@LouNeko @rephlekt2718

It also developed from scientists trying to keep things simple. Women's bodies are a lot more complicated than men's in terms of varying ratios of hormones, pregnancy, etc that have to be accounted for in studies. Same reason HeLa cells and genetically-identical mice are used.

It's still not a justifiable reason to neglect 50% of the population under the incorrect assumption that human physiology is the same across the board.

It's true that wartime produces massive leaps forward in all sorts of technology. And the military does use and abuse soldiers (of all sexes) for research. But patients involved in medical research are almost always ordinary people, recruited by their doctors. And we've only been doing medical research properly since the 1970s, after the thalidomide scandal happened. The first randomised controlled trial was conducted in 1948.

Most trials avoid recruiting pregnant women, despite the fact that if the trials are successful the treatments will be used in pregnant women (unless known to be mutagenic from animal studies) without any testing at all.

And many trials exclude women because of the risk of pregnancy, or hormonal fluctuations making it more complicated to interpret results (despite hormonal fluctuations in men being just as wild but much less predictable).

I know you feel hard done by. But your perspective is warped. We still have medical professionals debating whether the female orgasm exists, FFS.

While trying to """cure female hysteria""", we got a far deeper look into the function of our brains on the female side than on the male side.

As far as I know, treatments for "hysteria" tended to range from quackery at best to sexual assault at worst. You're going to have to do a lot better than a bare unsupported asstertion if you want me to believe science actually learned anything of value from it.