This longtime trend of exclusionary and quite sexist bias is still alive and prevalent today. Recent studies suggest that females are disproportionately less represented in a variety of disciplines within the scientific community - ranging from biomedical, reproduction, ecological, and natural history based research, as well as conservation initiatives (Nunamaker and Turner 2023, Bennett et al. 2019, & Cooper et al 2019). 

In the biomedical field, researchers reveal that more than 80% of the animals used in testing purposes were male (Nunamaker and Turner 2023). This highlights how this systematic omission of females, due to male focused regulations from the United States Food and Drug Administration, has continuously perpetuated the sex bias that has plagued the medical industry for decades. Not only does this provide an incomplete data set regarding the medicinal effectiveness in both males and females test animals, but also creates concern over the ethical validity of such research (Nunamaker and Turner 2023). 

In the reproduction ecology research perspective, researchers have discovered that across many species, male and female individuals tend to have fundamentally different needs throughout their life cycles (Bennett et al. 2019). Sexual segregation is a concept that has been explored a lot in the biological community, and describes the common tendency of the sexes to be apart for a large majority of their lives, with the exception being times of breeding (Ruckstuhl et al., 2005).

This phenomenon is prevalent in many species but none more than birds and carnivorous mammals  (Bennett et al 2019 & Jones and Sheard 2023). This means that females are often not coexisting with their male counterparts for a large majority of their lifespan - and in such cases, researchers know where the males go but are unaware of where the females go once mating season is finished. 

Researchers suggest that a majority of research conducted does not take these behavioral and ecological differences into account and therefore, their data is heavily skewed towards males and their known tendencies (Bennet et al 2019). As such, females are, once more, left unprotected and underrepresented in such conservation measures, as male habitat has been more commonly protected than female habitat consistently over the past 2 decades.  Research has revealed that ‘only 3% of species distribution models and 8% of conservation recommendations considered sexual segregation,’ highlighting how much of an overlooked issue this really is (Bennet et al 2019).

This lack of knowledge and bias towards the male sex has even permeated into the media that we consume. From museums to social media, females are continuously excluded (both knowingly and unknowingly). This sex imbalance has contributed to a culture of perpetual bias towards the male sex and against the female sex (Cooper et al 2019). 

As such, we, even after hundreds of years of cataloging and exploring the natural world, are so unaware of the basic ecology and behaviors of the females that inhabit the earth. How can we protect the givers of life… and the caregivers of the next generations of animals… if we know so little about the females of so many species? How, I ask?