Marina DeMarco

Women have been seen as either too kind of variable hormonally, like noisy and therefore bad sources of data.

And or we have just taken a male body as a standard and used that to produce knowledge for everyone.

I've never been to a doctor's appointment where someone checked how many X chromosomes I had or what kinds of gametes I make.

As far as I know, no one's ever even measured my estrogen or testosterone levels.

And yet my clinical treatment is supposed to be based on

We make a recommendation for all of the pink and it only actually works for like a subset of them.

As my collaborator Madeline Pape has put it, like we're really just moving from a one size fits all approach to a two size fits most approach.

if you have variation in that population or if the population you studied is different from the person that you're prescribing a medication to, there has to be some kind of leap or inferential move there, right?

You're taking a risk.

We reinforce the idea that people come in those two types when, in fact, we have significant evidence

that they don't.

If you focus on biology as an explanation for differences in outcomes across members of social groups, it naturalizes inequality by putting biology first and assuming that whatever is different about men and women, it's about their bodies instead of about how society treats us.