolving around an allegedly male-centric perspective that had perpetuated in the field of reproductive science, citing to the evidence of researchers using diction and metaphors that reflect the idea that the sperm is a rough warrior and the egg is a damsel-in-distress archetype (however there is reputable evidence that points to quite the …show more content…
This is not to undermine the importance of dealing with the issue described here, but it must be conceded that the problem stems far more than these instances. That said, it should also not be allowed for relevant data to be excluded on account of results potentially perpetuating or severing insensitive ideals, so long as the data is accurate and correct as well as correctly interpreted and peer-reviewed (which may be a tall order, but an order that must be