Recently on NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams there was a story about how new discoveries have disproved the myth that women were less intelligent mathematicians and less able to perform mathematically than their male counterparts. Evidently for years the comparative ability and intelligence of women have been called into question. This continues even in modern academic circles.
Since the evidence was so overwhelming against the notion that women were less intelligent, the question was asked "where did these thoughts and speculations originally come from?" Quite interestingly enough, none of the professionals interviewed could give an answer or even reference a particular study as to how and when the myth that women were less intelligent than men in math began. Well, of course in my many debates with atheists and in reading many blogs regarding evolutionary and naturalistic thought, it didn't take me long to find the answer that many of these "supposed" professors missed, overlooked and I believe intentionally minimized to further promote their naturalistic agenda.
"[Man] attains a higher eminence, in whatever he takes up, than can women—whether requiring deep thought, reason, or imagination, or merely the use of the senses and hands. If two lists were made of the most eminent men and women in poetry, history, painting, sculpture, music (inclusive of both composition and performance), history, science, and philosophy, the two lists would not bear comparison. We may also infer, from the law of the deviation from averages... [that] the average mental power in man must be above that of women." ~ Charles Darwin, "The Descent of Man in Relation to Sex" (New York: D. Appleton & Co., 1896), 564.
Engels wrote to Marx, "Darwin, whom I am just now reading, is splendid." ~ Conway Zirkle, "Evolution, Marxian Biology and the Social Scene", Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1959, pp.85-87
Marx wrote back to Engels on December 19, 1860, saying, "This is the book which contains the basis in natural history for our view."~ Conway Zirkle, Evolution, "Marxian Biology and the Social Scene", Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1959, pp.85-87
There's more. Darwin spoke the following concerning women's abilities:
"powers of intuition, of rapid perception, and perhaps of imitation are characteristic of the lower races, and therefore of a past and lower state of civilisation." ~ Charles Darwin, "The Descent of Man, The Modern Library", New York, p. 873.
"[Even in] the most intelligent races [there] are large numbers of women whose brains are closer in size to those of gorillas than to the most developed male brains. This inferiority is so obvious that no one can contest it for a moment; only its degree is worth discussion." ~ Stephen Jay Gould, "The Mismeasure of Man" (New York: Norton, 1981), 104-105.
In the world of Darwinian Evolution SIZE really does matter, but common sense doesn't.
"Women represent the most inferior forms of human evolution and...are closer to children and savages than to an adult, civilized man. They excel in fickleness, inconstancy, absence of thought and logic, and incapacity to reason. Without a doubt, there exists some distinguished women, very superior to the average man, but they are as exceptional as the birth of any monstrosity, as for example, of a gorilla with two heads. Consequently, we may neglect them entirely." ~ Stephen Jay Gould, "The Mismeasure of Man" (New York: Norton, 1981), 104-105.
David N. Menton, Ph.D., The Religion of Nature: Social Darwinism, St. Louis MetroVoice, September 1994, Vol. 4, No. 9, said that based on Darwin's tenets and beliefs many anthropologists bought into the "brain size" issue even falsifying the evidence to make it fit their presuppositional thinking and racial and gender biases and discrimination.
Who's the culprit? Darwinian Evolutionary Theory that taught and continues to teach that women were less intelligent, less capable and less important to society than men.
This is big business and there are major implications for professors and individuals willing to step out and expose the many lies of evolution. As preachers and ministers, we have a mandate to "be instant in season, out of season;" (2 Tim. 4:2) This topic usually genders much debate from supporters of evolution and naturalism. Opponents usually use the bible as an emotion tool to suggest that God despises women throughout scripture but the opposite is actually true.
The fight is on against creationism as Professor Dawkins outlines. However creationism when it comes to the place of women is much superior on all fronts than evolutionary theory. Example:
- Women are created from the same "stuff" as men. In other words man was made in the "Image" and "Likeness" of God, therefore women share those same attributes, not the attributes of an animal or Gorilla or Ape as evolutionists love to point out. (Gen. 1:27 ~ "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.")
- In God's system women are called to be leaders, used by God to deliver Israel. (Deborah, Ruth, Esther etc.)
- In the Old Testament, women are very instrumental in the survival of both the family and the nation.
- In the Old Testament, the critic is hard pressed to find ONE instance where God endorses the rape, molestation or abuse of women.
- In the Old Testament women were able to approach and receive from God without a male intermediary, indicating that women had every ability as an equal with men to access God.
- Women are valued and honored throughout the biblical narrative and considered to be smart both spiritually and naturally. (Pr. 12:4, 31:10)
- In the New Testament the blood of Jesus levels the playing field of traditions even within a patriarchal society by calling women and men equal in Christ Jesus. (Gal. 3:28 ~ "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.")
I thought it interesting to see how vehemently and avvid some individuals are in stating that evolution is a valid system. As we can see Darwainian evolution is the worst possible mix of confusion for anyone to adopt and accept. Theistic evolution is an even worse proposition no matter how badly many of us want to find a scientific ground or basis by which to defeat the criticisms of the enemy.
Why not simply just believe God and HIS WORD? After all the criticism it still stands the test.
Nex time I'll discuss the rank racism of Darwainian Evolution. Stay tuned.