The average American has yet to encounter new information about the importance of "healthy sperm" and the "male biological clock." That is because basic medical knowledge about how men matter when it comes to reproductive outcomes, from miscarriages to childhood illnesses, has only recently begun to be produced. This gap in knowledge about men is only more glaring when one considers the enormous efforts to understand and treat women’s reproductive bodies over the past century.
GUYnecology asks: What took so long? Why are biomedical researchers only now asking questions about how men's age and bodily health affect reproductive outcomes? Weaving together historical materials and qualitative interviews, Rene Almeling examines the history of medical knowledge-making about men's reproductive health and its consequences for individuals. From a failed nineteenth-century effort to launch a medical specialty called andrology to the contemporary science of paternal effects, a lack of medical specialization around men's reproductive bodies has resulted in obliviousness about men's role in reproductive outcomes. Sifting through media messages and analyzing the stories of individual men and women, Almeling demonstrates how this historical gap in attention shapes reproductive politics today.
I quite like medical anthropology work that supplements the knowledge gap in cultural studies and political economy. From sociology to medical history, the book rove between attentions to address male reproductive science. It gives hints on how we came into awareness for norms under consumer culture as egg-chicken relationship to male construct.
Aside from the heavy pedagogical tendency from this book, one might ask generational difference in attitudes to reproduction. I don't believe Gen Z would have the same reproductive expectations of other coined generations. It is indeed a tough quest to investigate the environmental influence to biomedical adaptations, especially the digital age provides an alternative platform to not only change sexual habits, but also to guide public decision-making, exchanging opinions from many to many.
*I was given a free eARC in exchange for an honest review.
DNFed at 11%. Nothing against this book, I just went into it expecting to learn about men's reproductive health, and it's actually more concerned with gender studies and why male reproductive science is so lacking. From what I read, it is well written!
Such interesting research! It really reframed how I view a-lot of things, not only as a sex therapist but also as someone who has been TTC for a bit now. The four stars is for the content - as for how it is written, for undergrad and grad school I have done a lot of research so am used to reading dry research. Even for me, this was dry. Don't pick it up expecting a fun, light read!