For centuries, science and technology have assumed that the male body is the "universal" human standard. This approach, with male as the default, has created a world where everything is designed for men: from life-saving medications to everyday products. And this often comes directly at the expense of women's health, safety, and opportunities.
It's time to acknowledge: women don't just need a seat at the table. They deserve a science that considers their own biology.
The Deadly Price of the "Default Male"
When products are developed solely based on male data, the consequences are often dangerous.
A classic example is the automotive industry. For decades, vehicle safety was tested with crash test dummies modeled after a strong male body, approximately 1.80 meters tall. The petite or pregnant female body was ignored. As a result, car accidents became one of the most common causes of death for unborn children, because seatbelts were not designed to keep women safe.
This bias extends into the professional world and sports. Women and girls suffer knee anterior cruciate ligament injuries three to six times more frequently than men.
Research attributes this, among other things, to the fact that they have to play in a "man's world": with soccer shoes developed for male feet, which have different arch support and stud arrangements.
It's similar with personal protective equipment in healthcare and for the police. It is often just a scaled-down male version that does not adequately protect women.
A Medical System That Misunderstands Women
In medicine, the male standard can lead to fatal misdiagnoses.
A heart attack often presents differently in women than in men. Because doctors are trained on the "classic" male symptoms, women without these typical signs are often sent home from the emergency room untreated.
Furthermore, clinical drug trials have historically excluded women. The reasoning was that female hormones would "complicate" the study – so they stuck to male subjects.
This means that dosages and side effect profiles are often tailored to men. As a result, women carry a significantly higher risk of adverse reactions.
When science ignores biological sex as a variable, it is not "objective." It is incomplete.
The Myth of Genius and the Scissors Graph
The problem begins long before women enter a lab or a doctor's office. It begins with societal stereotypes that label genius as a male trait.
Studies show: Even at the age of seven, girls are more likely than boys to believe that men are "smarter."
Marketing reinforces this conditioning. Boys' toys encourage building and fighting, while products for girls revolve around beauty and magic.
This culture contributes to a pattern known in science as the scissors graph: Women are often in the majority in bachelor's degree programs. However, the further it goes towards leadership positions and professorships, the more their proportion declines.
Women in science also encounter the myth of the lone genius. It devalues precisely the collaborative teamwork in which many of them are strong. And they often receive recommendation letters with gendered language that describes them as "diligent" or "nice" rather than "brilliant" or "world-leading."
A New Field: Products for Women's Health
Slowly, the tide is beginning to turn. A new wave of FemTech and longevity research is placing female physiology at its center.
Finally, products are being developed specifically for the female aging process and cellular health.
One example is NMN (Nicotinamide Mononucleotide). It is currently being investigated for its role in raising NAD⁺ levels, which can support metabolism and energy supply – areas particularly relevant for women during hormonal transition phases and in old age.
By focusing on the unique biological characteristics of women, these new products close a gap left by traditional science.
Conclusion
True scientific progress requires diverse perspectives. Those who develop for the "default male" lose out on precisely the innovations that arise when the full potential is included.
Closing the gender gap in science is not an act of charity. It is a prerequisite for a safer, more accurate, and more effective world.
Women deserve their own science. Because without it, science fails half the population.