The history of sexual selection research provides insights as to why females are still understudied

While it is widely acknowledged that Darwin's descriptions of females were gender-biased, gender bias in modern sexual selection research is less recognized. This Perspective highlights that sexual selection theory and research are still male-centered and suggest strategies for alleviating biases in this field and beyond. While it is widely acknowledged that Darwin's descriptions of females were gender-biased, gender bias in current sexual selection research is less recognized. An examination of the history of sexual selection research shows prevalent male precedence-that research starts with male-centered investigations or explanations and thereafter includes female-centered equivalents. In comparison, the incidence of female precedence is low. Furthermore, a comparison between the volume of publications focusing on sexual selection in males versus in females shows that the former far outnumber the latter. This bias is not only a historical pattern; sexual selection theory and research are still male-centered-due to conspicuous traits, practical obstacles, and continued gender bias. Even the way sexual selection is commonly defined contributes to this bias. This history provides an illustrative example by which we can learn to recognize biases and identify gaps in knowledge. I conclude with a call for the scientific community to interrogate its own biases and suggest strategies for alleviating biases in this field and beyond.

Automated summary

This article points out the gender bias in sexual selection research, both in the past and currently, with a focus on male-centered investigations. The author calls for the scientific community to recognize this bias and suggests strategies to alleviate it.